Freedom, inequality or brotherhood?
by Wim van Vugt
(posted 27 August 2003)
Wim van Vugt
|
During my holidays I only occasionally
was able to log in at TCCMB. It's often the case that summers
give us a quiet time and periods in which little or nothing
happens. One person may prefer going on holiday to a far away
country while another may prefer participating in the wide variety
of summer tournaments. The chess tournaments of Amsterdam, Vlissingen
and Gent are only a few examples available for the Dutch and
Belgians. The latter tournament with its tempo of 2 rounds per
day dictates that you inevitably fall into a rhythm of chess,
eating, chess, drinking and sleeping. Often sleeping is the
first victim, soon followed by the level of chess. Many months
later the new ratings are evidence of what you have really done.
A very particular event close to my own home is the so-called
Kroegloperstoernooi (Pub Loafers Tournament) for duets, teams
of two players. The Amsterdam quarter "de Pijp" (the Pipe) is
proud to be considered the area with the highest density of
pubs per square mile in the entire world. On a sunny Sunday
in July 40 pubs, pothouses and terraces together host over 200
players. For many years the current CC world champion Gert Timmerman
has participated but often another duo won the first prize.
Let's return to the
discussion on TCCMB: this summer was certainly the hottest since
the foundation. A veritable forest fire had broken out after
a hasty remark about Mia Poppe being excluded from further participation
in female championships due to the allegation that her husband
Frans Huybrecht actually had played her games. It's hard to
stop if it happens, but it's equally difficult to prove such
behavior. The storm only broke out in all its fierceness after
someone told us that he got a personal email from Olita Rause
where she admitted to receiving occasional help from her husband
Igors Rausis, who is a very strong OTB grandmaster. It didn't
take long before the validity of separate ladies titles for
IM and GM came into the firing line.
This discussion still
continues and even grows more intense concerning whether or
not those titles are founded in a real difference in strength
between men and women, or if they have been called into being
only for propagandistic reasons. The late Dutch GM Jan-Hein
Donner was very clear about this question: "Women can't play
chess." But now he is dead and gone there is hardly anybody
who dares to say this out loud. There even exists a persistent
anecdote in connection with this bold statement. Donner was
once again in his favorite Cuba, and be sure: not only for chess!
On a warm and sultry summer evening he was again haunted by
his pacifist friends who pressed him to not say that anymore.
His resolute answer must have sounded like thunder: "OK guys,
you are right. But black women can't play chess!"
All kind of complex
theories were presented on TCCMB proving that male and female
brains are fundamentally different in their construction and
that women are generally considered less capable of playing
good chess. My
contribution to the thread "A funny but serious question & IQ"
was the remark that the apparent differences "men=sports&hunting
vs. women=shopping&gathering" said more about learned behavior,
determined by society and surroundings, than about some inborn
difference in capabilities. Do women have an infirmity?
I wanted to find
out if there was something connected with chess, something that
can be proven beyond doubt, that would demonstrate a difference
or disadvantage of women compared to men. To achieve this I
decided it was appropriate to use the Dutch rating list of OTB
players, because nowadays all kind of chess players, ranging
from 800 to 2600, are included in the system, a pool of 15,000
players of which only 3% are females. I am currently working
on the German list, which is 5 times larger. With this collection
of data you have a complete population to examine, and comparisons
can be made between male and female characteristics of the statistical
distribution. It was no surprise to me that these distributions
showed the famous bell-curves. More striking was the discovery
of a significant difference of 160 rating point in favor of
males, the means being 1660 and 1500 (stdev=240 both). And I
still can hear Donner's burst of laughter resounding …
So the answer is:
YES, there is a significant difference. But take note: this
is not the same as saying that women have less ability for chess,
it's only an observation not an explanation! Instead of concluding
that females are born with an infirmity, an even more plausible
explanation for this gap of 160 points can be found in the fact
that they generally start to practice chess at an older age.
This is determined by culture, not intelligence. They often
learn it at school at the age of 8-12 years, then forget everything
about it and start to practice again when they have found a
nice boy friend who also plays chess.
And yet the argument
hadn't abated when an announcement was made by the so-called
ALL ROMAN CONSULTING company offering services and help for
your finished as well as ongoing games at the cost of $20, being
approved by the Ethics Standards Council. Of course this was
a joke. But if anyone thought such didn't happen in real life
then their hopes were quickly dashed!
Shortly thereafter
it became known that Peter Hertel, a GM rated 2653, had offered
his extensive services in CFC Magazine No. 03/2003:
Training offer by ICCF-GM Peter
Hertel
Peter Hertel offers to:
- Analyse your finished games with you, in order to
check the games for errors.
- Analyse games of you and offer you a report, where
he lists your strong and weak points. Based on this
he recommends what to do to improve your game.
- Preparing with you an opening repertoire which suits
you.
- Lectures about chess strategy, tactics and endgames.
- If you have special training wishes, this is possible
too.
Peter's speciality: Correspondence Chess Consulting
Do you have problems in your current games?
Peter Hertel offers to help you!
Honorary
To be agreed with Peter Hertel directly.
If you are interested contact Peter by Email: [email
address deleted]
Inquiries are possible in English or German language.
|
This hit like a bombshell.
Is consultation allowed? Is it ethical? No,
was the unanimous answer of all who reacted to this announcement.
But what if
you show your game to a friend? And if he asks you why you had
put your rooks at d1 and e1 instead of c1 and d1? And when he
asks you if you had seen that there is an interesting pawn sacrifice
imminent? As
long as that friend isn't stronger than you it will not make
much difference, many thought. But if he is 300 ELO points stronger?
Someone worded this dilemma very concisely: "Consulting with
God is Highly Unethical."
After a few days
Peter Hertel announced in a long emotional reaction that he
was so impressed by the wealth of criticism about the ethics
and non-ethics of this behavior that he had decided to stop
his "services" immediately. Freedom to
receive advice had led to an utter degree of inequality.
But has this practice
of consulting therefore ended for good and all? I am afraid
it has not. Anyway, Germany and many East European countries
have built a firm tradition of mutual consultation. Almost the
entire CC world looks jealously to the vast quantities of prizes
and titles taken away by the Germans at the yearly ICCF congresses,
many more than might be expected based on the number of CC players
alone. Is this is Brotherhood in its optima forma?
Another troubling
issue here is the use of computers. Fritz and friends are powerful
these days. Are they allowed? The discussions about consultation
and the silicon monster have much in common. Sergey Grodzensky,
one of the candidates for the soon to elect ICCF presidium,
holds the opinion that "It is obvious that growing computer
strength is threatening to traditional chess tournaments."
But at the same time
he doesn't see it as a real threat since almost everybody can
afford them nowadays, and so this equalizes all. He asserts
to have "theoretically shown" that in CC games the person has
much greater chances for victory against a computer than in
OTB games. What "theory" this is is unknown to me.
A completely different
matter is a team match. When everybody has agreed that "consulting
with God" is really unethical, what must we think when one team
is holding its own against another team? But here I can see
two different issues: consulting for individuals; and consulting
for team games. The answer is not necessarily the same for both.
An example may be
my own team The
Gambiteers Guild, which has so far scored about 60% in the
Champions League. At the beginning we had agreed not to influence
each other's results by giving any comment on our ongoing games.
Now after a year of play we feel that other teams must have
consulted within their team members, and now I am not so very
much convinced about our original ethical standpoint. One must
not be more Roman Catholic than the Pope himself, is a Dutch
saying.
At any rate, an allowed
consultation process has had an enormous positive catalytic
effect on our team spirit: the match
against Dave Taylor. From the beginning it was clear to
us that we were playing against the great Goliath with a wild
dog gambit that nobody trusts except Thomas Winckelmann and
us. And I must confess that it was a near thing or else we would
have lost in all kinds of endgames Dave was willing to allow
us. Against all odds, even Dave firmly believed in his imminent
victory, but we dragged the draw from the fire. Look for yourself
and try to find what Dave missed.
The Gambiteers
Guild - Dave Taylor, 2003
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.f3 c5 7.Qd2
Nf6 8.fxe4 Nxe4 9.Qe3 Qa5 10.Bb2 f5 11.0-0-0 Nd7 12.g4 Ndf6
13.gxf5 exf5 14.Nf3 Bd7 15.Rg1 0-0-0 16.Ne5 Nd5 17.Qe1 g6 18.Bg2
Rhf8 19.Bxe4 fxe4 20.c4 Qxe1 21.Rgxe1 Nf6 22.dxc5 Bf5 23.Rd6
Nh5 24.Red1 Rxd6 25.cxd6 Nf6 26.c5 Ng4 27.d7+ Kc7 28.Rd6 Rd8
29.Nxg4 Bxg4 30.Be5 Bxd7 31.Rxg6+ Kc8 32.Rg7 Re8 1/2-1/2
© 2003 Wim
van Vugt, All Rights Reserved.
|