|
Main
Date: 10 Apr 2008 23:19:15
From: Andrew Fabbro
Subject: Read my first Chess Life in 15 years, and...
|
...the mag seems the same, though not quite as thick. The production value is better - a much slicker publication - but it seems like some of the old columns are gone. The feature articles are longer, though. Alex Dunne's correspondence chess column seems absent...is correspondence chess dead? Rendered impossible due to computers? I see they still print all the tournament life entries, though I can't imagine why...I'd dare say that the number of people who play chess but do not have access to the Internet is vanishingly small.
|
|
|
Date: 11 Apr 2008 09:37:27
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Read my first Chess Life in 15 years, and...
|
"Andrew Fabbro" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:f65c5de8-0ef5-4146-a14a-e9c804ba4b3b@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > ...the mag seems the same, though not quite as thick. The production > value is better - a much slicker publication - but it seems like some > of the old columns are gone. The feature articles are longer, though. > > Alex Dunne's correspondence chess column seems absent...is > correspondence chess dead? Rendered impossible due to computers? I think a lot of corres players simply migrated to on-line correspondance chess, rather than postcards. Last year USCF postal ratings were 'held up' for 6 or even 9 months, and that may have determined recent choices of where to play cc chess. There are many services, and are auto-rated. I seem to have about 20 games going at any one time, and in two teams somehow, plus a number of individual games. Many players in these newsgroups play each other at cc at Chessworld.net - where you get the full wack of services for about 25 bucks a year, but can also play for free for a more limited range. This cc server is English, but membership is world-wide. Cordially, Phil Innes > I see they still print all the tournament life entries, though I can't > imagine why...I'd dare say that the number of people who play chess > but do not have access to the Internet is vanishingly small. >
|
|
Date: 11 Apr 2008 01:27:18
From:
Subject: Re: Read my first Chess Life in 15 years, and...
|
Dunne's column is still available on the web page, though it's a little hard to find. Lucas wanted more feature articles, so he cut a number of columns.
|
|
Date: 10 Apr 2008 23:49:14
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Read my first Chess Life in 15 years, and...
|
On Apr 11, 2:19 am, Andrew Fabbro <[email protected] > wrote: > ...the mag seems the same, though not quite as thick. The production > value is better - a much slicker publication - but it seems like some > of the old columns are gone. The feature articles are longer, though. > > Alex Dunne's correspondence chess column seems absent...is > correspondence chess dead? Rendered impossible due to computers? > > I see they still print all the tournament life entries, though I can't > imagine why...I'd dare say that the number of people who play chess > but do not have access to the Internet is vanishingly small. Interestingly, one of the local tournament directors blamed poor turnout on such things as some error by the USCF in which his tourney failed to get listed in Chess Life magazine. (He also has blamed the local chess association, for conspiring to do his tourneys in-- go figure.) Here's the scoop: while a player who is searching for a chess tournament to play in may very well log on and use the Web, those who happen to get a Chess Life magazine in the mail may very well check the back of the rag, just to see what's coming up. See the difference? In the one case, someone is actively searching, while in the other, he is prodded by the mere perusal of his mail. I have been a bit disappointed with the quality of chess analysis lately; now that I play over games using, say, the Arena interface, I can easily spot gross errors in a matter of seconds-- and there are plenty of them. Even those annotators who make use of some chess engine or other seem to miss the boat, now and then. For instance, in one issue they had a game in which Boris Gulko beat up on a much weaker player, and the idea was to show how great the old lion's technique and overall play was; trouble was, he coasted in the middle-game, and then blundered-- but his opponent didn't take advantage; the writers just pretended it didn't happen. In fairness to GM Gulko, they ought to have selected one of his many, finer games. I don't know if correspondence chess is dead, or if maybe that column was cut for reasons such as you observed above-- the reduced heft. Heck, maybe Alex is "done" with chess. -- help bot
|
|