Home
Information
Login
Register
Waiting lists
Membership
Hall of fame
Tournaments
Best game
Wikichess
Rating list
Problems
Forum
Links
Help
About
| Install FICGS apps | |
| play chess online |  |
|
Game result (chess) S. Ligon, 2321 M. LaDuke, 2326 1/2-1/2 See game 152178 |
Hot news Discussions Files search Social network
Back to forum
Jose Carrillo (2006-04-11 23:28:13)
Chess960 Challenge
I'm new to the site, and learning how to use it. Anyone interested can challenge me to a Chess960 game. Thanks.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-05 15:19:03)
FICGS world championship
Hello to all.
Please post here all your questions / suggestions about the FICGS world championship rules.
There are many answers to bring yet : about the building of groups, who exactly will play which stage, etc...
It seems that many players like this scheme : knockout / round-robin tournament, that is more fair and much more interesting than a pure round-robin cycle. The final match rules are particularly hard (24 games, 30 days + 1 day / move), but I think it's a good way to make it different and give value to the title. Rules are not far from the old classical world championship, the champion will only play the next final match against the challenger...
FICGS WCH Rules :
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#tournament
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-28 17:17:21)
Chess & go variants.
Ok David... But Chess 960 isn't chess 'training', as Go 9x9 could be. I think unrated chess tournaments wouldn't have much success.
Let's see if other players want to play go 9x9 ... I think the point is about rating and championship. As there is no rating system and only a title for 19x19, players couldn't be attracted by go 9x9 if there isn't the same challenge. I changed the rules in this way, now more players will play continuously Go tournaments and compete to have a chance to play the Go world championship tournament.
David Grosdemange (2006-05-28 22:08:48)
challenge ?
if trying to become the ficgs go world champion is a challenge , playing go can be a challenge for chess players who discover go . and beginning with 19*19 is a little hard ...
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2006-05-29 20:47:01)
Big chess
The middlegame could be a challenge, particularly if you have no board to test the consequences of your move. And what do you think about an endgame with 12 pawns and 3 rook or 5 knights on each side? What are the values of the pieces? There is much to investigate there. Perhaps I should write a computer program ... (just a joke)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-01 21:25:04)
Discrepancies
It is very clear Lionel.
In another hand, each tournament rules and generally each situation influence the strategy at chess (so other games). And FICGS chess wch rules are special ones in the knockout tournament that should avoid draws. Actually, only a "one game match" can have no influence on 'the game'. (not perfectly true, as the player's strength is another factor)
Rules are flexible, particularly for the game of Go, so I think we can use even uncommom ones, if it is balanced enough (= there's still a challenge). Do you have an idea about this rule avoiding repetition, how many stones or komi it could be worth ?
Another question : Are there situations that look like zugzwang in Go (where the best move could be 'passing') ?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-07 00:38:57)
Go / Chess
Hello Tommie.
I chose not to implement a Go rating system for several reasons, first and main is: a quite true correspondence Go rating may be very (!) long to achieve, maybe even impossible. It seems to me that the challenge could be elsewhere ie. tournament results, to qualify for the FICGS championship tournament.
About the rating list, so far all new players appear in a unique rating list, soon there will be an established rating list, a provisional rating list and a new player rating list.
About this rating for Ion (2600), where did you see it exactly ?
... at last what happens with the Go applet ? You have to click on 'game description'. If it doesn't work, feel free to tell me what game you try to watch and what happens... Thanks in advance :)
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-13 11:35:10)
help (2 players matches)
i would like to know if it is possible to challenge an individual for a game. ie. I would like to play vs Nigel Davis but dont know how to challenge him.
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-23 12:26:28)
Blinfolded chess ( part II )
Very recently, however, all the honors of Europe, in this department of indoor games, have been run away with by two young Americans, Morphy and Paulsen. Paul Morphy, a native of New Orleans, seemed to be born with chess in his blood; he played almost from childhood; and at thirteen years of age he proved a formidable antagonist to Herr Lowenthal, a noted Hungarian. In 1857, when just twenty years of age, Morphy encountered Paulsen, a native of Iowa, only a little older than himself, at a chess congress in New Orleans (Editor: It was New York!). All the gray-beards struck their flag to Paulsen, and then he struck to Morphy. Of Morphy's subsequent achievements in regular play, which stamp him as perhaps the first living chess-player (we say this with fear and trembling; however, for the knights of the game are a sensitive race), we will not speak here, for our purpose is only to notice the blindfold performances. At the chess congress above mentioned, he finely played a blindfold game with a leading German player. Early in 1858, he struck the New Orleanists with amazement by playing six games simultaneously, without seeing any other the boards; winning five of them, and exhibiting beautiful play throughout. He then came to Europe, not only to "lick the Britishers," but "all creation;" and it must be admitted that he made great progress towards that achievement. At a meeting of the Chess Association at Birmingham, in August 1858, he played eight games simultaneously, without sight of the boards. His opponents were Lord Lyttelton, and seven other persons, mostly presidents or secretaries of provincial chess clubs. Against such players, and under such tremendous conditions, he won no less than six games out of the eight, drawing a seventh, and losing the eighth. In the following month, he went over and astonished the Parisians in a similar way; he contended blindfold against eight practised players at once, at the Cafe de la Regence, a famous resort of chess-players; and out of these did not lose even one; he was the victor in six, and drew the other two. In the spring of 1859, Morphy contended against eight of the most experienced members of the London Chess Club, including Mr. Mongredien and Mr. Walker, two distinguished players. He won two games, and drew the other six--all the players except himself being wearied out by a very protracted sitting. A few days afterwards, he played with eight members of the St. George's Chess Club, including Lord Cremorne, Lord Arthur Hay, and Captain Kennedy; he won five, and the rest were drawn through want of time to finish them. Nevertheless, inconceivable as these mental labors are, Morphy yields to Paulsen in blindfold play. There are whispers of twelve or fifteen games having been tried simultaneously by the latter; but the number ten has been most certainly reached, under conditions of the utmost publicity. On the 7th of October in the present year, at a Divan in the Strand, ten players accepted Mr. Paulsen's challenge to grapple with them all simultaneously, the boards being placed out of his sight. One of the players was M. Sabouroff, secretary to the Russian Embassy in London; the other nine comprised many names well known among chess-players. Ten chess-boards were placed on ten tables in the room. An arm-chair, turned away towards a window, was mounted on a dais. At two o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Paulsen, a quiet, courteous young man, with not a trace of "brag" in him, took his seat in this arm-chair. For twelve mortal hours he never rose, never ate, never smoked, and drank nothing but a little lemonade. What were his mental labors during that time, we shall see. His ten antagonists took their seats at the ten tables; and each table speedily became the centre of a group of spectators, whose comments were not always so silent as in fairness they ought to have been. Paulsen could not see any of the chess-boards. Herr Kling, a noted player and teacher of chess, acted as general manager. He called the boards by numbers--No. 1 to No. 10. Paulsen audibly announced his first move for board No. 1; Kling made that move; the antagonist replied to it; Kling audibly announced the reply; Paulsen considered what should be his second move, and when he had audibly announced his decision, Kling made the proper move on the board. Here No. 1 rested for awhile. No. 2 now made his move, leading to the same course of proceeding as before. Then No. 3 in the same way; then No. 4; and so on to No. 10; after which No. 1 began a new cycle, by playing a second move; and thus they proceeded over and over again. Now let us see what all this implies and involves. Chess is not one of the most frolicsome of games; indeed, ladies generally declare it to be very dull, seeing that a chess-player is apt to be "grumpy" if spoken to on other matters while playing. The truth is, there is a demand for much mental work in managing a game well; the combinations and subtleties, the attacks and counter-attacks, are so numerous and varied, as to keep the mind pretty fully occupied. Nevertheless, a fine game between two fine players is mere child's play compared with this wonderful achievement of Paulsen. He was obliged to form ten mental pictures; and every picture changed with every move, like the colored bits in a kaleidoscope. Most persons, even though knowing nothing of the game, are aware that it begins with thirty-two pieces of different colors and forms, and that these move about over a board of sixty-four squares. After every change of position in any one of the pieces, Paulsen must have changed his mental picture of the board, the field of battle, and then made that a fixture until the next move was made. This is hard enough in even one game, against an antagonist who has his eyes to help him in planning attacks and defences; but how hard must it be against ten! It is difficult to conceive what is the condition of the mental machinery under such circumstances; and yet, there he sat, the calmest man in the room. When told of his antagonist's doings, one by one, he looked quietly out of window, and rubbed his chin, as a man often does when thinking, and then announced his move--never mistaking No. 1 for No. 7, No. 9 for No. 3--never failing to recover the proper mental picture, and making the proper change in it; never embarrassed; never making an unlawful move, or likely to lose sight (mental sight) of any unlawful move made by his antagonists. Nor did he obtain the least pause for mental rest. Without one minute's interval, as soon as he had announced a move for one board, he was required to attend to the move of another antagonist at another board. Hour after hour did this continue--all the afternoon, all the evening, midnight, until two in the morning. He made two hundred and seventy moves in the twelve hours, twenty-seven per game average; this gave two minutes and a quarter for the consideration of each move. As all his moves were met by corresponding moves on the part of his antagonists, he was called upon to form five hundred and forty complete mental pictures in twelve consecutive hours, each picture representing the exact mode in which all of the sixty-four squares of a chess-board were occupied. Paulsen won two games, lost three, and drew five.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-29 10:25:55)
Ficgs correspondence chess wch 1
Easy question, easy response : Yes ! :)
A hard challenge for anyone, for sure...
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-04 20:15:35)
8-game matches
John... ??? :)
Vladimir Kramnik - Peter Leko (match for WCH classical title)
Vladimir Kramnik - Deep Fritz...
Of course it is desired... Who will remember the names of the players in the last ICCF final tournament ? Even if ICCF doesn't use this format, and (as you say) serious CC players didn't have the opportunity to play such tournament, knockout format is still desired.
My first idea was a pure enormous knockout tournament, but it's obviously not possible (too much rounds, a time problem), that's why I thought about this combined system.
Now look at the chess world : Many players don't understand why FIDE progressively reduces the number of games and time controls in WCH matches. It is the main reason why FIDE world champion title looses value. Not hard / accurate, not spectacular enough !! ..
What many players (me, at least :)) expect is a classical world championship with a big final match. You may have noticed that FICGS champion will have the opportunity to defend his title in a... 24 games match against his challenger... (!!) That's real fight, that's real challenge and that's what I expect to see from a championship, a big opposition between 2 players, and not a round-robin more or less aleatory, with too much names, not understandable for the most.
Now, as we said on TCCMB : FICGS is not "official" matter, chess is for fun here, but chess must be a show and I'm convinced it is relevant in correspondence chess too. We'll see that ;)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-23 19:54:58)
Chess thematic tournaments
Hello to all.
The 7th chess thematic tournament (waiting list is open) may be a very interesting challenge...
The opening : 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Ng8
Is it a lost position or not, you can try to respond ! (it is at least very hypermodern style, but is there a name for such a manoeuvre ? :))
There are many other ideas of openings, but you can make suggestions for future thematic tournaments.
Previous ones :
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000001
King's gambit (winner : Josef riha)
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000002
Wing's gambit
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000003
Benko gambit
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000004
Orang-utan
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000005
Danish gambit
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000006
Scotch gambit
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-24 13:03:25)
Future of correspondence chess......
That's a fine analysis, Glen.
However, it's legitimate to consider that chess at a higher level is becoming much harder so that some of the very best players may stop their career, thinking that it's no worth the energy anymore, for results more influenced by 'chance' in statistics...
How many "super-grandmasters" (2700+) said that each point over this mark represents more and more work ?
It's probably the same (and more) in correspondence chess. I do think that it's still possible to improve a lot ! .. but there's a lack of a higher class of players. That's a pity the very best correspondence chess players (ie. former ICCF world champions : Joop van Oosterom, Gert Jan Timmerman...) retire or at least don't defend their title since they achieved it. Of course it's a lot of time, but result is the top class appear to be bigger and there's no clear champion. That's not good IMO to popularize correspondence chess.
All games need champions. I read recently on a Go forum that the success of Chess nowadays was due to his champions (Go is not popular yet in the west because there's noone to represent it, except a manga [Hikaru No Go]..), Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer... That's true IMO, and that's what particularly misses to correspondence chess. Maybe things won't change in ICCF (maybe I should pretend to the board :)), but anyway that's why I chose the knockout system for the FICGS world chess championship, and the possibility for the winner to play a final against a challenger. We'll see...
Thibault de Vassal (2006-08-04 17:47:56)
WCH tournaments
Hello Marc.
The new group you're playing in (probably the last built before august 15) has a bigger gap ("écart-type") than others.. It was not possible to build it in another way.
The advantage is given by the rating to the 'best' player in all stages (knockout or round-robin), but that's the challenge, and the way of these WCH rules.. (see previous threads about WCH)
However, it's not obvious that top players win all other games... A single draw should decide.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-08-19 00:06:35)
Tournaments with money prices
Hello Benjamin...
Many new tournament categories will be created when entry fees and prices will be available. Some will be designed for granmasters, others for special challenges. We'll have the opportunity to discuss about it in a few months.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-10 14:31:47)
Sudden death games !
Hello to all.
Does someone have any idea about chess openings that would give White 50% chances to win & Black 50% chances to win OR draw, or reverse ? (in absolute, not ie. blitz statistics)
Thinking about 1.e4 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 or 1.Nf3 d5 2.Ng1, in examples... but it's hard to know. Databases can't help much as very few games with obvious errors have been played. So mad gambits could be real challenges to play & analyze, with no draws at the outcome...
Your feelings ?
Dinesh De Silva (2006-09-10 16:19:37)
Re: Money Tournaments.......
I'm optimistic! Probably double-player matches might be more popular than multi-player tournaments in Money Tournaments category, as it gives a better chance to win. Some players might play it for fun too, if GMs could be challenged for a fee. Many possibilities why it'll be a success.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-11 14:28:51)
Gambits + Time controls
Ulrich : There's no line without a major mistake, even in these gambits, that really offers 50% chances to both sides this way (win & win OR draw) in my opinion. That's why I thought about these mad lines...
Dinesh : As I responded to Gino, time can't be an acceptable compromise. I thought about it already in order to find the best way to decide between players who tie in the WCH tournaments. It depends too much on personal parameters. There will probably be a kind of "infinite challenge", where the game starts again until one looses.. but it may be long in some cases :)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-12 13:40:08)
FICGS team
We have 4 players already... I hope many others will join for this funny challenge ! :)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-14 12:01:30)
Re: Greetings from GameKnot :)
Hi Thomas !
7 players of all levels are ok to play this challenge already. I'm sure we'll complete our team in about a week. And I have no doubt about that, we'll win this match ! :)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-14 13:33:14)
Chess engines prohibited
Please note :
"The use of databases and chess engines will be prohibited for this challenge." (games unrated)"
Lots of fun ! .. Join us :)
Don Groves (2006-09-15 09:14:14)
Challenge GMs for money?
This sounds like just another way to pay for a lesson ;)
Ilmars Cirulis (2006-09-19 10:16:32)
2 players match...
Is it possible to challenge a player to match? Or not yet? Thanks, Cirulis
Anthony Bingham (2006-10-03 15:47:07)
Introduction
Hello all, my name is Tony, aka (DEwillget8 @ Gameknot). I am looking forward to our upcoming tournament and would like to give a big thank you to all involved. I do have one question. How do I challenge a player here to a match so I can get used to the layout of your site? Thanks, Tony
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-04 16:31:45)
Re: Computers
My two cents, as I probably share Marius point of view : The same reasons you like to play a match or any game without engines... Challenge, chess beauty, and so on..
It is sportsmanlike ! .. simply because the rules allow it ! .. and it's worth playing such a match, simply because we like it :)
Scott Prestwood (2006-10-21 02:42:17)
Moderation in everything
I find it easy to take on too many correspondence games my self. I prefer to have time to analyze as this is the tradition of coorespondence chess. I often feel busy (zeitnot as you call it) with just 15 games with long time controls. Some principals I use in moderating my challenge rate are; 1) I dont start new games if I have a game under 15 moves in progress, opening require less analysis, and the mid game is where most of the work is done. 2) whatever the estimated days per moves is I limit myself to 1/4th of that as my limit of games. i.e. if the average days per moves is 12 days I will try to keep around 3 games going if possible. These limits work well and I'm on several coorespondence sites.
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-10-21 12:09:00)
Best game
The "Best Game" should be a figurehead of the FICS-Site - but is it? I don't think so. That so an exotic opening experiment (particularly with black) will run in a real loosing position, is not very suprising. And also the praised last move is found by several engines in a very short time! What we (this site) need is a very high classed game with surprising twists - which engines never can find. And it must be with very good comments on most moves. Looking for this - that is the real challenge for all of us! Wolfgang
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-22 14:00:32)
Re: Best Game
That's right Wayne, but anyway I would have played it even with one Nf6-Ng8 more... I like these mad challenges :)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-25 13:37:13)
Rating / 8-game match
Anyway this result is quite unusual in correspondence chess... :)
Conditions were best to realize such an increase of rating, and a part of the forfeit reasons are probably out of the match (a flag gate)... 6 games out of 8 were rated as a win in this match between Farit & John, with no other result for Farit when the rating calculation occured. It happened, it can happen, I think it won't happen often (I would be surprised if such a case occurs in semi-finals) but in all ways : That's great ! .. IMO :)
There's a part of "injustice" in all most watched sports and games, it's an essential element ! .. The biggest one 'strangely' is in soccer. At another level, chess stars choose their tournaments and manage their FIDE rating, remember ie. this match Etienne Bacrot (2470) vs. Vassily Smyslov (2510, wch) in Albert, with this result 5-1
An obvious, topical and nearer example : FIDE classical (old) world championship system is deeply unfair (for the challenger) but it MUST be kept !
As I said above, the concept (added to fast time control) may create some - rare - rating peaks, but effects are limited and I'm convinced it's interesting enough to try it.
To be continued... in a few years ? ;)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-30 18:13:36)
Big chess "birthday" tournament !
FICGS now counts more than 1000 members :)
The display of Big Chess games has just been improved : Last move marked, coordinates, speed, bugs fixed... So it may be funny to see more games !!
A special tournament will start soon, if you want to enter it, just post "I'm in." (or something like that :)) in this thread. The first 7 players will be in.
The tournament will be there :
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__BIG_CHESS__THOUSAND_MEMBERS_EVENT.html
Games unrated, time control is 30 days + 1 day / move... 7 players -> 6 games per player (big challenge).
Reminder : To see what Big Chess is, see the Inaugural match game...
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__BIG_CHESS__INAUGURAL_MATCH.html
100% human chess guaranteed, no chess engines & databases :)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-05 12:45:06)
Fischer : "Now chess is completely dead"
A new interview from the former world chess champion Bobby Fischer...
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3468
No surprise : Fischer’s problems with the Union Bank of Switzerland, United states founded and being run by extremists, Capablanca brillancy, but also : "I don’t like chess any more" (what about chess 960 ?), "Now chess is completely dead. It is all just memorisation and prearrangement. It’s a terrible game now. Very uncreative"...
I just wonder.. How can we find so much pleasure in correspondence chess ? .. Was his pleasure only to destroy weak players or in real challenges against strong[er] players (ie. Karpov).. I can understand why a grandmaster stop to play competitive chess because it's too hard & it takes too much time, but I can't explain myself such a champion finding "limits" to chess & getting no more pleasure...
"Play Go !" :)
Ilmars Cirulis (2006-11-13 13:10:22)
Challenge!
I think that
- Latvian gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5
and
- Traxler counterattack 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5
is won by white.
So I challenge everyone serious player who wants to play Latvian gambit or Traxler counterattack (for example, Thibault Vassal :D ) with black.
My e-mail is ilmars.cirulis@gmail.com
Ilmars Cirulis. :D
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-13 15:36:42)
Challenge!
I'll defend these openings :)
I sent an email to you.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-15 16:41:25)
Out of topic :)
Ilmars, it is no worth finding another way to win for White :) .. Please help me to save the Black position after 50.g5! .. that's real challenge !
Wayne Lowrance (2006-11-18 00:52:42)
Player needed
A challenge your invited to the Class A 000009 2000-2400 tournament. There are six players now, top rated is 2300+. Room for one more player. Cmon and enjoy a nice tourney. Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-21 11:32:39)
Go: Komi
Stones handicap or Komi handicap is handicap anyway... I'm not sure it makes sense to change the Komi (Lionel would agree, I think).
As I just said in another thread, if we add a handicap system which gives chances enough to weak players against strong players, I'm afraid results & ratings / ranks don't mean anything anymore then, at least more aleatory. This is another game... (and such 'strange' rules might frighten beginners).
I think it could be ok (as another challenge) in an unrated tournaments category.
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-21 14:00:19)
French Go Federation rating
Here is a link that shows an example of rating that include handicap-go games
http://ffg.jeudego.org/echelle/echelle_algo.php
Just food for thought, but I like this system because of the balance betwenn fairness and challenge involved.
(sorry but these pages are in french only, but maybe we could check the ratings formulae in AGA?)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-01 11:19:43)
Deep Fritz, Rybka & future
The Chess Challenge 2006 in Bonn between classical world champion Vladimir Kramnik and chess engine Deep Fritz 10 confirms (who ignored ?) the best chess programs can rivalize with the world champion in a match, but it first shows us these calculating monsters still have weaknesses.
Question is : What are the real improvements in Fritz 10 compared to Fritz 9 (engine speaking only) ?
Here is what I think about chess engines nowadays (Fritz 10, Shredder, 10, Junior 10, Hiarcs 10 and particularly Rybka 2.2) :
The way of think to play correspondence chess is (or should be) mostly human one combined with a chess engine algorithm. We follow the tree of moves like a program with our selective algorithm (much better than chess engines), applying our judgement of the position when necessary only. The point is we evaluate moves and we almost never evaluate a position twice.
Chess engines are very good analysis tools but are surprisingly not designed to be very good chess players. I think a major improvement in chess engines should be recognition of 'sufficient moves' : ie. it is no worth to always find the best move at a particular point of the tree, this reflection time could be used later... It depends on the evaluation of the position, on the clocks... Iterative model is quite basic (in a game at least !).
Another point is recognition of traps. This is the start of psychology in chess engines, and basics of the art of war. It first depends on who your opponent is, and on the clocks too. Finally, at the end of the tree, chess engines evaluate positions, but how many evaluate moves ? .. Speculative moves were a step, but it first shew chess engines were not able yet to see what move is worth to be analysed really deeper, consequently creating a 'human' weakness, particularly against some other chess engines.
I don't know how Rybka works, but as far as I read about this one that calculates much less positions (about 10 times) than Fritz, I wouldn't be surprised that Vasik Rajlich had implemented a better approach of human way of think, which is undoubtly the future of chess engines.
A good 'centaur' in ie. Playchess rapid tournaments is first a good choice between Chessbase engines according to the position and clocks. Fritz qualities probably apply best in standard games, where clocks are really designed for him. Among Chessbase engines, Hiarcs is probably the best Blitz player and could be the best correspondence chess player (even if it isn't the best CC tool for humans). Rybka is probably a kind of centaur itself (sorry, herself ;)), knowing when to use (in the tree !) brute force and more selective approachs - not to be compared to Hydra or Deep Blue which, on contrary, use most brute force.
My conclusion is chess engines have much to learn from humans yet, we'll see a Rybka 5 and Fritz 13, with much better results against other chess engines, but their results shouldn't increase a lot against the best humans in future. Finally, it will never be a good correspondence chess player :)
My two cents.
If I find time, I'll continue to implement my own chess engine..... but it's a lot of work :/
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-06 18:18:54)
David Bronstein
David Bronstein (February 19, 1924, Bila Tserkva, Ukraine - December 5, 2006, Minsk, Belarus) was not only one of the fathers of anti-computer play, he also drew a challenge match for the title of world champion by a score of 12-12 with Mikhail Botvinnik, the reigning champion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bronstein
He played (and beat) all the first well known chess programs : Rebel, Fritz, Zarkov, Chess player, Deep Thought, Socrates, Saitek Sparc, MChess, Genius, Dark Thought, Deep Blue Jr., XXXX ...
Some of his games - http://www.angelfire.com/on/anticomputer/bronst.html
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-10 16:20:16)
FIDE's world championship format
Quite good news...
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3530
Ok, we'll have a final match between a challenger and the world champion, this is great !
(the worst is avoided)
In future, the challenger should be designated after a multi-stages round-robin tournaments cycle, then a candidates match (original :))
Will it be enough to attract sponsors... In my opinion the candidates match should be played in 6 games at least, and the knockout tournament should be at least 2 or 3 rounds long. Several round-robin tournaments, this looks like correspondence chess format and this is useful when you have many players and few time. I'm not sure it's a good choice for OTB world chess championship... :/
What do you think ?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-11 03:58:47)
Portuguese opening
Did you know this one ??
Miguel shows interesting lines in Wikichess... A future challenge for Ilmars ;)
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=wikichess&article=3731
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-16 03:55:35)
Topalov vs. Kramnik v2, is it worth ?
I don't know how many times Kramnik will have to defend his title if challengers provide the money, but I'm quite disappointed with this news of a match scheduled only 6 months after the previous one.
I suggest they organize a match Topalov vs. Deep Fritz 10 (reigning world champion) first...
What do you think ? :)
James Stripes (2006-12-16 16:19:10)
bad timing, but
World Championships should be decided by matches, nit by a tournament such as that planned in Mexico. Topalov was never a legitimate champion, but he is perhaps now a legitimate champion (and FIDE finally recognizes the legitimate champion again). If this challenge by Topalov succeeds in derailing Mexico, it will have accomplished a useful purpose. Of course I'm lookin forward to watching the games in Mexico, and would be wholehearted in support if it were a qualifying tournament. Thus Topalov should be playing, rather than Kramnik; the winner should then challnge Kramnik with the full backing of FIDE.
Steve Sabean (2006-12-25 22:45:03)
Sounds like a challenge
The gauntlet has been thrown down! How about this: We play two games, I will play Black in both. In one, White plays 5 Bxf7+ and in the other, White plays 5 Nxf7. We could play here if M. de Vassal would be kind enough to set it up, or if not, then e-mail is OK.
Miguel Pires (2006-12-26 23:25:01)
Open challenge
Hello, I'm making an open challenge to all players (from the top to the bottom) in this site to play against me in the Portuguese oppening. Soo if someone accept the challenge please tell me. I play always with withe. To Thibault de Vassal If someone accept can you please setup the games in FICGS? Best Regard's Miguel Pires
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-27 00:37:59)
Simultaneous game
Ok, looks interesting... If at least 4 players accept your challenge, I'll create a simultaneous game on the server. Conditions : Unrated, time control 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves.
Wayne Lowrance (2006-12-27 06:41:21)
open challenge
I will play you provided it is set up here by Thibault as he said "if you get four players". Wayne
Wayne Lowrance (2006-12-28 20:48:53)
open challenge
sorry, remove me from challenge...Thanks anyhow Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-30 13:31:14)
Quad Silver?
Tournaments with money prizes will begin in january... By the way there will be changes in these tournament categories (it will be also possible to play "blitz" games, at probably 10 moves / 1 hour time control)
However I think this challenge should stay friendly... (at least 'on FICGS')
Elmer Valderrama (2006-12-31 11:01:04)
Blitz CC
It looks like half-way between chessbase freestyle and rapid CC time control, personally would prefer the old OTB control of 2h + 30min for 40 moves + 1h for 20 with adjourn; or similar TC.
Another time control variation on the 10moves/1h format would be to add an adjourn (suspend for a later specified time), this could be done after 4 hours of playing (or 6 hours) Then, players meet the next day after some home analysis for continuation with the same format (+ second adj after 4h or 6h)
I presume Thibault will enlighten us soon on this subject.
However I think it would be nice to let the player choose a time control for a chess challenge (duel) so all flavours and individual tastes are met.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-31 14:53:21)
Blitz correspondence chess
Hello Charlie & Elmer.
Still thinking about it, I don't think it should look like standard OTB time control, some points are :
- How many games played at the same time (2-game match or tournament) ?
- Entries in waiting list will have a life period (someone agrees the challenge in the next hour, if not it's canceled)
- Adjournment is a big issue... It could cause many problems :/
- Too many time controls is not good IMO.
Charlie Neil (2007-01-04 12:07:29)
Blitz Chess on Ficgs
Hello Thibault, By "Real Time" I mean both players are on the site, at the board at the same time. " The rendez-vous system" as you called it. The Swiss system of pairings by rating and then the second round having the winnners play the winners and those with no points play each other and so on into the next 4 rounds just may work I think, draws are then discouraged. If it is possible to play 40 moves in two hours on this site that would be brilliant! But how about 2 hours each for the whole game! Games lasting 4 hours maximum would be a challenge, and maybe fun. Along with the correspendence chess features. Ficgs would have it all! But then "you may call me a dreamer but I'm not the only one".
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-07 21:56:50)
Traxler
That's real challenge :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-10 03:08:52)
Rybka, Fritz and future...
Computerchess is definitely an exciting challenge... The community is fast-growing, new versions of chess engines appear every day, many dream to be the next Vasik Rajlich and to produce an engine that would beat the well-known Chessbase engines and the famous Rybka.
These days, I had a look at Fruit 2.1, TogaII and Crafty source code that are available to download, and started to implement new search & evaluation functions. It's quite easy to understand why chess programming is so addictive, so much done and so much to do... finally I did not enter this mad race without an ending, probably for the same reasons Anthony Cozzie (the author of Zap! Chess Zanzibar) and many others retired.
However here are my feelings about future of chess engines, and the fight that just started between most probably Chessbase engines (Fritz, Shredder, Junior and Hiarcs) and a new era of chess engines that started with Rybka...
First, it's quite obvious to me that Rybka (now Rybka 2.3) is only another one of a long series of chess engines always stronger than each others ! .. I expect the next ones to reach 50, 100 then 200 points more (and maybe more) on the next chess engines elo rating lists, a scale that definitely can't be compared to human elo rating list ! .. Several reasons to this : (1) Chess engines are human killers at standard time controls, but chess engines are far to play perfect chess yet. (2) The way ratings are calculated.
Rybka taught us several things IMO :
- Algorithms and evaluation functions are no more enough. Now chess engines have to play chess, not only search a tree of chess positions... That's probably what Rybka brought to computerchess. Since Fruit 2.1 & Toga II source code is available, and computerchess community is constantly discussing improvements in algorithms, evaluations of positions and new ideas, to implement a chess engine becomes easier so I have no doubt that new very strong chess engines like Rybka will come.
- To become famous, a chess engine must 'also' beat his rivals. I first thought that Rybka was designed to be an engines killer only (at least before to be an analysis tool) with some tricks exploiting most engines weaknesses. No, Rybka is also a great UCI engine, simply stronger and with many options & features. Like Vasik Rajlich, who is engineer and international chess master, you'll have not only to think like an engineer to create such an engine. However I still don't think it is the best analysis tool for correspondence chess, it doesn't play really better chess and in all cases it is not enough. More, Rybka 3, 4, 5 shouldn't influence correspondence chess (maybe even human vs. machine) much... Computerchess influences computerchess first.
It's written sometimes that the strongest chess engines could reach a IM, even GM level at correspondence chess. I definitely disagree with that, at least for the moment (it will take a long time yet), but as chess engines results tend to approach correspondence chess ones (means more and more draws), I do think chess engines have much to learn from correspondence chess players way of thinking, meaning : A more psychological approach, bonus for traps detection. Evaluate moves, not only positions. A more complex search, not 'only' iterative (brute force is definitely useless). No more anti-human style, speculative moves (=weakness, ie. Deep Junior) for speculative results against strongest chess engines, draws are prefered. To avoid positions not understood by the engine. Longer games, closed games (if supported)... Opening books should look like correspondence chess GMs ones (of course according to the engine's style of play) and no more been made of FIDE GM games. A better time management... Future of computerGo may teach to computerchess about some evaluations.
A chess engine must play good moves AND try to win (which is not always the same). It seems Fruit & Rybka play solid and are waiting to exploit their opponent's weaknesses thanks to a better "chess" algorithm/knowledge. As far as I have seen, Shredder & Fritz still have the best 'eye', they see far but fuzzy. Quite the same about Fruit & Toga developped by a great engineer, Fabien Letouzey : Less chess knowledge but an improved algorithm. As for Rybka, a great chess knowledge and probably a smarter algorithm (not better, smarter !) were probably enough already. The future best chess engines will be made by good chess players...
An interesting point is it could be not so easy, maybe even nonsense, to create the best analysis tool that would also obtain the best results against other chess engines. My first prediction is Rybka won't be the top rated chess engine ever, hundreds of new ideas will appear in all parts of chess programming, slowly breaking Rybka secrets, then speed will be a factor again. Deep Fritz, Junior, Fruit or Hydra are most probably the core of the next generations of chess engines... but there's a lot of work yet :)
My two cents.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-16 00:00:43)
A solution?
Hi Pablo.
The real point is here (quote from Benjamin) : "The discussion is not about to change something. It is about to build a new feature here"
Such a new feature is not only something more, it would completely change the challenge's nature offered here. I don't think it's a good idea. A special tournament would have no sense here IMO. If you want to play without computer assistance and be sure your opponents do the same, the only solution is... play big chess :)
Elmer Valderrama (2007-02-17 10:59:30)
like a no-smoking zone?
I believe what Aldag want is a place with a sign "computer-free chess" just like those pubs, restaurants, trains, etc use a "no-smoking zone" sign. It will be visible so that it will deter smokers/engine-users to enter that zone.
To make it less attractive to engine assistance, these games should be unrated, with player automatically losing their current ELO (that ELO rating could have been "won" using engines previously anyway) so just their names will suffice, and there should not be no tournaments --so that there is no "winners" as this will trigger the use of engines-- The players will only challenge each other and the winner will not be known to anybody except the players, and the games will not be recorded in the general database and they will not be shown live: all this will for certain deter any need to use an engine i.e. 'winning' means nothing literally and it will look as if it never happened
This way chess without engines will be as if doing something clever when actually it is a loss of time -can't remember who said this about chess 8-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-17 18:07:31)
Gameknot vs. FICGS, other challenges
It seems GameKnot leads 5-4 in the games played here... Not bad :)
Any news about the games played at GameKnot ?
It could be interesting to discuss about other team challenges... A team tournament, matches against other servers or forums (which ones ?), maybe at different time controls or playing chess variants (chess 960) or other games (could be fun to play chess & Go, poker or anything against the same players).. with or without computer assistance and so on... It should be easier to build teams now thanks to the chat bar.
It seems there was no problem of cheating with chess engines during the match against GameKnot, that's encouraging to organize other ones.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-18 19:14:30)
ICCF champions league
Hello to all.
While looking for interesting challenges that could take place here at FICGS (ie. simultaneous games at standard time control by a FIDE / ICCF IM-GM, or team challenges against other servers), Valer Eugen Demian (ICCF) suggested we build a team that could play in the next ICCF champions league... If we can build a team, why not ?
Rules of the event (taking place on ICCF server) are here :
http://tables.iccf.com/email/ChLeague/2004/season1faq.htm
What do you think ? .. Did anyone play this tournament already ?
Charlie Neil (2007-02-19 13:52:00)
ICCF champions league
I have played on the ICCF webserver. So, it must be an easy webserver to play on if i can manage it! I think there must be a Ficgs team! More publicity and a chance to meet more chessfriends. Unfortunately I'm not of the standard required to be in a successful team but I can stand on the "touchline" with my Ficgs scarf and shout encouragement. C'mon! Also what about challenges to those sites such itsyourturn and chessworld.net and schemingming.com. you know the ones that aren't free to play on.....
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-19 16:18:09)
Several teams ?
Maybe we can create several teams...
Looks like a nice & friendly challenge with many teams from the whole chess world... (Kings of TCCMB, Chessbase Users Club, Chessfriends, Rochade, Chess Mail, Gaia, Le Courrier Des Echecs, CC Vikings, Masters of the IECG, Satranc Okulu, Sachy, Rey Gris, Zugzwang Bocholt and so on...)
I did not find in the FAQ how the teams flag should be defined, but still enquiring :)
Wayne Lowrance (2007-03-30 02:15:30)
Droppers: New Rule
I am wrestling with this new rule a little bit. Cannot make up my mind if I like it or not. I do not like to see games foreited or silent withdrawals in general. But Tribault goes on to amplify "any player who forfeits his games without giving an explanation...." The term (plural) games is one thing. But should I wish to forfeit "a" game based on my evaluation should not be challenged. I would not think I would have to explain why I am doing so. A certain amount of trust is required here on this site as Tribault has preached over and over again...Oh well, either way, fire away. Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-05 04:22:32)
Go : Simultaneous games with handicap !
Hello to all Go players !
It could be interesting to organize simultaneous games by 1 kyu+ players with a stones handicap against weaker players... or another kind of hard & funny challenge, feel free to make a suggestion if you have ideas.
Any taker ? :) .. come in, more fun !
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-05 18:37:17)
Go : Games with handicap !
True ;-) .. but as this "tournament" would consist in one (or several) experimented player against many others, it's a bit different from regular tournaments, so I don't know how to name it... Also depends on the number of opponents.
Would you play this challenge ? :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-21 10:44:59)
WCH Rules
Thanks Jason :) .. Actually I wouldn't say these rules are "best", "logical" or whatever, I just feel it is an exciting challenge and a quite interesting way to see interesting games and find the best player.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-23 21:34:41)
Deep Fritz vs. Deep Junior
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3802
FIDE will organize a computer-computer 6-games match during the final days of the candidates match in june in Elista.
The "players" : Reigning computer chess world champion Deep Junior and 'reigning world champion' Deep Fritz. Time control : 75 min + 5 sec / move, the winner will get $60,000, the loser $40,000
This match brings a few questions : No particular comment on the choice of the engines, Rybka will wait for a win in a computer chess world championship... However I can't see a real interest for FIDE and for chess in such a match. I mean 6 games of rapid computer chess.. $100,000 !? Of course it will attract a few new players - to beat computers is an attractive challenge. But at least I hope Chessbase is the main sponsor :) .. does it mean a new Deep FRitz and Deep Junior version in june ? .. I hope that the games analyzed by Rybka 2.3 won't reveal the engines too poor.. :/ .. Finally what 'title' for the winner ?! ;)
Sandor Marton-Bardocz (2007-04-30 11:54:47)
WCH Stage 1 rules
Hi everyone! Let me introduce my self :-) I'm the highest rated player in the Wch stage 1 group 12 "the blocking guy" how Achim described me...whatever that means.. 1. there is no dead draw in my opinion likewise there is no absolute winning lines, openings in a chess game...And this is most true in our "centaur, human-engine tandem" era where lines are very "unstable" to say the least..so I don't believe that one can play for a absolute draw without any risk..avoiding complicated variations...the variations complexity is very relativ...line can be "cristal clear" for one and most complicated for other..In my opinion high rates of draws among world class cc player isn't because they all play for draws ...It's a tendency..like it was in otb chess among super gm-s...not long ago...until the "no draw alowed" rules were aplied...i don't want to speculate why this happens.. 2. If someone really want to win...then should play for a win ...no matter what regulations are applied for that particular tournament 3. I think that if someone might want to take a look to the game that I played against mister Deeb in the same tournament ...starting from the move 17 of mine...hardly can to argue that I wanted to play for draws just to achieve equal points to advance. I think that none of the engines can even "smell" the outcome of the game in that position after 17..d5!?...so...saying that nowdays it's easier to achieve draws because of engines....it's a little bit exaggerated The plan started with the move 17 ...d5!? that I have played it was an absolute rejection of a drawish (by repetation) position...and it was played just because i wanted to ...play.. not to advance in a higher stage of the tournament or something...even though the final outcome ( just in my opinion! and this isn't an absolute true by far) is probably ...still a draw. 4. The regulations regarding the advance in the higher stages of the tournament..now this are definitly arguable!there are pro's and con's...and always be. We don't have plausible answers for this kind of issues...because it's is a subjectiv matter. I'm not convinced too that "higher rated player advance"is the right regulation..few examples...just look for example ...Kramnik - Leko WCH . a. ..challenger and his fans can say.."hey he didn't beat him...why should remain WChampion?! He didn't proved that he is better!" b. ..Wchampion and his fans can say.."hey u want my crown?! than beat me, and take it! draw isn't enough!" The line of examples doesn't stops here ..i don't want to prolong this subject...No rule can satisfy both sides...polemics, flame are always present :-) 5. None can predict what will be the process in a group...If 2-3 or even 4 players changes they mind and doesn't really play..that's it, and none can't do a thing about that ...maybe some sanctions later...i don't believe it will do any good anyway... 6. In the game betwen me and Achim...I don't think that I choosed a draw line...I think that I had the initiative but probably it wasn't enough for a win, Achim overforced it ....which isn't a bad thing but probably not with the plan he had preferred. good day for everyone!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-30 22:34:37)
WCH rules
Thanks Sandor & Wolfgang for sharing your views.
As you said, there's no perfect rule for everyone, particularly in a correspondence chess championship, where time is a predominant factor. As for me, I like much FICGS rules so far because of these major points :
1) The best players have the best chances.
2) A new cycle can start every 6 months.
3) There's no external influence in a knockout tournament.
I think the lowest rated player has to prove he's stronger than the highest rated player or champion, so it's coherent in round-robin and knockout tournaments. I particularly like the special rule in the knockout tournament (stage 1, 2 & 3). I'm now playing an exciting quarter final against Wolfgang, that I'm to lose because of this rule - the winner is the player with the strongest TER is all games are draw, the player with the lowest TER if not all games are draw - even if it finishes with a 4-4 score. Simply because I'll lose most probably at least one game. I think it's fair ! .. I knew the rule (of course, I made it :)), I knew I had to draw all games or to win by one point at least. Rules are the game ! .. It's not more unfair than to draw a game with one or two pawns more ;)
However I agree that WCH round-robin tournaments should be 9, 11 or 13 players groups to give more place to chess. I'll take care of this in the next cycle.
Finally, not only rules are to be taken in consideration... To attract players, there must be a real challenge ! .. To take the title to the champion will be really hard for sure :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-02 19:10:02)
sb tie breaks
... it will be discussed every 6 months for sure ;)
While writing WCH rules, the main goal was not only (or firstly) to make it fair. It should be a spectacular and exciting challenge first ! .. Nothing was more unfair than the old FIDE WCH cycle and that was great. Once more these rules have not be designed to 'choose' the best player in the tournament, but more probably the best player. Another advantage of rating preference is you know the challenge when each group starts, result is not decided during the tournament, according to the games of your opponents with the same number of points.
At last, I just wanted to make it different. So you may play in the ICCF & IECG world championship tournaments if you prefer the classical round-robin system :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-03 02:13:44)
Go championship cycle
1st FICGS go WCH will start in a few months, but I'm still not really satisfied with current rules :
"FICGS world Go championship is first a round-robin tournament, involving 11 players including the 6 players who won or lead most Go tournaments started during the previous year and the 5 highest rated players, among players who entered the waiting list. If more than 2 players win (or lead) a tournament with equal score, no win is granted. A win in a "pro" tournament is worth 9 "kyu" wins. A win in a "dan" tournament is worth 3 "kyu" wins. In case of equality, the next places will be taken in account.
The winner of this tournament is the challenger for FICGS world champion title. In case of equality, the winner is the player with the highest tournament entry rating (TER), If this rule can't designate a unique challenger, current ratings will be considered. If current world champion defends his title, they will play a 6 games match. In case of equality (3-3), the winner is the former world champion.
All games are played in 30 days + 1 day / move. Komi is 7.5 points. Rules for Go are chinese rules, as defined by the Chinese Weiqi Association."
Not clear enough, quite complicate and strange, even if I like the idea of a 2-stages tournament (round-robin tournament then challenger vs. champion match) and to give the opportunity to the best rated Go players to enter it without playing tournaments before... Other questions, double round-robin or not, should it be open to all players.. Feel free to suggest your ideas for a nice Go WCH cycle ! :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-03 21:24:27)
opponents
To implement chess knowledge is a question of time, I'm not sure it was a priority in the last Fritz/Junior versions. Rybka will have serious challengers in a few months, one year at most :)
Don Burden (2007-05-11 02:32:13)
Chinese thoughts
Confucius could give answer to that, unfortunately Confucius not here at moment.
Kindness in heart better than gold in bank.
Truth like football, receive many kicks before reaching goal.
Politeness golden key that open many doors.
Any powder that kills flea is good powder.
Knowledge only gained through curiousity.
Man without relatives is man without trouble.
Sleep only escape from yesterday.
Do not challenge supernatural unless armed with sword of truth.
To destroy false prophet must first unmask him before eyes of believers.
When fear attack brain, tongue wave distress signal.
Drop of plain water on thirsty tongue more precious than gold in purse.
Thought at present like dog chasing own tail, getting noplace.
When money talk, few are deaf.
Humility only defense against rightful blame.
Luck happy combination of foolish accidents.
Alibi have habit of disappearing like hole in water.
Good fisherman, like clever merchant, know lure of bright colors.
Man without enemies like dog without fleas.
Front seldom tell truth, to know occupant of house always look in backyard.
One small wind can raise much dust.
Caution sometimes mother of suspicion. Suspicion often father of truth.
Ilmars Cirulis (2007-05-17 22:52:42)
Challenge!
Who want to defend
- Evans gambit with white
- Traxler counterattack with black?
I will be happy to play Silver Ligting game and try to kill that UCOs.
Wait and I will add more openings to that list. :)
Phil Cook (2007-05-21 08:56:19)
Challenge
Your 2 games Vs my two games I'll play Petrov,if you accept opening I'll accept Petrov If you play it
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-05 18:45:25)
Predictions :)
Ok, I take some risks ! :o)
My favourites are Shirov, Leko, Grischuk & .. Kamsky !
I feel these ones may want to reach the final match 'simply' more, for some different reasons.. (Shirov had a match to play against Kramnik in the past, Leko for a revenge, Grischuk for the challenge and Kamsky because he's the K who was not :))
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-06 19:12:00)
Rybka: $100,000 challenge to FIDE
The author of Rybka - undoubtly the strongest chess engine (Rybka 2.3.1), Vasik Rajlich challenges FIDE for a $100,000 match between Rybka and the winner of the "Ultimate Computer Chess Challenge 2007" between Deep Junior and Deep Fritz, that just started (first game drawn) :
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=1126
Also the match offer to grandmasters is more and more interesting :
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=794;pg=1
I doubt Chessbase or FIDE would accept to organize & play such a match, even if Fritz 11 or 12 can beat the next Rybka... The war of engines is not on the chessboard nowadays but that's quite interesting to follow anyway :)
Dirk Ghysens (2007-06-07 08:13:30)
Ehlvest
Rybka's GM challenger will be Ehlvest (again); in an earlier match, Ehlvest (Elo 2643) received Pawn odds and lost.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-14 18:14:03)
Rybka 2.3.2
Just after President's cup "Ultimate computer challenge" finished, Vasik Rajlich threw a new Rybka 2.3.2 in the chess engines arena... (partly explains the $100,000 challenge to Ilyumzhinov a few weeks ago)
Once more, Rybka 2.3.2 seems stronger than her predecessors with indcredible results (blitz time control) against Hiarcs 11.1, Zap chess Zanzibar, Shredder and so on... Maybe +35 elo points compared to Rybka 2.3.1 !
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=1264#fp
http://www.rybkachess.com
Albert Popov (2007-06-20 12:40:06)
We are in need of a good challenge!
I don't think Rybka could win in the same overwhelming manner, if Deep Junior the Horrible took part in the tournament. Why, it might be a well-thought move on the Junior team's part. Aren't we in for another Rybka - Junior thrilling match challenge soon? I would bet on Junior in that chess brain war as Junior's long-standing loyal customer.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-20 22:54:33)
Internet chess
Well, the discussion with Tryfon Gavriel continues at TCCMB. As I had to explain the way I make FICGS, I copy my responses here :
http://ancients.correspondencechess.com/index.php?topic=109.15
Hello again Tryfon !
That's a very interesting discussion...
Actually I have to explain FICGS in its whole to respond :) .. To be continued for sure..
While registering a new member wrote to me a few months ago "Thanks for creating this ultimate chess challenge" or so... That's exactly what I try to do, mostly with the FICGS championship knockout & round-robin rules... Players just want challenge, that's the only assumption I start with, so I try to create interesting challenges. About the intellectual part, you're right but I'm quite sure that top level correspondence chess players still consider their game as an intellectual challenge, much more than a brute force or computer skills one. That's not the case for Advanced chess with fast time controls.
Let's take a look at the bicycle races again... The "Tour de France" is dying IMO.. because everyone understood we "don't know" if the champion is ok.. If doping was allowed (it would be a scandal for health of course), I'm sure the interest would raise again ! I think it is the same for chess & for everything else... The "Tour de France" syndrom happened in Elista with the match Kramnik vs. Topalov... It will have consequences. We need champions and we want true champions, every means are ok for this ! .. So the "engines allowed" rule is the only one possible or reasonable in my opinion.
Of course, chess & correspondence chess are changing, because these "walls" are nearer & nearer... maybe chess will die, maybe not.. The main problem is that in 1997, a super computer became World Champion... this year a "simple" computer Deep Fritz became world champion, soon Rybka on a cellular phone... :) Who is really interested to be a champion in "human category" ? FIDE world chess championship will continue to progressively lose its interest IMO...
Correspondence chess is just starting to grow in popularity and is told to be dying already. Surely correspondence chess will ask more & more time at a high level to win a few points, but it is possible to create more challenge by ie. changing the rating rules (the "design" of Elo rating system will become a problem).. Then, if it is not enough, we'll look for other challenges... It's told for years that Go (Weiqi) will replace chess in western countries... why not Big chess as the "brain only" game if there can't be doping in it.. just trying, as there's no other solution :)
A word about Poker of course, as it's probably the fastest growing game in popularity : IMO this game is at a stade like chess in year 1900, but the same problem will happen, even quicker. At a high level the game will be just more and more boring (if you wish to win real money) or chancy (in a wch tournament), or you'll have to always find weak players (well, not very challenging).
About the simultaneous exhibition against Alekhine or Capablanca, I'm not sure at all they would crush everyone at our chess servers, they are undoubtly more talented than all of us, but I feel it wouldn't be enough in all cases to win against correspondence chess style of play & knowledge accumulated for 50 years... A few players rated OTB 2000-2200 could draw against them IMO...
At last, yes I'm a fan of Sun Tzu's "The art of war" :) .. I strongly believe that correspondence chess will not die in the next few years because players will follow its principles more and more, as the only way to win ! .. Big chess follows the same principles... and Go is the most challenging game because of it too !
Tryfon, I'm not sure that we're opposite in our vision of chess ! .. Our servers have obviousy different goals, nothing more.. I do enjoy playing mad blitz games without chess engines... I just believe that the future of internet chess is "serious (engines allowed, rated) correspondence chess" on one hand and "human chess for fun (no engines, unrated)" on the other hand... The other ways look like nonsense to me.
I hope it responds.
Best wishes, Thibault
Alexander Shalamanov (2007-06-21 08:46:21)
The rating principle is a must
Hi, mates! I sincerely believe the rating principle should be a concern when arranging the team members in a match challenge. That way we would provide for the fair play principle. It doesn't make any sense to try gaining cheap wins. Remember, honesty is the best policy. Cheers, Alex
Dan Rotaru (2007-06-22 00:41:00)
Lightning and Blitz Time Controls
I am proposing the following idea to solve the problem of Lightning and Blitz Time Controls: the first person who signs up should be able to choose a date and time when the game should start (use server time to avoid confusion). The player who accepts the challenge should accept that he has to logon and play the game at the established date and time. Of course any of them can cancel the game or ask for a new date and time if for any reason they cannot play.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-23 06:06:29)
Chess Engine Strength
Hello Glen !
I see your point, that's quite true and a consequence is what I called at TCCMB "the extensive nature of elo rating", however rating rules are more dynamic at FICGS.. So, let's say Rybka playing the FICGS championship against players of all kinds of ratings in the round-robin cycle... Anyway 2200 is only my feeling.
I understand your views about "rybka" [correspondence] chess nowadays, even if I don't agree with it completely. I saw some of your CC games played at IECG, and it looks much more like 'good old' chess with some unusual and beautiful tactical openings than typical 'correspondence computer chess' nowadays. I do believe there will be a place in the next CC years for more weird openings like bird, king's gambit, english... Also take a look at Peter Schuster and Wladyslav Krol games here !? .. Nothing boring with them, chess engine or not :)
Also advanced chess games with fast time controls could be quite interesting to watch in future as a way to see granmaster games with chess engines avoiding blunders 'only' (ok a bit more). We don't know exactly the human part in it, but draws won't be the rule for sure.
What is "boring" at correspondence chess (not new) is that achieving a top rating take a long... very long time ! .. But this is a great challenge yet IMO.
At last, thanks for you kind words :)
Best, Thibault
Alexander Shalamanov (2007-06-26 11:33:47)
Good, good...
Nice to hear that the match gonna take place under any weather! Lol! Great that the nicks stuff is fading into the background. Anyways, nicks or fake names are minor issues compared to a good inter-server challenge match! Good luck to anyone and especially to the IGAME team! Pardonnes-moi, Thibault, mais je suis Russe, n'est-ce pas? Cheers, Alex
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-28 04:07:04)
IGAME team
I don't think IGAME team has to provide more information... The match started, once more that's internet chess, we have to accept this part of uncertainty. You may search ratings for players mentioned above (using their real name), but anyway IMO at least 1 player (not me :)) in FICGS team does not use his real name too, moreover a few players in our team still have a provisional or under-estimated rating... Any player can start with a 1600 rating here if he does not mention his FIDE rating, so the same for IGAME players. This is part of the challenge, so let's just play :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-07-15 14:17:47)
Rybka vs. Human
Hello Jason.
You are right, but I doubt this "war" will end soon. Unlike pure calculation, chess is a symbol of intelligence, even if it's said to be pure calculation since Deep Blue won the match over Kasparov 10 years ago. It will be always possible to draw against the best computers, so there will always be challengers to try to equalize in a match against the king Rybka or any other super-calculator. Some will succeed, undoubtly... That's a question of time. And they will be chess heroes :)
About Go, the same cars on another circuit are not so successful, so why not to continue the race championsip anyway ? .. There is life, so there's hope... :)
Garvin Gray (2007-08-07 18:32:38)
Challenge game
I would like to make some arrangements to play a game of FICGS__CHESS__BLITZ_SILVER__000002 if someone is interested. Please just reply to this post to start arranging a time.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-06 12:29:10)
Glen D. Shields
Hello Glen !
We had this discussion before, indeed chess engines killed imagination and a part of the fun. The game has changed a lot, more since Rybka appeared. Correspondence chess is now how to beat Rybka, that's a fact... and a new challenge.
Did you try another game, like Big Chess or Go (I really enjoy playing these games), where engines are completely useless and now both rated at FICGS ? My two cents ;)
Jason Repa (2007-09-09 22:48:45)
To: Garvin Gray
I don't "think" you're a troll my mentally challenged little friend. I KNOW you're a troll. This thread was about FICGS Hardware + Software. Your post here had nothing whatsoever to do with that. You posted only to harass and annoy. That is what a troll does.
Gray, I'd play you for $100 a game anytime, but playing against your program is not playing chess with you. You would never dream of playing with me wtihout having your program make the moves for you. You know it, and I know it. I'd beat you even easier than I beat llmars Cirulis, when he decided to try some HUMAN ONLY chess with me.
Hannes Rada (2007-09-15 20:01:39)
Surprise, Surprise
Thibault or David :-) As far as I remember: several years ago I received a challenge for a 2 game match at the chessfriend server from a movie director where he mentioned some of these video-links. (I had to decline the match offer, because I had too much games at the same time) I really liked the dull ambience of the clips. I am also a big fan of Stanley Kubrick and I consider his Clockwork Orange a masterpiece. The trailer of the PSI - Movie looks really good and interesting. What kind of movies are these ? Public Domain movies :-) Or commercial movies produced to earn big money :-)
Gino Figlio (2007-09-18 06:53:43)
Tie breaks
Rodrigo, I agree there must be better ways of doing this.
As far as the current match, the rules cannot be changed and I guess I will not have to withdraw since I will lose with the tie. I can see the challenge for the tournament organizer but we have to also realize that FICGS is relatively new and its ratings do not necessarily reflect player strength.
How can we decide a match based on something less than representative even if we don't have anything better?. I believe for the future ties must be broken playing chess even if it's "blitz" cc.
I also would like to stop making comments on this unfinished match, I don't want to get distracted nor distract Peter from our competition.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-12-17 02:42:31)
FIDE world cup / WCH
Gata Kamsky (2714) just won the FIDE world cup final match against Alexei Shirov (2739) : 2.5 - 1.5 in Khanty-Mansiysk (Russia).
According to a recent FIDE rule, he should challenge the former world champion : Veselin Topalov. So he may play the reigning world champion after that (if he wins of course, if Anand keeps his title until there and if I understood well, not sure). Okokok...
Thibault de Vassal (2007-12-20 00:26:09)
FICGS World Ch.
Hi Dan, It's only a way to separate the final matches (candidates final or current champion vs. challenger) from the first stages tournaments, but I'll probably reorganize some things in a while as it is not so easy yet to find a particular WCH tournament...
Thibault de Vassal (2007-12-20 18:44:21)
Kramnik vs. Anand 2008
Vladimir Kramnik, Viswanathan Anand, FIDE & UEP (Universal Event Promotion) have come to an agreement : The next FIDE World Chess Championship will take place from October 11 to 30, 2008 in the National Art Gallery in Bonn (Germany). Reigning world champion Viswanathan Anand will play challenger Vladimir Kramnik in a twelve-game match. The prize fund is 1.5 Million Euro, the main sponsor is an industrial enterprise, Evonik Industries, located in Essen (Germany) which was the exclusive sponsor of the 2006 World Chess Challenge between Vladimir Kramnik and the most famous chess program distributed by Chessbase, Deep Fritz.
Any predictions ? .. (may Anand lose his title before that date ?)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-12-28 14:11:54)
option 4
I tried to change the rating ranges but a few 2200+ players would retire from the rapid M tournament... I'm afraid we have to wait. Anyway I'm to make a major update (challenges) and other improvements on the server, so I can't do it right now.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-12-29 23:27:34)
Major update : challenges
Hello to all.
Now it is possible to challenge connected players for bullet / lightning / blitz games (advanced chess tournaments - note : please verify time controls, ie. blitz games are played in 2 hours + 2 hours / 40 moves) with White or Black.
Many improvements to come (when I find some time), to display ratings and so on... All feedback welcome.
Garvin Gray (2008-01-06 14:28:36)
hmm
Has anyone played a game using this challenge system.
I have made a few offers and never even got a reply. Don't even know if it was received?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-06 17:05:31)
Challenges
Yes, I made and I'll make updates to avoid such aborted games... Now players are warned if they receive a challenge but as this is a web server and not a software, players still have to check if a game started (ie. by email or in the message box)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-01-14 10:08:25)
challenges
Thibault I must confess to being mystified by this: a name appears in the box entitled challenge a player, the name varies. Whats happening? does the system generate random names of those currently on line to offer up in case I want to challenge?? Or is the player challenging me?? Out of curiosity I have occasionally pressed the challenge button but nothing appears to happen. All in all quite baffling - now I ignore it!
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-14 16:19:56)
challenges
Hi Andrew, yes players are ordered by login time (then roll so looks like random) while they most probably should be ordered by rating. Maybe soon... If a player challenges you, a line with an "accept" option appears below the box. If you challenge a player, a line that you can remove by clicking the double arrows appears below the box and your opponent is warned. But I have to make new improvements to increase the interest of these bullet/blitz bronze games - maybe it should be free after all :) .. Now, the empty games (without any moves) will be deleted by new ones...
Andrew Stephenson (2008-01-15 11:20:51)
challenges
ok tks thibault
Philip Roe (2008-01-17 03:05:06)
Excellent enhancements
Thibault,
Many thanks for the work you put into this!
I have one minor complaint. I think it is very unlikely that I will ever want to respond to any of the displayed challenges, so for me that is just clutter. Is there way to opt out of having this feature displayed?
Don Groves (2008-01-17 03:33:19)
Same here...
Hi, Thibault -- Since I only play Go and the challenges are only for Chess, I will never use this either.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-17 04:10:04)
Challenges option
Hi Philip and Don, yes of course I have to add this option. A few more days or weeks, and it will appear in preferences, that's written on my sheet anyway ;)
Thibault de Vassal (2008-02-07 03:43:44)
Tie break rules
This set of rules favour the players with the highest TER at the start of the cycle (or CER - cycle entry rating), who play the knockout cycle, anyway the challenge for a player coming from the round-robin cycle - so difficult already - is just even more interesting :) .. looking at the first candidates final, I'm not sure at all who's favourite according to these rules. Xavier Pichelin is a dangerous player with an under-evaluated rating yet, he had to win (several) games in all stages of the round-robin tournament and he did it well, now quite the same situation but only one win could put him in a favourable position. He's used to this challenge, I think it is just more challenging and interesting this way. But the main idea is always to favour the highest tournament (here I should say cycle) entry rating.
"Victory belongs to who wants it more" (Bobby Fischer)
Thibault de Vassal (2008-02-07 17:05:08)
WCH candidates final tie break rule
I understand your point of view but I see no problem with this "CER rule" at stage 4. It looks 'logical' to me, firstly because this stage is not included in what is called the knockout cycle (just like stage 5, with another rule), then because the round-robin winner still appears like the challenger in this match.
Now we may have a poll on this issue and continue to discuss it, why not...
Should the same TER rule apply at stage 4 like in the first 3 stages of the knockout cycle ? Who is favourable to the current rule ?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-02-07 18:50:03)
Candidates final tie break rule
I vote for 1 consistent single tie break system for all matches and round robins: player higher TER at the start wins if all games drawn loses if not all games drawn. The tie break rule is complex enough without suddenly switching. To answer your 2 points Thibault: 1) The round robin winner is a sort of "challenger" to the knock out winner thus its right to give the knock out a tie break win if all games drawn and require the round robin winner to win a game to go through on a tie. But the whole process is a method of determining a challenger for the WCC not a challenger to one of the top eight. 2) Tie break system is different for WCC challenger ie champ keeps title in the event of a draw. Well this isdifferent and its easy to understand that its necessary to beat the champ to take the title. This difference does not explain having a different tie break system in the candidates - there is no challenge here and no title at stake. Each cycle is a challenger selection process and we need 1 consistent tie break method for each stage.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-02-08 00:57:29)
Candidates final tie break rule
"But the whole process is a method of determining a challenger for the WCC not a challenger to one of the top eight." << Well, actually it is also in a way, why not ? :) Anyway, thank you for discussing this point and trying to improve the rules, it would be great to know the opinion of other players !
Wayne Lowrance (2008-02-15 18:57:08)
ratings
Thibault you say you don't understand why a strong player would not ask for a provisional rating change when coming aboard.... Easy to answer Thibault, most people feel like rules are rules, and won't challenge them. At least that is why I didnt ask for a rating upgrade when I first came aboard. As I said earlier that when I came aboard my rating was 2300+ on another CC site I played on for humpteen years. Anyway I was confident in my CC chess ability and figured it would not take long to get to a decent rating, I wanted to more or less prove my self here. I guess that is basic to what you have answered. Wayne
Purity Tallant (2008-03-26 01:26:30)
Go! Challenges, why not?
I would like to challenge someone outside of a tournament.
William Taylor (2008-03-27 22:01:08)
Good idea
I don't see that any harm could come from adding the ability to challenge people to go games like we can challenge them to chess games now.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-03-27 22:58:03)
Improvements
Hello all. Yes, I still have to make some improvements this way (optional chess or Go challenges), it should be available in a while.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-04-23 22:11:45)
Free bullet & lightning bronze games
Hi Benjamin, I don't think so 'cause chess bullet & lightning bronze waiting lists may be closed soon. A better way is to use the challenges option in "My games" as there are much less chances to start a game while the opponent is offline (and no more messages in the chat).
Jason Repa (2008-05-07 01:09:36)
Step up, or shut up!
"I know that you're only a 1912 rated player on this site" Yeah, on this site... I began here as a 1700 (the first rating here)"
Join the club. I started as a 1700 player also. You've lost over 25% of your games. And to weak opponents at that. So I'm quite justified in assuming that I'm a better chess player than you, and by a very wide margin also. The fact that you couldn't figure out on your own why 10...Bf5 is no improvement over 10...Qe7 is just icing on the cake.
But anyway, I've had enough of you whining about your low rating and making excuses for your poor performance in chess. Excuses are for losers.
And there was nothing "arrogant" in any of my statements. The problem here is your stupidity and incapability at understanding what has been said to you. I've already explained to you TWICE that you were wrong in assuming that there was an implication that "material is everything" when I was discussing the recovery of material. That was not said nor implied. What part of this isn't sinking into your skull? How many more times does it need to be repeated for you to be able to understand???
I don't normally give free chess lessons to insolent patzers like you, but I'd be willing to have you a few bullet games on a secure server like playchess.com where in bullet time controls you won't be able to use your chess program to do the thinking for you like you do here. I've already had this type of thing go down with another motormouth on this site. I beat him 100% of the games and posted a link to them. At least he was man enough to step up to the plate and play me. You made the challenge so don't back down with any excuses, like the excuses you used to explain your paltry 1912 rating. And obviously if we're going to play real-time chess with the assumption is that its going to be human mind vs human mind chess, it's going to have to be fast bullet games. Not standard blitz where you have time to see what rybka running on your other computer suggests. Let me know what your playchess.com account name is and when you're able to play.
Jason Repa (2008-05-07 12:45:03)
Pablo BACKS DOWN!
Your OTB rating is NOT stronger than mine, liar. If it were you'd step up to the plate and play me, instead of backing down as you're doing. You're probably a 1500-1700 elo OTB player. Considering your rather beginnerish question about the Lasker From, I might be giving you too much credit at that. You know as well as I do that you'd be lucky to get a single draw in ten games against me. I'd probably just win all ten.
Do you always run around challenging people to a chess match on the internet, then retreat like a frightened animal, with your tail between your legs, when they accept your challenge? How pathetic is that? I was looking forward to playing some human mind vs human mind chess with you, but the idea of actually having to THINK and use your own mind to come up with the moves was too much for you to deal with, so you BACKED DOWN like a little girl!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 15:47:39)
Mr cfc
Frankly I have alway taken someone saying they have an ELO rating to refer to having a FIDE rating and not a national rating I understand that you need to deduct about 35 points from sub 2200 ratings to get a FIDE equivalent. Well I have never met anyone before who thought that FIDE 2000 was such a high rating I dont mean that in a bad way I am just surprised that you think this is high. As for beating me at chess I thought this was not real chess? Well like I said there is a sense in having it both ways. Look we could easily organise a money match at cc say for Euro 1000 6, 8, 10 games whatever you want, rapid time limit you can have white in every game and I can give you 3 to 1 odds. You win 1 game you get Euro 3000 you fail to win a game I get Euro 1000. All you have to do is win a game you can even lose all the other games. Well like I said it does not prove anything - its a research competition. I dont want to hustle you but you have been making a lot of statements so if you are interested ....... But please dont challenge me to bullet games on playchess......
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 21:36:18)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
What a <1500 player like yourself "has always taken" is meaningless. What is objectively true and factual is what counts. As has been explained to you repeatedly, elo is not exclusive to FIDE ratings, not even to chess in fact. Are you beginning to understand or still confused?
Also, there is no simple (deduct x) formula to get a FIDE equivalent. Sometimes a national rating is worth more than a FIDE rating. There are various factors to consider.
There is no "magic" about a FIDE rating. You just need to play in FIDE rated events. I've beaten many FIDE rated players otb, including FMs. It's really no big deal.
I never said 2000 was some sort of "high rating", so don't start with the lies again Stephenson. But compared to a guy like you who is rated under 1500, I'm like a more evolved being. Is that why you're so frustrated to the point of stalking me as you're doing? Is it a combination of that and the fact that I CRUSHED you in chess? When are you going to get over that? When are you going to stop whining and crying?
Why don't we play fact to face otb chess, if you have lots of Euro to throw around as you're claiming. Fly to Canada and I'll play you a match for 5000 euro. First to win 6 games or something like that. I'd probably have to spot you 5/6 just to make the match somewhat competitive.
I never challenged you to bullet chess, my <1500 rated acquaintance, but that would be the only other way to play human mind vs human mind chess. I'm certainly not about to fly to the third world country you live in, just to beat some "C" class chess player in person.
Let's take a little tally here. I've already beaten you at correspondence chess, and you've made it clear you want no part of playing chess at time controls that doesn't allow you to consult your program, so I've effectively won that as well. What is left? Arm wrestling? I kinda like my chances there too!
Thibault de Vassal (2008-05-27 19:07:57)
E-Points
Hello Mik.
"chalnge", you mean challenge I assume.
Well, as E-Points may be converted in real money by winning silver/gold games, I bet you understand that it should lead quite quickly to some problems & abuses :)
Mik Kris (2008-05-27 19:51:18)
Thanks for the quick response
I am sorry I did not think my original idea it all the way And forgat my manners for a moment there I wold like to thank you for building this great site and this opportunity for me to meet many intersting people Yes I wold like to be able to challenge some one for a simple rank game without starting a tournament one more thing might be nice is to get an "are youre ready to play" message before a game in a bullet or lightning tournament
Thibault de Vassal (2008-05-27 20:04:17)
Advanced Go games
You may play rated bullet & lightning Go games for free against 1 opponent only (see Waiting lists, challenges to a specified player are not available, sorry :/).
The scrolling message should warn you if a bullet or lightning game starts.
Don Groves (2008-05-29 00:17:16)
Fast games vs. slow games
Hi, Mik -- Fast games are more often lost by a mistake rather than won by good play. Many of us enjoy the challenge of finding the best move and winning by good play instead of relying on opponent mistakes. Try it, you may like it too ;-)
Wayne Lowrance (2008-06-08 22:59:52)
Rapid chess entry rating
Sorry for mispelled name, not my intention. This my last post here with you, I do not wish to engage in insults. I have never claimed to not use a engine. of course I do. I do not know your rating, not bothering to look it up. I am so very busy with my tourny games I have no time for you. I will not forget your last post my friend. After I get a little free time from games I will challenge you to some match games. I doubt you will accept, but I will do it. So long my friend, good c hess, good luck with your problems Wayne p.s. do not bother with a follow. I thank you
Jason Repa (2008-06-09 00:22:32)
Rapid chess entry rating
If you're not bright enough to figure out how to look up someone's rating, you better stick to "engine-assisted" chess. I'd probably beat you blindfolded in chess where you have to come up with the moves using your own mind. You're not even intelligent enough to figure out how to spell someone's name, when the spelling of it is right in front of you.
And for someone who doesn't want to engage in insults, you sure are doing a good job of insulting. Nice of you to "claim" I wouldn't accept your "challenge" of playing match games, before you even make the challenge. Obviously it's YOU who's backing down from match games with me, under the pretense of not having any time to play. What sheer nonsense. You seem to have a lot of free time on your hands....enough to blabber away with numerous forum posts where you whine about not being able to make it to 2300.
I'm challenging YOU to some human mind vs human mind chess on the playchess server right now. You can get a free trial account there (if you don't already have an account) in about 2 minutes. For a guy who's incessantly bickering about Rybka hurting your performance, you should love having the opportunity to prove to everyone reading this that you're not the spineless hypocrite coward I'm claiming you are and step up to the plate to play me some fast (so rybka or other engines cannot be consulted) online games.
Nice of you to tell us you have problems, but it was already obvious.
Don Groves (2008-07-10 23:43:15)
Challenges
Thibault - Can we have a box on our preferences page that says whether or not we will accept challenges? Either that or a way to respond to a challenger with a message. I hate to appear rude and simply reject a challenge with no explanation.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-11 01:30:59)
Challenges
Hi Don, I'll work on it in a few weeks only :/ BTW players use the "challenge connected players" [All] option sometimes...
Thibault de Vassal (2008-08-16 12:29:32)
Questions to Xavier Pichelin
Xavier Pichelin is 1st FICGS chess champion after beating IM Gino Figlio in the first candidates final, he accepted to talk about his match, the tournament, his views around correspondence chess, chess engines and so on... The most important part may be he'll defend his title against the winner of the 2nd candidates final :)
Unfortunately, the complete interview is in french only as he doesn't speak english, but if someone finds a good translator (if possible better than Babelfish), he may post it in this thread. Thanks !
- Bonjour Xavier et tout d'abord félicitations pour ta victoire dans le match qui t'opposait au MI (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Pérou] dans la finale des candidats. Tu devais éviter à tout prix la nulle dans toutes les parties, finalement les noirs t'ont porté chance, comment expliques-tu ce résultat ?
Xavier : Bonjour, merci pour les félicitations. C'est vrai qu'en cas de nulles pour toutes les parties, le règlement indique Figlio Vainqueur en cas d'égalité avec victoire(s) et défaite(s) je remporte le match. Donc il fallait que je prenne des risques en attaquant et c'est avec les noirs que je l'ai fait car je pensais que Gino, dans ces parties, attendrait sans prendre de risques pour assurer les nulles.
- Peux-tu nous décrire la manière dont tu as abordé ce match contre Gino et son déroulement au fur et à mesure des différentes phases du jeu ?
X : C'est assez simple, dans ce match je n'étais pas du tout favori car avec plus de 200 points ELO FICGS en ma défaveur, et Gino titré Maître International avec plus de 2480 point ELO ICCF, je pensais que je n'allais pas résister sur 8 parties simultanées car sur une partie tout est possible mais sur 8 parties... c'était pour moi un grand défi ! Pour le déroulement du jeu j'ai joué la diversité sur mes débuts avec les blancs 4 parties 4 coups différents : 1.e4 1.d4 1.c4 1.Cf3. Gino a fait de même : 1.e4 1.d4 1.Cf3 1.Cc3. Ce qui m'a fait douter aussi car 1.Cc3 m'a surpris, je pensais qu'il avait prévu un début tonitruand et c'est là que je me suis dit qu'il fallait que je prenne des risques avec les noirs. Au fur et à mesure des différentes phases du jeu j'ai assuré les nulles des positions équilibrées pour me concacrer a deux parties avantageuses dont une avec les blancs et une avec les noirs pour au moins faire la différence dans une partie pour assurer la victoire. Et en fin de compte c'est 3 victoires qui me reviennent, ce qui me paraissait impossible étant donnée la qualité du jeu de Gino joué sur ce site pour arriver à la finale des candidats du championnat.
- Tu as réalisé pendant le championnat un parcours sans faute, aucune défaite à signaler, tu affiches également des statistiques stratosphériques à 78% contre une moyenne elo à près de 2200, quel est ton secret ?
X : Mon secret? Je n'ai pas de secret. Si j'avais un secret je ne le dévoilerais pas sinon je ne gagnerais plus ! Je pense que j'ai eu un petit peu de chance car il s'en est fallu de peu que je ne sois pas qualifié au stage 3 (robin-round final) car il y avait 3 joueurs à égalité et j'ai eu l'avantage du classement du départ de ce tournoi comme l'indique le règlement. Quant à mes statistiques, c'est aussi grâce aux erreurs de mes adversaires qui m'ont permis de gagner des parties équilibrées.
- Que penses-tu du système mi-ko, mi-toutes-rondes du championnat FICGS et de ses départages inédits lors des matchs en 8 parties ? Quelles modifications y apporterais-tu ?
X : Très bonne question ! Le système mi-ko pour moi est un peu trop rapide car un coup par jour c'est des heures d'analyses pour exploiter une position compliquée, ce qui est difficile quand on à plusieurs parties en cours. Surtout quand on travaille. C'est peut-être aussi grâce à cette cadence que mes adversaires, faute de temps, ont fait des imprécisions sur certaines postions ou exploité mes erreurs. Mais cette cadence a un avantage par rapport aux cadences ICCF qui est de 5 jours par coup, c'est que les parties durent 5 fois moins longtemps ! Le départage inédit des matchs en 8 parties est excellent, obliger le favori à assurer tous les matchs nulles pour gagner ce duel et sinon d'obtenir une victoire supplémentaire contre le challenger est un mode très bien pensé. La modification que je pourrais y apporter est peut-être la gestion du temps qui est rapide pour un système de jeu par serveur. Peut-être augmenter l'horloge de départ de 15 jours, soit de commencer avec 45 jours contre 30 en ce moment. Et aussi la possibilité des prendre des vacances uniquement sur le tournoi en cours afin de gérer les autres parties du site. Par exemple prendre 7 jours de vacances sur un tournoi d'échecs du championnat et pouvoir jouer un tournoi de Big Chess, de Go ou un autre tournoi d'échecs pendant ces vacances. Pouvoir choisir une date de début de vacances à l'avance serait également appréciable.
- Pourquoi t'être investi dans les échecs par correspondance ? T'apportent-ils d'autres satisfactions par rapport aux échecs classiques et au blitz ?
X : Je préfère les échecs par correspondance par rapport au temps. Car les échecs classiques se jouent souvent le week-end, à une heure précise et souvent en déplacement pour effectuer un tournoi. L'avantage, pour moi, des échecs par correspondance est que je puisse me connecter à n'importe quelle heure pour jouer mes coups, ce qui me permet, par exemple, de faire des repas de famille le week-end et le soir tard de jouer un coup, ce qui n'est pas possible aux échecs classiques.
- Tu as su ne pas céder à la tentation et te limiter à jouer un nombre très raisonnable de parties sur le site tout le long du championnat, penses-tu néanmoins que les échecs par correspondance soient addictifs et à quel point ? Ont-ils des répercussions sur ta vie de tous les jours ?
X : Oui ! Limiter mon nombre de parties en cours est pour moi essentiel pour essayer d'avoir des parties de qualité plutôt que de quantité. Avoir beaucoup de parties en simultanée est quand même une chose très difficile à gérer ! C'est peut-être la clé de ma victoire contre Figlio, j'ai regardé ses parties en cours, il en avait pas loin de 90 sur le site de l'ICCF, cela a pu se ressentir sur son temps d'analyse consacré à nos 8 parties sur FICGS. Sur la vie de tous les jours les répercussions sont familiales car il est vrai que je passe plus de temps à analyser les parties et moins temps avec ma famille, ce qui est assez difficile pour moi. Mais quand les résultats sont là je ne regrette pas !
- Que penses-tu de la place actuelle des moteurs d'analyse (Rybka, Shredder, Fritz et autres) dans les échecs par correspondance ? Quelles sont pour toi les qualités complémentaires essentielles du joueur par correspondance, devenu centaure avec la machine pour jambes ?
X : Les moteurs d'analyses dans les échecs par correspondances sont utilisés par 95% des joueurs... Maintenant il faut s'adapter et savoir utiliser ces machines à calculer. Car jouer simplement le meilleur coup de Rybka 3, de Fritz 12 ou Hiarcs 12 sans réfléchir mentalement mène à la nulle si l'adversaire fait de même ou possiblement à perdre si l'adversaire se donne la peine de réfléchir en les utilisant également. En sachant que lorsqu'on est dans le milieu de partie ces logiciels vous donnent souvent 4 à 5 coups evalués de manière semblable, et c'est là qu'il faut choisir le bon coup alors que celui-ci n'est même pas forcément cité par le moteur d'analyse...
- Tu joues désormais au Big Chess sur le site, curiosité ou intérêt ? Que penses-tu de cette version étrange des échecs ?
X : Par curiosité et par amusement et je pense que Rybka 3 ne joue pas encore au Big Chess ! Cette version est quasiment inédite je ne connaissais pas cette forme de jeu d'échecs auparavant donc celui qui a inventé ce jeu a très bien fait ! A propos c'est moi qui vous pose une question sur le Big chess... Y a t-il possiblité de roquer avec ce jeu si oui comment? (NDLR : Non, il est impossible de roquer au Big Chess)
- Et enfin la question que tout le monde se pose, particulièrement François et Wolfgang qui disputent la deuxième finale des candidats, penses-tu pouvoir défendre ton titre l'an prochain ? :)
X : Bien sûr ! Je défendrai le titre ! J'aimerais si possible savoir la date et la cadence du match. Et je souhaite à François et Wolfgang une belle finale ! Je dois faire honneur à cette compétition qui est bien organisée !
- Le match devrait pouvoir débuter durant la première semaine de janvier 2009, la cadence sera à nouveau de 30 jours et 1 jour supplémentaire par coup. Merci pour tes réponses, et encore bravo pour cette belle performance !
X : Merci ! Et à bientôt ! Bonne continuation à tous et bonnes parties !
Benjamin Block (2008-08-18 08:52:18)
Try to translate!
I think it is something like that?
Hello Xavier and first congratulations on your victory in the match which t'opposait the MI (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Peru] in the final candidates. You should avoid at all costs void in all parties, finally brought blacks t'ont chance, how do you explain this result? X
avier: Hello, thank you for the congratulations. It is true that in case of zero for all parties, the regulation states Figlio winner in the event of a tie with victory (s) and defeat (s) I won the match. So I had to take risks in attacking and it is with blacks that I did it because I thought Gino, in these parts, expected without taking risks to ensure the void.
-- Can you tell us about how you approached this match against Gino and his conduct as different phases of the game?
X: It's pretty simple, in this match I was not at all favorite because with more than 200 ELO points FICGS to my disadvantage, and Gino titled Master International, with more than 2480 ELO ICCF point, I thought I n ' not resist going on 8 simultaneous games as a part everything is possible but on 8 parts ... it was for me a great challenge! In the course of the game I played diversity in my beginnings with white 4 parts 4 different strokes: 1.e4 1.d4 1.c4 1.Cf3. Gino did the same: 1.e4 1.d4 1.Cf3 1.Cc3. What made me doubt also because 1.Cc3 surprised me, I thought he had planned an early tonitruand and this is where I said that I should take risks with blacks. As the different phases of the game I assured the zero positions balanced for me concacrer deal has two parts, one with blanks and one with the black for at least make a difference in part to ensure victory. And ultimately it 3 victories me back, which seemed impossible given the quality of the game Gino played on this site to reach the final of the championship candidates.
-- You have made during a championship course without fault, no losses to report, you also posters statistics stratospheric to 78% against an average elo to about 2200, what's your secret?
X: My secret? I have no secret. If I had a secret I do not dévoilerais if I do win more! I think I got a little lucky because he is required by little I am not qualified to stage 3 (round-robin final) because there were 3 players equally and I had l 'advantage classifying the departure of this tournament as indicated by the regulation. As for my statistics, it is also thanks to the errors of my opponents who allowed me to win parts in balance.
-- What do you think the system mid-ko, semi-all-round championship FICGS and its new départages in matches in 8 parties? What changes would it be?
X: Very good question! The system mid-ko for me is a little too fast since a coup by day is overtime analyses to operate a complicated position, which is difficult when several parties in progress. Especially when you work. It is perhaps also through this pace that my opponents lack of time, made some uncertainty regarding postions or exploited my mistakes. But the pace has an advantage over the cadences ICCF which is 5 days a coup is that the parties had to 5 times less time! The départage new games to 8 parts is excellent, forcing the favorite to ensure all matches to nil win this duel and otherwise obtain an additional victory against the challenger is a very well thought out. The amendment that I could make is perhaps time management which is fast for a game system per server. Perhaps increase the clock starting 15 days, starting with 45 against 30 days at this time. And also the possibility of taking a vacation only on the tournament underway to manage other parts of the site. For example, take 7 days vacation on a chess tournament championship and be able to play a tournament Big Chess, Go or another chess tournament during the holidays. Being able to choose a start date of holidays in advance would also be appreciated.
-- Why t'être invested in correspondence chess? T'apportent there are other rewards compared to traditional chess and blitz?
X: I prefer chess match over time. For the classical chess is often play the weekend at a specific time and often on the move to make a tournament. The advantage for me, correspondence chess is that I can connect at any time to play my shots, which allows me, for example, making family meals on weekends and late at night to play a coup, which is not possible chess classics.
-- You knew not to succumb to the temptation and you only play a very reasonable number of parties on the site throughout the championship, do you think nevertheless that the correspondence chess are addictive and at what point? Did they affect your everyday life?
X: Yes! Limiting my number of games in progress is essential for me to try to have parts of quality rather than quantity. Have a lot of parts simultaneously is still something very difficult to manage! This is perhaps the key to my victory against Figlio, I watched its games in progress, it had nearly 90 on the site of the ICCF, it has been felt on his time devoted to analysis our parties on FICGS 8. On the everyday life impacts are family because it is true that I spend more time to analyze the parts and less time with my family, which is quite difficult for me. But when the results are there I do not regret!
-- What do you think about the current position of engines for analysis (Rybka, Shredder, Fritz and others) in correspondence chess? What are the qualities you complementary core player by correspondence, now centaur with the machine for legs?
X: The engines of analyses in chess matches are used by 95% of players ... Now we must adapt and learn to use these machines to calculate. Car simply play the best shot of Rybka 3, Fritz 12 or Hiarcs 12 mentally without thinking leads to zero if the opponent does the same or possibly lose if the opponent gives himself the trouble to consider using them as well. Knowing that when you're in the middle part of these programs give you often 4 to 5 strokes assessed similarly, and that is that we must choose the right time when it is not even necessarily cited by the analysis engine ...
-- You get the Big Chess now on the site, curiosity or interest? What do you think of this strange version of chess?
X: For curiosity and fun and I think Rybka 3 is not yet the Big Chess! This version is almost unprecedented I did not know this form of chess before therefore the one who invented this game was very well done! About I'm the one who asks you a question on the Big chess ... Is there possibility of castle with this game if so, how? (Editor's note: No, it is impossible to castle the Big Chess)
-- And finally the question that everyone arises, especially Francis and Wolfgang disputing that the second final candidates, think you can defend your title next year? :)
X: of course! I will defend the title! I would like if possible to know the timing and pace of the match. And I wish Francis and Wolfgang a beautiful final! I must honor in this competition which is well organized!
-- The match should be able to start during the first week of January 2009, the pace will again 30 days and 1 additional day by coup. Thank you for your answers, and even congratulations for this excellent performance!
X: Thank you! And see you! Bonne continuation to all and good parties!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-18 16:06:16)
translation
I will have a go off the top of my head at giving a sense of the interview in english (I dont know the phrase tonitruand but I am guessing it means dynamic!)?: Hi Xavier and first of all congratulations on your success in the candidates final match against IM (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Peru] You had to avoid drawing all the games and finally you succeded with the black pieces. How did that happen? Xavier: Hi thank you. Its true that if all the games had been drawn then under the rules Figlio would have won whereas if the match was drawn but with a win and loss I would win. Because of this I had to take risks and attack. It was with Black that I did this because I thought that Gino would play safely to be sure of a draw. - Tell us how you approched the match and how the different phases of the game went x: Its quite simple, I was not the favorite I have 200 ELO less on FICGS and Gino is an IM on ICCF with a 2480 rating. I did not think I could survive 8 games at once - in a single game anything is possible but 8 games .... it was a big challenge for me! In the openings I chose 4 different moves 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nf3 Gino chose 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nc3 I was surpised by 1 Nc3 because I was expecting dynamic openings and it was then that I decided I must take some risks with black. I kept most of the games balanced with a draw in hand and concentrated on 2 games 1 white and 1 black to get a result. In the end I got 3 wins which seemed an impossibility given the quality of the games Gino had played on this site to reach the final. - you have not lost any games in the championship and you have fantastic statistics 78% against an average elo of about 2200. What is your secret? x: My secret? I havent any secret and if I did I would not say because I would not win anymore! I think I have been a bit lucky because in the the Round Robin final there were 3 of us on the same score and I went through under the rules because of my rating. As for my statistics I was helped by mistakes by opponents who allowed me to win some drawn games. - What do you think of the system for the FICGS championship (round robin and knock out matches)and what changes would you make? x: Very good question. The matches are a bit too fast for me - 1 day per move when there are hours of analysis needed to exploit a complicated position its difficult when you have several games running Particularly if you are working. Perhaps that is why my opponents have made errors or failed to exploit my mistakes. But this time limit has an advantage over ICCF where it is 5 days per move the games here are 5 times quicker! Having 8 game matches is an excellent idea and obliging the favorite to draw all the games and the challenger to get a at least 1 victory is very well thought out. The change that I would suggest is to have 15 days extra starting time that is 45 days at the start instead of 30 and also the possibilty to take holidays for tournaments for example take 7 days for championship games and to be able to play big chess go or another chess tournament during the holiday. To be able to choose the start of a holiday in advance would also be good. - Why do you like cc and how does it compare to blitz and normal chess? x: I prefer cc because of the time factor. Classical chess is often played at the week end at a fixed time and you have to travel to the tournament. The advantage for me at cc is that I can connect at any time to play a move which allows me for example to have meals with the family at the weekend. Late night moves for example are not possible at classical chess. - You limited the number of your games on the site to a reasonable amount throughout the championship. Do you think nonetheless that cc is addictive? Does it affect your daily life? x: Yes! Limiting the number of my games is essential to try to have games of quality not quantity. Having a lot of games going at the same time is something very difficult to handle. It is perhaps the key to my victory against Figlio - I looked at his games - he had not less than 80 games going on at ICCF this must have affected the amount of time he could spend analysing his 8 games at FICGS. The effects on daily life are felt by the family because the reality is if I spend more time analysing the games I spend less time with the family. Thats difficult for me. But when the results come I dont regret it! - What do you think of the role of chess engines (Rybka Fritz etc)in cc. What are for you the important skills of a cc player - to supplement the machine? x: Chess engines are used in cc by 95% of players. You have to adapt yourself and know how to use the engines. To play just the best move of Rybka 3 Fritz 12 or Hiracs 12 without thinking leads to a draw if your opponent does the same or to a loss if your opponent is thinking. You have to choose bewteen 4 or 5 moves with a similer evaluation from the engine during a game and sometimes the best move is not among these. - You play Big chess. Interest or curiosity? What do you think of this strange version of chess? X : Curiosity and amusement and I think Rrybka 3 cannot yet play Big Chess! This version is new and I did not know it and the inventor has done a good job! By the way I would like to ask is it possible to castle at Big Chess? [No its not possible] - Finally the question that everyone is asking particularly Francois and Wolfgang who are contesting the 2nd candidates final. Do think you will be able to defend your title next year? :) x: Definitely I will defend the title I would like to know if possible the date and time limits for the match. I wish Francois and Wolfgang a great match! I would also like to express my appreciation for this tournament which has been well organised! - the match should start in the first week in January next year the time limit will be 30 days plus 1 day per move. Thank you for your answers and once again congratulations on a great performance. x: Thank you. Cheers. Best wishes to everyone and good games!
Thibault de Vassal (2008-08-22 17:50:17)
Team challenge : Latvian gambit
Based upon an idea by Ilmars, let's try to create a special Latvian thematic tournament that could start at the beginning of september, consisting in two teams : Latvian gambit "defenders" and latvian gambit "refuters" (that will play either Black or White), this could be interesting to improve the theory in this opening.
Any player who wishes to play this tournament may post in this thread "I am in as White (or Black)" and I'll make pairings in a few days/weeks.
Thibault de Vassal (2017-05-29 21:41:37)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
Looks like the tournament finished a few days ago... one recognize "Zor" as winner (again), but the crosstable shown seems to be a small part of it!?
http://infinitychess.com/Page/Public/Article/DefaultArticle.aspx?id=322
Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-05 19:23:28)
Team challenge : Latvian gambit
"Will every play with every from opposite team?"
Good question : I think yes, at least if there are no more than 4 players in each team. Do anyone else want to enter a team or may we start the tournament ?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-16 13:12:58)
Tournoi multi sites
Salut Alexis, non tu vois ça ne décolle pas sur le forum en tout cas, mais je pense qu'il faut de toutes manières continuer d'en parler sur le forum intersite pour voir s'il n'y a pas moyen de rendre le concept plus attractif (un challenge plus clair) et plus pratique (moins de parties, et sur un site ou 2 maxi) pour les joueurs de chaque équipe.
http://grandintersite.forumactif.net/forum.htm
William Taylor (2008-09-22 18:36:07)
An idea
We could perhaps use the 'M' class tournament that has just started to decide the first Big Chess champion. Thereafter a challenger could be decided by a similar high-rated tournament, or else by an open tournament or series of tournaments if it's thought that the rating system isn't reliable enough.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-28 21:51:45)
Big Chess Championship
18 months is so long :/ .. In my opinion, the scheme could be the same than the Go championship :
"FICGS world Go championship is a 2 stages tournament. First stage is a single round-robin tournament, involving the 9 highest rated players who entered the waiting list. The winner of this tournament is the challenger for FICGS world champion title. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage. If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account. If current world champion defends his title, he will play a 5 games match against his challenger."
William Taylor (2008-10-03 14:43:56)
Big Chess Championship
I like the idea of making it like the Go championship because it's simple. As for excluding players, I'm not sure there are many more than nine who would want to play anyway. If there are lots of players outside the top 9 who would want to play in the championship, perhaps there could be two stages of tournament. For example, if 21 people entered, we could have 3 groups of 7, with the top 2 from each group advancing to the next stage. Then there would be a six-player tournament to determine the challenger, followed by a match challenger vs previous champion. For the 1st championship the champion could either be the winner of the 2nd-round tournament, or the winner of a match between the top 2 finishers in the 2nd-round tournament.
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-10-11 07:03:49)
Promotion
I did not have any promotion in Latvian Gambit Team challenge ...
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-02 20:07:17)
Update : challenges & move send
Hello all,
It is now possible to challenge a player for a chess, Go or Poker holdem game ! You can choose the game by clicking the pictures near "Challenge a player" in My games, you can also change the 'challenges' option in Preferences. This is an important improvement as advanced poker & Go games are a faster way to improve ratings ie. in order to qualify for the FICGS poker holdem & Go championships. (advanced chess has its own rating, different from the correpondence chess rating)
Also a new improvement in the 'move send' process, it should be much faster now, please report any bug if you notice one.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-13 23:42:25)
FICGS poker holdem championship
The waiting list for the 1st FICGS poker holdem championship is open, as all ratings are not established, the rating limit has been changed to 1600.
Only the 9 highest rated players at the beginning of the tournament (february 1, 2009) will play it, consequently the best way to improve your rating before the deadline is probably to play POKER HOLDEM BULLET BRONZE games (you may use the challenge function in My games).
The current rules :
"FICGS world poker holdem championship is a 2 stages tournament. First stage is a single round-robin tournament, involving the 9 highest rated players who entered the waiting list. The winner of this tournament is the challenger for FICGS world champion title. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage. If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account. If current world champion defends his title, he will play a 5 games match (3 games with White, 2 games with Black) against his challenger.
All games are played in 30 days + 1 day / move. Rules for poker holdem are official rules. You may find more information about the FICGS betting structure in FICGS rules. Both players must play until one resign or game is adjudicated. One game is played in 3 winning rounds of 100 chips by player played in no limit mode. The minimal bet is always 1 chip and does not depend on the blind's value. The small blind's value is doubled after the 50th hand, then after the 70th, 80th, 90th and 100th hand (the big blind then is 64 chips) of each round."
Don Groves (2009-01-04 01:35:56)
FIDE or FIFA...
... what's the difference?
The FIFA World Cup champion gets no special privileges in the next cup challenge, why should the FIDE World Champion?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-04 14:14:38)
Rybka 4
Vasik Rajlich wrote a few comments on what can be expected from the Rybka engine/team in 2009 :
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=9199
Three engine releases are planned in 2009:
* Rybka 3+ - Rybka 3 playing strength, with bugfixes and cosmetic improvements, for Rybka 3 customers
* Pocket Rybka 3 - published by Convekta/ChessOK, packaged with their Pocket Champion interface, conforms to S. Tsukrov's Pocket-UCI protocol
* Rybka 4 - better search, better eval, new analysis features
"Our tournament goal for 2009 is to win a top freestyle event in 100% automated mode. (...)"
Very interesting, a new challenge for Eros :)
Ben Milton (2009-01-05 16:00:41)
CHALLENGE!!!
I hereby challenge all to 2 games one as black and one as white, to whoever believes they can beat Rybka 3 using tuned Perfect 15 book and depth 23 after opening. This is ofcourse to win my E-points. Any one interested at all?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-05 18:34:24)
Depth 23
It would have no sense to propose such a challenge. No, only Rybka moves (played by Ben) will be limited to depth 23.
I think I would accept the challenge (for at least 100 Epoints) if the full analysis by Rybka is posted after the end of the game :)
Marc Lacrosse (2009-01-05 23:17:16)
First flaw is in the book
There are many published lines crushing perfect15.
I am not sure that sedat already corrected all the known ones for the coming perfect16.
Either you publish your ctg at the beginning of the games or you cannot affirm that you run a "modified" perfect15 without providing proofs that you are not playing yourself during the opening phase
So i fear it's a flawed challenge
Apart from this I suppose that any player among top-50 here is ready to play against a pure R3. If we were not ready to accept this, then this would mean that correspondence chess has come to its end.
Marc
i must admit that in case your opponent plays postman chess with his engines, times have become tougher for those who try to demonstrate something, and much tougher since rybka 3 appeared. But so far there are still players who keep achieving 70% against opponents who probably all use top engines ...
Wayne Lowrance (2009-01-06 05:11:28)
Challenge
Well Ben as I said I am not inclined to accept your challenge, but if It could be proved your using only r3 + your best book, you would not have much success against strong centaurs Wayne
Don Groves (2009-01-06 05:18:20)
I don't understand why a challenge...
Why don't you simply enter the Gold or Silver waiting list and play? The methods you propose are entirely legal here and don't require advance notification.
It would be interesting to see Rybka's analysis published as Thibault suggested but that goes for any worthy game played here.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-06 18:59:13)
Challenge
That's an interesting challenge, with or without epoints. As for me, that's a pity I have no time enough yet, maybe later (in a few months).
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-07 11:14:47)
Procedural answer
You may challenge each other ?!
Normajean Yates (2009-01-08 04:48:31)
your challenge would have takers if...
if you could improve upon this:
Milton, Ben (AUS) [member # 4431]
ELO : 1597
Next page : History
Statistics for rated correspondence chess games :
Won : 0
Lost : 6
Draw : 0
Unfinished : 6
So, as thing stand, your challenge sounds trollish, if you will excuse my saying so. But I think someone has to.
I am in two minds whether to post this: I am violating the golden rule of usenet "don't feed the troll". :/
Ben Milton (2009-01-08 05:08:32)
.
The reason to my rating is that my opponents were mostly human at this level and could not compare with me a centaur player and therefore i lost interest and let my games be lost with time forfeit. If you are not interested in the conditions i mentioned before, then no one forced you to play me, and there is nothing trollish about my challenge.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-08 12:23:20)
No ratings...
Just an idea, this challenge could be played here in this forum, move after move, with the conditions mentioned above (& Rybka 3 analysis in real time, no need to hide it after all). 2 unrated games, 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves. What do you think ?
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2009-01-09 08:31:05)
Why?
What is the purpose of this challenge? Do you accept Thibault conditions in the post above this one? and who you will proof the engine is playing alone with book and you are not leading it as Marc Lacrosse pointed?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-10 17:23:24)
Challenge
Great ! We have a candidate :) Ben, what do you think ?
Normajean Yates (2009-02-05 04:19:20)
Don & I - same pt fr diff directions:)
Don - no use if hardware doesnt 'fit' software [engineer's way of putting it ;)]
me - no use if software doesnt 'fit' hardware [programmer's way of putting it ;)]
(prefix 'retired' to 'engineeer' & 'programmer' )
We are saying the same thing!
Another point: debugging parallel programs is much more tricky than debugging - uh - non-'parallel' programs
I have no engineering experience [1] but I'd venture to guess that a 'parallel' electronic machine of any kind [not necessarily a computer] which has to synchronise signals from various sources, and do it fast, would be much more of a design challenge than a non-'parallel' one...
[1] (well I did assemble my first personal-computer - a BBC[2] acorn - by cannibalising parts from discarded damaged BBC acorns and some borrowed parts - with a scope and a soldering iron - does that count? But that was back in 1983-84... and I had help....)
[2] yes, BBC = beeb (British Broadcasting Corporation) - they *used* to do meaningful things - but that was long ago....
Scott Nichols (2009-02-08 16:58:00)
GM quotes trivia
"I felt that my judgment and skill were being challenged by a player who had every reason to fear both." (Who said this and what was the game?)
Philip Roe (2009-02-08 22:43:43)
Capablanca?
Is that Capa on deciding to accept the challenge of the Marshall gambit?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-02-14 13:29:46)
Topalov vs. Kamsky
The match between Veselin Topalov & Gataulla Kamskiy (Gata Kamsky) is about to start, a former challenger of Vladimir Kramnik and a former challenger of Anatoly Karpov in the FIDE World Championship, quite surprising.
Both usually make amazing performances in top chess tournaments, but not exactly as regularly as Garry Kasparov. Who do you expect to win such a match ?
The prize fund is $250,000, the winner should play current FIDE world champion Viswanathan Anand later this year.
More to read in an interview with Veselin Topalov in Chessbase news, particularly on the Lvov bid, originally of $750,000.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5207
Thibault de Vassal (2009-02-28 03:35:14)
Svante Carl wins FICGS Go WCH (again)
Congratulations to Svante Carl von Erichsen who keeps the FICGS Go champion title by beating Ke Lu 5d on an impressive 5-0 score, also reaching a rating of 2653 !
A rematch just started between our two top Go players, as Ke Lu convincingly won the 3rd FICGS Go WCH preliminary tournament by 7/7
You can follow the games here :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000003
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match :
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, first of all congratulations for your win in the FICGS correspondence Go championship final. Your opponent was Ke Lu 5 dan, you won 4 games out of 5 already (the last game is not finished yet), how do you explain such a result?
Svante Carl - Hello! Thank you very much! It is certainly astonishing for me that I was able to hold my own in these games. I believe that the main factor that helped me in getting on even terms with such a strong player was that I could spend much more time analyzing each move than in a face-to-face or online direct playing situation.
FICGS - Did you have a particular preparation or plan before to start the games?
Svante Carl - The only things I planned beforehand was to really give my best, and to make the games as distinct as possible.
FICGS - The site will now try to attract more correspondence Go players from Asia (with a few chinese, japanese or korean words on the home page already), what do you think about the games format played at FICGS (30 days + 1 day / move, chinese rules komi 7.5 points) and the championship rules?
Svante Carl - I like the format. I am also interested in the rules of Go as well as the rules that surround Go, like tournament rules and time settings. My current conviction is that the "real, pure" Go rules are area rules with superko, and territory rules should be seen as a shortcut which should give the same result. I have come to think that the "Taiwan rule", i.e. White gets a point of compensation if Black got the last play (before the first pass), is a sensible part of the rules. FICGS has taken a very easy route by declaring the rule set and leaving negotiation of the result to the players. While in the end, it is only important who won, I think that showing a result as e.g. "White+3", "Black+Resign" adds a lot of flavour. As a time system, I think that bonus time (a.k.a. Fischer time), like on FICGS, is a very general and sensible approach to timing a game like Go. I think that many "real-world" tournaments and internet servers will switch to that in the future, for all, blitz, speed, normal, slow, and correspondence games. The championship format is quite nice. I like the title holder/challenger way of tournament series. The only thing I would like to see is some sort of nigiri to determine the colours in the odd game. Attracting players from Asia is really a worthwhile goal. I look forward to playing players from all over the world.
FICGS - Does correspondence Go bring you something more than real time Go? What is more addictive according to you?
Svante Carl - Since I think that analyzing is a forte of mine, I might be a bit stronger at correspondence Go than at "real time" Go. I don't think that one is more addictive than the other.
FICGS - Do you often play real time Go online? What servers do you prefer?
Svante Carl - I usually play on KGS, but not too much, perhaps one or two games per week on average, often in "bursts". KGS is quite nice, but not perfect. Sometimes I play at CyberOro, but there is much less communication; I like to watch pro games there.
FICGS - Do you use softwares that assist you in your games (FICGS rules allow this)? What do you think about computer Go in general nowadays?
Svante Carl - I only use a board or a simple SGF file viewer for analyzing. There are no playing programs that could help me. The programs have advanced quite much recently, but I think that it will still be a long time before they can beat me in an even game. Currently, most tests of these programs are against professional players with high handicaps, and I think that this is a good situation for the bots, since they get exponentially weaker the further the game is from the end -- high handicap practically eliminates the opening, their weakest spot. I would like to see more tests against amateur players at the bots' own level.
FICGS - Do you play other games (board games, video games...), what is your favourite one?
Svante Carl - Go is certainly my absolute favourite. I also know chess, although I am really weak at that. I also like "german board games", there are some really nice pearls there. In video games, well, there are also some pearls, but they get drowned by a mass of ... not so good games..., I don't waste time looking at that scene any more. I also played some online poker, but it wasn't able to keep me interested.
FICGS - Will you defend your title again against Ke Lu who also won the 3rd wch tournament?
Svante Carl - Of course, I am looking forward to that!
FICGS - Could you give us your impressions on the games, how it went from the beginning to the end, do you think that time pressure were a non-negligible factor in the result (the clocks of Ke Lu were quickly near 1 or 2 days left)?
Svante Carl - I was a bit surprised that he let his time drop to such a low level right at the beginning, perhaps he was not familiar yet with the vacancy feature at FICGS. I can't see his reasons for this, or how much time he actually could spend on his games. I was ahead in each game when it timed out, though.
I think that game 2 was quite even from the start. The skirmish in the lower left resulted in me capturing a little group, but he got a nice framework on the lower side. My prospects of reducing this were a bit hampered by the fact that my right side group was not completely settled. I found a way to sacrifice some stones to settle my group while fixing the framework's extent and keeping sente to secure my top side, at which time, the game was still almost even, but I think that I was a few points ahead then. Later, I could seal the top side with some extra points through some rather blunt forcing moves.
In game 3, my opponent made an approach with White 24 that is usually regarded as bad in this situation, because the pincer Black 25 works out very well in conjunction with the stone on the left side. He tried to settle with White 26, but I refused to make things so easy, even though the result from the usual joseki would not have been bad. He resisted Black 27, but I think that White 28 is an overplay. The resulting fight left me with nice profit in that corner and sente, while he made some centre thickness. I then tried to carefully neutralize this thickness, but I may have played some slack moves in the course. Later, I was able to keep a little moyo in the lower right centre, and then I poked into his right-side territory where he had left a serious weakness earlier.
Game 1 started out with an interesting fight in the upper right. After White 42, both the three captured black and the two almost captured white stones retain some serious aji, which I came back to fix on my side a few moves later. When I could set up a splitting attack with Black 77, he was able to connect his two weak groups, but in bad shape. I continued to keep this dragon separated from the top, planning to invade the top side afterwards. However, with White 110, instead of connecting by playing B6, he saved some centre stones, and I proceeded to separate and kill the dragon. He may have overlooked that my upper left side group was still able to live after 110 and 111.
In game 4, after White 22, Black's stones on the left side have a strange relation. The three stones in the corner are a bit far from C10, but putting another move here is way too slow. He tried to remedy this situation with the following moves. After Black 27, there are weaknesses left in both sides' shape. When I entered with White 32, I thought that his weakness at F13 would let me settle easily, but he attacked very hard. After White 60, there are some weaknesses in my shape, but he also has a weakish group in the centre. Playing at K10 with White 76 before taking the two stones with H2 felt very important to me. At move 94, I couldn't find a good move to complete my moyo at the top, but I thought that I had found a good point to invade. This was much harder than I thought, since after Black 95, the 3-3 point fails to live. With 96 and 98, I thought that I would get a ko, but he played a line that I had excluded earlier on account of too many cuts in Black's outside shape. However, with Black 107, he made things very difficult for me, since cutting at P16 doesn't work out too well -- my inside group doesn't have enough liberties. I cut at Q14 instead with the hope to at least get some outside forcing opportunities that might have been able to keep me in the game. I think that Black 115 should have been at R12, because after White 116, R12 and N16 have become miai. Black 117 just doesn't work at all. I really got lucky in the end here. These impressions are naturally one-sided, and I would be really interested what stronger players might say about these games.
FICGS - Thank you very much and have good games !
Svante Carl - Thank you!
Philip Roe (2009-03-06 14:06:34)
Thanks for the check, not for the clock
Thibault,
The notification check on the My Games title is a typically thoughtful touch. Thank you.
However, the clock just adds clutter unless you have a use for it. Can this enhancement be made an optional preference?
Also, since I am not interested in accepting challenges, is there a way to prevent challenges from being issued?
Don Groves (2009-03-07 00:50:45)
Agreed...
... on both counts, Philip.
The Challenges at the top of the page are more annoying than the clock for those of us who are not interested in challenges since they take up space that could be better used by displaying games. Making both of them optional would be a welcome change.
Another solution might be to put the Challenge section also at the bottom of the page.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-03-07 01:51:18)
Clock / Challenges
Well, the "My games" timer feature may exist without showing the clock also... About the challenges I'll add the option soon (it should have been done months ago, lack of time).
Thibault de Vassal (2009-03-10 18:28:08)
Big Chess WCH
Yes, I agree... 2 rounds would be enough. If the current champion plays a final match against a challenger, it would take one more year at least. That's a pity.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-03-23 15:55:15)
Checkmate detection (finally)
A few improvements to come today !
Checkmate detection : Finally I implemented it even if I like the idea that a player should resign by himself (just like for Go). It will be in test for a few days/weeks so it may not work for everyone during this time.
A few informations more in players statistics (number of advanced chess, Go & poker games won, lost, running...)
In Go games, a reminder will appear when a player "pass" (one player has to resign or call referee to end the game, with a link to the Go scorer)
Thank you all for making suggestions that help to improve the site, I know there are many others to implement (e.g. challenges option & so on...), be patient :)
Normajean Yates (2009-05-21 02:36:57)
to summarise: interesting!
I read the ficgs chess WCH rules: interesting!
In short,
stages 1a-3a: the top-8 rated players play a (3-stage obviously!) *knockout* (each match consisting of 8 games; so that is 56 top-rated games!)
stages 1b-3b. In parallel, the rest of the contenders play a 3-stage round-robin (groups of 5, 7, 9, 11 or 13 players.) - as William Taylor posted, only the *winner* of each round-robin stage goes to the next stage - (or if rated above 2300, directly from stage 1 to stage 3 - see rules for detatils)
stage 4: the knockout winner plays the round-robin in an 8-match candidate-finals; to decide who the challenger will be.
stage 5: the challenger v the current WCh -12 game match.
for pairing and tie-break rules (and all the above), just follow the link above [William Taylor's post]; search the page for "FICGS CHESS WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP :": it will probably be faster than scrolling down ;)
Scott Nichols (2009-06-03 03:09:30)
Chess is dead? Not hardly.
In his book "The world of chess" by Anthony Saidy the following paragraph appears. "Later in his (Capablanca) career, his play became ever more technical and drawish. He expressed the idea that with the perfection of modern knowledge it would soon be impossible to win a game against a master. Chess would soon reach a "draw death". He even proposed interchanging the initial positions of the Bishops and Knights to inject new life into the game."
An exact quote found earlier in this same book exemplifies more of what this thread is about---In reply to a Steinitz comment Tchigorin replied "Chess is a limitless forum for the human imagination. Each position is a fresh challenge. Rules and book openings, to the creative player, are no more than guidelines to be transcended. Individualize. Each position is new--terra incognita that may contain the seed of a beautiful combination. Gladly give up a pawn in return for the attack. Play chess with joy."
Daniel Parmet (2009-08-11 20:08:24)
Quotes!
The following 11 quotes are all by me:
1- "Experiences are the keys to life."
2- "Happy endings are just stories that haven't finished yet."
3- "If you expect nothing then the following will happen: either 1) you will receive nothing and thus can be happy your expectations were met or 2) You will receive something and thus be happy you have received something. And.... Happiness ensues..."
4- "Step up and face your fear or you will never be what you should be."
5- "A mistake is only a mistake if you let it happen twice. Otherwise it is a learning experience. your experience."
6- "Life is painting a picture over many years with different paints and tools."
7- ""Horney concluded that love was at least a temporary escape from all her anxiety and insecurity" - Karen Horney
Does anyone else think that someoe named 'Horney' shouldn't be talking about love?"
8- "Take each event in a singularity and say if time passes will any of this matter?"
9- "Plans are ideas that never come to fruition."
10- "You should only get upset about the little things cause you have no control over the big things."
11- "Causing another problem without fixing the initial problem just makes the initial problem worse as time continues"
The following are classic quotes:
11- "If you lose the game you should win the analysis!"
12- "Every passing minute is a chance to turn it all around." - Vanilla Sky
13- "Life is pain my dear and anyone who says otherwise is selling something." - Princess Bride
14- "The 7ps: Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance" - U.S. Military
15- "Water water everywhere but not a drop to drink!" - Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner
16- "You can get in way more trouble with a good idea than a bad idea cause you forget the good idea has limits" - Warren Buffet
17- "Teach a child to be polite and courteous and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to merge his car onto the freeway."
18- "Experience is the thing you have left when everything else is gone."
19- "There is no tomorrow without the pains and pleasures of today" - Gabriel
20- "If life weren't this complicated, it would be nowhere near as fun. Why? WHY NOT!" - Catch-22
21- "When you've done things right people won't know you've done anything at all." - Futurama
22- "The right perception of any matter and a misunderstanding of the same matter do not wholly exclude each other." - Kafka's the trial
23- "the Trausi follow the normal practices of Thracians in general, except in one particular- their behaviour, namely, on the occasion of a birth or a death. When a baby is born the family sits round and mourns at the thought of the sufferings the infant must endure now that it has entered the world, and goes through the whole catalogue of human sorrows; but when somebody dies, they bury him with merriment and rejoicing, and point out how happy he now is and how many miseries he has at last escaped." -Herodotus Viv
24- "When a Persian herald demanded the surrender of arms, the king shouted back 'come here to get them'; and when he had seen that he was surrounded, he commanded his men to have a good breakfast since their dinner would be served in hell." - Herodotus
25- "I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it"
26- "Why, we don't even know what living means now, what it is, and what it is called? Leave us alone without books and we shall be lost and in confusion at once. We shall not know what to join on to, what to cling to, what to love and what to hate, what to respect and what to despise." - Fyodor Dostoyevsky Notes from the Underground
27- "Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep." - Scott Adams
28- "Nobody is always a winner and anyone who says otherwise either is a liar or doesn't play poker."
29- “The darkness immutable tranquility holds sway.” - Jun’ichiro Tanizaki
30- “People who are constantly asking 'why' are like tourists who stand in front of a building reading Baedeker and are so busy reading the history of its construction, etc., that they are prevented from seeing the building.” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
31- “Either move or be moved.” - Ezra Pound
32- "The real meditation is the meditation of one's identity..... You try finding out why you're you and not somebody else. And who in the blazes are you anyhow??" - Ezra Pound.
33- “The image is more than an idea. It is a vortex or cluster of fused ideas and is endowed with energy.” - Ezra Pound
34- “The thought working its way towards the light.” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
35- “There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer.” - Ansel Adams
36- “When words become unclear, I shall focus with photographs. When images become inadequate, I shall be content with silence.” - Ansel Adams
37- "Wanting to think is one thing; having a talent for thinking is another." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
38- “Philosophers use a language that is already deformed as though by shoes that are too tight” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
39- “Nothing is more important for teaching us to understand the concepts we have than constructing fictitious ones” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
40- “don’t for heaven’s sake, be afraid of talking nonsense! But you must pay attention to your nonsense” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
41- “In a conversation: One person throws a ball; the other does not know: whether he is supposed to throw it back, or throw it to a third person, or leave it on the ground, or pick it up and put it in his pocket, etc” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
42- “I really do think with my pen, because my head often knows nothing about what my hand is writing” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
43- “What I am writing here may be feeble stuff; well, then I am just not capable of bringing the big, important thing to light. But hidden in these feeble remarks are great prospects.” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
44- “I ask countless irrelevant questions. If only I can succeed in hacking my way through this forest!” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
45- “Even to have expressed a false thought boldly and clearly is already to have gained a great deal” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
46- “Don’t concern yourself with what, presumably no one but you grasps!” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
47- “when you are philosophizing you have to descend into primeval chaos and feel at home there” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
48- "You cannot step into the same river twice." - Heraclitus
49- "Eternity is a child playing, playing checkers; the kingdom belongs to a child." - Heraclitus
50- "Nothing endures but change." - Heraclitus
51- "For a guest remembers all his days the hospitable man who showed him kindness." - Odyssey Book 15 Line 75
52- "Watching [GM Nigel] Short peruse the photos of young women, I had a fanciful notion that the development of specialized skills and character traits in early childhood is like a country fair in which you are alotted a fixed number of tickets to spend on the various concessions. This particular fixed number of tickets to spend on the various concessions. This particular fair is of short duration and happens only once in a lifetime. Nigel took the chess roller-coaster a dozen times, and rode the honesty ride twice, and so he had insufficient tickets left to take the Train Beyond Adolescence more than a stop or two. I myself missed the athletic concession, and I should have ridden -damn it- the chess coaster three or four times." - King's Gambit: A Son, A Father, and the World's Most Dangerous Game by Paul Hoffman page335
53- “I don’t know, but I do know with great precision why nobody else knows either.” - John H. Cochrane
54- "One must have chaos within oneself, to give birth to a dancing star." - Friedrich Nietsche
55- "I created chaos on the chess board and my strength lay in finding hidden harmonies. I always cultivated being at peace in chaos. manifest your unique character on the chess board." - Josh Waitzkin
56- "Leave numbers behind and ride the wave of the game." - Josh Waitzkin
57- "The weakness of an artist is dogma." - Josh Waitzkin
58- "Everything i've learned, i've eventually unlearned. I spend more time unlearning than learning. You must challenge your own micro thought constructs." - Josh Waitzkin
59- "It is like a tunnel, the deeper you get into the more you see there is to learn." - Josh Waitzkin
60- "Your emotions are there for a reason. Observe their ripple." - Josh Waitzkin
61- "The same mold, teachers have learned a certain way. great teachers should listen first." - Josh Waitzkin
62- "Change from psychology and technical errors, transition from opening prep to first middlegame decision or tactical to strategical." - Josh Waitzkin
63- "There is some part about any discipline that should appeal to any person." - Josh Waitzkin
64- "Identify thematic connections by breaking down the walls between different disciplines." - Josh Waitzkin
65- "You know your country is dying when you have to make a distinction between what is moral and ethical, and what is legal." - John de Armond
66- "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
67- "When you stop learning you start dying." - Scott Adams
68- "If you could buy some people for what they are worth, and sell them for what they "think" they are worth, there would always be a profit margin."
69- "Don't compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about."
70- "Life is too short to waste time hating anyone."
71- "When in doubt, just take the next small step."
72- "When it comes to going after what you love in life, don't take no for an answer."
73- "Frame every so-called disaster with these words 'In five years, will this matter?" - Ellis
74- "If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back."
75- "Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need."
76- "There are three sides to every story: your side, their side and the truth." - Bablyon 5
77- "Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher." - Japanese Proverb
My apologies if some of the classics are in the ficgs quote file already as I just keep my own (and pull quotes from everywhere). I tried to cull out the duplicates.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-08-26 19:21:42)
Stan Vaughan vs. Varuzhan Akobian (WCF)
Many of you probably saw this strange banner in a Chessbase news article, with this title :
"THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"
World Chess Federation, Inc.
WCF "WORLD CHESS CHAMPION" Stan Vaughan
vs. WCF official challenger Varuzhan Akobian in WCF TITLE MATCH 2009 (starting on December 1st, 2009 at Riviera Hotel Casino, Las Vegas)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5717
The Chessbase article says that when FIDE stripped Fischer of the title in 1975, he set up the WCF which sanctioned his "World Championship" rematch with Spassky in 1992 (with a record of five million dollars prize). After winning the event, Fischer was scheduled to play WCF official challenger Stan Vaughan, but he retired.
Well well... I cannot even find a page on Wikipedia on Stan Vaughan, but the article on Chessbase also mentions that Vaughan would have been 29 time US Champion of the American Chess Association, retaining the title at 2008 Robert Fischer Memorial and also, but not least :
* 1988 US Correspondence Chess Champion
* 1989, 1995 Mensa World Correspondence Chess Champion
* 1995-2007 WCCF World Correspondence Chess Champion
* WCF “The World Chess Champion 2001-present 2009
* Retained the title in 2007 with an 11-0 title match victory over Francisco Metz, an International Master from Mexico and former 1975 USCF's US Amateur Chess Champion
To finish, Garry Kasparov would have turned down the opportunity to play him in a match for 5 million dollars in 2008 - not a big surprise.
Does anyone have more information on all this and eventually games played by this un-unknown correspondence chess champion ?
Maurice Ellis (2009-09-07 01:09:38)
HOW TO START PLAY
Newcomer here.Can't get anyone to challenge me in a free game. Can't seem to challenge anyone in a free game.HELP!!
William Taylor (2009-09-07 14:57:28)
Good news
I'm glad to hear that. Hopefully Carlsen will be World Champ in a few years, and then Kasparov will take up competitive chess again to challenge his former pupil in a match! ;) Well, I can dream anyway.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-09-07 19:11:36)
Games vs. Tournaments
Hello Maurice, FICGS is mainly a correspondence games server so it is much easier to play tournaments (you can register in Waiting lists) than live games (advanced games and challenges), be patient and you may use the chat bar to try to find an opponent !
Garvin Gray (2009-10-30 14:04:54)
accept challenge
William, you could start by being white against me in lightning bronze :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-04 16:58:01)
Advanced games (blitz) : improvements
Hi all,
You probably noticed that there was many forfeits in advanced games as :
1) Many new players try it but do not read the instructions.
2) The system is not efficient enough to warn the players when a game starts.
The facts :
a) When you enter a waiting list for an advanced (blitz, lightning, bullet) game, you HAVE to withdraw before leaving, or the game may start without you - the way to do it may not be clear enough.
b) When you challenge a player, you may leave the computer, the system will not start the game without you (or in rare cases).
The idea of FICGS is to provide a web interface without any software to download, consequently everything is not possible... Now it only opens a pop up (if possible) & sends an email when a game starts, and it updates the page if you are in My Games.
Possible improvements :
1) To add a sound or voice message when a game starts.
2) To close advanced games waiting lists :/
3) ...
Well, it looks like I need some ideas. Anybody help ? :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-07 16:16:28)
"blitz cc"
Well, FICGS cannot & will not become a fast games server to play eg. "2 0" or even "5 0" (by the way even on the fastest servers, there are lag - and other - problems) but I hope there will be more and more players interested in classical time controls (called blitz here) & 'freestyle chess'... William, I can't remember the last time when you played a fast game here, the page now only refreshes when a move is played, and faster now... With an AJAX interface, it will be almost completely transparent.
Lazaro, actually the fast games with less than 2 moves will be replaced when a new challenge is accepted, to delete the forfeited games.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-15 22:37:30)
How to join a game?
Hello Anthony,
You may challenge players in My games (best way), or you may enter a bullet, lightning or blitz waiting list in an advanced tournaments category in Waiting lists - in this case do not forget to retire from the waiting list if you don't find an opponent.
Most players here prefer to play tournaments at a long time control.
Feel free to read the help section - http://www.ficgs.com/help.html
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-20 14:23:36)
Boris Spassky vs. Viktor Korchnoi
Entitled the "Battle of the Giants", a match just started in Elista (Kalmykia) between the 10th World Champion Boris Spassky (aged of 72), and Viktor Korchnoi (now aged of 78, multiple World Championship challenger mainly during the Karpov era, but still active in competitive play).
Korchnoi won the first game, game two ended in a draw. This kind of match is always a pleasure to follow for long time chess fans :)
Here is the first game !
Nick Burrows (2010-01-05 07:52:00)
Poker Software?
There is a big difference between heads-up play & full table games. In heads-up the computers can apply perfect game theory
There have been a few human vs poker heads-up challenges with inconclusive results.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_poker_players
Thibault de Vassal (2010-02-05 21:48:48)
Advanced games : Problems & solutions
Hi all,
There's a real problem with the advanced games so far, anyone who tested it lost on time at least once without having played and/or won a game because his opponent forgot to play or to retire from the waiting list.
The challenges partly solves the problem as the program verifies if both players are connected to the server (also I added some warning messages explaining how to use the advanced games) but it seems it is far to be enough.....
Anyway I agree that a web interface is not really designed to such games, particularly when it is hard to find an opponent for these games (which is probably the main problem).
Whatever the way, both opponents should probably be able to discuss just before their game in the chat bar, so one solution would be to verify if the players wrote (or even posted a kind of "start" message) in the chat bar during the last few minutes, it would be a way to be "SURE" that both players are ready to play, even if I'm not sure that it would be enough again.
In my opinion, no more advanced game should start if both opponents did not confirm their presence to the other player in the chat bar.
Any opinion on this ? Any other idea to solve this ?
Thanks in advance and sorry again to all players who experienced this.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-02-05 22:39:18)
Advanced games : Problems & solutions
When a player signs off (or sign on), his challenges are cancelled, the problem is that players rarely sign off (/logout) anyway. And it would partly solve the problem only, this is a web interface, people jump on other pages while waiting an opponent and just forget, even pop up windows are not enough.
Garvin Gray (2010-02-09 16:08:18)
Advanced games : Problems & solutions
An idea might be set a time period that challenges are valid for ie after a person sends out challenges or joins the waiting list, if no one has accepted inside a certain time period (say 15 minutes) the challenge automatically expires.
If the challenger wants to keep their challenge going, they have to re-send, helping to ensure that they are online, or at least near the computer.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-16 10:37:01)
Interview with E. Kotlyanskiy
Congrats again to Edward Kotlyanskiy, new FICGS chess champion after beating Xavier Pichelin (2577) in the 12 games final match of the 3rd cycle.
Edward kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match and correspondence chess in general :
_________________________
> Hi Edward, first of all congratulations for winning this 12 games match against the former FICGS chess champion, Xavier Pichelin. You had to score at least one point more than your opponent, what was your strategy when the games started?
Knowing that I had to score at least +1 against Xavier, I had to try to get the games into complex positions where there are many options to play for both sides. At the point when the games started, I was the underdog to Xavier (mainly due to the face that I was rated about 200 points lower). In part, I think that one of the reasons why Xavier allowed the games to reach such complex positions is due to the fact that his rating was undoubtedly higher than mine and therefore he probably assumed that he could “outplay” me. Although this was simultaneously a brave and admirable choice, I think an option that many other players would have pursued would have been to play “drawish” lines with the hope of having all of the games ending in draws. I have great respect for Xavier due to the fact that he didn't choose such a path and allowed us to put on a hard fought show that was worth watching.
> What could you say on the hot moments of the match?
The first game in which I thought I had very good chances to win was game 34739. In this game (particularly on move 18) Xavier played the move Nb8?? Looking back at the move, I realized that the game was lost for him. I assumed that Xavier probably underestimated the threat of f5. There were no good responses and/or countermeasures for the move f5. For example, if 19) gxf5, I have 20) Nxh5 Nc6 21) Rc3! Bxh4 (Qd8 was also possible) 22) Qf4 Be7 23) g4! His king is just clearly caught in the attack! 19) exf5 also fails to 20) e6 f6 (trying to keep the king safe) 21) Bxh5!! gxh5 22) Nc6 Rc3 and therefore it’s easy to see that it is just a matter of time. Xavier did try something better although even that failed due to some nice moves. I believe that 21) g7 came as a surprise to Xavier (or that at least he hadn't seen this move when playing Nb8). After Nxh5 (another neat move), another line that I thought Xavier would enter (which is also losing) is 22) Qxc2 23) Qxc2 Rxc2 24) Nf6+! Bxf6 25) exf6. Clearly my pawns are just too strong! Knowing that I am winning after the mentioned alternatives, the other games (although I won three others) were just necessary to hold without falling for any tactics/tricks.
A second game I want to briefly comment on is game 34729. I played a very nice (although I am not sure if it is winning just yet) move known as 17.a4! It was a very nice way to open the position on both of our kings. In all honesty, the move that I think was winning in this situation 25) Rd3, I did not even consider too highly until the position reached that very move. After a relatively short analysis, I was indeed pleasantly surprised to see that; overall, it was completely winning for me.
> What could you say on the advantages and inconveniences of this 12 games match format played at a quite fast time control?
From the days when I first starting playing correspondence chess, I have always been accustomed to making moves rather quickly. In fact, when I first started playing, in some games I made moves within 10 minutes of looking at the position. Although I take a lot more time to analyze now-a-days, I still consider the speed of my play to be relatively faster compared to most other correspondence players. Playing 12 games simultaneously can have drawbacks as not having enough time to properly analyze; however, I didn't have such a problem. With the exception of a few games that I was playing on IECG at the start of the FICGS Championship, the 12 game series was my main concern.
> Without revealing your secrets, how would you define modern correspondence chess as a centaur (playing with chess engines)?
These days, it is impossible to play correspondence chess on a high level without consulting the engine. It is also unlikely that one can achieve a lot of success just by following the engine blindly (even after a long analysis). Personally, I know that some of my friends believe that in correspondence chess you are just following the engine but I believe that most “high level” correspondence players know that it just doesn't work that way.
In my opinion, one of the most important skills that a correspondence player should have is having some sense of where the engine he is analyzing with is faulty. To give a well known example, many people know that there are certain endgame positions that an engine alone can't be trusted in (a simple case is the wrong color bishop). In essence, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of whatever engine you are analyzing with is critical to playing correspondence chess at a “high level”.
> Why did you choose to play correspondence chess, do you play OTB (over the board) chess as well?
Before starting correspondence chess, I played OTB chess for quite a few years. When my schedule became busy, I realized that I wouldn't have much time to play OTB in clubs. I came across correspondence chess and got hooked on it very quickly. Also, I began to enjoy more of the subtleties of the game; something that is just lacking in OTB blitz games. I imagine that some people prefer to play practical chess (OTB) in which a move order wouldn't make much of a difference; however, I guess I am a perfectionist and believe the game should be played on as high of a level as possible.
> How many correspondence games do you usually play at the same time (on different chess servers or by email)? Would you say that it is an addiction?
Usually, I played about 5 to 10 games on average on all different sites. I did play via email on IECC but wasn't fond of playing by email therefore I went back to server only sites (IECG, FICGS, Schemingmind).
I can definitely say that correspondence chess is an addiction. All too often, I catch myself analyzing games when I really should be doing something much more time sensitive. Well, at least I can say that this addiction paid off in that I am the new FICGS champion!
> Are you interested in other games?
As far as board games go, chess is primarily the only game I play. At times I do play games like monopoly and scrabble with my friends. Another interest that I have is billiards.
> The next challenger for the FICGS chess champion title is SM Eros Riccio (winner of several PlayChess PAL freestyle tournaments). Do you think that you'll play him? What does this perspective inspire in you?
I can't wait to play Eros! I believe that he would be my toughest opponent yet (although I have played GM Leitão, Rafael (fide elo: 2619) and managed to draw). Eros is like an unstoppable juggernaut in corr chess. That said, I look forward to our games and I am certain that they will simultaneously be challenging and entertaining.
> Thanks and best of luck in your future games!
Don Groves (2010-03-25 22:50:03)
Challenges
Thib: Please give us an option in Preferences to remove our name from the challenges lists.
Don Groves (2010-03-25 22:54:57)
Challenges
And also to remove the Challenges section from our My Games page.
Don Groves (2010-04-10 18:22:19)
Challenges
Is this so hard to do? I keep getting Chess challenges but I'm only playing Go now. I don't have time for both.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-04-10 18:25:44)
Challenges
Ok, I should find some time to fix this this week, at last ;)
William Taylor (2010-04-10 18:27:50)
Challenges
I'll second this request. Another related issue which I and several other players have been experiencing recently is that of repeated spam challenges (i.e. a player keeps sending challenges even when they are turned down). Perhaps it would also be a good idea to be able to exclude certain players from challenging you (like an ICC 'noplay list').
Don Groves (2010-04-10 18:49:13)
Challenges
That's been happening to me also today. Same guy, over and over and over...
Garvin Gray (2010-04-10 18:59:54)
Challenges
I third this!
Thibault de Vassal (2010-04-10 21:19:28)
Challenges
This is the software's fault (my bad), not the player's... because there's a "challenge all players" function that is supposed to be used... so this is unlikely to be harrassment! Please keep cool in this case, you may move the challenges at the bottom of the window if you don't use it by clicking the arrow (towards the bottom). I'll add an option in Preferences to completely hide it, and probably a blacklist function also. Now working on.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-04-10 23:19:20)
Challenges hidden
New option for the challenges ! (see Preferences) .. now you can "hide" the challenges function. This means that a player still can challenge everyone (including you) but you won't see it. Not a perfect way but to be improved. There should be a blacklist function (during a session only) soon.
Don Groves (2010-04-10 23:37:00)
Challenges
Merci !!!
Don Groves (2010-04-11 02:35:11)
Challenges
For the final solution, can you add a "none" entry to the challenges listbox in Preferences? That would be the same as "hidden" except also that person's name would not appear in the challenges list at all.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-04-11 14:46:49)
Challenges
Yes, that was a quick update... I'll see what I can do soon.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-05-11 15:25:54)
A suggestion
Hi Don, of course that's very feasible but I just drastically optimized the My games page so that it displays faster (it seems to work, the number of SQL requests went in average from about 30 to 2).
A consequence is that one can see if a player is in vacation on this page only if it's his turn in the game, maybe that's not definitive but I have to make this test and observe how the server reacts.
I'm not sure if your suggestion is really useful (maybe for those who hide the challenges form) but it would be kind of bonus, so if I can do it while avoiding too many tests, why not. For now, I prefer to let this page as it is.
Michel van der Kemp (2010-05-11 16:42:20)
Entry fee for higher class tournament
I just dont like the possibility to buy oneself tickets for higher tournaments. What's next? Next FIDE world championship challenger is going to be the one that brings the largest bag of money to the table?
Perhaps a commercial aspect to this justifies this idea. I know it's a lot of work to keep a site like this running, and FICGS gets many improvements all the time. It makes sense to get some revenue out of it, to compensate so much work.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-05-11 18:01:16)
Entry fee for higher class tournament
Hi Michel! Thanks again for discussing it.
> What's next? Next FIDE world championship challenger is going to be the one that brings the largest bag of money to the table?
I don't know if this was designed to be humor (I guess, but maybe you meant FICGS instead of FIDE?) but in the context of current FIDE rules I find it very funny :) .. by the way if the same rules were applied at FICGS, anyone could challenge the champion for the title for $500,000 or something like this. Of course that would be great for FICGS and the current champion may appreciate such a prize as well, but that's not the point here.
However yes this FIDE rule may be compared to my suggestion, at a very different level though (the basic idea is the same: to build prizes for more interesting [free?] competitions), in my opinion an entry fee of 10 Epoints is quite different from what I suggested before already. Note that even if FICGS was not free, it would not justify such special entry fee more (not saying it cannot be justified!), after all there's an entry fee in the vast majority of OTB tournaments, if you don't pay it (but GM/IM that are generally invited to play for free - and most often take the prize), you cannot improve your rating, the problem is that the entry fee depends on the tournament, and the entry fee for closed tournaments (the main/only way to get norms) is often much higer.
I agree that things are somewhat different here as the main idea of FICGS is to be completely free. So the real question is : "Is FICGS still 'free' if a tournament's winner can choose to pay an entry fee in a virtual money (by the way it is quite easy to get Epoints without having to pay anything) to enter the next tournaments category".
- If despite of all the answer is "no", then FICGS is NOT free right now anyway as any player can play a rated 2 games match RAPID SILVER with an entry fee against a higher rated player to have more chances to win elo points. This way even IECG was not free (chessfriend), and even if something is really 100% free, it still doesn't mean fair, which is the main point here. Even if a tournament's winner could enter the next tournament's category for free, such a rule would NEVER be completely fair, as I described the particular cases.
Quite complex :)
Finally I'm not saying you're wrong in any way. Free or not free is a really complex question IMO, in my point of view, FICGS will remain free as noone needs to pay to become champion or to achieve the highest ratings (unlike FIDE). But if it is 99% free only while offering money prizes, I'd choose it anyway for sure.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-05-13 23:09:38)
Big chess engine
I'm very curious to see if this idea to see a Big Chess engine will give something one day :)
http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34284
It could be a new challenge for programmers...
William Taylor (2010-05-14 13:01:56)
Big chess world championship
It seems there is no final match phase for this. Do you plan to have a match between defending champ and challenger in future editions of the championship, and if not, why not?
Thibault de Vassal (2010-05-14 14:23:53)
Big chess engine
It wouldn't be so hard to make an engine, I'm just very curious on which level it can play... I hope there will be people to throw themselves into that challenge, that would be interesting! :) .. I replied at talkchess, let's see how this will evolve.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-07-28 15:56:50)
Match vs. ICCF
Did ICCF play such a match in the past? I would be surprised... anyway it would be great, and a real challenge for sure...
Kamesh Nookala (2010-07-28 16:00:14)
Match vs. ICCF
Hello Thib,
I am not sure. Somewhere from within my 1kb memory, i vaguely remembered that FICGS played with ICCF in the past and lost. I may be wrong too.
But, that's a real challenge and we got players who have nothing to lose. They know the tricks of trade and can grill the ICCF players. I suppose they will come up with weaker players, but not the top level. Once we show our mettle, only then will they know that FICGS means Real Business.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-08-03 11:49:16)
Match vs. ICCF
Hi Gino, thanks for your precious advices... Good ideas, and indeed ICCF could host the whole event (if they wish).
Still thinking about it... another idea (among others) : if only FICGS players who are not members of ICCF could enter the FICGS team, maybe the experience could be interesting as well as I feel that many 2200-2300 players here are getting stronger [maybe also due to the increasing level of engines] and will probably reach 2400 in a while, so they would have a chance to play a match against very strong ICCF players... The idea would be to see the real strength difference between these 2 categories of players (ICCF would be almost sure not to lose but for us the challenge would be even greater).
The other idea behind this is that ICCF may see an opportunity to make discover their server to these new players.
Finally we may suggest several ideas to ICCF, Gino's one, this one & maybe others... Whatever they choose, it could be interesting for the players, what do you think?
Scott Nichols (2010-08-31 16:34:23)
Latest deletions of chat
On a little variation of this subject. Thib, I was wondering if you could have the chat refresh each time the page does. Sometimes people reply or challenge or whatever and unless we manually refresh or we get a move we don't see the chat until it is to late.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-09-17 00:29:38)
Svante Carl von Erichsen on Go WCH #4
As you probably read in the news, Svante Carl von Erichsen won the 4th FICGS Go WCH, beating his challenger Huayong Yang 3-2, Svante Carl wins the Go championship for the 4th time in a row!
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000004
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match & computer Go:
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, congratulations once again for winning this match against a surprising challenger who started here a few months ago with a 10 kyu rank, Huayong Yang, now rated 2438 after scoring 2 points in your 5 games match (which is a great achievement for sure). What did you think about his play & yours in these games?
Svante Carl - I think that he greatly underestimated his rank initially. As far as I know, he had not played for a long time and believed that his ability had therefore deteriorated. I do not think that you can drop more than one or at most two stones, though -- it is like cycling or swimming, you never unlearn it. I had the impression that we were quite evenly matched in summa, but our strengths are in different aspects of the game; I cannot really put my finger on the difference, though.
FICGS - After a previous win, you said that you spend a quite long time to analyze, which probably helps you to reach a higher level than 2 dan (your EGF rating) compared to OTB play... It looks obvious to me that correspondence chess moves generally ask for much more time than Go moves at a high level but I may be wrong, how much time did you spend on your longest analysis during the match? Do you remember for which move?
Svante Carl - I usually spend at least a few minutes on each move, except when the continuation is obvious. I often use more, and if I do not find a satisfactory move then, I will even postpone the move to another day, so that I can sleep over it and let my subconcious work on it.
FICGS - Do you watch other games played by your future opponent before starting your match? Do you think that this is really important in preparation like it can be in Correspondence chess?
Svante Carl - I sometimes glance over the games in the championship qualification tournament, but I do not try to prepare this way. I do not think that such preparation has any value in Go, especially in correspondence Go, since you have time during the game to do deep analysis. I usually try to take each game out of standard fuseki patterns pretty quickly, anyway. Of course, I know that my opponents in these title matches are always very tough and demand my utmost respect.
FICGS - Do you still follow the recent developments in computer Go? What do you think about the latest Go engines? How much time do we have yet before the best Go players are caught by computers according to you?
Svante Carl - I have the impression that the currently most promising technology (Monte Carlo/UCT) has the potential to achieve a rank of about 2 or 3 dan (EGF/KGS). I think that the next fundamentally new idea or breakthrough might add 2 stones, to get to 4 or 5 dan. I do not have any idea where it might go from that, but I think that it gets always harder.
What I would find interesting is having more intermediate board sizes. The best bots are almost on par with the best professionals on 9x9 now. I would propose to try to achieve a similar level on 11x11, then 13x13, then 15x15 etc.. Regarding 9x9, I think that the currently predominant komi of 7.5 points is too big, and that this has a negative impact on the experiments because the bots do not play in a balanced environment. It might be worthwhile to introduce the Taiwan rule (last move compensation) to get more fine-grained scores.
FICGS - What programs did you use this year to analyze? (just trying, of course it may be part of your secrets ;))
Svante Carl - It is not a secret. I just use an editor, usually EidoGo or CGoban3, to visualize the variations I imagine.
FICGS - Finally, what thoughts would you like to share on your 5 games, that could help us not to miss the best times or to help us to understand the most complex moves...
Svante Carl - I cannot give a detailed commentary, but I can try to summarize my impressions.
I think that Game 5 was quite balanced until move 21, but I think that the white invasion was a bit ambitious then. Of course, White did not need to die there, but after moves 32-33 I think that Black had a good result anyway (move 32 should go out faster in my opinion; note how E14 helps Black in enclosing White).
In Game 3, I think things got quite difficult for White in the lower left, but I let him take the initiative by backing off at move 35 (I should have simply closed off F10 then). White gained control of the centre as a result, and in the large endgame, I lost too many points there.
In Game 4, I fell behind in the opening through some slow moves (there was some discussion on the Life-in-19x19 forum about this, see the link in the comments of that game). In the endgame, Black then lost some points in the centre, so that I was a bit ahead when the game timed out.
In Game 1, I made some bad decisions on the left side, and never managed to turn things around. I think I was behind by about 5 points in the end.
In Game 2, I think that Black should not have ignored move 24. After I got quite some territory from my moyo and also reduced his top side, I could play it safe.
I look forward to the games with Olivier Drouot that recently started, but I also hope that Yang Huayong will re-enter the championship cycle.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-09-30 13:26:12)
WCH Stage 1 Tiebreaks
1) This is correct. Actually, when it is possible, 2 players per group (the second one is chosen according to his number of points in the tournament and his rating compared to all other players in the same case in the same cycle) may play the next round.
2) The tiebreaker is the TER because it does not change during the tournament, so whatever the difficulty (and the difference between TER) the challenge is known and it gives a chance by influencing the risks to take, just like in the knockout cycle! (it answers the final question as well) When the TER tie, the current rating is the best way to do it IMO, it is rare enough anyway. The WCH rules are based on ratings, thus all rated tournaments "count" in a way for the final result & title.
Kamesh Nookala (2010-12-10 18:41:26)
Eros Riccio vs Eros Riccio in WCH 5 ?
Like the heavyweight boxing championship, I throw a challenge to any of the former or current champs to play a game vs. me.....
Ehem Ehem,, sorry out of context... btw, all and any rules always make me sick, so i hate reading them :-p
Hmmmm, who is Eros? any idea?
Daniel Parmet (2011-01-14 08:01:36)
Eros Riccio is the new FICGS chess champ
in the case of Riccio winning the challenger match shouldn't the previous Champ get a rematch just so there is a 5th title bout?
Thibault de Vassal (2011-01-30 21:07:31)
Eros on his win in the 4th chess WCH
Eros Riccio kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his win in the 4th FICGS chess WCH, and explained how one particular game influenced another one that he finally won:
- Hi Eros, first of all congratulations for your latest outstanding results at FICGS, you won the Freestyle tournament, now two chess championships in a row... When the privilege of the champion is to defend his title without playing the preliminary tournaments, you are involved in all championship cycles & a few regular tournaments, do you plan to avoid that anyone can even reach the championship final in the future? :-)
Thanks! I must admit that this is really a magic moment for me in chess... if you consider that despite my recent ICCF Grand Master Title, probably I will also soon win my third italian Correspondence Champion Title out of three participations in the Italian Final Tournaments. And now also this huge satisfaction of being the FICGS Champion! I look forward to seeing a new challenger soon, I wonder who he will be, but let me enjoy the next few months for now ;-)
- What are your impressions on the games? Did you have any strategy from the beginning to the end? Finally did it work or was there another factor? (without revealing your secrets, of course :))
The games in the opening were as I expected, all Najdorf Sicilians except one game where I played 1.d4. My goal was to win at least one game, so I tried different aggressive variations as White (6.Bg5, 6.f3, 6.Be3 and 6.h3) with the hope of catching Edward unprepared on at least one of these, but uff, he was very well prepared on each one of them! A curious thing is that my biggest chance of winning happened in a game where I had the Black pieces! So Edward had to take some risks in one of his games where he had Black (the games where he had White were already finished or all very drawish) he was forced to avoid an easy draw he had (the 6.h3 game) and eventually he lost that game. Happy of having reached my goal of winning at least one game, I accepted his draw offer in that other game (6.f3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.Be3 Be7 9.Be2) where I had good winning chances.
- You probably noticed, like many correspondence chess players, that the hardware still fastly improves while chess engines are continuously getting stronger, particularly since that "supposed" clones of Rybka (some may be even stronger than Rybka herself) appeared in the race. Do you think that the rate of draws will be so high soon that it may definitely kill correspondence chess? Do you have any opinion on these new engines?
I think that despite the big improvement of Hardwares and engines, we are still very far (and we will still be in the next 5 years, hopefully) from a situation where all the games will most probably end in a draw. So I think we can enjoy correspondence chess for many more years in the future, even if of course the Draw percentage at the highest levels will be higher and higher.
- I remember that you were surprised to win your match against Alberto in the Candidates Final of the 5th cycle (the reason why you do not even have to defend your title this time), the WCH rules (particularly the co-existence of the round-robin tournament & knockout tournament) are obviously not well understood by all players, what do you think about this system and the tie in 8 games matches? Are there changes you'd like to see in the future?
Yes, I really was! We were both convinced that with all draws, the higher rated player would have won (Alberto was higher rated than me in that match). Anyway it was our fault, as we didn't read the rules carefully. I am not sure what changes could be done in the future... maybe this is anyway the best setup, no new ideas are coming to my mind right now.
- Do you have a few more words for Edward after these nice games? Maybe also for your future opponents? :)
It was a real pleasure for me to play him, not only for the interesting games we played, but also for the friendly chats we had during the exchanges of the moves. I hope to play him again in the future for a rematch.
- Thanks for your answers and congratulations again!
Welcome, and thanks ;-)
_________
It is very interesting to see that a even a player like Eros prefered to minimize the risks (avoiding mouse drops or whatever) as much as possible by accepting a draw in a game where he had winning chances. Correspondence chess is definitely not all about chess, that's probably the lesson.
Also it is reassuring to read that correspondence chess is NOT dead yet, nor soon :)
Thibault de Vassal (2011-04-03 01:53:04)
FICGS Birthday?
Ah! You challenge me Sebi :) I was not even able to find an april fool joke good enough this time... but I'll try! A special tournament wouldn't be a good idea right now though :/
Don, I can do this! Cheers at 00:00 April 5th!
Scott Nichols (2012-03-04 22:48:24)
FICGS poker ratings
An interesting challenge. I held the #1 spot for a long time and in truth lost interest and let myself slip down, playing rarely and then stopping for over a year I'm pretty sure. So just recently I announced my intentions to reclaim the #1 spot and hold it before this year is over.
Then soon "after" I said this, Nelson resigned his games to start this "experiment". IMO this is how, in addition to playing good poker, he achieved being able to stay #1 for long periods of time. First, you have to play as many games as possible, over a hundred or more. This will allow you to implement the second phase. That is you get to pick and choose which games to play out immediately an which to stop playing to continue at a more opportune time. e.g. Only finish the "winning" games to get to the top. Then when you have a sufficient lead to where a loss or two won't hurt your position, THEN play out the losing ones.
Thib quote from above " In my opinion he'll reach the top rankings within a few months (particularly if he plays bullet games) which is quite short compared to correspondence chess. " Well for him to do this, he will have to get by me, and others, this time. So consider the Gauntlet thrown down! Scott
Thibault de Vassal (2012-03-04 23:01:30)
FICGS poker ratings
A problem is that it is impossible to enter new waiting lists when having more than 50 poker games running.
On the other point your strategy may work but at the end you'll probably lose many points... I prefer to lose the almost lost games before to win the almost won ones to have a stable high rating. Anyway it would take much time to sort, I prefer to play all games the same way.
That will be an instructive challenge for sure.
Ramil Germanes (2012-04-21 01:42:02)
Slow tournament entries
Another thing:
Why only tournaments?
Why no option for only one or two games where you can challenge a player of your choice directly in a longer time control? (what we have now is we have no control of who our opponent is, as long as the fee is met anyone can challenge anyone, but that is not attractive to higher rated players. see it's mostly about rating points!)
Often newly registered players don't easily see how to play correspondence chess here (many asks in the chat bar how to play) because they are expecting they can play a game instantly but here you have to wait for the waiting list to be filled for the tourney to start and that may take weeks or even months. And that's kind of turn-off to them even for me before.
Ramil Germanes (2012-04-21 02:01:43)
Slow tournament entries
Daniel:
If we have the option to challenge a player of our choice then your second problem is solved.
Your first problem is partly due to negative reactions of players here due to not able to play stronger players but if that is met we all be satisfied and might give good overall reactions about ficgs which might help to attract more players in the long run.
The more important part is the current players here must be satisfied for the site to attract more players.
Paul Campanella (2012-05-11 04:57:14)
Playing poker for e-points
Members of FICGS are able to play chess for e-points but poker challenges are only allowed in "bronze".
Why are members of FICGS not allowed to challenge other members to either "silver" or "gold" poker games?
Garvin Gray (2012-05-19 15:31:54)
Advanced challenges, time out expiry
I think time has come to implement a time out expiry on advanced games challenges.
If an advanced game challenge has not been accepted by someone with 1 hour of its posting, that challenge expires and is automatically removed from the system.
The challenge would then need to be re-issued.
This would help prevent the issue of players accepting challenges many hours after it was posted and then waiting around for a time out.
It would also help to ensure that the challenger was around to accept their own challenge.
Don Groves (2012-05-20 00:31:55)
Advanced challenges, time out expiry
This could also be fixed by not starting clocks until both players are online.
Thibault de Vassal (2012-09-21 14:31:25)
A radical idea?
Yes, it is stored for each game, but the waiting list system does not work this way and the opponent must not miss the time control (in challenges or in the waiting list). But that's possible.
Garvin Gray (2012-09-22 08:40:14)
A radical idea?
How this could be done is as follows:
Player A (person sending challenge)specifies what time control they want.
This would do away with the concept of bullet, lightning and blitz as player can choose whatever time control they want.
The three terms are not required as there is no weighting for rating purposes in advanced chess based on the the time control.
Then the challenged player can accept the challenge, or propose a new time control or parameter.
The clocks would only start after the challenge has been offered and agreed to.
This would eliminate time forfeits.
Thibault de Vassal (2012-10-02 11:38:49)
A radical idea?
Nope, the idea is not radical at all... Now I know that I can do it quite easily in the waiting list system (not challenges)!
I can't do it right now but do not hesitate to harass me :)
Garvin Gray (2012-10-06 17:21:33)
WCH Final match
After having read Eros Riccio's answers to the interview questions on his defending his title twice, I am proposing a few changes to the final match.
I wish to make it clear that this is not in any way an attack on any person. They can only play to the rules set and try to use those rules to their advantage.
My issue is with the rules themselves.
I would like to propose a new format for the final match, because I think it is ridiculous that any player can defend their title with short draws and make no real attempt to prove that they are superior than their opponent.
Of course if the challenger is happy to draw all eight or twelve games, then that is their 'fault' as well.
My proposal is the following:
After eight games, if neither player has won a game, then the match continues for another four games.
In the first eight games, if both sides have won at least one game each, then the result is a drawn match and the champion keeps their title.
In the tie breaking four games, as soon as one player wins a game, the match is over.
I think the current rules are weighted way too much in favour of the champion, which as we have seen from these two games, the champion does not even have to try to prove that he is better than the challenger, but can just draw all eight/twelve games and retain the title.
Thib, please change the rules for this upcoming cycle.
Thibault de Vassal (2012-10-09 18:52:25)
WCH Final match
Of course this correspondence chess championship is very different from FIDE WCH, but it seems to me that 12 games is still enough (24 games would be quite inhuman by the way), the score in the latest final matches was not significant on the draws issue, particularly now that we all know how Eros deals with it (in a smart way that can be compared to Kramnik's strategy in his match vs. Kasparov: draw with Berlin's defence, fight with White if no risk). IMO the champion has nothing to prove as he made it in a whole cycle and by beating the previous one, while a challenger should at least be able to win one game out of 12.
Actually the real evolution should have been towards freestyle chess, but it has no success enough to organize a whole cycle and it looks like Eros is the king as well. Also I don't like the idea to melt different time controls like FIDE does. The whole challenge is about one thing, not 3 or 4 differents kinds of games.
I love the past tradition not because it is a tradition, but because I really think it is the best system so far! If a new system proves to be better to me (there will always be a question of taste though, of course) then we would have to discuss it here.
The only way to encourage players to try for wins is to go towards the ICCF format, that has other issues that I wanted to avoid at any price. And why to do the same?
Neel Basant (2012-10-11 20:48:44)
WCH Final match
Certainly both the challenger and the defender should have equal ..
In this context i like Garvin's proposal..
The defender should not have draw odd..
Garvin Gray (2012-10-13 12:49:22)
WCH Final match
Neel, I have no particular issue with draw odds. Being corro, it is not possible to organise anything that might be still decent corro, but is at a more rapid time control to get a tie break going.
My issue is that as Eros's comments have shown, he was not even slightly forced to try and win any of the games.
So I think the rules should be made more attractive to try and get players to win games (and yes put on a show too).
Another idea could be to start eight games, if the champion is ahead, the match is over and if still tied, start games 9 to 16.
If the challenger is ahead after game 8, games 9 to 16 are still played, and now the champion would have to go all out to win a game to at least draw level.
Thibault de Vassal (2012-11-04 01:23:15)
Eros Riccio wins 6th and 7th chess WCH
Only if Eros is reaching the candidates final while he's champion... that's the current challenge for Jeroen, that's the rule so that is fair.
Horatiu Adrian Petrescu (2013-01-16 18:07:11)
FICGS admin scam me
Garvin,if you say your mind is not lazy ,and if you say I am ignorant ,i challenge you at a fight without using any machine.What do you say you accept ? There are many websites like playok.com where we can play without using programs not how says jerk admin that "it would be very easy to cheat anyway" How you cheat if is an implemented security system?
Thibault de Vassal (2013-05-07 13:17:57)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH
As you may know, Eros Riccio won the 8th FICGS chess championship by beating Jeroen Van Assche (who remains undeafeated though, he did not lose a single chess game at FICGS yet) in the candidates final, preventing him to play Eros again in the final.
Eros kindly accepted to answer a few questions:
- Hello Eros. First of all, congratulations for winning this 8th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, you did not even have to play the 12 games match to defend your title as you won the qualifying tournament. In these conditions, the challenge was really tough for Jeroen Van Assche, in despite of his prodigious chess. He had to beat you consecutively in the candidates final (8 games match), then in the final (12 games match). How did things go in this candidates final?
Eros: Hi Thibault, thanks again! I was also worried to have to play a very strong player like Van Assche, but fortunately I had again the advantage that all draws were enough to win, and so my strategy was again not to take risks in all my games. As White it was easy... and surprisingly also as Black. The only game where I had to be more careful than others was this one: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qf3 h6 8.Be3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.Qg3 b5 11.a3 Rb8. Here Jeroen surprised me with an interesting novelty, 12.Kb1. The two times I had played this position I was White against Gueci and Kruse, and in both games I continued with 12.Bxb5 but couldn't get more than a draw. The idea of 12.Kb1 is to sacrifice a Pawn for the initiative after 12...b4 13.axb4 Rxb4 14.Nb3 Nxe4. The White Bishops are very strong after 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Bd3 Ra4 17.Bd4 and fully compensate the Pawn less. Anyway I managed to defend, and when I was finally able to trade the Queens we agreed for the Draw.
- You also won the ICCF Umansky Memorial a few weeks ago, the italian correspondence chess championship (again) as well, obviously you played numerous games last year, what do you plan for the next months? By the way, Jeroen already qualified for the candidates final of the 9th cycle, meaning that he may play you in the final match next year if you defend your title again, is there a chance that we can see a revenge?
Eros: Yes, like in the past, also last year I have played a lot of games... anyway for the future I am planning to reduce my games a lot. At the moment, except a few games in minor tournaments, I am only playing for the italian colors at the Olympiads and European Championship, for ICCF. I didn't register for the new Italian Championship this time... I prefer to wait that another individual top ICCF Tournament starts. And of course I am also waiting to meet my next challenger for the FICGS Final! Maybe it will be Van Assche again, we have to see if he beats his opponent in the semifinal (actually next candidates final).
- It looks like a few chess engines reached a certain maturity, I mean algorithms. As a consequence, the computer speed may become the major evolution factor during the next years, that is generally slower than the program's improvements (but the future may have surprises, of course). What do you expect from the computer chess world in the next few years and its impact on correspondence chess?
Eros: As I have already said in a previous interview, being chess probably a draw with perfect play, the more engines get stronger, the more draws we will see. That's quite obvious.
- You probably do not play chess over the board so often, yet you have a quite good ELO! (about 2200, while many correspondence chess masters are rated below 2000 or not rated at all) By the way, I can certify that you are a strong blitz player after we met a few years ago. Do you still play tournaments?
Eros: I am not playing otb chess for a few years, my peak was 22... and a few points, I don't remember exactly. One of the main reasons why I stopped is because later, when analyzing my games with an engine... every time I got frustrated a lot seeing all the blunders I was making.
- Do you estimate that playing OTB chess is good to improve at correspondence chess?
Eros: Yes, it's useful especially if you develop a strategical style, then also in your corr. games you can see more easily "long-term-strategy" plans, which is still the "weakest strenght" in all engines.
- Do you feel that you're still improving at correspondence chess? If yes, is it mainly a question of opening book or something else?
Eros: Improving at corr. chess... hmm... I will surprise you with my thought about this matter! I think I can evaluate my strenght according to the speed of the computer I am analyzing my games with. When I bought this computer, 3 years ago, I felt like I could beat the corr. World Champion. Now... as my computer is becoming older and older, I feel like my play is getting weaker each day it passes. So my answer is that I am still getting worse at corr. chess, not improving.
Attila Ba (2013-06-11 10:10:18)
Playing activity top 20 players
As to 'create your own site of you are not satisfied' I'm seriously considering setting up a big chess site of my own. I like the idea of engine free chess very much but I can't get a tournament running here for half a year or so.
My site is not fully working as yet but has fragments that work (you can sign up, modify your profile, create challenges, view the board and make moves on it etc.).
Should you have any comments on the design it has a forum.
you can find it here:
baatti.com
Thibault de Vassal (2013-07-15 14:16:39)
Interview with new FICGS Go champion
Yen-Wei Huang, winner of the 8th FICGS Go championship, kindly accepted to answer a few questions for this very interesting interview!
_______________________
- Hello Yen-Wei and congratulations for winning the FICGS Go championship! Xiao Tong was obviously a tough opponent, yet you won 5-0, what happened during this match?
Hi Thib. Thanks again for your kind invitation. Xiao is definitely one of the strongest Go players on FICGS, and I was really, really lucky to have won all five games. In fact, I was behind in three of them until Xiao made some mistakes late in the games: in game 69092, I forced a tough ko fight which jeopardized my lower group. Xiao made a mistake at P2 as he missed my T3 could force another ko. Game 69093 was very close towards the end but I think the move at C13 caused him the game. Game 69096 was even closer that I won by half a point thanks to the big 7.5 komi. The other two games were not easy either and I am glad I could have hung on to the lead. Overall I really enjoyed our match and I would love to have a rematch with Xiao in the future.
- You're from Taiwan, could you tell us a bit more about you? At what age did you learn Go? Do you have any other ranks (e.g. at other sites)?
I learned Go when I was 5 and I have always enjoyed playing all my life. I used to play on servers like KGS and Tygem and I was around 6-7 dan on these sites. Recently I don't have that much time to play so that's why turned to turn-based server like FICGS.
- What do you think about the world of Go these days? Who is the very best player in the world according to you?
I think the past two years were the "warring period" in the world of Go. I would say Lee Sedol was the best player two years ago, but he seems to have lost his dominant position recently. There are many rising stars that are winning the world champions. I am especially keeping an eye on Yuta Iyama, who I think is No. 1 in Japan and has started to threaten the dominance of Chinese and Korean players.
- What about computer Go and its future? How many years do you give to the human before losing to the machine?
As a software engineer I foresee the computer Go beats the world's No. 1 player in two decades. Crazy Stone already beat Yoshio Ishida with four handicap stones earlier this year, and I believe it wouldn't take long for computers to beat pros in two handicap stones. The real challenge will come when computers need to go from handicap games to even games since they need to advance from defensive mode to attack mode. I am really excited to see how Artificial Intelligence can surprise us with its "creative" moves when the time comes.
- Do you use engines or databases? What advice would you give to beginners (and to your future challengers :))?
I know there are many useful Go engines and databases that are being developed these days, unfortunately I don't really know much about them. I do use http://ps.waltheri.net/ if I need to look something up, and I go to http://tom.com for commented games (they're in Chinese, nonetheless). Advice to beginners: just go to any search engine and you can easily find all the free resources you want. Advice to my future challengers: just try the new variations since I know none of them :)
- What new features would you like to see at FICGS?
Firstly I'd like to thank Thib for maintaining such a wonderful site. I enjoy playing Go and Poker here and maybe I'll start playing Chess sometime (I really suck so I'm not ready to embarrass myself yet). The ability to play different games is what makes FICGS unique. As Thib mentioned earlier, we need much more players, and I think FICGS simply needs to host much more tournaments, probably some with shorter time settings. With more games and more player engagement, more people will stick around. Another feature I'd really like to see is FICGS client for cellphones/tablets. The main advantage of turn-based servers is that it allows people to play wherever for whatever period of time: a 1-min ride in the elevator, a 10-min wait at the bus stop, or a couple of hours at home. If playing on FICGS is made easier, I know I will be more addicted to it :)
- Thank you very much and good luck in the next final match...
Thanks! And please go easy on our Poker match...
Don Groves (2013-07-18 03:57:11)
A player goes on inviting me
On your "Preferences" page there is a section called "Challenges." Change its setting to "hidden" and your name will no longer appear in the list of players who can be challenged.
Robert Knighton (2013-07-18 06:32:23)
A player goes on inviting me
Also I don't think it's intentional. I think when they join the waiting list for advanced games it automatically challenges all available players at the same time.
He is not trying to annoy you :)
David Fierry Fraillon (2014-04-23 13:20:16)
Standard time control abusers
okidoki ...
Reasons for ban can be fuzzy i do agree, and i think not in a ''fair play spirit''.
I should have spoken about withdrawal or something else ... whatever i am intersting in playing chess and i always intend to play my Pech's game normally.
It can even be fun to play like that : the challenge is to win by time !!! :-)
In fact i wanted to pointed out that there is maybe different ways than changing rules to avoid time abusers. It's been a long time that i did not seriously play chess, and i am not an expert in cc ... but i am thinking that the actual time rules (combined to the moves interface) are simply really good ...
As a server manager you can find out material evidence of time abusing ( even if it is not as simple as i say ) and a cheater will always find a way to cheat on new rules.
Peter W. Anderson (2014-07-13 10:54:56)
FICGS WCh results summary updated
I have given the question of the format of the WCh matches a lot of thought.
There is no doubt that having the advantage of the draw is a huge advantage at correspondence chess, much more so than at normal chess, simply because the draw rate is so high amongst strong correpondence players.
However, there are disadvantages to other formats. It is true that a tournament final gives a better chance of having a new champion. But the outcome is dependent upon the results of players who are not necesarrily fighting hard for the prize (perhaps they have an early loss, perhaps other parts of their lives become too busy). You might hope that in the final this would not happen, but if you look closely at the games in the round robin finals you will see some strange results, clearly drawn games being lost etc. If it can happen in the round robin final it could happen in a championship final.
Having more games in the final is a very logical option. However, as Thib has pointed out, this will create a big workload. It would make it almost impossible for a serious challenger to enter consecutive championships without having to withdraw from later ones if they reached the final (this is already very difficult witouht more games!).
Another option would be an advanced chess play-off. I would be concerned that this would be too dependant on who had the biggest hardware with less chance for human skill.
Finally, there is the chance to decide a tied match with a toss of a coin. Not a great way of picking a champion.
This problem is not so much an issue with the format as with the game itself - chess is almost certainly drawn with sensible play and as engines get stronger it is going to become harder and harder to win games.
All in all, I think the current format is very reasonable, perhaps the best.
One final observation re Neel's comment that a top player can draw a game if he wants. Perhaps, and if this is 100% true then the draw problem is realy severe. However, I am a little more hopeful. Eros Riccio sometimes beats even very strong players playing the same openings he plays - it is not as if the openings he plays are guaranteed draws in practice. He finds ways of putting them under pressure and sometimes they make a mistake. Perhaps eventually he will do so too (we may have to wait for him to get old!). Or to put another way, chess is almost certainly drawn but it is not an easy draw even at correspondence if white plays really well!
Alexis Alban (2014-09-08 22:22:39)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *
But you still have 100 e-points right? Why not challenge someone, maybe you'll end up with more euros than you started with. Of course there's the possibility that you might lose all of it, but that's the risk involved in gambling.
Nick Burrows (2014-09-08 23:17:04)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *
Accepting a challenge just took 60 days with no moves. I will probably have to wait 3 months; just to wait for a player I can't beat accept the challenge.
Jing Huang (2014-11-08 12:02:55)
How is the WCH challenger decided?
In the (unfinished) tournament GO__WCH_TOURNAMENT__000011(http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WCH_TOURNAMENT__000011), Ruzin, Praz and I all have exactly the same points, but it seems that tournament GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000011 (http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000011) has started with Ruzin as the challenger.
Does anyone know how this is decided? Thanks :)
Thibault de Vassal (2014-11-08 21:07:10)
How is the WCH challenger decided?
In this (rare) case, the "TER" (tournament entry rating) decides... Mikhail was the highest ranked player. It's all explained in the tournament rules - see waiting list page.
Jing Huang (2014-11-09 01:44:05)
How is the WCH challenger decided?
Thanks, it's sad that I have just missed two Go WCH (11 & 12) in a few days... :(
Thibault de Vassal (2014-11-09 18:21:41)
How is the WCH challenger decided?
Ah, if you decided not to enter the waiting list because you thought you were qualified for the final match in the 11th cycle, then yes I understand... :/
Thibault de Vassal (2015-01-09 20:46:20)
Eros Riccio on his win in 9th chess WCH
Eros Riccio kindly accepted to answer a few questions after his win in the 9th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, his answers are worth to read... including probably a few surprises and valuable informations for most of us!
_____________________________
- Hello again Eros. Congratulations for this new win! So you played Jeroen for the second time in a row, this time in the 12 games format. There were 12 draws but it does not mean a lot. How did things go?
--> Hi Thibault! Nice to answer your questions again :-) I managed to resist again Van Assche's assaults, this time he was well-determined to win, as he made me really suffer in a couple of games. The first game was a semislav, me as Black. He played a rare variation (starting with 14.Be2 followed by 15.Qd3) that was new to me. At first the engines were giving 0.00 evaluations, but after the move 22.Qg3 they started to realize that Black's position was difficult, and they kept increasing their evaluation in White's favor move after move. That was quite a scary thing to see, and I really thought that I could have lost the game. I had to use all the thinking time (leave included) to be able to resist. This new variation impressed me so much that I decided to use it as White myself as a surprise weapon, and in fact it allowed my engine on autoplay on my old I7 980x to win a lot of games as White and a 500 dollars prize getting first place in a strong tournament on Infinity Chess. The second game was a Spanish, me as White. After his 7...0-0 I decided to avoid the Marshall (that would have probably happened if I had played 8.c3) trying the AntiMarshall variation 8.d4. I am now convinced that this variation gives nothing good to White, but I didn't know that yet when I played it! Already after the rare strong move 11...c5! things were starting to get difficult for me. He simply continued with c4 and d5, getting space advantage with his Pawns on the Queenside, while I could find no attack at all on the Kingside. Again I had to be very careful to escape with a draw.
- What can you tell about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you're now ranked #9 with an outstanding rating of 2639 ?
--> My ICCF elo in the past few years has raised. Slowly, but it has raised. I had no defeats and a couple of wins in the Olympiads and European team tournaments started in 2012. I am satisfied of that, as winning nowadays in top correspondence tournaments is very difficult. Important is to remain undefeated.
- Last year, you said that you felt like your play was getting weaker each day because your machine was getting older, did you finally upgrade it? But maybe this is a secret...
--> No. As I wrote earlier, I haven't updated my machine. Fortunately cpu's general speed has kept increasing not as quickly as in the past, so my I7 980x can still compete.
- Did your vision of computer chess evolve after these last 18 months? What do you expect for the next years? Do you plan to become a chess cyborg? ^^
--> Fortunately for our hobby, computer chess isn't rushing towards the "all draws" situation that I talked about a couple of years ago. That's because, fortunately, increasing cpu's power and engine's strenght is getting more and more difficult. Yes, some main lines already lead to all draws often, but chess gives so many openings options that to avoid that, you can simply play subvariations. When played a lot, also subvariations will become main variations. Then again, when the draws rate gets too high, you just pick another less played opening. It will take many years to cover every opening to a high draws rate.
- Your next challenger is Peter W. Anderson, who made a convincingly path through the round-robin cycle before to defeat SM Igor Dolgov 5-3 in the 10th candidates final (by the way he's also playing the 11th candidates final). It seems that you never played him before. How do you feel this match? Do you have any words for your opponent before that the games start?
--> I am happy to play a new player! We have just started our match, again, all my first moves as White were 1.e4. What to say... it's up to him to avoid main lines as Black (he already did it answering with 1...g6 in three games) if he wants to try to win with the black pieces. But the real challenge for him of course will be to try to win with the White pieces. It will be interesting to see if he can find holes in my Black repertoire like Van Assche was able to do. Let's wait and see!
Jan Ohlin (2015-10-14 07:08:13)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
If playing a lot more games it is like forcing mistakes instead of good games?! Social life will become ruined... Whom will bother about become a "world champ"? Not me who also have small kids to take care of.
And the opposite, if instead play fewer games it will force the challenger to play even more risky openings. The games will become more exciting to watch.
Jan Ohlin (2015-10-14 17:12:18)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Garvin: I´m maybe the crazy one who wants to play less or equal (!) games as now and think it then will be acceptable for the challenger to play openings as Benko gambit, closed Spanish etc. I see that we have not been sufficiently clever at exploiting engines weaknesses.
Thibault de Vassal (2015-10-16 01:12:10)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Hi all,
The recent discussions on FICGS chess wch tie break rules just gave me an idea...
Obviously, there are no satisfying solution (for everyone I mean) for a change in the wch rules. In my opinion, wch rules are great already, even if there are too many draws in matches.
The idea of a cup tournament is here for years but I didn't see any way to include it, in a several rounds version at least, in our calendar because of the wch cycle, the slowly decreasing number of active players, and so on...
But what do you think about this cup format:
An enormous round robin tournament with the 33 (1 player for each piece on the board, it's a symbol but the number is to be discussed) highest rated players who entered the waiting list. It is 32 games per player for 1 round only, duration of games could be the standard one (because there is one round only), longer but maybe fits more the number of games and additional games in other tournaments.
Looks like a great challenge and a real alternative, with very few risks of draw odds, cheating or whatever... It may be the biggest correspondence chess round robin tournament on the internet.
Any opinion? Would you play such tournament?
Thibault de Vassal (2015-10-23 22:10:19)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Could someone copy-paste Garvin's original idea for the cup tournament? I'm not sure which thread deals with it (even if I think I remember the main scheme)...
By the way, I agree with your points Garvin, finally question is what tournament do we want? ... Surely we'll have many different answers. Multi-rounds tournaments bring many problems (first is IMO that next rounds start-date still surprise many players), that's what I thought one round could be interesting. Also, it looks like a big challenge with a fast result. But I agree that many top players would think twice before to enter it, but wouldn't they do the same in a multi-round similar event? To be continued.
Thibault de Vassal (2015-10-27 23:03:32)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Hi Garvin... Surely not!
Well, just read your cup idea again, here are my thoughts:
- In my opinion, in both ways, top players will probably ignore such a tournament. So, the challenge point may be most important.
- In my opinion, the 33 players round robin is even more simple (and avoiding complicate cases depending on the number of entries), more different from FICGS WCH, faster (no choice to make about playing 2 cycles at once) and with more chances of clear victory, but does it really bring something in both cases? Quite subjective at the end.
Thibault de Vassal (2015-12-02 02:48:10)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Finally... after a way too long thought on this FICGS cup idea and FICGS wch format, I think that Garvin's idea for this new tournament should be tried.
1) Eros just won the latest WCH with all games drawn again, but not all games in the knockout tournament are draws (e.g. latest candidates final). I think that we must keep this original format because it doesn't exist elsewhere and because it is a real challenge (and it must be possible to beat Eros in 1 game... one day :)) ! Of course, the other reason is that I didn't find any other acceptable way in case of equality.
2) I still think that there are problems in both my cup idea and Garvin's idea in the current context, but this cup will be different enough from the WCH, so the two formats should probably coexist so that each player can choose (or play both).
Nilson Pereira (2016-07-03 01:21:19)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP
Champions was legitimate until the fourth tournament, I see the hall of fame from 5 tournament no simple champions but draws no point who highlight, hurting the challenger who has not lost even 1
Herbert Kruse (2016-08-06 10:13:53)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP
if there is at least one loss and one win and 6-6, the challenger should be the winner, because all stages before have the simular rule
Alvin Alcala (2017-03-31 18:27:51)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
Details:
http://infinitychess.com/Page/Public/Article/DefaultArticle.aspx?id=298
Thibault de Vassal (2017-04-01 20:47:35)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
Quite sure you'll be in Alvin :) Good luck!
Arturas Drozdovas (2017-04-02 11:42:04)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
50 USD to enter, it's like burning your money if you are positive that you can't win :)
Alvin Alcala (2017-04-02 14:23:20)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
If you finish the tour fair and square then your eligible to get $100 as fair play prize.
Alvin Alcala (2017-04-14 23:18:29)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
Some updates from the sponsors:
http://www.infinitychess.com/Page/Public/Article/DefaultArticle.aspx?id=299
Thibault de Vassal (2017-04-15 00:26:03)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
Looks like an all-star... or almost.
Scott Nichols (2017-04-18 19:32:39)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
A lot of the old stars are in it. I still have the same equipment as I had last time which was good for the bottom 1/4 of the results, :) I see Dave and Al IMO will be among the favorites.
Peter W. Anderson (2017-04-19 08:29:26)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
Good luck Alvin - I may come and watch a few game.
Thibault de Vassal (2017-04-21 22:54:00)
WCh and other ramblings
Thanks for these words & analysis Peter! Yes, I don't know yet if Eros will fight one more time to retain the title but obviously he did it very well during these last years... the strongest engine alone would certainly not have been able to achieve this. Anyway, Herbert (& others) looks like to be ready for the challenge and this could be very interesting to see such a match! Well, let's see how this tough candidates final with Pablo finishes before :)
Well, the cup format was a first step towards a championship with more chances for everyone... the future "King's supertournament" will be another one with a thematic bigger round-robin that should definitely avoid the drawish problem & a new attempt to give sense to correspondence chess. To be continued...
Scott Nichols (2017-05-01 01:05:29)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
This was absolutely the worst tournament atmosphere I have ever saw. I would not only not recommend, I wholeheartedly discourage anyone from this site. But to each his own.
Herbert Kruse (2017-05-01 01:24:25)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
details please
Pablo Schmid (2017-05-07 18:22:38)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
Why do you mean by worst atmosphere?
Thibault de Vassal (2017-05-13 19:50:31)
Ultimate Challenge Tour 2017, USD 20k
By the way, why "this was"? The tournament is scheduled to end not before May 20th, but I cannot find any news about it on the site.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-06-30 20:22:16)
Interview with 15th chess WCH finalist
For once, as Eros & I couldn't find much more to say after all his consecutive wins, I asked Ramil Germanes these few questions around his match & correspondence chess (with what may look like a quite surprising conclusion).
_______________________
- Hello Ramil, many thanks for answering those few questions! This is a first time with the WCH finalist, as the winner (Eros again) agreeded this could be an interesting experiment for a change, so we'll probably have a quite different point of view this time! You just finished your games to score 6-6 (12 draws), Eros retaining the title again. I guess this was the first time you played such a correspondence chess match, what are your impressions on this knockout format?
Yes this is the first time I've played a world championship match although I played before in earlier editions of this world championship but not reaching the challenger level. My impression? Its great playing for the world championship but I know its nearly impossible to beat the world champion.
- Let's rewind a few months backward, would you make other choices, in openings or anything?
I don't know. Tbh, I'm not very good on chess theory and not very updated as well. So I'm just playing basic moves hoping for opportunities to come up.
- So, is Eros beatable in this final match according to you? (please give us some hope) ^^
With how quickly you can search information and the strength of chess engines nowadays, its almost impossible to beat him unless you have access to alpha zero (haha). Though maybe Herbert Kruse can pull it off.
- What can you tell us about yourself and your relation to chess & correspondence chess?
I'm just an ordinary guy from the Philipines who happens to love playing chess. But my love of computers is what brought me to correspondence chess and to ficgs.
- Do you play other games, e.g. Go, Shogi, cards games?
No I don't know how to play those games.
- Could you tell us how these 12 games went from your own point of view?
For me, the games went through their normal course. Both of us didn't made any major mistakes so all games were drawn. That's just how it went. Though there were new moves on some the games it doesn't really changes result of the older games played before.
- Would you share a few tips to play good correspondence chess in 2018, or at least to beat the best chess engines? :)
Sorry but i dont know. I will be the new world champion by now if i know, hehehe.
- You told me that your computer configuration was basically a quad-core i5 3570 / 4gb on Fritz GUI (about 10,500 kn/s) / Windows 10, and we know that many of us (Eros included) still use such configs or even dual-core, would an octa-core have brought a significant advantage to you to win this match according to you?
Oh I don't know they still have those configurations. But I've already encountered opponents in Infinity Chess with 18-22 cores configs. Anyways, an octa-core or faster cpu would definitely be going to speed up my analysis and will let me analyze more lines and variations which may improves my overall play.
Honestly, I don't have that much time these days for correspondence chess. In my match against Eros, I had only about 1 hour of analysis time before work and about another 1 hour after work. Since I already have a family and 2 kids, they have to be my priority first. And I think somebody also can relate to this. So a faster cpu would be very helpful in the match and maybe will give a better chance than a slower cpu.
- As far as I know, you love to build computers, did you use or think about using several ones at the same time for analysis?
No. I only used one computer in my match against Eros. I have 2 other computers but both are slower.
- How much time you've been playing correspondence chess & how do you feel the way the game changed over the years?
I've been playing correspondence chess since 2010 and I have observed that its easier to win games in the past when chess engines were still weaker. Because you notice some players depend only on engine moves and engines still commit mistakes and you can exploit those mistakes if you "investigate" further.
Unlike now, engines are very strong that even players who rely solely on engines moves will be very hard to beat. It lessens the gap of players that know how to "use" the engines and the ones who do not.
- Finally, what makes you love correspondence chess in 2018?
I will always love chess and correspondence chess but what makes it exciting now is the rise of the new kind of engines.
Engines like Leela chess zero that has a different approach in playing chess. Maybe more of these kind of chess engines will be seen in the future. Because of its use of monte carlo analysis and neural networks, we are starting to see moves that we have never seen before. Very aggressive attacks and moves defying opening principles can now be seen. Correspondence chess is getting exciting again!
Thibault de Vassal (2018-09-24 00:15:43)
Some questions to H. Kruse, WCH finalist
After that the last FICGS chess WCH final match finished, the choice was made again to ask a few questions to Eros Riccio's challenger: Herbert Kruse, for the 2nd time. He kindly accepted to answer it so let's learn a bit more on our top-ranked correspondence chess player.
______________________________
Hello Herbert, you're not really a player to introduce as you're very active here and at several chess websites for years, with outstanding ratings in each one (as far as I know), you're the 1st FICGS CUP winner & several times FICGS WCH challenger, each time facing "the wall" Eros Riccio, what could you tell us about yourself particularly as a chess & correspondence chess player?
- i began late with 16 to play my first tournament game, but with 18 i already was kicked out of a night club in company with tony miles ;) (dresscode) had vlastimil hort as trainer for a short time and played in teams with gutman, michalchisin, klovans, gipslis and some other GMs. corr chess i began, because i love to find the truth and because of freestyle, where i began to build very strong computers
What kind of computers do you build? Is it all dedicated to chess?
- i have several dual xeon e5 computers with 64gb ddr3 and 16 to 20 real cores and they all play chess ;)
Once again, GM Eros Riccio managed to draw the 12 games of the match. What are your feelings on these games? How did you estimate your chances to destabilize your opponent in the openings and to create complications enough with White (or Black)?
- this time my feelings were neutral. 1% chances to win, but i hoped he would lose his concentration if i began more games with him (we played 6 other games at the same time)
Doesn't "1% chances to win (the match)" mean about 0.17% to win only one game with White, even when losing one with Black? Isn't it a bit pessimistic after all, or is it the new so called Riccio-effect? :)
- if the strongest players face each other there is no win possible, except some has a mouse slep or forgot something during human interfacing
When did you start playing correspondence chess and what changed since that time? What attracted you most in the game?
- 2004 and evaluation of the position is the key point of improvement since then. attractive was to be better than actual world class players :)
Could you tell us anything on the way you work chess and play your correspondence games? Any tip or secret? (nothing to lose to ask :))
- with black i play for fastest way to 0.00 and with white i try every promising way to make a game for a longer time complicated
Do you use several ones at the same time when analyzing a game? (still grabbing some tips)
- i only use the newest stockfish versions of brainfish and corchess because the other engines are not so good. because i have many games i decide which one gets the most cores and time and let them run in infinity mode until i am happy that can be after 1 week or more sometimes.
You're not far to rank 2nd as a poker player at FICGS, you obviously started to take on Big Chess as well. What other games do you play? Did you consider to play Go already?
- i played go against the german champion and lost so i quit :)) played backgammon money game and internet (in fibs with kit woolsey i played over 100 matches) in bridge i was best bidder in germany 1994 to 1995, but dont play much nowadays
Do you have specific goals to achieve as a player?
- 2 goals, since a long time: be ficgs world champion and win one german bridge championship
How do you imagine correspondence chess evolution within a decade? What kind of engines/computers do you expect to use and what will look like centaur chess according to you? (in other words, what part will remain to the human player in the decision?)
- i think the engines today are already unbeatable, so in 20 years the would still not lose and chess is dead since about 4 years
What did you think about Google Deepmind's Alpha Zero performance vs. Stockfish?
- it was a joke because they let a bad version of stockfish play. i would not have lost one game against az0 and maybe won 2 til 5 out of 100
Conditions of this AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match were very specific (opening books, unbalanced hardware...) What weaknesses did you detect in AlphaZero play?
- it was the lack of precision, what would let it lose against stockfish in its tuned newest version but i look from a view of a player who is used to play with deep 60 :)
It seems that computers did not completely take on Bridge yet, what do you expect within a decade?
- i have not seen bridge programms, but the game is so easy that it must be already mastered by computers
William Taylor (2018-10-27 12:03:10)
World Championship Tie-breaks
For many years, the reigning classical world chess champion had draw odds. The chess world eventually realised this was both unfair to the challenger and uninteresting for the spectators, and introduced a rapid and blitz playoff match for use in the event that the players remained tied after the classical portion of the match. There have always been, and will continue to be grumbles about this system (mostly that the classical WC should be decided by classical games), but overall it is popular (as I imagine can be seen from online viewing figures from the Carlsen-Karjakin match, for example) and, to my mind at least, fairer than the alternative. I propose something similar for the FICGS WC match: an advanced chess tie-break match. Granted, there is the same objection as for the classical WC match - advanced chess is not the same as correspondence chess. However, the combatants will already have had ample opportunity (12 games) to decide matters in that format. An advanced chess tie-break would provide much more sporting interest, as the current system is becoming a bit predictable (this is not in any way a dig at the incumbent, Eros Riccio, who is just doing what he has to do, and doing it very well). I think the match would also be great for promoting FICGS - you could stream it live on Twitch, for example, perhaps with commentary. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Thibault de Vassal (2020-05-06 01:41:10)
AlphaGo, the movie (Deepmind)
Actually, the story ends with the defeat 4-1 of Lee Se-dol, but it is really great to see more of the way the match was conducted (and how this incredible champion lived that huge challenge). Great archive IMO.
Ilmars Cirulis (2020-05-08 01:01:32)
Thematic Suggestion: Traxler
When I was younger I was embarrassingly enthusiastic about refuting this opening. :D
Remembering youth, still believing that white wins (with Bxf7) and having 11.16 epoints, I challenge those who disagree to the Silver thematic game. :)
Yeturu Aahlad (2021-04-12 19:10:42)
Poker Rating
At big chess, it is fairly common for one side - typically Black - to be down a pawn early in the game. I have had at least one opponent immediately resign. At Go, a player may blunder in a corner and immediately resign.
On the other hand, I have won many games on time and in many of those cases, the opponent didn't make any moves at all.
Perhaps a subjective challenge deserves a subjective response - I am seeing sound arguments on both sides. Suggestion - if a game concludes under 10 moves, and the winner thinks she has a genuine grievance, she can appeal for the ELO grant and a referee will adjudicate. Herbert's case is very strong. If the losing side didn't make any moves, adjudication need not be allowed, or may be automatically denied. Too many frivolous appeals from a player can lead to disciplinary action including a loss of this privilege. (I don't expect that to happen in this community)
Thibault de Vassal (2022-05-15 16:39:20)
19th Go championship final match
Hello everyone,
The 19th Go championship final match just started... late, really late. It did not start before because the challenger obviously stopped to play at FICGS and lost games without making a move (cancelling his qualification), but when reading the rules again, I realized that nothing prevented to make a replacement by the 2nd best score.
Consequently Paul Dao (CAN) is the challenger in 19th & 20th Go championships. Of course he will not have to play the 20th final match if he wins the 19th...
(better late than never, sorry for the delay)
Thibault de Vassal (2023-11-17 19:27:42)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
First of all, Russell Tribunal in Palestine was criticized:
"Judge Richard Goldstone, writing in The New York Times in October 2011, said of the Russell Tribunal on Palestine that "It is not a 'tribunal.' The 'evidence' is going to be one-sided and the members of the 'jury' are critics whose harsh views of Israel are well known. In Israel, there is no apartheid. Nothing there comes close to the definition of apartheid under the 1998 Rome Statute."[34]
South African journalist and human rights activist Benjamin Pogrund, now living in Israel, described the Cape Town Session of the Russell Tribunal on Palestine as "It's theatre: the actors know their parts and the result is known before they start. Israel is to be dragged into the mud."[35]
After the Cape Town session, Israeli MK Otniel Schneller filed a complaint with the Knesset's Ethics Committee against MK Hanin Zoabi, who testified at the Tribunal that "Israel is an apartheid state".[36]
A group of Jewish South Africans protested against the court, and the organiser of the protest called it a "Kangaroo Court."[37]
Daniele Archibugi and Alice Pease have argued that it is a rather common practice that those accused of international crimes challenge the impartiality of their accusers. And it may be the case that the organisers of opinion tribunals, as of any other tribunal, might be biased or produce insufficient evidence. But to further develop the rule of law, those which are unsatisfied about the outcomes of these tribunals should be able to produce further evidence and legal arguments rather than unsubstantiated criticism. Legal discourse, they argue, is necessarily based on the opposition of contrasting views.[38] "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Tribunal
Zbigniew Szczepanski (2023-12-11 11:50:09)
Referee Adjudication
In ICCF and LSS-Server, when 7 figures are reached, the game ends automatically. Some disadvantaged people are just malicious and continue playing the hopeless game. As a rule, these are people who do not know how to play chess, but only use powerful computers to challenge good chess players. They count on a mistake or the death of their rival. It's a waste of time. 99% of players use engines, databases and tables.
Scott Ligon (2025-10-31 12:46:50)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest
To make things just slightly interesting. There's no challenge at all in holding the draw with black while playing a standard opening. Modern engines make it trivially easy. But in the Budapest or the Albin Countergambit or Alekhine's Defense, I'm pretty sure black can still hold the draw, but you have to be careful.
George Jempty (2025-11-04 14:06:45)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest
Yes, Dutch is OK, but 2.Nh3!? is a challenge, and I've won at least one game on this server with that. But the Benoni and Budapest are significantly worse IMO. Like I say a 2300-player tried the Budapest against me and I have something like a +2.5 advantage (according to SF17) at move 23. Yes, he was not at all careful and definitely made a couple of very bad decisions. Interestingly, I see the average ELO he face is 1900, so I think his rating is really inflated and he doesn't do so well against stronger players, whereas I'm currently at 2175, and the average ELO I face is 2100. I try to "play up" for the strongest competition, rather than "play down" to pump up my rating.
[Chess forum]
[Rating lists]
[Countries]
[Chess openings]
[Legal informations]
[Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]
Social network : create your photo albums, discuss with your friends...
Hot news & buzz : discover the latest news and buzz on the internet...
Discussions : questions and answers, forums on almost everything...
Seo forums : search engines optimisation forums, web directory...
Play the strongest international correspondence chess players !
|
Legrand, Stephane (FRA) [member # 3609] Correspondence chess : 2433 FIM Ranked # 64 in the rating list. Rating history : 2466 2465 2433 2433 2433 2433 2433 Go : 1581 Advanced chess : 2207 Big chess : 2270 Poker holdem : 2257 This member has no profile in the social network. |
 | Correspondence chess World championship Play chess games Go (weiqi, baduk) Advanced chess Play big chess Chess trainer apk Rated tournaments Poker texas hold'em Fischer random chess |  |