database
FICGS - Search results for database
There are 115 results for database in the forum.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-16 16:02:22)
Right again
You'll have both options very soon.
In case of crash, the database is automatically & periodically saved out of the server.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-24 16:18:23)
Time pro move
The date of the last move played is displayed. I prefer not to store time for all moves on the server to minimize the size of the database. But they are stored on my computer. If there's a problem, I can find the time for any move.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-03 04:41:09)
Start positions
It seems to me that changing the start position from classical chess is "sufficient"... The purpose was, according to Fischer, to avoid databases and to favour creativity.. The same positions in the whole tournament allows to compare & analyze a bit deeper, maybe understand better the position. The start position will be different for the next tournament (working on). There are "only" 960 positions, there will be repetitions anyway... And what do you think about the Fischer rules ? Seems strange to me. I wonder if everyone knows how to castle in other start positions (king or rooks at different places)
Marc Lacrosse (2006-06-09 09:21:54)
I cannot understand ...
To Trent Parker :
you say :
"I think the teams should be geographical at least"
This is really something that I cannot even understand.
In which way is my way of playing correspondence chess related to the place where I live or where I am born???
Is my kind of play "belgian" ?
Or is it "brown-haired", or "butter-cooked", or ...
Why shouldn't I be allowed to find a few friends from all over the world that play the same kind of unusual openings than myself to build a team ?
IMHO this kind of team could well have a better signification than a one made of chess players of the same country or of the same geographical region.
Anyway the idea itself of "correspondence chess teams" is completely strange for me. Does it mean that collaboration between members for the choice of the moves is allowed ?
This is at the exact opposite of what I feel to be the minimum requirement for a meaningful correspondence chess competition to survive : anything allowed (books, computers, databases) except human advice, and at least one single human name alone identified as the single "author" of the moves ...
So, why teams at all...
Marc
Daniel De Noose (2006-06-15 17:23:38)
It is not the same !
Playing 1st or 2nd Championship is not the same because if you play only the second you can't be the first FICGS champion !
;-)
Secundo, as you explained it at the start of the site, everybody can use databases, computers, ... In that case a 1600 can beat a 2300 if he enters correctly parameters in his chess engine.
Because the tournament is not again started you can correct this. After the beginning it will be harder.
And what's my rating now ? ;-)
Wayne Lowrance (2006-06-22 21:11:43)
interesting question for the Gambit's a
Sir let me explain, the stats are taken from A database of 1600 GM's. the statistic is taken prior to blacks response but assuming pxp. Of course the percentages varies as you go thru the book lines. Where did your statistics come from (e-mail me, dont want to continue with troll)?
Kings gambit with perfect play as you say leads to a draw.
That does not impress me much. I agree the best defence against a gambit is accept, I usually do.
Yes your right the thread is a troll, I apoligize for contributing but I found my self not being able to agree with where the last few topics were heading.
I do not accept this mind games thing excet against a very weak player playing a much stronger player. In this case I agree. I end the troll with this...Wayne
Glen D. Shields (2006-07-22 19:50:51)
Interesting Discussion Topic
Thibault - this is a interesting discussion topic. Of course, no one knows the future with certainty, but we can all offer an opinion :)
I'm nearing my 40th year of correspondence play. Sometime later this year I will complete my 1000th tournament game. All my games were played by postcard until the mid 90's. E-mail dominated my CC schedule from about 1998 until 2002. Now I only play server chess. I've played on the FICGS, IECG, GameKnot, ChessFriend, Schemingmind and ICCF servers.
Contrary to many people who've played as long as I have, I do NOT see chess engines as a threat to the game. I think they've changed the game, but not hurt the game. I believe they've increasd CC's popularity and game quality. The same is true for opening and ending databases.
Some of the changes that will occur in CC the next ten years:
- Servers will improve functionality and ease of use.
- Due to engine use we will grow to accept 2200 as an "average" rating rather than "Master."
- Tournaments will be re-structured to include fewer players per section and shorter tournament durations. This particularly applies to ICCF where 15 player sections and slow time rules to simulate postal chess are used.
- New server functionality will be added to allow players the option to SLOW down the game. It's too easy to get caught in a mindless "server flurry."
- New chess software will be developed to analyze games. This analysis tool will give proability estimates on what engine one's opponent is using. That information will allow one to counter and plan against one's opponent.
- There will be more anti-computer books written and theories developed. We will use these techniques to beat our opponent and and improve our chess planning skills.
Bottomline ... I am excited by the new technology. I see continued advances in the way we manage our gameload, the way we send moves, the way we play, plan and analyze our moves. The way we play in the future will be different and will still be fun for those who embrace new technology. My disappointment is I am an old man and unlikely to enjoy all the advantages the future brings. I hope those who follow me enjoy what I will miss :)
Graham Wyborn (2006-08-13 17:32:35)
(download) in Go games!
Recently started playing Go. Similar problem to (download) in chess. If I hoover over the Go (download) button, the ballon reads, "Download this game in PGN format". If I press it, it tries to download game into my chess database!
Can you help? You solved it last time, can you do it again?
Benjamin Aldag (2006-08-26 01:37:37)
"NEW" Opening Idea !
Hello,
i would be very happy, to see the following line in a thematic opening tourney:
1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Bc5
4.c3 Nf6
5.d4 exd4
6.cxd4 Bb4+
7.Nc3 Nxe4
8.0-0 0-0!
ok folks, i am searching for this line in my database and found just a handfull games, played by low rated players. I am searching in many books for this line, but i found nothing ! I've analysed this line and i believe, this line is good for BLACK ! What do you think about this line ??? Do you see more than me ? Do you have any GM-Commentary about this line ? Maybe in an ebook or something else ? Please help me to find the answer, why this line is never played by some very good players. It would be helpful, to start a thematic-tourney'bout this nice line.
Benny
Don Burden (2006-08-26 18:51:54)
Opening Idea
I'd say it is a fairly big advantage to black. He's a solid pawn up and threatens to win another. Found two games in my database with higher rated players:
[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Majewski, Jan"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2335"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "122"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8.
O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. Ba3 Nxd6 14. Bxd6
cxd6 15. Qxd6 Ne8 16. Qd5 Nf6 17. Qd6 Ne8 18. Qd2 d6 19. Ng5 Nf6 20. Rad1 d5
21. Bb3 h6 22. Ne4 Bg4 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. f3 Qb6+ 25. Qd4 Be6 26. Bxd5 Bxd5 27.
Qxb6 axb6 28. Rxd5 Rxa2 29. f4 Rc8 30. Rd3 Rc2 31. Ree3 Ra8 32. h4 Raa2 33. Rg3
Rd2 34. Rde3 Kf8 35. Re4 b5 36. Re5 Rab2 37. Rc5 b4 38. Rc8+ Ke7 39. cxb4 Rxb4
40. Rxg7 Rxf4 41. Rh7 Rf6 42. Kh2 Ke6 43. h5 Rd5 44. g4 Rd4 45. Kg3 Rd3+ 46.
Kg2 Rd6 47. Re8+ Kd7 48. Rf8 Ke7 49. Rhh8 Ke6 50. Re8+ Kd5 51. Re7 b6 52. Rf8
Rf4 53. Kg3 Rdf6 54. Rc8 Rf3+ 55. Kg2 Rf2+ 56. Kg1 R2f4 57. Rg8 b5 58. Re3 b4
59. Kg2 Kd4 60. Rb3 Rb6 61. Kg3 Rf1 0-1
[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mathias, Manfred"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2370"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "110"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8.
O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. dxc7 Qxc7 14. Qb3 d5
15. Bd3 Be6 16. Rb1 b6 17. Qc2 g6 18. Bb2 Ne8 19. Re2 Neg7 20. Rbe1 Rfe8 21.
Qd2 Nd6 22. c4 dxc4 23. Qc3 f6 24. Bxg6 hxg6 25. Qxf6 Qf7 26. Rxe6 Qxf6 27.
Rxf6 Rxe1+ 28. Nxe1 Re8 29. Nf3 Re2 30. Be5 Nf7 31. Bd4 Re6 32. Kf1 Rxf6 33.
Bxf6 b5 34. Bc3 Ne6 35. h4 Nf4 36. a3 Nd5 37. Bb4 a6 38. g3 Kg7 39. Ke2 Kf6 40.
Ba5 Nd6 41. g4 Nb7 42. Bd2 a5 43. Bg5+ Kg7 44. Ne5 c3 45. Kd3 b4 46. Kc4 Nb6+
47. Kd4 Nc5 48. axb4 axb4 49. f3 Nd5 50. Nc4 Ne6+ 51. Kd3 Nxg5 52. hxg5 b3 53.
Na3 Kf7 54. f4 c2 55. Nxc2 Nxf4+ 0-1
Charlie Neil (2006-09-02 21:49:18)
why do you play corr chess
i play corr chess as i don't go to chess clubs as i work shifts and can't devote a single night off the same day in every week. also i pause at the board smoking cigarettes drinking coffee and have music playing in the background, ( most of the time dressed in my pyjamas). the corr chess players you meet can be some nice people who are usually polite and chessfriends. and the rude ones you can ignore.
of course you have the time to study a game a bit longer before making that blunder. i am learning and re-learning chess all the time. at the moment i am playing from memory after finding using books confusing when i got to the end of the line. i feel sorry for those people who use databases/computers for their moves as in the end they are cheating themselves out using their own brain, there is an old saying, "cheats don't prosper" i believe it to be true.
Chess is the best and the most terrible game in the world.
Marc Lacrosse (2006-09-04 10:51:45)
To Charlie on cheaters ...
Hi Charlie
I completely agree with the first sentences of your post, but I cannot accept the second part of it.
I use computers, and books, and databases and lots of prepared personal analyses for my games here.
I do not accept to be called a cheater : this is explicitly allowed by the rules here, and it is even one of the main reasons for which I joined this association.
There are lots of other sites where computer use is forbidden : you can for sure play there and complain when you will guess that your opponent is making use of electronic assistance, but not here.
Moreover for me it is pure shortness of sight if you are not able to imagine that playing with computer help can be both creative and even fascinating.
Take any of your games and do a quick analysis with several chess programs : you will see that for a large majority of positions they completely disagree on which is the best move to play. The human touch is critically decisive when playing with computer help.
And resulting games are far more complicated and interesting in my eyes.
Another point is that for myself I prefer that my opponents do not spoil an interesting game for which I have spent hours and hours of analysis along weeks of play through a stupid human blunder that ends it all suddenly.
I do pretty well understand that you prefer to play on your own. But what is the problem if you have a computer-assisted opponent? Either you will loose and will maybe learn something either you will win and it will be a pretty good achievement. And surely it will be a better game. The only problem I can see is the possible frustration not to be able to win many games.
Then I repeat : go on another site where computer assistance is forbidden. But I have to say that having played on such sites for years you will find _many_ cheaters... Pure human play cannot be enforced ...
But please stop saying that players like myself are cheaters and poor ignorants.
It is sure we play a different game but why should you be entitled to say that mine is worse than yours?
Regards
Marc
Charlie Neil (2006-09-05 09:50:08)
why play corr-chess
Marc, excuse me I didn't make the difference between chess engines/databases and someone playing straight moves straight off their own computer. Yes, use books and databases that's what they are there for. But I feel sorry for the individual who relies solely on their computer to play their games for them. It is a bit like taking a fork lift to a weight lifting competition. The use of computers and servers is still relatively new to me. There are sites that ban the use of computers. but who is to know who is using their computer in an illegal way? There can be no profit for them or enjoyment in the game.
It is good that FICGS has this forum for free discussion. I enjoyed reading "The future for Corr-chess" thread. There has always been points in time when it has been discussed that chess has "burnt-out" and the game will die off. I don't think that will ever happen in light of the passion for this terrible game expressed in all these forums. So, forgive an ignorant "free-range" "organic" chessfriend for not being clear about the differences about databases and computer-slaves who rely on their machines. The game is the thing. ( and maybe just maybe I wasn't drinking just coffee the time I posted the cheats slur...:-/)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-05 12:58:56)
Major update : your feelings ?
Hello to all.
There has been several changes these last days to optimize the access to the database... as it grows quicky :)
A major update just occured to speed up the display of all games. (Google and other search engines may slow down the whole server sometimes) The effects should appear gradually.
Feel free to post here if you observe any problem or change, or on the speed of the server in general (please specify the speed of your computer & internet connection)
Thanks in advance ! :)
Thibault
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2006-09-06 09:04:10)
Time to display all informations
~ 15 seconds now.
I suspect the program uses most of the time to collect the information from the database tables. If I save the page it needs less than 400 kilobytes.
Charlie Neil (2006-09-07 09:02:54)
Krammik vs Topalov
Krammik will play 1.Nf3 with his 1st 5 games with white and as Topalov is dozing off.....POW! It's going to be a tense match. A clash of styles I'd say. But it is all good for chess. We need an undisputed OTB champion again, it can only be good for chess. ( A million dollars for the best of twelve games.....I think I'll go and buy myself a database....:-)
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 ?
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 :)
Miguel Pires (2006-09-14 15:33:01)
whay databases
whay databases are prohibited? in GK we can use them.
Regard's
Miguel Pires
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-15 00:24:12)
Chess databases
Hi Miguel.
Really ? Looks strange to me... So what about 6-pieces tablebases ?
Miguel Pires (2006-09-15 01:05:13)
Chess database
This is the rules of the gk, you can see in this link
http://gameknot.com/pg/pol_community.htm
What is important is this one:
3. You may not use chess engines, chess programs, chess computers to help you decide your next move. You may not consult with anyone nor ask advice about any games in progress. You may analyze games with chess engines after they are finished. You may consult chess books or game/move databases at any time.
Soo i can consult databases. You can fin the tablebases in PGN or other thing, by this rule you can use, any databasese, oppening, games etc. Don't you agree?
Regard's
Miguel Pires
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-15 01:46:29)
Chess databases / tablebases
Ok, I was confused.. Chess database and tablebases / "chess programs"...
Anyway, I suppose we can use any rules if it's clearly specified, that's not a problem. However, for just more fun, I would suggest games without any kind of assistance... Games could be just more human & original :)
What do you think ?
Miguel Pires (2006-09-15 02:50:58)
well
you are the boss, if say soo, for me is ok. But for shure some not going to do that. And now we have a big problem, the OTB Vs CC rating. Cairo from GK have an elo in OTB +2300, mor or less the same at GK an ICCF, but others, the thing's are different. Like me, i'm a +1700 in otb, and + 2000 in this site, and in GK i'm a +1900 (a lot of timeouts put my rating in 1756 now). soo playng in CC without any help (databases like i play in GK) is hard to play at + 2000. And we need players with good OTB rating's to.
Like i say, you are the boss.
what time controls we going to use?
Thomas Gilbreath (2006-09-15 02:53:36)
re: computer help
Greetings:)
Maybe I was misunderstood.......the use of databases is ok - but like Miguel said, we oppose the use of computers to recommend moves.
:) Thomas
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-18 14:00:30)
FICGS vs. GameKnot
Thomas :
I agree with you, the match is for fun only, I like the idea whatever the result, even 100-0 :) .. If players use engines, their problem.. we can't avoid the risk totally... I think it's more logical to prohibite databases too or to allow both databases and chess engines, playing "real correspondence chess", and we could have a larger team for sure... Still discussing.
Miguel :
I prefer to avoid to "mail" everyone about the match.. It's clearly announced in the news, so I think most players here are "more CC ones" and don't trust the no use of engines...
James Stripes (2006-09-18 15:56:13)
27 years ago
When I first played correspondence chess, books were encouraged and the few chess engines in existence were garbage. Good quality engines and comprehensive databases have changed the nature of correspondence play.
Nearly everyone permits databases (electronic books), although endgame tablebases are less clear. Engines are permitted some places, while banned others. This site is my first foray into CC where engine use is permitted, but I've played at dozens of sites where I can use databases. (I don't believe I've ever reached a position in which tablebases would be useful, except a few elementary positions that any average player could win against Kramnik.)
These inter-site matches, it seems to me, nurture connections across the broad community of correspondence players--a rapidly expanding coterie of chess aficionados thanks to the likes of GameKnot and similar sites.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-18 18:06:50)
FICGS correspondence chess database
Hello to all.
FICGS chess database (games rated + unrated, finished + unfinished) is now a unique static PGN file, that will be updated at least every 2 months. You can find it by clicking 'Search games' or at this link :
http://www.ficgs.com/databases/chess.pgn
Other free chess databases (ie. games played by famous players) will be added at :
http://www.ficgs.com/directory_databases.html
Best wishes.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 15:03:13)
Computer use on GameKnot......
I just read GameKnot forum about the FICGS vs. GameKnot match :
http://gameknot.com/fmsg/chess3/3860.shtml
It seems to me this question of computer use on GameKnot is quite out of topic (and on the wrong forum)... I proposed to GameKnot rep (Thomas) to prohibite any computer assistance (engines + databases) for the match or to simply authorize it, as I think more players from FICGS would play, and surely players from GameKnot too... Then everyone is free to play, accepting the rules and the risk of cheating (quite small IMO), but it's up to I & Thomas to deal with that. This debate shouldn't happen here IMHO.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 19:13:07)
No cumputer use at all
Thomas & I finally agreed to prohibite chess engines & chess databases for this friendly match ! :-)
Games should be really interesting this way.
Elmer Valderrama (2006-09-19 19:42:56)
FICGS correspondence chess database
That's a great improvement on the former listing of un/finished games (somehow it took ages to load those pages on my PC).
Now why is it that it will be updated 'at least' every 2 months, not daily as the former pages?
(assuming fetching all the PGN scores into a single PGN file is done automatically by a script)
Thanks
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 21:25:57)
FICGS correspondence chess database
Hello Elmer.
Former databases were not updated daily, it were generated in real time... It could be updated daily yet, but as it will grow up a lot & quickly, I prefer to make it myself (instead of the robots).
Best regards.
Rodrigo Jaroszewski (2006-09-30 09:41:27)
Re: Legitimacy
Hey, you don't have the chance of asking a GM a question every day! :)
Nigel, since my limited database and research resources here didn't allow me to know if you played a game against Kramnik, much less if you ever had a nice chat with him, I'd like to know if you did and if you really believe that he'd be the kind of guy that would go out and organize a WC Cicle on his own, like Kasparov did (well, tried)?
I take this match as a display he is willing to expose himself in order to get things straight once and for all, but going to the business side of the game is for those that really want to risk a lot to get things done.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-03 14:32:52)
SmartGo, Many faces of Go...
Computer Go seems to be very far from computer chess yet... (more than I thought)
Do you think a playing Go program could beat the best player in future ?
(following discussions I had with several players here :))
I've read the strongest programs could play around 8 kyu level (SmartGo, Many faces of Go). Not so bad, but I suppose it's at a blitz level, what about correspondence Go...
I train myself against gnuGO and I've been told about Kombilo, a free Go program (database), but I did not really enter it. SmartGo and Many faces of Go seem to be really good programs to learn the basics of the game.. but then ? .. Should we learn life and death structures, other things or only practice ?
Roger Weber (2006-10-03 15:11:47)
Go
The one thing that makes humans good at Go is our ability to recognize patterns.
Go is all about seeing patterns and making strategical moves.
Chess engines are so good at Chess because there aren't that many possibilites to be played, so a computer can calculate the best one by looking at databases.
However Go has a much larger board and much more possibilites of moves for a game, making it impossible for a computer to calculate the best move.
Also computers do not have an AI yet to enable them the recognition of patterns, or not to a degree that humans do.
So a Go-engine could theoretically beat you on a 9x9 sized board, but it is very improbable that it will do so on a 19x19 board.
At least for the moment ...
Rodrigo Jaroszewski (2006-10-05 11:42:35)
Re:
Basically, I'm playing to force myself to learn. In July, when I began my first game in FICGS, I knew nothing and had nobody to teach me. Since the probabilities of me ever having a tutor are dim, I knew I had to learn alone.
FICS won't cut it, because the guys at my level generally memorize a line and go for it until the bitter end. Having no opening knowledge I would generally end up in a bad spot until the midgame, where I can handle myself better. I rarely got past move 15 there.
OTB won't do for me, because I don't even know if there's a chess club in my city. I had a neighbor that used to play with me, but I quickly got past him on knowledge.
Studying database games is just not my style. I can't get drawn into the game if I'm not playing. If I choose the bad move I have to feel threatened by it, it has to have a consequence to me.
Thus, I'm here at FICGS. Before every move I'm able to analyze it and how the line goes forward, to understand why it is a good move. Plus, I'm able to test the moves that come to my head and check them (generally to find out they are outright suicidal).
In the end, I think my opponent wins something back, which is an entertaining and hopefully instructive game.
P.S.: BTW, just so you know, I play clean on FICS and OTB. I think those are, after some time at FICGS, becoming instructive environments on their own right.
Elmer Valderrama (2006-10-20 21:24:52)
quite a lot!
Thanks for your comment Thibault
Out of curiosity, just searched the Chess Problem Database Server and found a lot (+200!)of chess problems that have been found illegal one way or the other
(not sure yours is listed there but I presume it is)
Scott Prestwood (2006-10-21 03:15:11)
Full Disclosure
Perhaps tournaments should be labled as permiting engines and not permiting engines. Coorespondence chess has tradionally had only the rules of chess and the time control limiting it. And the early masters that used and believed in coorespondence chess as a method to improve ones game did not have access to computers, nice to know I could get killed in the tourney I am in just because I'm playing 6 computers. The initial allowance of databases and books to aid ones choice of moves as well as playing the game through allowed improvement of ones chess abilities. Computers will have a greater tendency to be the one playing the game because they only prescribe one line of action from a position. That line is very strong and likewise tends to be the operators choice of the next move. If the allowance of computers is posted for the games it will allow for the players to chose which type of game they prefer.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-21 12:11:22)
Tactics / server chess
You just have to be a bit more creative or to play different openings in your 3 games as White & Black in a tournament... Anyway, with online databases it's quite easy to know any player style & opening book.
There are many psychological tactics with server chess & CC time controls IMO, ie. it may be quite important to manage your unlucky opponent spirit during a tournament :)
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 (2006-11-14 13:49:08)
Story Of Life and Chess
Yes, a story of life and chess ! ..
In my ICCF database, the oldest archived correspondence chess games have been played (at first sight, I may be wrong) in 1989, did you kept your first correspondence chess games ? It would be great to see some from this period... In which organizations did you play before ? Thanks for your answers :)
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-20 21:29:31)
You seems in advance :-)
Well, considering the results of last year pro games (almost a perfect 50-50 result, according to my rather large but admittedly incomplete database) I am not sure a komi change from 6.5 will occur soon, at least in the japanese pro scene... And the number of recent games in gobase that ends in 1 or 1/2 points difference is astonishing :-) (not really significant, I know, as pros have the capacity to keep a tiny edge till the end, reducing it to simplify the game... but still :-))
Anyway, for us, simple and humble go mortals, that does not change much :-)
(but even at my low level I tend to be more aggressive in my fuseki while playing with an opponent of my level or stronger when the komi is 7.5 instead of say 5.5... so considering the increase/decrease (black/white) of aggressive attitude, maybe it is important for most of us because the feeling of a game might eventually change)
Elmer Valderrama (2006-12-04 14:18:02)
intuition
I disagree, chess knowledge can't be equated to intuition, here
is my long post about it
(why am I writing about the same things all over and over and at the
same time of year, I dunno ;)
1. Players without any intuition whatsoever but great working
capabilitites (as Botvinnik, Fischer, Kasparov, ..engines..)
-they never relie on intuition (they dont have any at all after all)
so everything must be subject to calculation, they have the
"hardware" (perfect body and mental conditions, rigorous training,
perfect visual/realistic representation of positions and a great
chess knowledge which must be kept fresh in mind -if not, they wouldn't
have reference points to judge/evaluate resulting positions.
When on top form they can beat anybody and I mean ANY body: human,
extraterrestial,
ultragalactic, trans-natural, hyper-divine,etc, and for an overwhelming
score, like 6-0 ;)..well you know what I mean.
The drawback well you already know it, it last a mig, except for
the engines, no-one can keep up with this regime
(GK could for a long time, but resorting
to short breaks (not playing for WC, choosing carefully where to play
etc,) But most important it's impossible to implement for long if the
"hardware" -see above- starts to "leak oil" then it's all over..
This can be brought up to an art, like Kasparov or Fischer, it is more
powerful than understanding chess as a natural tongue (as intuitive
players) because the "top-form" competitive element is always
present and the "hardware" works in pristine conditions.
From the above it follows of course that engines are the ultimate
chess warrior over the board at least (and only there, not in CC)
2. Those who have strategical intuition. (Capablanca, Petrosian, Karpov
maybe Anand..)The general impression is that
they are simply lazy people: not need to work out any thing as they
just "know" where pieces should go and what the point is of their
moves, usually there is no need for deep calculations, just two or three
moves (4 to 6 plies) to corroborate the "feeling" and the game is won.
The "feeling" is hard to express in words, and usually is lost if
expressed in words ;). It goes beyond a simply pattern recognition,
or a full database of chess knowledge, it is about predicting the
future possibilities (not having real positions in mind, just the
"possibilities" or general lines of play in future positions which
may or may not happen to appear for real in the game.
They can play for long long time and win a lot of tournaments
(Karpov I believe have the record of won tournaments)
3. Those who have special understanding in unbalanced positions
(Alekhine, Tal, Korchnoi..) They are dynamic players who love
to calculate but not for the sake of finding the best of the best of
the best of the moves (as those in group 1 would do), they
calculate SOME variations, those who have meaning to them
I see them as players of group 2 with a more or less working
"hardware" i.e they are not going to trust 2 or 3 moves variations
neither they are going to speculate on the future possibilities
without any ground/basic calculation under it. Their "feeling" is
again hard to express in words, but I believe it is something like
calculating a 10-12 plies variation with every position in-between
being subconciously excrutinated for crushing unexpected turning moves
(this is not done by players of group 1, they would calculate
"normal replies" in that 10-12 plies variation and would have to
go deeper (like 20-30 plies to see the point ;)
So that "feeling" is what enable us to compose music, create
art etc but also it is something that enable us to err like fools :(
Whether it can be mimicked by software or not it's an open question
but as I said a calculation 40-50 plies deep it's practically
equal to using intuition...
Obviously the above classification of G Kasparov it's a bit
rough in the sense that there are very few "pure intuitive"
players (of either group 2 or 3) as mentioned by Don in his post
most of the players is a mix of talent I believe, if I had to
choose a pure intuitive player from those groups I would point
Capablanca and Korchnoi, and of course Kasparov of group 1
Marc Lacrosse (2007-01-08 14:53:13)
My new little chess site ...
... is located at http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info
There will be some computer chess related stuff (opening books, collected ICC games, database processing tips, tests results ...) together with a few games, analyses, and maybe some historical data and so on.
Not that much so far, but I wish and hope that the baby will be growing fast :-)
Marc
Sandor Marton-Bardocz (2007-01-16 18:29:21)
Conditional Move
Hi there!
I noticed that there was a topic regarding conditional moves but it is closed. I think that conditional moves, aren't a bad thing after all..it should be implemented..Just think about the first moves of a game....for now, even the weakest players play theory ( fritz database or something)and this implies that the first moves will be played rather fast...Then why spend time clicking around to get to the games on a starting tournament over&over again, just to play the well known moves? U can overcome the "irritation" issue by limitating the use of conditional moves. Let's say every player has the right to use for example ...10 conditional moves in the begining of the game (in the first 15 moves for example). After that in 10 to 10 moves have let's say 2 possibilities to use conditional moves...This way it's erradicated the annoyance of countless use of premoves. Btw. I think that the example of those players who might use Fritz or whatever chessprogram to play, and then premove the lines indicated by the engine isn't really good..Only if the opponnent against whom they use it ...playes using the same lines indicated by ....an engine :-) Otherwise I can't realise how on earth the replied moves can be the same and matching with....or those lines are really forced..and if that is the case then the use of premoves is normal. Thank You.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-21 13:48:44)
Go and chess, IGN Goama newsletter
From IGN Goama newsletter by Alexander Dinerchtein - http://www.gogame.info
Go and Chess Two Games, Shared Experiences
Chess and go show are similar in many ways, yet it's always strange to see how the masters of each game try to "invent the wheel", instead of benefiting from the knowledge of their colleagues.
Let's consider sharing experiences!
These ideas can be useful even for strong Asian Go professionals:
1. Currently, only a few pros use Go databases and programs for studying. It is easy to find commentaries, written by 9-dan masters, which state that a move is new and has never been played before. Yet if one checks such moves in Go databases, one can sometimes find up to 100 examples from professional games. How can they cheat the readers who study these commentaries?
Once in Korea, I showed the Bigo Assistant program (similar to GoGod, MoyoGo and SmartGo) to Lee Sedol's brother Lee Sanghun, 5-dan, who is the director of a large children's Go school. He was surprised and said that the program looked very useful, and he added that he had never met this kind of program before. He even suggested deleting all amateur games and games played on Go servers, because of their low quality. I promised to order the programs and to install them on the school's computers if he liked this idea, but he did not follow up. Lee Sanghun, 5-dan was not able to break the traditions of his forefathers …
2. Even such top chess players as Kasparov, Kramnik and Topalov enlist the support of trainers during important tournaments and matches. During the Communist era, almost every Russian grandmaster worked on behalf of world championship candidates. Our government forced them to help, to show them new moves and ideas. Those who refused to help were punished severely: for example, sometimes a player would be prohibited from playing in tournaments abroad and would be refused foreign visas.
We do not see this in Go. Everyone thinks only about his or her own self. Do you know who is currently assisting Lee Changho? I don't know, either!
3. I would like to say a few words about playing technique. Chess players often used to write the move on paper first and then make it on the board. This helps to avoid impulsive moves and to prevent blunders. Go masters record the game afterwards, and so one can often find terrible mistakes, such as overlooking ataris and recapturing ko without playing a ko threat first. As an example you may see Black's move number 271 from this game:
http://www.go4go.net/v2/modules/collection/sgfview.php?id=10828
I am sure that if a player looked at their move at least twice before they write it on paper and after they would not make such mistakes.
4. Even top Go tournaments are usually run by the knock-out system so we often see sensational results. Mightn’t it be reasonable to think about increasing the number of games in each round? If rounds were best-of-three (in case of time constraints, it would be possible to use blitz time controls for the third game), it would help to minimize sensations.
How about organising a definitive World Go Championship? Chess players have contested one for more than 100 years, and competitions for this World Championship have revealed the very best players of each generation. In Go it's harder to tell which player is true champion. In 2006, for instance, one international tournament was won by Lee Changho and another one by Lee Sedol, while Cho U won the largest amount of prize money. Whom can we call the World Champion? Who can say which tournament is the most important : LG, Samsung, Fujitsu, Chunlan or another? We don't even have a unified rating system …
If we determined a single World Go Champion, he might earn the same degree of popularity as Garry Kasparov achieved in chess, and this could have a very positive influence on Go popularity around the world!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-23 12:27:06)
Famous chess games
Hello to all.
I am testing a new database which will contain famous chess games / games from famous chess players... World championships, Man vs. Machine, Computer games, Correspondence chess, Curiosities etc.. Now 2200+ games in, but it will grow quickly.
Feel free to suggest any link with interesting free chess database, or you may send to me PGN games (particularly looking for non-chess celebrities chess games).
http://www.ficgs.com/informations.html
(see A-Z)
All suggestions & feedback are welcome. Thanks in advance :)
Benjamin Aldag (2007-01-29 16:46:51)
Translation
Ok....i'll do my best :-D
Hattest Du seine mail mit der Datenbank bekommen? Viele Grüße and Nein, ich habe keine Datenbank von ihm.
Did you have his mail with the database got? Many greetings and no, I have no database of him.
yk
Ron Keyston (2007-01-29 17:27:38)
"Major" Deep Fritz 10 Bug
I've confirmed this problem on two different computers with completely different hardware and different operating systems. I've also sent the problem off to Chessbase, but have not yet gotten much of a response. If anyone else has Deep Fritz 10, would you mind giving this a try and reporting back with your results? Also, if anyone has the non-Deep version of Fritz 10, I'd be interested in knowing if it is also affected by this problem.
Input a game into Deep Fritz 10 and get to a point in the game where it is possible for black to castle long. Now save the game into a database, close the game and then open it back up from the database. If you either turn on infinite analysis, or just try to make the move, black is not able to castle long...Fritz assumes that it is an illegal move.
Furthermore, if you castle long BEFORE saving the game into the database, then save it and re-open it, then go to the position after black has castled queenside and turn on infinite analysis, the analysis is "messed up." Either the analysis text is invisible, or it reports impossible lines, or the evaluation score is very obviously wrong. This should be enough info for anyone to give the test a try, but if you want some specific examples, please let me know.
Ron
Ron Keyston (2007-01-29 19:04:14)
Specifics and Examples
OK, one PC is a 3.2GHz P4 w/1GB RAM running XP Pro. 256MB Hashtables with an ~800MB Maximum possible. The other PC is an Athlon X2 4600+ w/2GB RAM running Vista Ultimate (RTM.) It has 1GB Hashtables with ~1.5GB Maximum Possible. I can pretty much guarantee that it is not a hashtable issue though as the problem is with the legality of a move and only arises after saving into a database, closing the game and then re-opening it from the database. Also, if I open the same saved game from the database into Fritz 9, castling long as black is perfectly OK.
As for some examples, I will give the same five games that I sent to Chessbase. Some of these are contrived examples, whereas some are from my games here at FICGS:
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Bg4 6.O-O Nc6 7.d4
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Be7 6.Bxf6 gxf6 7.Nf3 b6 8.Bc4 Bb7 9.Qe2 Nd7 10.O-O-O c6 11.Rhe1 Qc7 12.g3
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c4 7.Qg4 g6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Nh6 10.Qh3 Nf5 11.g4 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Qb6 13.Bg2 Nc6 14.Qh6 Nxd4 15.O-O Bd7 16.Bg5 Ba4 17.Nxd4 Qxd4 18.Qg7 Rf8 19.Be3 Qxg4 20.Bc5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 a6 6.Be3 Nc6 7.Qd2 Bf5 8.Bd3 Bg4 9.Be2 e6 10.O-O-O
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3
Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c4 7.Qg4 g6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Nh6 10.Qh3 Nf5 11.g4 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Qb6 13.Bg2 Nc6 14.Qh6 Nxd4 15.O-O Bd7 16.Qg7
In all five examples, it is black to move from the final position. Also, in all five examples, castling long/queen-side is perfectly legal and likely one of the best moves. BEFORE the game(s) is/are saved into the database, Fritz allows black to castle long (and it is at or near the top line in infinite analysis mode.) AFTER saving the game into a database, closing the game window, and re-opening the game from the database, Fritz treats castling long as an illegal move.
Charlie Neil (2007-02-02 11:45:33)
Without Computer
Marcus if you can please read the old forum postings, "Why do you play corr-chess." I made a similar comment about computers being used as the main player. Believe me I was wrong! As much as in correspondence chess you can use notes, books and databases for reference. Here at FICGS, (A great site!) players use their computers as a reference. It does not benefit anyone to just relay their computer moves without understanding them. Those players won't prosper nor will develop a passion we chessplayers have for the game. I believe that now to be the case.
Personally I don't have a Juinor8, Fritz 10 or Deep Joe 90 or whatever to use as a reference point. I do have a pile of books that serve to confuse me in my games. As I continue to seek understanding in this game. People should use computers as long as the computers don't use them! How boring can it be just to imput moves? The computer isn't compulsory. And I am saving a fortune on stamps playing here! It is fun after all. It is only a game. Even if it is a terrible one.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-15 14:26:23)
Engine free area
Definitely, there won't be a (C) mark as computer, (F) as Fritz, (B) as books or (D) as databasen, (C+B), (F+D+B) and so on :) .. It makes sense in blitz / bullet chess on Playchess ie., not in correspondence chess, as human makes the real decision.
Definitely, I agree with Marc. I had some experience in the past in organizations that forbid computer assistance, I'm convinced it's no use to separate rating lists. Actually, it would even lose some interest for many players.
Anyway, if you do not take care about top ratings, just play chess without computer assistance (it is allowed too) :)
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-)
Ilmars Cirulis (2007-02-17 15:13:58)
one more
http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database.html
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-09 16:16:41)
GM vs. chess engines database
Someone mentioned "Marc Lacrosse´s database" in a Rybka forum's thread, I did not find it with Google, but I found this interesting Man vs. Machine database, 2837 GM vs. engine games on ICC so far, on Marc's website : Chessbazaar (link was on this forum :))
http://users.skynet.be/mlcc/chessbazaar/gmvscompsicc2006.html
Scott Prestwood (2007-04-16 16:19:09)
Consider this
It has been a part of the correspondence chess tradition that you can use your own personal databases. Well, what if this database has a large proportion of computer verses human games? Computer verses computer? What if these databases were being generated by computers? Many chess viewers and database applications provide statistics and information are not reasonably generated by anything other than a computer. It seems that computer chess will be slowly keeping in.
Don Burden (2007-05-17 00:45:25)
Fighting against Tablebases
Needing over a terabyte of disk space, I doubt if anyone actually has the 6 piece tablebase installed on their computer, though a position can be queried at:
http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database.html
BTW, I've played endgames here where I had to play the game out to checkmate where my opponent had just a king and a few locked pawns, while I had an advantage of a queen, rook, and several extra pawns.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-15 17:12:39)
Online chess today
A few links to discussions at TCCMB (The Correspondence Chess Message Board) on chess servers nowadays, future of ICCF, correspondence chess [once more] and so on...
http://ancients.correspondencechess.com/index.php?topic=105.0
http://ancients.correspondencechess.com/index.php?topic=109.0
In the second discussion I tried to answer on the future of correspondence chess & chess engines :
1) Like the 'tour de France', it is impossible to organize a "bicycle race" at chess without doping today IMO. Also there are so many 'products' : Various books, databases, engines, human help.. so it seems to me that it is a non-sense to try to make it like an OTB tournament. Online chess is "motorcycle races" & freestyle, nothing else.
2) The ratio of wins does not decrease much in computer games & advanced chess (blitz), and correspondence chess games will never be all drawn IMO. We just have to follow the horizon line... Engines still have difficulties when there are 32 pieces on the board... Make the position more and more complex & critical, play Benoni structures, East indians and English openings... There will probably be more and more draws but when looking at CC 2500+ games, the ratio is still quite good. The problem at CC is mainly the style of play with humans 'humanly' trying to remain in known positions where they can win and can't lose.
'The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy', 'Opportunities multiply as they are seized' (Sun Tzu)
A solution is to make rules that motivate players to avoid draws, particularly when playing against a higher rated opponent. (ie. the rule for FICGS 8-games matches)
3) We feel that engines play almost perfect chess because of our poor human's level of play (I should say ratings)... But engines & computers have to improve a lot yet - not obvious they can do it in a more or less near future -, the horizon line is not so far, each version of Rybka wins about 30 elo points... We'll see engines at level 3200, 3300 maybe much more... (4000 ?)
4) If too many players have their CC rating between 2750-2800 in future, we can make new rules : Ratings wouldn't be calculated on the basis of each game, but on the basis of ie. 8-games matches... Then strategy would be more important & we would see rating gaps again between the best players...
Finally if I'm completely wrong, play Big Chess ;D
Graham Cridland (2007-06-15 19:29:51)
Incidentally...
Perhaps I just have a tiny database (I do), but I think ...0-0-0 may have been a novelty in that position. Most players, it appears, follow Anand-Lautier, Biel 1997, with possibly some advantage for White.
...0-0-0 looks very natural, and seems to make the best of White's slightly disarranged pieces.
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-06-16 07:52:47)
Dead Man's Defense
Nobody has to install 6-pieces-endings on his own computer today. You can just have a look at internet site:
http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database.html
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-18 20:50:23)
Big chess theory : "Queens opening"
The first rated Big Chess tournament started a few days ago... I like this game more and more, no theory, no databases, no chess engines, many strategies & many queens captured already ;)
Every opening seems ok, we still don't know if taking pawns with the queen during the first moves is worth something or not, the value of the pieces is quite unpredictable... Many players now play 1.Nh4 to threaten 2.Qo7 then 3.Qc7 if needed, winning a pawn. What is the best response if you want to keep the same material ? .. Anyway that's very interesting to see a side with 1 or 2 pawns more, giving some rooks activity to the opponent.. Still looks like a draw theorically.
My main line is : 1.Nh4 Nh13 2.Qo7 No14 3.Qc7 Ql13
Any other suggestion ?
See Big Chess waiting list in Chess Special Tournaments.
Hannes Rada (2007-06-18 22:32:37)
Big chess software
Is there any software that can manage big chess games ? (store, load, database )
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-26 01:35:03)
A guide to Endgames Tablebases
Endgames tablebases fully explained, a great page :
http://horizonchess.com/FAQ/Winboard/egtb.html
* [A.1] What is a endgame tablebase? How do they work? How much stronger will it make my chess program play?
* [A.2] What are the different endgame tablebases formats out there? What are the differences?
* [A.3] Where can I learn more about the endgame table formats?
* [A.4] What are the Chess programs that support endgame tables? Which format do they support?
* [A.5] Where can I get endgame tablebase?
* [A.6] Where can I buy tablebases?
* [A.7] Where can I download tablebases?
* [A.8] How do I generate tablebases on my computer?
* [A.9] How large are the tablebase files? Can I put then all into one directory? Do I have to use a complete set of 5 men tablebases?
* [A.10] Questions about 6 men endgame tablebases. Which are the most useful?
* [A.11] How do I find out which tablebase is corrupted? How do I know the endgame tablebases are working?
* [A.12] What is datacomp.exe? Where can I get it?
* [A.13] How do I get Crafty to work with Endgame tablebases?
* [A.14] How can I get Fritz to use Endgame tablebases?
* [A.15] What is the difference between tablebases download from Dr Hyatt's ftp site and those on the Chessbase endgame turbo CD? Can they be used together?
* [A.16] What are the files ending with .tbs? What about those with nbb and nbw? Do i need both?
* [A.17] Help, the endgame tablebases are not working properly!
* [A.18] Can I use tablebase files in zipped form?
* [A.19] Where can I get a useful graphical browser to view endgame tablebases? What about an online searchable database?
* [A.20] Misc questions
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-27 14:14:36)
Figlio - Schuster
Hi Wolfgang.
Is it possible for you to post this game here ? (I've lost my ICCF database) .. Thanks !
Andrew Stephenson (2007-07-10 11:11:52)
FICGS Data base of Games
Is there a searchable database of games on FICGS? How can I search for games by a particular player? Compliments to Thibault on an excellent site.
Andrew Stephenson (2007-08-11 23:49:31)
Real names and databases
Do games with fictitious names ever get into databases like Mega Corre etc? I get the feeling that chess sites that use nicknames dont get onto databases so the games are less accesible maybe even lost?
Ivan Pljusnin (2007-08-12 01:41:19)
2 Andrew Stephenson
In fact there is a database of IGAME games in pgn format, about 400000 games. Formally speaking, it is not free: you have to register and buy membership and then you can download it. But somewhere it can be downloaded for free, I remember. If you wish I can give you a link, but I have to find it.
Our administrator does not send our games to MEGA Corre or any other chess databases, I am sure. From this point of view FICGS is much better.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-08-13 17:20:46)
Go Search Engine
From IGN Goama newsletter - http://gogame.info
Go Search Engine, created by Alexander Dinerchtein
There are many sites on the Internet dedicated to Go. The majority are non-profitmaking. They were created by people who enjoy playing Go strictly as amateurs. As a result, they don't invest much money or effort in making their sites popular among search engines, so it's hard to find their sites using Google, Yahoo! or other common tools.
Of course, it's not easy for them to compete with online gaming stores and gambling sites, which spend thousands of US dollars monthly on advertising and optimizing their sites for search engines. The verb "to go" makes the situation even more difficult. If we search for "go magazines" or "go news" on Google, we may find only a few Go-related resources on the first few pages. It's terrible!
The situation with Asian Go masters who have short and common names is also confusing. It's almost impossible to find their games, biographies and photos on the main search engines.
We have decided to solve this problem! We have made a special search engine, based on Google Custom Search, which searches information only on Go-related sites.
Right now there are more than 500 sites in our database (99% of all Go-related resources) and we are trying to increase this number daily. We allow people to suggest new sites to crawl. Each site passes moderation, so you can be sure that each side is relevant to the subject of your search. We exclude non-Go related sites, doorways, sites with hidden text and dishonest competitors.
Dear Go-lovers, we hope that our system will be helpful for you!
You can find it here: http://find.gogame.info
Hannes Rada (2007-09-06 21:28:07)
FICGS Hardware + Software
In my opininon it would be interesting to know on which hardware + software (Opening system, database) our server is running ?
So Thibault, hope that's not a big secret :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-09 16:17:20)
Waiting list is open
The rules are : "FICGS chess no engines tournaments are unrated single round-robin tournaments, involving 7 players. The special rule for these tournaments is that chess engines, databases and opening books are strictly forbidden.
All games are played in 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves. Norms are not possible."
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-12 16:51:49)
Gene
ok Gene let me give you my experience as to why you should use an engine in cc. 1) I have learnt a lot about certain openings and I remember lot more effective systems 2) finding the truth about a position is fun and instructive 3) I have acquired some endgame knowledge I never would have got. 4) Generally I wil try to understand why the engines like certain moves and drill down into the position trying altrentives until I get it. Sometimes in very wild positions its tough. Most of the the time this reinforces principles of develpoment pawn structure piece dynamism and I find it rubs off on my understanding. One proviso - if you take on too many games a lot of this wont work!
Facing a much lower rated player you have to do research and prepare something - trotting down the main line poisened pawn Najdorf may not be the way to go. A lot of top players go for catalan and english openings hoping to utilise their chess knowledge and research.
One thing is for sure always playing the best move of your engine is going to drop 1/2 points and lose some games and that includes Rybka. Finally all this stuff is done by all the top professionals in the otb chess. One example I faced the line that Kramnik got crushed with by Topalov playing b5 and f4. I looked at the game notes and databases and couldnt find a good response 45 minutes with fritz and I cracked it and in the process gained some insight into the opening. In fact its a harmless variation if you know the antidote but over the board one slip and Kram was toasted
Wayne Lowrance (2007-09-19 00:56:11)
Missing game(s)
I seem to think at least one of my games does not appear in "My games" tab. I see no result for game A_000012 5866. I dunno if this is the game or not. But anyhow I am used to seeing one gamer in the 5k series listed when I click "My games" tab. Hope there are not others as I have many games going. In my Ficgs database of games I do not anotate a win or loss.
Help please Thibault......thank you Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2007-10-02 13:08:20)
Rating lists
Hi Don, that's right ! .. I'll have to make some changes in the database to take account of this.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-10-11 12:43:33)
pinot noir, knowledge & 9x9
I agree with that :)
Don, I mean 9x9 should be compared to checkers, it is "chess" at a size where brute force is enough, so a 'particular case' only. But just like Rybka/Hiarcs playing at master level even thinking a few seconds per move by imitating (knowledge + algorithm) an international master's way of thinking more than calculating trillions of positions, why not a Go engine built the same way, much more complex though. Actually Go engines do not calculate much, they try to 'see' already but sure these programs will be improved significantly soon and it could play about the same level (without joseki databases) on different goban sizes. I feel a Go engine could reach a 1 dan / 2 dan level on our small computers, whatever the size of the goban... But it should be incredibly harder to beat stronger players, which is great for Go :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-03 05:26:32)
Free engines to download
I see that Fruit 2.3.x and Toga II 1.3.x series (and of course Rybka 1.0) are still the best free chess engines to download, quite near Chessbase engines strength.
Shredder 11 seems to be sold with Fritz 10 interface and old 2007 chess games database, a good reason to buy forthcoming Fritz 11 ;) .. I assume that Chessbase will focus on the interface and Chessbase 11 (or.. 10, 12 ?! hard to follow)
Which is the current best free engine to help in correspondence chess games in your opinion ?
Konrad Hornung (2008-01-16 07:11:38)
Games Database
Having a user friendly games database, showing the board and position and listing the options of moves played in that position by users of the database, with the option to filter games below a particular rating e.g. 2000, is my next idea to improve this site.
Wayne Lowrance (2008-01-21 05:06:18)
Making a database of my Ficgs games
can this be done in the fritz format ? if not may I make this a suggestion for next up date
Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-21 05:18:05)
One way
Hi Wayne, one possible way already (at least for finished games) : you may download the full ficgs chess database, then filter games played by you... anyway you're right, it could be a next update ;)
Garvin Gray (2008-01-21 08:02:03)
database
I have a database of my played and ongoing games in fritz.
I just download each game after a few moves and add it to the database and then keep refreshing the game each time a move is made to keep the position and my analysis current.
Wayne Lowrance (2008-01-21 18:18:35)
database
Good thinking Garvin, I wish I had done this from the beginning. Too late for my entire ficgs games. I try what Thibault said, sounds very time consuming tho
Wayne
Wayne Lowrance (2008-01-22 17:12:13)
Database
Yes Mladen, I guess that will work for current games.....I have all current games in a Ficgs database I created. My problem is I do not have the entire database of my games.
I tried Thibault's suggestion and it worked fine.
Thank you Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-31 01:51:01)
Nothing strange
Hi Nicola, that is normal... just trying to replace the first bullet games without any move in the database.
Mark Hailes (2008-03-17 09:56:01)
Engine/database rules
Also I'm uncertain what the Database/Engine/consulting books etc rules are...
Jason Repa (2008-05-06 21:54:09)
Bird Brain loses in 33 Moves!
"Obviously playing the From or the approach adopted by black in these games is not an accurate response!"
That's not obvious at all. What's obvious is that I beat you quite easily when you and I played cc so you're far from being any kind of authority whatsoever!
"1f4 does not lose or lead to a worse gane for white - it just allows black to get equality very quickly and easily"
I just finished trying to explain to you, in the way a young child should be able to understand, that there is more to think about in chess than trying to play what current theory considers to be the best try for an opening advantage. Yet here you are rambling on about the same nonsense you were in your previous posts. Was Fischer's 2.d3 against the French the objectively strongest move? Even against (and perhaps especially against) computers, it can sometimes be better to play sidelines or moves which may serve to confuse an opponent. Is the King's Indian Attack the best try for an opening advantage for White? Probably not. But it was used by Kasparov to defeat Deep Blue. If you still can't understand the concept I've been trying to teach you, after several posts, I don't know what more I can do for you. Just keep mindlessly playing what established theory tells you are the strongest lines,(without having even the incipience of an understanding as to why) and keep mindlessly trusting the evaluations your program gives you, and you'll keep getting CRUSHED by guys like me.
"1 f4 doesnt develop any piece (except the king!) and is a bit committal and slightly weakening of the king side."
After this statement, if I didn't know better, I would have thought you were someone who just learned how to set up the pieces. It might be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard anyone say. Does 1.e4 develop a piece? How about 1.d4? I suppose those moves are "a waste in cc" as well. We should all be playing 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 according to you, lol.
1.f4 grabs space. It stakes out influence both in the center and on the kingside. It effectively prevents 1...e5 (lest White goes into a dubious gambit system) as an alternative to other moves which achieve this. There are also other intangibles that are part of the picture, such as the psychological effect the move may have, the lack of preparation an opponent may have against it, etc. If you ever began to understand chess at a level beyond just plugging moves into a program, you might start to appreciate that allowing concessions (such as the slight weakening of the White kingside resulting from 1.f4) is all part of the game. Fischer's famous quote: "you gotta give squares to get squares" is a famous example. If allowing static liabilities were something to be avoided at all cost, you'd never see a Sicilian Scheveningen. It allows all sorts of weaknesses.
As for your so called "analysis". It's a complete joke! For starters, you're "analyzing" a game resulting from the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening. I line I've never played in my life, let alone here on FICGS. Is this how you try to win an argument/debate? By misrepresenting the facts? An intelligent person who genuinely felt that their argument had a leg to stand on, would simply take one of the 4 games I provided to you and do some analysis from there. Showing where Black could have improved. Then finally, after trying to "score points" with examples of the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening, which I have never played, you post a game where White played poorly and lost to a lower rated player. As if that's never happened before in chess, lol. You don't even know enough to post the date of the game. I couldn't find this game on any of my databases(totally over 4,000,000 games), so if you didn't just make it up out of thin air, perhaps you got more wrong, such as the actual moves that were played, in addition to incorrectly stating: <BR><BR>"Look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as black - a very strong 2600+ GM at the time - he continued 6 ..b6 7 h3 c5 8 Qe1 Bb7 9 g4 and lost to IM Sengupta." <BR><BR>
Is it Black that lost here or White?
I took a brief look at the game, and it's hardly representative of proper play by White. 7.h3 was dubious at best. I prefer 7.Ne5. White then misses another opportunity to play the knight to e5 after 7...c5. Then 9.g4? is a gross thematic mistake. The only thing this game proves is that you're completely incapable of discussing chess in an intelligent way. Real chess players look for games that illustrate the critical lines for both sides, and try to arrive at some actual insights.
There is a reason I crushed you when we played cc last year.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 11:30:35)
French traps
The French defence is one of the best replies to 1 e4 - accidents however are always possible as the following correspondence game shows with black playing into a lost position after just 13 moves:
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qb6 9.Qd2 Qxb2 10.Rb1 Qa3 11.Bb5 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Bb4 13.O-O O-O ?? (black had to play 13 ..a6 although he will still be under pressure) 14 Rb3 Qa5 15.Qe3 Nb6 16.Qg3 Nc4 17 f5! and the correspondence game finished Rd8 18.Rf4 Bf8 19.Rg4 Kh8 20.f6 g6 21.Rh4 h6 22.Kh1 Kg8 23.Qh3 Kh7 24.Bc5 Rd6 25.g4 Qd8 26.g5 h5 27.Rxh5+
These things happen OTB but French defence players have known of this since Rechlis (2525) - Zueger (2448) 2001 which went 19 f6 g6 20 Rh4 a6 21 Qh3 h5 22 Rxh5!! gxh5 23 Qxh5 axb5 24 Kf2 and white won. since then 13 0-0 has been avoided.
Of course at cc a player has time to research the databases and access to powerful chess engines at no cost.
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 12:54:06)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
My obsessive fan is quoting my game with Bucsa Ioan played last year. Actually you have it backwards Stephenson. I trusted my database, which wasn't up to date. I wasn't even consulting an engine until around move 18, when it's already lost for Black. I thought quite a bit about alternative lines in this game, but found myself agreeing with the Psakhis analysis. That line is recommended by Psakhis in his book "French Defence - Steinitz, Classical, and other Systems". Additionally, 13...0-0 has been played by the likes of GM Dreev, as well as GM Marjanovic, as recently as 2003. But alas, it pays to keep your databases up to date for correspondence chess.
The game was a valuable learning experience for me. I'm very happy that it occurred. My otb opponents will never get me in that position as a result :)
I can't help but feel sorry for you Stephenson. Firstly I'm sorry that you don't have any of your own games worthy of publication, and that you need to vicariously live through me and post my chess games. Secondly, I'm sorry that you don't play otb chess and appreciate the joy of playing chess using your own mind. But then again, in your case, maybe that's a good thing. :)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 13:22:56)
Provocation
I am sorry I cannot respond to a lot of what you have posted as such a response would breach the rules.
I have not examined all your losses - just the French games - so I do not know how instructive they are I will try to review them later but I can't promise anything.
However I am a great believer in checking lines I play with the database to see whats been learnt and how the top GM's handle the particular lines.
All I learnt from my loss was not to play that particular line and to cut out all dodgy openings. In fact the line you played is not the strongest and I believe black can equalise - unfortunately I found an even stronger line for white which seems to refute the entire variation. There is however a book by an english GM from 2007 which looks at sicilian side lines and claims that there is no refutation.
When I have time I will stick all the analysis up and people can make up their own minds.
On correspondence taking someone's OTB chess to the next level I am a bit sceptical. It definitely has a significant effect on the accuracy of opening play and this can get some valuable wins by itself. But other progress needs separate study and training. Silmans Reassess your chess for example will increase the rating of any one below FIDE 2300 if studied intensively IMO.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 13:57:40)
Databases and books
Well I dont think a book should ever be trusted for cc no matter who has written it. It should always be critically examined - playing 18 moves from the book without switching on the engine seems very risky.
I think the position is lost after 13..0-0 14 Rb3 Qa5 15 Qd3 and I see no defence here. The only Dreev game I have in this line continued .. Nb6 16 Qg3 Nc4 and a draw was agreed.(Ivanchuk-Dreev 1993) Chess engines were not as good then and 17 f5 wins as was later discovered.
Where are these GM games from 2003?? Its strange that your database does not have Rechlis (2525) - Zueger (2448) 2001 In fact an earlier game Ernst - Grigutavicus (1999)had seen white crash through with 15 Qf2 Nb8 16 f5 - although Nb8 does not look a very good move. Whats the date of this Psakhis book? I hope its not after 2001!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 14:33:15)
Opening books
I think the truth is that a lot of opening books are not always objective and someimes do not give the best lines or give assessments that are not always accurate. Active GM's someimes keep things back for there own use .. which is understandable I suppose. John watson seems to be an exception to this and produces very high quality opening work. The bottom line is you have to check them all IMO.
Incidentally I am not sure there is much need to keep databases up to date - I suppose that refers to downloading games from TWIC. Most databases are up dated automatically.
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 14:43:09)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
No, it looks like my comment was a bit over your head, once again. By keeping databases up to date, I don't mean just mindlessly adding random games, as perhaps a <1500 otb player might do. I was talking about updating the database with current theory and critical lines.
What you're sure or not sure of is of no consequence. This is what chess players do.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 14:57:54)
Updating databases
The professional chess players I know down load TWIC then filter the stuff they are interested in into sub-databases. But what has this got to do with not having a 2001 game in 2007??. Unless a person has some ancient chess base data base - but then why would they not look online and cross check?? It took me about 3 minutes to find some relevant games including the 2001 game showing 13 ...0-0?? as losing.
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 15:15:32)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
You don't know any professional chess players Stephenson. Who are you trying to kid here? You don't even know that the word is "download" not "down load", and "database", not "data base", lol. This is the problem with a mental midget mindlessly trusting machines, as you are doing with the spelling software. It is for this reason it was so easy to beat you in chess. I only had to outplay a machine, not outsmart a human who has the ability to THINK.
If you're such a "whiz" at correspondence chess, as you keep trying to convince me, and have such wonderful databases, why did I beat you? I think saying that I beat you is even a bit of an understatement. It was more like a slaughter!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 16:00:22)
ELO
Well like I stated elsewhere talking of ELO points I take to refer to FIDE rating not national ratings irrespective of the underlying methodology used to calculate the national rating. I guess we will have to agree to differ on that one. Sorry I cannot respond to the grammer stuff - its against the rules.
On the game we played check out the available database games and that may give you an answer. Like I said in another post the line I believe is the refutation is not what you played - I will put up the analysis when I have more time.
At the risk of repeating myself I still dont understand why you cannot find a 2001 game or what sort of databases you are looking at but I guess we have reached a dead end there too.
Jason Repa (2008-05-14 21:31:38)
corr. & otb
"But cc rating does not implicitly say anything about chess strength."
I disagree. But first be clear that I'm talking about correspondence chess strength. I never said that corr. chess strength has a 1 to 1 relationship with otb chess strength. I know too many guys who are better corr. players than me that I could mop the floor with at any time control in a live chess game.
But having said that, I believe that people have high corr. ratings for a reason. At a minimum they're good at employing interactive chess engine research and have good updated databases. I think overall chess knowledge and judgment are factors as well. Stronger chess moves win more games. Yes, I understand that sometimes an ambitious 1800 can beat a higher rated opponent, on occasion, but it's overall results that are important, not anomalies. The same is true otb. Sometimes experts and national masters beat GMs. That doesn't mean they're a stronger chess player than the GM.
"Do you think the playing cc helps to improve your otb abilities?"
I'm not surprised you're getting differing stories. Like anything else, it depends on how you use the experience and of course on your individual aptitude. Some people will just memorize the opening theory they learn from corr. chess, if that. Others will do much more with those games, such as developing technique, increasing their strategic knowledge, learn more endgame theory, etc. I think it is without question that corr. chess can have great benefits for your otb chess game, if used properly. Just being forced to comb through opening books and game databases alone is useful.
"OTB requires the abilities to calculate deeplines correctly and to maintain concentration for a couple of hours"
I agree that the ability to concentrate well is important for otb chess, but I think you're overvaluing calculation. The reality is that otb is all about COMPETITION. It's a mental fight. I know guys are are great analysts, and with the right hardware/software would probably be great corr. players, but they don't handle the pressures and stresses that go along with competition very well. Judgment and competence, especially while under stress and duress, are of the utmost importance in otb. You can calculate as deeply as you want, but if you're expending energy calculating lines that you should have rejected, or mismanaging your time by thinking too deeply in a spot where it's not necessary, you won't get good results in otb.
I don't have any desire to try to get anywhere near 2700 level in corr. chess. And I agree with your analysis that it would not be fun anymore and become a huge drain of time sitting behind the computer. Perhaps not unlike what a professional chess player has to go through in order to prepare for their tournaments, with the chief exception that the professional chess player gets paid for such a sacrifice.
"...for the purpose of improving the otb abilities it would have been better to study chess books and solving tactical exercises than playing cc."
I don't see why these things have to be mutually exclusive. For me I get more motivated to study my chess books and look through my databases when the positions occur in games. I also think about what I'm doing and analyze the positions using my own mind when I play corr. chess. Maybe that's not the case for everyone, but it is for me. As for tactics, I think blitz/bullet against strong opponents can be very useful for developing that.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 23:14:37)
Books and databases
This thread is really about how reliance on books and lack of research can get someone into trouble ie a lost position after 13 moves in a main line opening - even with plenty of time and powerful chess engines available. Actually its not even necessary to own an up to date database to avoid this - the resources are freely available to anyone with an internet connection.
The point about ELO is dead I think referring to ELO points is associated with FIDE ratings irrespective of the fact that most national rating systems use ELO's methodology. Mr Repa does not agree - thats it.
"but when I'm dealing with who says down load and data base ..."
I don't read anything into the omission of the word "someone" here nor the numerous spelling mistakes that have cropped up.
Incidentally the book I referred to with analysis of the dodgy siscilain variation is called Experts V the Sicilian with different chapters by various GM's and IM's including a chapter on the pin variation about which one reviewer says:
"we get no less than 12 pages on the “silly” Pin Variation, and in the end Aagaard seems unable to prove a certain advantage!" Whatever the truth about that variation its highly risky and not recommended for cc!
Jason Repa (2008-05-16 00:23:32)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
Geez Stephenson, I thought you were done stalking and harassing me and had found something else to amuse your little mind with. Something shiny and metallic perhaps? But here you are continuing your trollish ways.
Actually, what this thread is REALLY about, is a pathetic little character who doesn't handle losing at chess very well. As was stated before, it's pretty sad that you don't have any chess games of your own worthy of publication or discussion, so you post one of mine and continue to rant, and rant, and rant about nonsense. I already BEAT YOU in chess. Quite easily, in fact. Could there be anything more ridiculous than a guy who loses at chess criticizing the play of the victor?
Normally when someone obsesses over me like this it's a female doing the obsessing. But hey, each to their own.
And yeah, it's pretty obvious you're someone with a lot of time on your hands. Nice of you to share that with us. But you only speak for yourself in that regard. Even with all your free time I was still able to beat you easily when we played chess.
Just look at this latest drivel you're posting. You go on and on and on about why I shouldn't have lost a chess game I played a year ago like this is some life and death event for you. It's really not a big deal to me. So why is MY game such a big deal to you? If you're trying to make an argument that I'm such a terrible correspondence chess player based on this game, why did I beat you so easily when you and I played? I'm also higher rated than you as well. If you're going to harass me with one of my losing games, at least have enough intelligence and imagination to vary the game once in awhile. You have 5 more to choose from.
Sorry but I've never met anyone clued out enough to put DOWN LOAD and DATA BASE before. This isn’t a minor spelling mistake or typo. This is a surprising lack of education. What’s next, “COMP -UTER”? A chess player should especially be familiar with the word DATABASE. But as I said earlier, some people mindlessly trust machines, and don't have the capacity to think for themselves. People like that like to brag about their meticulous spelling, because even a chromosome-deficient inebriate can figure out how to use spelling software. Most of us couldn't be bothered, because we realize that spelling is not important when making casual internet forum posts.
And no, Stephenson, the "point" about ELO is not dead. It's your ability to learn and understand simple concepts that appears quite dead here. This has nothing to do with me not "agreeing" with you. This has to do with objective fact. An ELO rating could be talking about GO, Backgammon, or other games, that FIDE has absolutely nothing to do with, in addition to national rating organizations. You were wrong. End of story. Continuing to defend your ignorance of the meaning of ELO is just making it all the more obvious what it is you are to everyone reading this. Again, Stephenson, LOOK IT UP.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-16 18:32:40)
ELO ELO
"I was talking about updating the database with current theory and critical lines. "
So what are you doing if not examining the latest games played and what better source is there than TWIC? How do you examine these if not downloading and filtering out the openings you are interested in by high rated players?
Anything else is going to be taking other peoples selections eg New In chess opening surveys or subscribing to a chess opening service. Even then the best way of keeping a database up to date is with TWIC.
Wayne Lowrance (2008-07-02 17:26:08)
my games copied to Fritz database
How can you do this ?
Thanks
Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-02 23:22:15)
games in PGN
Hi Wayne,
Well, many ways but no way in a single click yet... I'll make an update.
In example :
http://www.ficgs.com/databases/chess.pgn (then filter by name)
http://www.ficgs.com/user_games_print.php (make a PGN file)
Wayne Lowrance (2008-07-03 01:03:17)
my games copied to Fritz database
Sorry Thibault, I cannot make this work, too dense I guess. Thanks for trying to help me.
Maybe you can make a site up date to do this.
Wayne
Wayne Lowrance (2008-07-03 23:48:22)
mygames copied to fritz data base
sounds like it, but I may not understand it. is...."your games in fritz database"
thank you
Wayne
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-30 11:03:31)
Databases
Thibault I believe FICGS games do not get into any of the databases (mega corr etc) Is there any way to get these games in? I have seen some tremendous novelties in FICGS that I have not found anywhere else. It seems this knowledge is hidden ....
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-30 13:01:18)
Databases
Benjamin, I think Andrew meant to share FICGS games in known correspondence chess databases (not programs).
That's a good idea but it's probably a question of time only, or I may ask the owners... why not.
Normajean Yates (2008-08-12 02:10:55)
Okay, requestiong annnotation!
Consider this latvian fraser 'book' line:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Qh5+ g6 5. Nxg6 Nf6 6. Qh3 hxg6 7. Qxh8 Qe7. [yes I know it is in crisis :)]
well, opp played 8. Nc3 [which i couldnt find in any database] and I was already in serious trouble after:
8...fxe4 9. Be2 Nd4 10. O-O.
Cant see any counterplay by black.
[not on this site; and the game is in progress but has moved on a few moves beyond this point - so I am not cheating!]
Anyone care to comment on - ahem, annotate - my [black's] 8th and 9th move?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-02 15:09:28)
Rating update
Ciao Wayne !
Ratings and games database have been updated (the rating list will be updated automatically in a few hours)
My best,
Thibault
Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-29 17:26:36)
How to make a *.cbh from ficgs
In the worst case, it should be possible to open a PGN file, copy the games and paste it in an opened CBH database, then save it, or to make a CBH database from the PGN file then merge the two CBH databases... Sorry, I don't have the GUI here :/
Josef Riha (2008-09-29 19:32:36)
Hallo Wayne,
it's a little difficult, I believe.
Start Fritz and then change to the Database(the very right icon in the iconbar). Then click New Database. In the dialogue enter the name, e.g.: FICGS.cbh and open it. Remember the directory displayed at top.
Now go to your ficgs site and download your games in that directory.
After this load one game after the other and save them as New Game. That's all.
Wayne Lowrance (2008-09-30 03:13:54)
copy games
Thank you so much Joseph. I followed your instructions. I was able to copy a game, but again when I ried to place it in mydatabase it just didnt happen.
Thank you
Wayne
Josef Riha (2008-09-30 09:01:07)
copy games
No problem :-)
Very dubious! I've done this several times and it works.
After loading the .pgn file into the GUI you must change to your database and in that window click on the 'add game' icon(I don't know how it is written in the English version). A dialogue appears where you can edit some datas. With OK it is saved.
I hope you don't misunderstand my extensive description:-)
An easier way is to create a new game and parallel to FICGS you enter the moves done by you and your opponent.
Greetings, Josef.
Tano-Urayoán Russi Román (2008-09-30 19:29:45)
Maybe use Chessbase 8-9-10 or light
The problem is Fritz is not designed as database you have more flexibility using Chessbase.
After downloading the game ( it is saved as pgn ) You need to open that game and choose File-Save As- Here you are given the choice to save the game to a database of your choice, for example, lets create My FICGS games, open Chessbase, File-New Database-and create your database in any place you want, generally My documents-Chessbase-etc. So after you have created your database open the downloaded game , again I suggest open it with Chessbase, and choose File-Save As- and put it in the database we created My FICGS games, voila.
In Fritz creating a database takes 2 more clicks. First go to File-Open database or F12 then in that window choose File-New database or Ctrl+X , and the the same procedure as above. Choose your path , name it, then open your downloaded game(s)and Save As, choose the database of your preferences.
Even in chessbase light this is possible, but the number of games in each database is restricted to 50,000 I believe.
Hope this helps
Normajean Yates (2008-10-26 08:03:34)
ive seen those chesville articles before
http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Openings/LatvianGambitRevisited.htm
http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Openings/LatvianGambitRevisited_PartTwo.htm - not bad for a starting uderstanding.. but the lines - dont follow them blindly! doublecheck with latest databases and - with llmars :)
Thibault de Vassal (2008-10-26 22:10:03)
Search wikichess & games in one click
New features in chess games !
It is now possible to search wikichess & games in one click from your running games in the fast moves mode (page move_express), see the S & W options below the chessboard. One more tool to get quick statistics from FICGS database before to play.
Please report any bug. Thanks in advance :)
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-01 21:55:48)
Chessgames.com
I just noticed that a few games played at FICGS were in chessgames.com, ie. this game Peter Schuster vs. Thibault de Vassal (WCH4 QF4, 1-0)
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1507687
Does anyone know how games are selected in chessgames.com ?
Maybe we'll find games played here in correspondence chess databases in a while :)
Don Groves (2008-11-05 08:02:06)
8 x 8 chess variant
There is another way to foil the computers and re-energize chess: A screen is placed between the two sides of the chess board and each player places their pieces on the board in accordance with two rules: (1) one pawn on each file; (2) no piece past its own third rank. Then the screen is removed and the game begins with White's first move.
Opening books become useless (requiring the computer to begin using its clock from the first move) and the usual endgames will rarely occur (although endgame databases are obviously still useful).
Knowing your opponent's tendencies becomes even more valuable than in the normal game.
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-11-08 10:03:24)
Games ...
What I do is to download ALL the games and I use a freeware chess database tool called SCID to get the games with the opening I want.
Normajean Yates (2008-11-09 04:26:24)
Rodolfo, I do *exactly* the same thing!
"What I do is to download ALL the games and I use a freeware chess database tool called SCID to get the games with the opening I want." - I do *exactly* that!
Specially, the newer versions of scid are *very* convenient! [I am using scid 3.6.23 - but 3.6.26 is available I checked.]
There are 1 results for database in wikichess.
Kieran Child (1600)
Na3 e5 Nb5
The most common move on my database, but I can't see any reason why. The knight will just track back to c3 with white two tempi down.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
FICGS : database , Encyclopedia : database , Wikipedia : database , Dmoz : database , Google : database , Yahoo : database
I'm not afraid of Spassky. The world knows I'm the best. You don't need a match to prove it. (Bobby Fischer)
In Chess, as it is played by masters, chance is practically eliminated. (Emanuel Lasker)
Chess holds its master in its own bonds, shackling the mind and brain so that the inner freedom of the very strongest must suffer. (Albert Einstein)
Back to FICGS , Wikichess