fide
FICGS - Search results for fide
There are 350 results for fide in the forum.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-08 13:10:47)
Things to be implemented...
Hello to all... and thank you for your confidence in this very new server (when no game started yet ! maybe today...)
I expected a high average rating, but not so much :)
The last update provoked the first bug -> in this forum. Sorry to all who tried to post here. It should work now.
Here are things to be implemented in the future :
- Vacations (until, time limit by move is 2 months)
- Conditional moves
- A better interface for the forum...
Don't hesitate if you have ideas to improve the website !
Best wishes.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-08 14:49:23)
FICGS titles
As you may have read on TCCMB forum, ICCF officials reacted when they learnt about FICGS titles. My idea was it first to be informative (titles from ICCF/IECG/FIDE), because I think players like to know who they play against, particularly if their opponents are titled. It seems obvious to me that FICGS titles are FICGS ones, not "official", not ICCF or FIDE.. even if words are quite the same (titles are FICGS IM, not IM).
I would like to know what you think about that. Do you think FICGS titles should be renamed (ie. FEM, FIM, FSM, FGM), or do you think there's no possible confusion between FIDE/ICCF/IECG/FICGS titles ? This is an interesting debate I invite you to follow :
http://pub11.bravenet.com/forum/924995304/fetch/552912/
Thank you for your advices.
Per Lea (2006-04-09 11:37:05)
Titles
In my opinion, there are only 2 official sets of titles in the chess world, belonging to the only officialy accepted world-wide chess organisations: ICCF and FIDE.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-10 12:53:29)
FICGS and internet
Hello to all & thanks again for support.
I announced FICGS starting into main chess forums (FIDE, TCCMB, Talkchess, France-Echecs...), now working on search engines.
Feel free to talk about it in other forums (in your country or chessclub) and to your chessfriends... Website success is here, and the more players, the more players :)
Thank you in advance. Have good games !
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-12 11:24:03)
FEM, FIM, FSM, FGM
What do you think about all titles not from FIDE / ICCF to be renamed with 'F' letter added. I tried to add 'I' for IECG, but this is really not convenient for the eye... :/ (see the new rating list)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-12 14:02:49)
Solution...
One solution could be to display titles from organizations in separated columns named FICGS, ICCF, FIDE, IECG etc... (as Chessfriend do) It's quite heavy for the rating list page :/ So the idea was to display the player's highest title only, and player is free to mention his titles in his own informations page.
That's not a completely satisfying solution, I agree...
Hannes Rada (2006-04-12 19:15:19)
Titles
>> One solution could be to display titles from organizations in separated columns named FICGS, ICCF, FIDE, IECG etc... (as Chessfriend do) It's quite heavy for the rating list page :/ So the idea was to display the player's highest title only, and player is free to mention his titles in his own informations page.
I think that's the best idea. Maybe you can use smaller fonts, so that all information can be displayed on that page.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-13 15:46:55)
New Titles
Hello Paul-Iosif.
Interesting new idea. In my opinion, there are too many titles & titled players already from official & "non-official" organizations. I think this is a mistake from FIDE / ICCF they couldn't remedy anymore. Titles from other organizations and particularly IECG are not really a problem "more", cause they are hard to achieve (rare), but I don't think this could be so attractive for players. To get a title is a reward itself. Maybe even EM title shouldn't exist.
But I think that ie. a KM title (over GM) could be an interesting idea !
Anyway, I'm ok with the commission idea, we'll vote that too.
Another interesting & controversial idea is (as IECG do) titles not to be awarded for life ! If player's rating decrease, he could lost his title... but I don't think this is very fair.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-14 04:54:25)
Proposal from a visitor (anonymous)
" >>> Hi Thibault
Congratulations for the launch of your new CC server!
I fully support your initiative and hope I will join very soon.
Meanwhile I would like to share some ideas about the Ficgs
Titles, which I also fully and unconditionally support.
My proposal is to adopt/or "recognize" any title awarded
by FIDE/ICCF/IECG as a FGM, FSIM, FIM, FEM titles.
(e.g. not just IECG IM = FIM, but all others too).
That is, a ICCF GM should be named FGM much as a FIDE GM,
or IECG GM (or SIM, IM or EM for CC).
There shouldn't be special treatment to those players
with a title from FIDE/ICCF
Then, to differentiate them, there could be a color
scheme or a footnote explaining the procedence of
the title: FGM (ICCF) ...FSIM (IECG) and simply FSIM for
the truly SIM title obtained at FICGS.
In adition, those players who do not have a title,
but have norms either at FIDE/ICCF/IECG (my case ;)
either will have them "homologated" (as the titles are)
or better, when/if the title has been awarded later, his Ficgs
title will be "updated" to the newly awarded title
(by FIDE/ICCF/IECG), which must be the highest of
them all (as in IECG SIM > ICCF IM > FEM ..etc)
This way FICGS will be the first organization
to homologate norms and titles in CC world ;) <<< "
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-14 05:16:26)
re: Proposal
What do we call "legitimacy", "official" ? This is quite subjective. In my opinion each organization can create his own titles and choose to recognize titles from other ones. IECG titles are recognized by FICGS, but it's obvious titles from FIDE / ICCF have more value in players mind (legitimacy is not the subject), and players from everywhere could appreciate this distinction. Anyway the FICGS council will discuss about that.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-14 16:07:16)
"Blitz" cup...
Thank you Heinz Georg, for the files you sent to me.
Now I understand better the work and ideas of Reimund Lutzenberger in Chessfriend.com, a great experimentation field for sure...
I first concluded some things not to do in FICGS WCH. In example, a player rated 2500 (even provisional rating from fide) shouldn't have to play in the first stage against a low-rated player in a world championship [but that could be possible in a cup tournament cycle]. So I'll add special rules for high rated players (who are not qualified for the WCH knockout tournament) to begin directly in a 2nd stage tournament...
I agree with Dinesh, the aim is not to use the same formulas, even good ones. Anyway I think we can find new interesting (better :)) ones. But as the WCH is already a rapid tournament cycle, the CUP could be an unrated "blitz" (30 days per game with no increment, or even 10 days + 1 hour / move) knockout (2 games / match + playoffs) !! Something quite "brutal" and unfair between correspondence chess & classical rythms. What do you think ?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-30 13:23:44)
1st SM chess tournament, elo 2443
The first FICGS CHESS SM tournament just started !
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_SM__000001.html
3 ICCF titled players, 1 FIDE GM, 1 IECG titled player, and 2 'newbies'.. :)
FEM norm : 3 points, FIM norm : 3.5 points, FSM norm : 4 points, FGM norm : 4.5 points...
Have good games !
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-02 17:48:34)
Go rules
Hello Lionel. I just read the 1988 version of the official rules of the Chinese Weiqi Association.
The point here is to play with the most interesting & fair rules, not 'official' ones or others if it could be improved...
Note that FICGS chess rules have a peculiarity : 50 moves rules isn't applied if the mate can be forced. FICGS chess world championship rules are not (of course) the rules used by FIDE. I spent much time thinking about rules which are IMO the best thing in this server and I think most players will appreciate these points.
I think avoiding draws in Go is interesting because energy consuming could be too different in some games and lead to unfair situations in tournaments.
Hash keys don't solve all problems, 'superko' situations could remain as draw, furthermore these special rules could avoid any ambiguity. It is clear, it brokes 'symmetry' and I feel it is fair enough.
Then, rules exist to be enforced ! :) .. More seriously, I'm not convinced these new rules don't make sense, even if it needs adjustments. Still inquiring, but unless I find (or you convince me :)) a solid argument in another way, I think I'll apply them.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-14 13:15:33)
FICGS 1st chess world championship
Hello Heinz-Georg !
It's only a logical extension to the rule that divide the championship in a round-robin and a knockout (for the 8 best rated players) tournament. Of course, there's no rule that fit to everyone, only choices... I hope to make the most balanced ones for the whole site.
By this rule, high rated players have a stage less to play (that they would probably win) and it limits the rating gaps (otherwise it would be more like a cup). In most wch competitions, winners and high rated players/teams are qualified for an advanced stage in the tournament.. A quite common and logical system, used everywhere from football world cup [winner qualified for quarter final] to Roland-Garros [qualifications stage], FIDE world championship etc... 2300 rule is a statistical choice, used in IECG too with more parameters. (nevertheless at IECG high rated players can choose to play the first stage too, but IMO it's quite complicate)
I hope to make it as simple and attractive as possible, believe me ;) Of course (and it is mentioned in the rules- preliminaries) rules could still evolve if improvements are decided by the [future] council.
The only negative point is, indeed, only 2300+ players can play the 1st wch, that is in a way not a "complete" championship. But compared to all other positive points (first, everyone can play now), and as 2nd wch starts at the same time, I think this choice is best.
What I think to do is to send all tournament tables to players who registered on 2006 june 16. If finally there are players who don't want to play it, they'll just have to tell me within days, responding by email. It should avoid any forfeit.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-15 16:36:17)
Criteria
Hello Dorel and Daniel.
As you noticed, rating is quite important in FICGS world championship cycle (particularly established ratings, obtained from IECG / ICCF or after 9 games finished in FICGS) !
I think these rules are really the best choice in order to designate a world champion. It's more logical IMO to favour players who obtained previously the best results in FICGS and recognized organizations, and consequently a high rating. It takes time, of course. Even very strong players starting with a 1700 rating won't achieve a 2300 established rating before months !
Criterias in FICGS wch are (from most important to least) :
1) Winner of the previous cycle (qualify for the final match)
2) The eight best established ratings (play the KO tournament)
3) Points obtained in the wch tournaments
4) The tournament entry rating (TER)
Of course, there are some provisional ratings that will increase a lot, but it is not possible to grant a 2300 rating to any player saying so. It's already a lot of time gained that ratings from FIDE, ICCF, IECG be recognized.
Finally it is the same in IECG / ICCF : it's very hard to achieve a high rating, it's very hard to directly qualify for a 2nd stage too, it takes months, probably years in email chess...
Now, please consider this, if we start 1st wch at stage 1 : It won't change anything for your play, as the 1st stage of the 2nd wch is exactly the same... 2300+ players won't play before months... and if the rule is changed about 2300 mark and everyone playing 1st stage, probably all games for 2300+ players won't be rated with a 100% result... and at last it will be harder for you to qualify for 2nd stage...
It is a hard work to write rules as fair, balanced and interesting as possible. Rules can't satisfy everyone, sorry about that.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-16 14:13:29)
Statistics, ELO and performances
Time and ratings will answer to that... It takes a few months for ratings to find themselves ! The same in FIDE and wher'ever...
Next rating list will be calculated on july 1st. :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-17 12:39:45)
Correspondence chess
Hello Wayne.
Correspondence chess is definitely a game of patience...
Note : When you register, you can enter your rating ! The rules state a rating not from FIDE / IECG / ICCF gives at most a 1700 rating... So you could have started with a 1700 rating ! Anyway in july (after the next rating calculation) you can play stronger tournaments... and so on..
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-04 01:25:41)
Go rating list
Hello Sebastian.
So it was a GO rating about Ion... (I did not understand that :/)
Still thinking about a Go rating list... If I implement something would it be better to have only informative ratings (from federations) or rating calculated from the games played here (probably not very relevant) ?
Anyway, players who didn't play a single chess game with a rating <1700 (~not from FIDE / IECG / ICCF) won't appear on the chess rating list in a while.
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 (2006-08-01 22:32:16)
United Kingdom = 1 code, 1 flag
Hello to all.
Sorry, I definitely made a mistake offering both United Kingdom and England-Scotland-Wales-Northern Ireland flags... The four are not official countries... I had the same problem with Québec/Canada & Puerto Rico/USA.
Everyone will have GBR code (and flag), but feel free to ask another country flag if it doesn't fit to you.
Thibault
"Hello Thibault, Thanks for trying. I did think it would get to be a bit confusing. The United Kingdom and Great Britain issue is a difficult one to explain. (...) we can get "heated" when our seperate nationhood and identity are not recognised. But this is chess and the International Correspondence Chess Federation has the motto, "we are all friends" and FIDE has "we are one people" as its motto. So avoiding the mire of nationalism let's just get on with the game without frontiers.
You can't please everyone. This is still a good place to play chess."
Thanks ! :)
Benjamin Aldag (2006-08-17 19:42:02)
Ratings ???!!!
Hello,
i have a question about the Rating-System here. There are many players here, with an offical FIDE or NATIONAL ratingnumber under 1800. Some of these players have here at FICGS a ratingnumber over 2000 !!! Of course, this is correspondence-chess, but it would be a nice ratingfeature, to include the official FIDE/NATIONAL ratingnumber at the FICS-Ratingformula.
Benny
Thibault de Vassal (2006-08-17 21:57:51)
Ratings FIDE / ICCF
Hello Benjamin.
These players probably have an established correspondence chess rating over 2000 at ICCF or IECG. Players can't be forced to specify their FIDE rating, but they can do it in the 'player informations' text area.
Elmer Valderrama (2006-08-25 13:08:31)
bug: en-passant captures
In the ongoing games of players Herr, Jeff v Sarihan, Sefa
FICGS_CHESS_RAPID_C_000004 and FIGCS_CHESS_CLASS_G_000003
there is an "en-passant" capture (move 10.dxc6) which is not
allowed by the chess rules (as I know them, maybe FIDE
Congress has already changed them ;)
The pawn c was first moved to c6 (3...c6) and then to c5 (9...c5)
Somehow, the player Herr managed to capture the pawn
by playing 10.dxc6 after 9...c5, which was accepted
by both the player Sarihan and the interface ..(!?!)
And the same happened in the game Ducreux, Regis v Sarihan, Sefa
FIGCS_CHESS_CLASS_F_000007, this time pawn c was moved
twice again (2...c6 and 10...c5) and captured ("of course")
by 11. dxc6.. 8()
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-06 15:43:12)
FIDE WCH : Kramnik vs. Topalov
Do you believe it ? .. now it's most probably almost sure :-)
We'll have a new FIDE-Classical world champion in a few weeks !
A reminder : This will be a 12-games match, taking place from September 21 to October 13 in the capital of Kalmykia (whose president is FIDE president : Kirsan Ilyumzhinov himself), Elista. In case of equality, four rapid games will be played, if equality again two blitz games will be played and finally a sudden death blitz game. The prize fund of one million US dollars will be equally divided between Vladimir Kramnik and Veselin Topalov, whatever the result. The looser won't play the next world championship tournament (quite strange).
Anyway, that's a great thing for chess, even if I'm not very optimistic for the next FIDE world championship cycles, particularly if the world champion has to play a knockout tournament, instead of a classical 12 or 24 games match...
My favourite in this match is still Kramnik because of his style, but Topalov is really getting stronger IMO... It will be a hard match !
Any predictions about the result & games ? .. Will Vladimir Kramnik play his Berlin defense in the Ruy Lopez again...
Alarich Lenz (2006-09-13 11:07:04)
Elo calculation
why did my provisional rating
(fide 2196) change, despite the fact that i didnt loose a singl game until now?
best regards
al
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-15 03:08:36)
Ratings used
It's logical IMO to consider OTB ratings if we all play in OTB conditions, without computer assistance... FIDE or self-estimated OTB ratings should prevail over CC ratings (ICCF, FICGS or so) for the pairings.
Dirk Ghysens (2006-09-18 10:33:56)
Not all, Henri
I know of two exceptions:
1. Yelena Dembo, FIDE rating 2466, WGM, IM, and a GM norm; rating at Gameknot 1775;
2. Marius Ceteras, FIDE rating 2427, FM (he missed IM title due to a strange decision by FIDE officials), very well-known correspondence chess personality, chess publisher, organiser etc.; rating at Gameknot 1740 (not in top 2000 there and loses regularly against 1800 rated patzers).
Unfortunately Yelena Dembo is no longer playing at Gameknot; they threw her out.
Also Marius Ceteras has no ongoing games there during the past month.
So you may be right after all: most players above 1600 are using a chess engine (except the WIMs, WGMs, FMs, and IMs rated below 1800), and certainly all players above 1800 (with one possible exception, a WIM from Holland/Russia, who managed a rating slightly above 1800, but she got thrown out also, for being a nuisance).
BTW, it boggles my mind why the use of tablebases is allowed there; unlike engines, tablebases tell you the perfect move to play and what the outcome will be with 100% certainty.
Thomas Gilbreath (2006-09-18 12:55:35)
My friends at FICGS:
I am a little concerned, yet understanding, of your feelings about the possibility of cheating in our proposed match. Please understand that there are two sides to the suspicion coin. For those of you who are not familiar with the GameKnot website, let me assure you that I will only be putting up players who I am familiar with, and who have proven themselves to play honorably. I am a three year veteran of GameKnot, and play on the site daily. I will be selecting my team from players whom I feel confident will conduct themselves within the rules we agree on. The intent of arranging this match is NOT to simply put up all of our master level players and attempt to whitewash you guys 100-0. The intent is to provide as MANY matches of ALL ratings ranges for a fun, competetive match. If we lose every match we will have no hard feelings towards you. As the game results in our proposed match will have no bearing on ratings changes, we view the match as a simple, friendly exercise. So, having said all of that, we hope that FICGS will offer up as many people as possible, and Thibault and myself will pair them with my guys in such a way that is FAIR and equitable to both sides. Should anyone here at FICGS have any questions, please feel free to post them here or in the GameKnot forum (in the GameKnot Related threads). Thanks:) - Thomas
Dinesh De Silva (2006-09-29 13:03:02)
Psycho(logical) games by Topalov's team?
[moderator : please don't copy exact content (news, articles..) from other websites]
Common toilet for both players.
29.09.2006 The Appeals Committee of FIDE has taken a decision on protest by the Bulgarian delegation who, after viewing the video tapes, stated that Kramnik would visit the toilet too often. A common toilet will be opened for both players.
The Appeals Committee : FIDE Deputy President IM Georgios Makropoulos, Continental President for Americas FM Jorge Vega, FIDE Vice President Zurab Azmaiparashvili.
More - http://www.chessbase.com
Dinesh De Silva (2006-09-29 13:09:10)
Psycho(logical) games?...........
Silvio Danailov.,
Manager of the Bulgarian team says:
To all mass media
Ladies and Gentlemen,
After we got acquainted with the ruling of the Appeals Committee of the Topalov vs. Kramnik world championship match we deem it necessary to point out the following:
The ruling in its present form is not satisfactory to us since it practically does not result in any change. Mr. Kramnik will be able to visit the new bathroom an unlimited number of times without being subject to further control.
We would accept the current relaxation rooms to continue to be used provided that the presence of controllers in both rooms is ensured.
When the two players need to go to the bathroom, they should be accompanied by an assistant arbiter.
The checks carried out in the relaxation rooms were made only by experts of the Organizing Committee, whereas our experts were present as observers and only after the second game.
We find it difficult to understand why is it that the accredited journalists are denied access to the video tapes from the relaxation rooms.
The World Champion Veselin Topalov is outraged by the suspicious behavior of his opponent Mr. Vladimir Kramnik who in actual fact takes his most significant decisions in the bathroom.
Despite the above, in the name of the chess game and out of respect to FIDE, to Kalmikia and the millions of chess lovers, Veselin Topalov is willing to continue his participation in the match provided that measures to guarantee fair play are taken.
If the match were to continue, the World Champion would refrain from shaking hands with Mr. Kramnik before the games and would not take part in joint press conferences with him. Veselin Topalov will make statements for the media separately.
We look forward to receiving your response by 14.30 h hoping that it will give concrete answers to the questions that we pose.
28.09.2006
Elista Sincerely:
Silvio Danailov
Manager of the Bulgarian team
Dinesh De Silva (2006-09-29 13:14:25)
Kramnik's team says...........
Kramnik threatens to stop playing the match......
29.09.2006 Statement from the team of Vladimir Kramnik, rejecting the decision of the Appeals Committee of FIDE : "The protests of the Topalov team and the suspicions in the press release of Mr. Topalov are utterly disgraceful and are touching Mr. Kramnik’s privacy."
Elista, 29 September 2006
Open Letter to FIDE President H.E. Kirsan Iljumshinov
Copied to Executive Committee of Kalmykia Mr. Valery Bovaev, Chief Arbiter Mr. Geurt Gijssen, Russian Chess Federation
Dear Mr. President,
The Appeals Committee of the World Championship Match between Veselin Topalov and Vladimir Kramnik made the following decision on the protest of the Topalov Team:
“to close both the toilets in the players rest rooms and to open another toilet that will be available only to the two players”
The Kramnik team received the mentioned decision a few hours before the start of game 5 and was officially informed about the protest of Mr. Topalov only yesterday evening, 10 p.m., 28 September 2006. With such a decision the WCC Committee is clearly violating both the rules and regulations of the WCC match and the rights of Mr. Kramnik.
The relevant clause in contract of Mr. Kramnik expels: “FIDE shall provide a rest room and toilette for the players during the WCC match in the playing hall and close to the stage (if possible backstage) to be equipped with a live monitor furnished with coffee and tea as well as with light refreshments.”
The reasons that Mr. Kramnik is entering his own bathroom often is simple: The restroom is small and Mr. Kramnik likes to walk and therefore uses the space of the bathroom as well. The Appeals Committee has been informed about the issue before they decided. It should also be mentioned that Mr. Kramnik has to drink a lot of water during the games.
On the request of Mr. Topalov the agreed live monitors have been removed as well as the shower cabines in the bath rooms. The moves are provided on demonstration boards only. The substance of Mr. Topalov protests (dated 22, 24 and 28 September 2006) were basically always met by the approval of the Appeals Committee. Everything has been done here to satisfy Mr. Topalov’s requests.
On a regulary basis the restrooms and toiletts are heavily checked by specialists, obviously local police forces. This goes together with the arrival of the players. The arbiters are observing all the measures. One representative of each team has the right of being present in order to observe the activities. The playing area is banned from signals and the glas wall protects from any kind of view contact and/or body language. There is not a single reason or evidence to believe that a player would have any kind of cheating possibilities.
It is and was no problem for the organization to assure all necessary measures in order to avoid any kind of cheating. By starting the match both participants agreed all the playing conditions de facto and de jure and the conditions are therefore legally binding. Any change of the playing conditions without a good reason would in our understanding request the approval of both players which is not the case here.
Mr. Kramnik believes that the latest decision should increasingly concern the world of chess as it shows very clearly and once again the biased stand of the Appeals Committee members involved. In person: Mr. Makropolous, Mr. Azmaiparashivili (well known as a close friend to Mr. Danailov), Mr. Gelfer (now replaced by Mr. Vega). Therefore Mr. Kramnik requests to exchange the mentioned persons immediately. Enough is enough.
We would like to add that the recent decision not only insults Mr. Kramnik but is clearly critizing both the excellent work of the local organisation at Elista and the nominated arbiters. Yesterday evening the chief arbiter and the head of the excutive committee once again confirmed that the indirect accusations of cheating are nonsense.
The protests of the Topalov team into the direction of Mr. Kramnik and the suspicions in the press release of Mr. Topalov are utterly disgraceful and are touching Mr. Kramnik’s privacy. We do not think that the Topalov team has any right of getting access to the recordings. This shall be job of the nominated arbiters only.
The Topalov team includes a parapsychologist and more people which are obviously having no other tasks as to distract and to insult Mr. Kramnik especially since their team is realizing that Mr. Topalov finds himself in a difficult situation. This is what we call an utterly unfair behaviour which is not in accordance with the FIDE Code of Ethics. The decision taken by the Appeals Committee can only be seen as another attempt to disturb Mr. Kramniks concentration since it is difficult to understand what kind of improvement it shall be to have one toilet instead of two.
Our team does not trust the objectivity of the Appeals Committee anymore. Therefore it makes no sense for us to bring a protest to this table and Mr. Kramnik strongly insists once again that the members of the Appeals Committee will be changed immediately and that the heads of the Organizing Committee are taking their responsibilities.
In the meanwhile Mr. Kramnik will stop playing this match as long as FIDE is not ready to respect Mr. Kramnik’s rights, in this case to use the toilet of his own restroom whenever he wishes to do so.
Further and more detailed legal investigations are already in process.
On behalf of Vladimir Kramnik
Yours sincerely,
Carsten Hensel
(Manager to Vladimir Kramnik, Classical World Chess Champion)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-29 13:19:45)
FIDE world championship (suspicions)
A "toiletgate" : Kramnik visiting the bathroom unreasonably often (according to Bulgarian delegation), video surveillance in rest rooms, Topalov threatening to stop the match, FIDE decisions (common toilets, players accompanied...), now Kramnik threatening to stop the match !
Tension is high, reminds us old memories :) ..
Can this world chess championship be finished yet ??
http://www.chessbase.com
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-29 15:57:14)
Fischer vs. Spassky ?
Vladimir Kramnik did not play game 5 !
All this reminds me the first match Fischer vs. Spassky... In a documentary, Boris Spassky said he lost the match when he accepted Fischer's new conditions (ie. playing in another room) in order to continue to play...
Seems to be quite the same situation here...
Now who made the mistake : Kramnik, Topalov or FIDE... I hope game 5 will be replayed.
Dinesh De Silva (2006-09-29 16:56:32)
Re:
If game number 5 is declared a loss for Kramnik due to forfeit, then Kramnik made a bad choice by not playing, as it's almost a free point for Topalov who was 2 points adrift. It would seem Topalov's team's psychological warfare/psychological trap has won over by closing the gap. If game number 5 is replayed, Kramnik has gained the upper hand in psychology, and Topalov's team's supposed psychology has backfired on them. I think FIDE is in a very awkward position. FIDE should clearly state who's accusations are true or false and make immediate, clear decisions regarding the whole situation. Otherwise, the World Championship will be seen as a real fiasco.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-30 03:31:40)
Topalov vs. FIDE vs. Kramnik
I agree with you, Nigel.
Obviously Topalov's team 'manipulates' FIDE against Kramnik. Worked quite well... But now the situation seems to be best for both Topalov and Kramnik... If the match does not continue Kramnik will stay clear classical World Chess Champion (3-1) with a new legitimacy, Topalov will stay clear FIDE World Chess Champion (playing the best chess) and FIDE will remain... the organizer of chess championships in Kalmykia... :/
Finally, only FIDE made a clear mistake during the event, but is it so important... Kramnik wins, Topalov wins, Ilyumzhinov always wins...
I hope the match will continue but I'm not very optimistic.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-30 03:39:05)
Vladimir Kramnik - Open letter
Open Letter To
FIDE President
Kirsan Iljumshinov
Russian Chess Federation
Elista, 29. September 2006
Requests of Vladimir Kramnik
• To proceed with GAME 5
Clause 3.17.1., Schedule 2 of the contract:
“All protests must be submitted in writing to the Appeals Committee not more than 2 hours after the relevant playing session.”
The protest made by the Topalov Team were not made within this window after game 4 (27 September 2006) but only hit the FIDE Office and the Appeals Committee on the rest day (28 September 2006). Therefore the protests are not even relevant and should have been rejected by the Appeals Committee immediately.
Clause 3.18.3., Schedule 2 of the contract:
“After the World Chess Championship Committee agrees with the Organizers on the arrangements in respect of the tournament hall, facilities etc. etc. etc……., no objections from the participants shall be acceptable as long as the conditions are in accordance with the rights of the players granted in their agreements.”
This clause clearly underlines the statement made in today’s Open letter: “By starting the match both participants agreed all the playing conditions de facto and de jure and the conditions are therefore legally binding. Any change of the playing conditions without a good reason would in our understanding request the approval of both players which is not the case here.”
Therefore it is clear that the Appeals Committee took a completely wrong decision and was obviously not even aware of the Rules and Regulations. The decision of Chief Arbiter Mr. Gijssen to forfeit game 5 was clearly based on a wrong decision of the Appeals Committee and shall be nullified.
Mr. Kramnik is ready to continue the match and to play the 5th game (with a leading score of 3:1) on the conditions that were accepted prior to the start of the match.
• Toilet issue
The toilets connected to the restrooms shall be opened again. This request is in accordance with clauses 3.17.1. and 3.18.3 (see above) and in the general understanding that by starting of the match both participants agreed to all the playing conditions. Any change of the playing conditions without a good reason would require the approval of both players which is not the case here.
Mr. Kramnik is ready to accept even stricter controls by sealing the toilets before and after inspections. Inspections shall be done before and after each game.
• Exchange of members of the Appeals Committee
We repeat that the Kramnik team does not trust the objectivity of the Appeals Committee anymore. It is evident from this letter and our first Open Letter today that the existing Appeals Committee is biased and incompetent. Mr. Kramnik strongly insists once again that the members of the Appeals Committee will be exchanged immediately.
• Access to Recordings
As Mr. Kramnik in the press conference stated he did not sign a contract for acting in a reality show. The recordings shall be observed by the arbiters. Neither Team Topalov nor Team Kramnik shall have access to the recordings. Investigations shall be in the sole responsibility of the Arbiters.
• Requested Apology
Last but not least Mr. Kramnik believes that Mr. Danailov should apologize to Mr. Kramnik in writing. Remarks such as:
“If the match were to continue, the World Champion will refrain from shaking hands with Mr. Kramnik before the games and will not take part in joint press conferences with him.” and “Veselin Topalov is disturbed by the suspicious behavior of his opponent Mr. Vladimir Kramnik who takes his most significant decisions in the bathroom.” are clearly insulting.
On behalf of Vladimir Kramnik
Yours sincerely,
Carsten Hensel
(Manager to Vladimir Kramnik, Classical World Chess Champion)
Nigel Davies (2006-09-30 09:07:48)
Legitimacy
This is (or should have been) the real point of these championships from FIDE's point of view. Rather than being seen as a banana republic with a paper champion their aim should have been to establish legitimacy for their cycle and organisation. FIDE established itself by taking over the World Chess Championships with the death of Alekhine. If it can no longer do that, a large part of its raison d'etre disappears, in my view.
I'm not sure they realise it yet, but if Topalov 'wins' from his 1-3 position with some trumped up accusation of cheating, their legitimacy is not enhanced. Quite the opposite in fact.
Kramnik goes home with a very strong claim to being the REAL World Champion (he beat Kasparov in a match) and having allowed FIDE to demonstrate its true colours. I think that the odds of him establishing his own cycle will have improved dramatically, he just needs a sponsor.
Nigel
Nigel Davies (2006-09-30 13:50:51)
Re: Legitimacy
Hi Rodrigo,
I haven't played Kramnik but I met him once; my impression is that he's a proud and rather honourable person. I don't see him organising his own cycle, but there are plenty of people opposed to FIDE who could. This might be just the opportunity they need.
Kramnik couldn't really have refused a 'reunification' match before this, it would have looked like he didn't want to play. But now he's got a strong case that FIDE cannot provide a suitable aegis.
Nigel
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-02 15:06:33)
Chess / FIDE
Why did Kramnik accept to continue this match... Becoming a chess (FIDE) hero ? Prize ?
Finally I would prefer the prize reason... :)
It seems he just resigned the psychological battle against Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, unless he's sure he can contest the final score once the match is over, but it would be harder for sure.
It will be just harder for him to play now... Anyway, the result in this match is not so important, the real issue is future of world chess championships, but in the 'other match' that just began, FIDE scored one more point.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-02 15:11:16)
Kramnik plays under protest
Official statement and protest by V. Kramnik
To FIDE President H.E. Kirsan Iljumshinov
To the WCC Appeals Committee
On 2 October 2006 my manager received the following decision from FIDE:
“Tomorrow, 2 October 2006, at 15.00, the 6th Game of the World Chess Championship Match a Topalov-Kramnik with the score 3:2 in favour of Kramnik, will take place.”
Based on this decision I make the following statement:
I inform that I am ready to proceed playing the match by reserving all my rights. My further participation will be subject to the condition to clarify my rights regarding game five at later stage.
I do not agree with the decision made by FIDE and I formally protest against it. The decisions made on my requests, especially the resignation of the Appeals Committee, opening the toilets to the restrooms again, are chrystal clear admissions of FIDE of having taken a false decision. Logically FIDE admits herewith that it was a mistake to start game five by violating the rules and regulations of the competition and by changing the agreed playing rules and conditions during the match without my approval.
I deeply regret the unsportsmanlike and unequaled behaviour of my opponent whom FIDE donated a victory outside of the board by using dirty tricks.
High level functionaries inside FIDE once again were making the professional part of the chess world a disgraceful playground of their own interests. I strongly believe and hope that the course of these events made it obvious to everyone that drastic changes with regard to the professional management structures inside FIDE are evident.
By deciding just a couple of hours ago I had to assess between my personal interests and the interests of the entire chess world. It is very difficult to play under these circumstances. But I came to the conclusion to proceed under protest because I do not want to disappoint the overwhelming majority of the chess fans which are hoping for the unification since so many years.
I also had in mind the people of Kalmykia which are doing their utmost to organize this match on the highest level possible.
Last but not least I would like to thank very much for all the support I experienced during these days.
Elista, 2 October 2006
Vladimir Kramnik
Classical World Chess Champion
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-02 16:03:25)
FIDE vs. Kramnik
Vladimir Kramnik - Veselin Topalov (game 5)
0-1
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-02 17:46:46)
Re:
"the one true champion" .. until next FIDE wch cycles, where Kramnik will most probably loose his title, simply because he'll have to play a 4 rounds / 16 players knockout tournament (if I understood well, not sure.. :/) that he could even refuse to play ! :)
Let's say he will be the last one true champion. Maybe that's a reason enough to continue the match after all :)
Dinesh De Silva (2006-10-03 01:01:03)
Re:
Thibault, you have made a good observation there. But there's some news that Kirsan might hand over FIDE professional match organization part to Besel Kok, who ran against him at FIDE elections. Kok might decide to have a candidates style of qualifying, instead of knockout.
Marcin Kasperski (2006-10-04 12:27:12)
Exaggerating?
I googled this thread accidentally, and ... I would like to say that some opinions here seem to be going too far.
I am just an amateur player (no FIDE rating, but according to my results on FICS and Playchess I would estimate myself about elo 1900). I play on a few servers including gameknot (my nick there is Mekk). I have never used chess engine there (or anywhere), and I am at the moment rated 1654 on gameknot, I also happened to win and draw some games against 17xx rated players. Surely they were not using engines, if they were, I would lost those games - my results on IECG (where I lost everything I tried to play) show this clearly.
Of course my claim, that I am not using an engine, is just my claim - but you can take a look at my games, if you like...
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-10 16:16:37)
To be continued...
Open Letter
To
FIDE President
H.E. Kirsan Illyumzhinov
To
Head of the 2006 Executive Committee
Mr. Valery Bovaev
Dear Mr President, Gentlemen,
Having received innumerable published and unpublished inquiries I would like to clarify, in the name of Vladimir Kramnik and his team, our position in the decision taken by FIDE regarding the fifth game of the current World Championship match.
As you know Vladimir Kramnik is playing the current match under protest. Nothing has changed in our attitude, which is documented by Kramnik’s actions around the fifth game and our statements, protests and letters:
29.09.2006:
http://www.kramnik.com/eng/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=104
02.10.2006:
http://www.kramnik.com/eng/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=106
04.10.2006:
http://www.kramnik.com/eng/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=107
Consistent with this standpoint Vladimir Kramnik will be playing this match, including a possible tiebreak, up to the last move under protest.
Should the decision of FIDE regarding the fifth game have any influence on the awarding of the World Championship title, with Mr Topalov receiving the title after being granted a free point for the unplayed game, Mr Kramnik declares unequivocally: “I will not recognize Mr Topalov as World Champion under these conditions, and I will take legal action against FIDE at the end of the World Championship.”
The damage done to Mr Kramnik in public opinion (e.g. the slander campaign) after the illegal release of private video images by the then FIDE Appeals Committee or the WCC 2006 Executive Committee to the Topalov team, and the subsequent release of these video images and private information of Mr Kramnik in his restroom to the mass media, as well as the interruption of the match, which broke Mr Kramnik’s concentration and playing rhythm, will all be part of the legal action which will be initiated.
As a sign of good will Mr Kramnik once again requests FIDE to arrange for game five to be played out on the board immediately after game 12. This in our opinion is the only way to alleviate the personal, sporting, judicial and ethical injuries that have been incurred by Mr Kramnik.
Elista, October 10, 2006
On behalf of Vladimir Kramnik
Yours sincerely
Carsten Hensel
(Manager to Vladimir Kramnik, Classical World Chess Champion)
Rodrigo Jaroszewski (2006-10-12 05:38:01)
Kramnik
Oh, forgot to say it, since you commented after posting the moves for g11. You probably read it already, but Kramnik's latest open letter says he'll play through the tiebreaks, even if FIDE doesn't go back on the g5 decision. But if he looses, he'll sue FIDE.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-13 17:57:26)
Kramnik world champion !
Congratulations to Vladimir Kramnik ! ..
I was to say "this is a great day for chess" but I think I'll wait to see how FIDE will manage it... At least this is a great day for Kramnik :)
The story "ends well" at first sight, but can Topalov sue Fide as I read it already...
To be continued.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-14 18:33:37)
Chess and Go diagrams / Forum update
A major update for FICGS forums (& blogs) !
Now you can insert Chess & Go diagrams in messages...
(useful to submit chess problems, analysis and so on...)
See the FAQ in help section - http://www.ficgs.com/help.html - for details, in example here is the position of the last game in the FIDE world chess championship between Veselin Topalov & Vladimir Kramnik, just before Topalov blunder 44. ...Rxc5 ??
ChessPosition (see diagram)
Diagrams format is quite simple (see Help), please note only one diagram / position will be displayed per message.
Also minor bugs (links, search functions) corrected...
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-17 12:43:42)
GM Suat Atalik
GM Suat Atalik is about OTB #100 ranked player in the world (GM FIDE), and one of the first players who registered at FICGS. Ratings & titles are also displayed in an informative way, some other strong players will probably register when it will be possible to play unrated simultaneous games for money, but they'll keep a provisional rating. I still have to separate the rating lists, but provisional ratings aren't displayed the same way already.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-25 11:47:22)
Once upon a time in Kalmykia
An interesting interview of FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov about future of chess, reunification match and other things...
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3448
I can't resist this quote :
Misha Savinov : Bearing in mind successful unification, do you see a chance of Kasparov returning to chess?
Kirsan Ilyumzhinov :
In my opinion, Garry will not return. His age will not permit him returning, chess advanced too far. But, of course, we would all be happy if he returns. Actually, I would be happy if not only Kasparov, but also Spassky and Fischer come back. If they do, I am ready to organize a supermatch of FIDE champions. A good idea, by the way! We’ll invite Vassily Vassilyevich Smyslov, Spassky, Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov, Topalov, Anand, Ponomariov… It is going to be a good supertournament!
Misha Savinov : In Elista?
Kirsan Ilyumzhinov : In Elista. And, probably, it will be 25-minute games, double round-robin. I wonder if Fischer accepts the invitation, what do you think? We will announce the winner a superabsolute champion (laughs)!
Misha Savinov :
One can call it an open championship of Kalmykia…
Kirsan Ilyumzhinov :
Are you suggesting inviting the Kalmyk champion of 1978? I think I could play 25-minute games…
.....
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 (2006-10-28 15:59:37)
Chess quizz :-)
I see the interview (1) was also published on Chessbase news..
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3454
Some other questions...
3/ Will Kasparov return at competitive chess ?
4/ Will Kramnik defend his new FIDE title ?
5/ How many years Kirsan Iljumzhinov will still remain FIDE president ?
6/ Will Fritz 10 beat Kramnik ??
7/ Will chess be solved by a super computer in the next 200 years ?
8/ Who will win the 1st FICGS world championship ? :)
... my answers :
2/ Boris Spassky
3/ Yes !
4/ No
5/ 8 years
6/ No
7/ No
8/ Joker :)
Dinesh De Silva (2006-10-29 16:13:10)
JUDIT POLGAR ..........
Thibault,
Is it possible for Judit Polgar to try/ask for a title shot versus Kramnik?!! If it becomes reality, it might turn out to be a huge attraction. Judit seems to nearing peak form right now. What do FIDE rules say about such a possibility?! Any obstacles?!
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-31 15:47:58)
Chess games belong to the world !
Quite funny (or frightening) to see this kind of discussion now on a Go forum, the excellent godiscussions.com
About ten years ago, FIDE tried to claim Copyright over non-commented chess game records. In an article entitled "Chess Games Belong To The World" (published in The Kibitzer), Tim Harding argued how this would benefit only a few companies like ChessBase. The same thing now might happen in the Go world. (I saw at somes places Go games are not allowed to be free)
Tim Harding's article :
http://www.moyogo.com/blog/2006/10/i-have-no-problem-obeying-law-i-do.html
More on GoDiscussions forum :
http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1323
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-11-13 11:16:00)
Nice endgame
I'm quite confident of to find the solution this week. Currently I think, that after 61...Rh5 62.Kg4! (and not 62.Kf4?!) and after i.e. 62...Rh1 63.Rb6! (63...Ba4 64.e5!) will be the best.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-14 16:47:18)
Kramnik vs. Deep Fritz, 2006
In less than 2 weeks from now, classical & FIDE world champion Vladimir Kramnik will play the best (at least most famous) chess program Deep Fritz 10 !
From november 25 to december 5, 2006 at the Federal Art Hall in Bonn. One million US dollars for Kramnik if he defeats Deep Fritz, half this amount otherwise...
We did not forget the previous match in Bahrain (2002), that ended with a 3-3 score.
Do you feel Fritz improved enough to beat a player like Kramnik, who most probably improved his play too... Will Kramnik play rather different openings than in his match against Topalov ? .. Anyway it should be an interesting match to follow.
A few links :
http://www.kramnik.com/eng/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=95
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2947
Barry Bell (2006-11-22 04:42:46)
Introduction - Anyone4chess.com
My name is Barry and after corresponding with Thibault on my website (www.anyone4chess.com) for the last few days, Thibault suggested I drop by and post something about our website.
Anyone 4 Chess is not a correspondence chess, we call our system an online a turn based chess system (Association – A4C). The site works on a 7 day cycle for moves and you receive no emails that a move has been made however, if you are entered into one of our free tournaments (all tournaments are free and their will never be any cost to play chess on our system) an email is sent to each player in any tournament that the next round is about to begin.
Anyone 4 Chess is an online turn based chess system however, it also hosts the Association dedicated to promoting, supporting and developing an association for webmasters / players who support this type of chess. We believe there is a place for this type of chess (different from correspondence, OTB and real time chess) and the association will work to promote this type of chess following the example of FIDE and other organization to work towards our mandate and goals.
Thanks
Peter Eizenhammer (2006-11-23 16:00:42)
No information and too ambitious
Visiting the homepage one can read some/few lines and is told that anyone4chess is going to "create the rules of chess" (sic!) and wants to be a "chess entity" "following the example of Fide". Wow, very ambitious. Thinking about it I am not so sure if people would be impressed if I told them that I am a GM created by anyone, ah Anyone.
Really, these creative some lines full of hubris could not convince me to register, sorry.
Peter
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 (2006-12-16 04:05:26)
Topalov vs. Kramnik v2, is it worth ?
Responding to myself, according to FIDE rules there could be a match about every 6 months (WCH tournament or Prize funded)...
Obviously good for world champion (and for FIDE), but maybe that's also good for chess after all. What disturbs me more is last result against Deep Fritz :/
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.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-26 15:43:07)
Topalov disqualified for three years ?
Carsten Hensel (Vladimir Kramnik's manager) has submitted a complaint to FIDE, Veselin Topalov would have broken the ethical code of FIDE in a ABC interview.
More in Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3562
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-28 10:47:52)
Cheating : Future is now
An indian player (rated 1900, suddenly 2484) gets ten year ban from FIDE for cheating... Using a bluetooth device stitched into his cap to receive external computer assistance.
Source - http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3573
A new danger for OTB chess... Could suspicion (like Topalov-Kramnik match) kill the game ?
Kieran Child (2007-01-07 12:14:08)
Rating
Would it be possible for the sign-up page to have a feature for entering your rating as a BCF rating rather than FIDE? I'm more used to BCF ratings and had to times it by five and add 80 then subtract 22% of my birthday before entering my rating - 'twould be much easier if the website did it for you.
This is just a suggestion though. I'm aware we're a minority.
Jaimie Wilson (2007-01-08 18:00:37)
ECF ratings
There seem to be two formulae for converting between ECF (formerly the BCF) and FIDE ratings. The old one which still seems to be in use is ECF x 8 + 600 = FIDE ELO. A Newer formula I have seen is ECF x 5 + 1250 = FIDE ELO.
This newer formula rates ECF players higher on the FIDE scale than the old one did. I don't know which is more accurate although I certainly like to believe that the old formula underestimates us a little bit. It's as clear as mud.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-18 11:58:31)
Titles update from FIDE / ICCF / IECG
Hello to all.
A reminder : "It is possible to update the best title obtained from FIDE, ICCF or IECG just by sending an email to FICGS."
Rule 11.8 - http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating
I just updated titles from IECG for Dinesh de Silva (FIM), Harry Ingersol (FIM) and Wolfgang Riemer (FEM). Congrats :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-21 13:59:06)
FICGS titles
Hello Spiros.
FEM, FIM, FSM, FGM are titles awarded by FICGS.
Requirements are not the same as in ICCF but it quite looks like : ICCF titles are EM (Email Master), IM (International Master), SM (Senior Master), GM (Gran Master).
Note : In rating list, a GM player could be a FIDE GM or ICCF GM...
See rules (11.7 - 11.8) :
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating
Best wishes.
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-03 18:09:12)
To Richard & Benjamin
There are dozens of web-server-chess sites where computer use is forbidden.
If you cannot see any interest in computer-assisted play why do you play here ?
Nothing requested you to play here ...
I won't argue on the interest of computer-assisted chess. It's a question of taste and I do completely understand that you do not like it.
Every month there is a new thread in the forum complaining against computer-assisted cheaters or defending the gimmick of the poor computer-assisted idiot unable to play on its own.
This I cannot accept : go away to these numerous sites where computer is forbidden (and real cheaters abound) and let us play according to the rules of this site !
By the way if you wish do choose any engine of your liking and do let it play alone without human intervention a pair of games against any of the 100 best rated players here.
I am ready to bet that the computer alone is probably going to lose both games or at most to get one draw.
Then you will maybe understand why the human touch is decisive in these games.
And as I already said on numerous occasions, when I am going to spend dozens of hours analysing a foregoing game all along months of play I prefer that my opponent won't spoil it due to a pure magnificent and so-human blunder.
Winning against blundering self-comfident purely human opponents has no taste at all IMHO
I prefer fighting hard against one who has all kind of book and computer help assisting him.
Marc
Benjamin Aldag (2007-02-04 22:26:09)
To Marc Lacrosse
Hey guy, come down !
I just say, it makes more fun to play without computer-assistence.
I play here, because i will never reach the level of computerplayers and my opponents are in 99% free of computer-assistence. I dont want to be a slave of my computer and in my opinion is this the right way.
I know 9 people here with an official rating between 1500 and 1600 ELO(DWZ) and here they have a rating between 2200 and 2300. :-D<br
You say, with only computermoves you will never reach the highest level here and i can say - YOU ARE RIGHT !
Players with a FIDE ELO 2200 and higher will have here a rating over 2600 and they will not only play computermoves. But i play chess for two years and have an official FIDE rating of 1822 and believe me, it makes no sense for me to play with computer-assistence.
yk
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-05 12:34:53)
Correspondence chess / OTB chess
Quote : "Players with a FIDE ELO 2200 and higher will have here a rating over 2600 and they will not only play computermoves."
Benny, this is just wrong ;) .. There are many examples, here and everywhere... Best correspondence chess players are not best chess players with computer assistance, they are 'only' the best correspondence chess players.
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 (2007-02-10 15:58:56)
King's indian
Radjabov's good score in Corus 2007 tournament (Wijk aan Zee) gave a second youth to King's indian after Kasparov dropped it about ten years ago. Chessbase now sells a dvd by ex-FIDE world champion Kasimdhzanov.
I still consider this opening as a good OTB weapon, but what do you think about it in modern correspondence chess, particularly after the nice victories by Christophe Léotard during last ICCF world championship.
I think it could be interesting to discuss this opening, why not in Wikichess... What would you play after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O 6.Be2 e5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 (9.Ne1 and 9.b4) ?
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=wikichess&article=4156
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-11 16:42:09)
Topalov suspected
Investigations to come. FIDE & ACP, Pavel Tregubov accusations...
Is Silvio Danailov the 'teddy bear' of Topalov ? :)
The whole story :
http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=741182
Really strange to see Veselin Topalov under attack the same way Vladimir Kramnik was.. by him. To be continued.
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 ?
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-03 13:32:43)
FIDE world championship, Mexico
Here is the decision of the FIDE President (Kirsan Ilyumzhinov) in respect of the World Chess Championship cycle :
http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1277
Now if Kramnik wins in Mexico, Topalov will play his match against him... But if Kramnik loses his title, he (Kramnik) will play a match against the winner.
Conclusion : Topalov will support Kramnik in Mexico :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-09 16:53:11)
GM Ehlvest vs. Rybka
A strange match happened between FIDE GM Jaan Ehlvest (2610) and Rybka, with White playing with 7 pawns in all games...
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=519
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=564
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-10 22:51:55)
Anand virtually ranked #1
After Morelia-Linares 2007 tournament, Viswanathan is virtually ranked #1 on the next FIDE rating list (2007, April). Great achievement :)
Quite funny to see the separated results of Morelia & Linares tournament, particularly performances for Alexander Morozevich (!)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3722
Dagh Nielsen (2007-03-12 03:20:43)
5th Freestyle tournament
Just a short comment on the use of computers in these Freestyle tournaments:
There are two groups of participants:
1) Pure engines (with a book).
2) A somewhat larger group of "centaurs" who play the moves themselves, and use computers to analyse the moves actively.
Please note first, that the engine names behind some of the nicks in the crosstable do not necessarily mean that that participant played as pure engine (it's just an irrelevant effect of the server software somehow, decided by whether the participant had an engine uploaded during registration).
In fact, only two of those 10 who made it to the final (after the playoffs Saturday) are playing as pure engines. All the rest played as centaurs, including Cato the Younger.
This was also the case in the 4th Freestyle tournament: Only two pure engines made it to the final.
However, the pure engines surely made up more than 20% of the starting fields. What is more, these engines are usually operated by engine-chess freaks who have very strong hardware (Hercules01, who made it to the final after the play-offs, is allegedly running a 16-core system).
So my conclusion is: Centaurs perform significantly better than pure engines still. Even at this relatively short time control.
In other words: The human aspect is very much alive and kicking in this kind of chess :-)
I can only recommend interested people to try it out next time. It really is quite a bit of fun!
PS. I was lucky to qualify for the final, playing with nick "Flying Saucers". Also in the final is Corr. GM Arno Nickel (=Ciron) and FIDE GM Yuri Solodovnichenko (2585) (=Engineer). Several finalists have not yet revealed their identities :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-13 00:37:20)
FIDE about time controls
This topic, very discussed in Correspondence Chess forums (see TCCMB), is also debated in FIDE. We may play games with 1 hour + 10 seconds time control in future open tournaments...
http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1288
Any opinion ?
Charlie Neil (2007-03-17 21:18:40)
FIDE time controls
OTB 1 hour plus 10 seconds a move. The Fischer time clock manufacturers will be happy with that.....and it makes my old turnier clock obsolete! I checked out the site and read about the candidate matches in June. Boris Spassky is on the appeals committee. I wonder how he will deal with the ridiculous acussations that no doubt will arise.
Nicola Lupinacci (2007-03-18 00:53:40)
FIDE time controls
In my opinion this time control is too fast...
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-18 02:00:14)
FIDE time controls
I agree, actually this is "1h ko" with no loss on time... (less stress and more Fischer clocks, indeed)
That's a pity, I very like 2 hours / 40 moves. Maybe it's useless in some open tournaments, but in others the quality of the games will be affected undoubtly. I hope it will attract more new chess players, I suppose it is the main goal...
Elmer Valderrama (2007-03-26 20:12:01)
The perfect title
As the title couldn't be more awefull, let's try to improve it:
"Decision Making: Invaluable Lessons Taken from Chess"
by G Kasparov
Instant best-seller.
Although the decisions of splitting from FIDE, creating a ghost
GM association, not defending the WC
in a proper Cycle, and....etc,etc..premature retirement, ..etc ..etc,
don't speak too well about the lessons, let's try and improve it:
"Decision Making: Invaluable Lessons Taken from Chess, With Emphasis
in What Not to Do"
by G Kasparov
A killer.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-01 15:21:45)
Anand number one, or not...
Vishwanathan Anand was announced to be ranked #1 on the next FIDE rating list. Finally, Veselin Topalov is still ranked first on the list that was published yesterday. Protestations by the indian federation... The results of Morelia-Linares should be included in the next list to be published very soon. Quite strange mistake !? :)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3768
Nick Burrows (2007-04-02 10:07:11)
no.1
Maybe Mr Danilov is in charge of Fide's printing press?!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-02 21:52:55)
Anand number 1 !
Here is the FIDE elo, 2007 april list.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3771
1 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2786
2 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2772
3 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772
4 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2762
5 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2759
6 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2757
7 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2747
8 Leko, Peter g HUN 2738
9 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2736
10 Adams, Michael g ENG 2734
11 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2733
12 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2729
13 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2727
14 Navara, David g CZE 2720
15 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2717
16 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2717
17 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2709
18 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2708
19 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2705
20 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2699
21 Akopian, Vladimir g ARM 2698
22 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2693
23 Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter g ROM 2693
24 Short, Nigel D g ENG 2691
25 Sasikiran, Krishnan g IND 2690
Nice to see a player like Morozevich at this level...
Jason Repa (2007-04-10 01:03:22)
Rounders
I did enjoy this movie. I like alot of Edward Norton and John Malkovich's work. Speaking of Malkovich, did you see the comedy "Art School Confidential"? I thought it was hillarious. It's amazing to see the range of that actor. He's played everything from cold-blooded serial killers to effeminate Fine Arts professor's.
Achim Mueller (2007-04-21 14:50:38)
Some answers
1) If the "higher rating" rule is best practise, as some players here do state, why isn't it used at _any_ FIDE tournaments? They have everything from SB, direct result, more wins, more wins with black pieces, but never ever used rating.
2) Even if it may not that easy to play for a draw ... I guess besides the fact that you get half a point as a gift it's also undoubtfull an advantage at least in correspondence chess to _know_ that a draw will help you, if you are the better rated player.
And this is definitely true in a tournament with only 4 players where there is only one qualifier.
Nonetheless you have all the right to use every rule you like. And as long as a player participates he "accepts" theses rules. That's what I also do, though I didn't know before that we are only 4 players and though I wasn't aware of this certain rule before.
But I also have all the rights to make future decisions regarding playing a qualifier here depending on the rules.
Ciao
acepoint
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-21 19:46:04)
Rules
Why FIDE didn't use such rules... Interesting question : IMO because OTB (over the board) chess is simply so different ! .. It is quite logical to use SB in open tournaments because it helps the player who is probably best "at this particular moment", meaning the best player of the event. In correspondence chess, it is quite different, I think using SB makes less sense here.
About draws, I think there's a real trap :) .. A player who thinks 'I must draw' will have difficulties against a good CC player IMO. And you probably noticed the players ratings in 7-players groups.. Even if all players fight, in most groups only 2 or 3 players probably really hope to win the tournament, the others have (at least) an opportunity to play stronger players and win some points... And you may be right (Don), 11 players groups may be more interesting. Maybe the next one...
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-22 12:32:08)
win against Anand :-)
Great & congrats ! :) .. such a thing does not happen every day. It's a real honor to beat a top class player, even in a simul - and with Black. (would have been even more pleasant in "real life" for sure)
Do you still play some FIDE events / tournaments, Marc ?
Nick Burrows (2007-04-23 01:50:31)
my 64 pence worth...
I must admit that i have always disliked the Fide WC rule. It seems to be there to protect the champion rather than creating a level playing field.
The fide WC is also played over 24 games rather than 5 in the groups here.
My humble opinion is that for the WC groups of 11/13 or double round robin, would be fairer and give the skillfull players more oportunity to demonstrate that skill.
It is quite likely that in a group of 5, with just 1 or 2 critical games - the better player could finish even and be eliminated. Fine for class groups, but surely the in a 'World Championships' its worth exploring a little extra detail to find the real deserving winner.
A healthy debate! No matter what, thankyou for the provision of such a great site :)
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 ?! ;)
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 :)
Albert H. Alberts (2007-05-26 01:33:41)
Deep Fritz vs. Deep Junior
Thibault:
Maybe the reason is that ICGA Ilyumzhinov=FIDE=ICGA=Chessbase=Fritz stage an advertisement campaign with Fritz-10 the New Ruling WC? In that case the 100 000 comes back triple. Who knows. Computer chessmen/women know that Rybka is unbeatable at the moment.
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 :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-16 02:26:35)
WCH rules
Hannes, any tournament, any championship, any game (!) is a contract that players accept before to play. As Kramnik said, the same for Topalov about FIDE WCH in Mexico... Peter made it. That is fair ! .. IMHO
Dirk Ghysens (2007-06-16 04:06:23)
Not "dead man's defense"
This is not a case of dead man's defense, since the game started less than 20 days ago and they are at move 86. From international postal games I remember waiting more than 20 days for my opponent's 1st move.
While it is allowed, certainly nobody can be obliged to consult 6 men tablebases.
I'd also like to point out that the FIDE rules (which are mentioned in the FICGS rules) forbid a player to make disturbing remarks, and that a game cannot end by requesting your opponent to resign.
Also posting such comments about ongoing games, trying to discredit the opponent, is unethical. The complainer should forfeit the game.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-18 15:19:55)
FICGS vs. IGAME.RU
Thanks for joining us Janos, we'll need you undoubtly :)
It will be a great match, just looking like Russian vs. The World... About 30 russian players registered these last 2 days, with several FIDE / ICCF masters (GM/IM). We need more 2300+ players !! :)
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
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-24 19:29:09)
FIDE world championship cycle
An interesting article about the new FIDE world championship cycle in Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3948
Albert H. Alberts (2007-06-25 14:48:57)
Deep Fritz vs. Deep Junior
FICGS: Junior won over Fritz Elista 2007. Very sharp but correct remark by M.Aigner: people that bought Fritz will now want to have Junior too the FIDE-approved champ by K. Ilyumzinov= ICGA=FIDE=CHESSBASE=FRITZ(=Junior?).
However: he future champ will be the program with the best BOOK with sharp novelties. The future world tournament champ will be the one who knows/WROTE this book. It is like in cycling: you can have a great "bike" (chess engine) but to win the Tour the France you still have to peddle. That champ/novelty finder/writer/head player can be one and the same person. Great news for the sport I think.The new "Fischer" will come.
Albert H.Alberts, www.howtofoolfritz.com
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-27 21:18:36)
FICGS vs. IGAME.RU, the games
Hello to all.
The friendly match between FICGS & IGAME.RU teams just started :)
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__FICGS_VS_IGAME_RU_MATCH.html
I'd like to thank Sergey Pligin for organizing this match and all players who registered to play. I apologize to the players who couldn't play :/ .. 25 boards was not enough this time. To build FICGS team I selected players with the highest ratings but one cause his rating should be clearly >2000 already. Also IM Mark Noble plays at table 6 because his opponent is another FIDE IM.
I wish good games to everyone, this is a great opportunity for us to meet russian chessfriends.
Amici Sumus !
... quote of the day : "Top boards make the show, last ones win matches." :-)
Here are the complete teams :
FICGS :
1. Thibault de Vassal # 1
2. Michael Aigner # 139
3. Peter Schuster SM # 323
4. Janos Helmer # 47
5. Miguel Pires # 83
6. Mark Noble IM # 1991
7. Leszek Tymcio # 2151
8. Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff # 142
9. Silviu Nenciulescu # 1319
10. William Taylor # 1232
11. Poulerik Jorgensen # 940
12. Wayne Lowrance # 135
13. Edward Kotlyansky # 1140
14. Christophe Czekaj # 1193
15. Konstantin Dudulec # 1329
16. Robert Mueller # 1233
17. Josef Riha # 157
18. Dan Rotaru # 1394
19. Garvin Gray # 1363
20. Nick Burrows # 1643
21. Vadim Khachaturov # 1078
22. Daniel Khayman # 1032
23. Gaetano Laghetti # 138
24. Alexander Nent # 1411
25. Ilmars Cirulis # 533
IGAME.RU :
1. Sumets Andrey, Member # 2137, GM
2. Pljusnin Ivan, Member # 2147
3. Pligin Sergey, Member # 2189
4. Doinikov Owl, Member # 2191
5. Romitsin Nikolay Sergeevich, Member # 2159
6. Vovk Andrey, Member # 2144, IM
7. Yunusov Adkham, Member # 2124
8. Pavlikov Andrey Nikolayevich, Member # 2157
9. Leskiv Miroslav, Member # 2133
10. Domanov Dmitry, Member # 2130
11. Kragujevcanin Stole, Member # 2148
12. Silkin Aleksey, Member # 2198
13. Orlov Sergei, Member # 2207
14. Kim Vladimir, Member # 2139
15. Gerasimov Vladimir, Member # 2190
16. Larin Igor, Member # 2193
17. Zarullin Ivan, Member # 2203
18. Filimonov Evgeny, Member # 2176
19. Pezikov Evgeny, Member # 2174
20. Stork Denis, Member # 2180
21. Mancubov Boris, Member # 2156
22. Ilyuschenko Yury, Member # 2168
23. Prokopenko Alex, Member # 2182
24. Basiliev Iouri, Member # 2205
25. Shpakovsky Alexander, Member # 2185
Edit : There was a mistake while building the games, I had to make a replacement at board 23.
Dan Rotaru (2007-06-28 03:30:01)
IGAME team
Apart from Member # can the ratings be revealed for each player: IGAME rating, FIDE / ICCF ratings if available? It would be fair at least to know the strength of our oponents. The rating registered on FICGS for some players is provisional and it doesn't tell anything. IGAME players have free access to this information so it has to be reciprocal.
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 :)
Ivan Zarullin (2007-06-28 07:09:17)
2 Garvin
Hello, Garvin,
most of our players have not got fide rating since they quited active chess before acquiring the rating. Even now most tourneys in Russia are not calculated by fide. Our team is ordered by a player performance on igame. Since our players typically played a hundred of games on igame, this performance most adequately shows our correspondence chess skill.
Ivan Zarullin (2007-06-28 07:34:24)
correction
a typical participant from our team has played a hundred games on our server.
Since Russia has its own title system, the absense of international title can be also confusing. In particular some of chess players consider the fide master title not worth paying money. E.g., GM Korneev has never been fide master.
Artur Saigakov (2007-08-10 07:54:07)
Re
Eto i est polnaia 4uw. Dokazatelstv nikakix - krome virezok iz foruma i po4ti.
--- [moderator : name deleted] slu4aino natknulsa (possorilsa) na gruppu ludei v internete, kotorie svoe delo znaiut:
1/ Oni umelo podtasovivaiut fakti
2/ Zadevaiut 4eloveka za zgivoe
3/ S celiu vigodi na4inaiut luboi konflict
4/ Megdu soboi obwaiutsa na otdelnom skritom forume
5/ Vsia4eskii podrivaiut reputaciy IGAME iz za togo 4to im ne nravitsa administracia igame i mnogie igroki igame.
6/ Oni zanimaiutsa priamim vreditelstvom na igame. Zabivaiut pustimi soobweniami forum. Zavodiat mnogo nikov i tormaziat turtiri. Zavodiat temi na forume 4to-bi posorit ludei. Izdevaiutsa nad slabimi waxmatistami i MNOGOE drugoe.
7/ Sami oni narkomani i alkogoliki i NE imeiut waxmatnix zvanii FIDE - igraiut tolko v advancechess.
No nesmotria na etu malo4islennuiu gruppu zlonravnix ludei - IGAME.RU zame4atelnii sait s UIMOI zame4atelnix ludei. Za plusami igame mogno zaprosto ne zametit minusov, a negativnaia reklama - toge REKLAMA.
Artur Saigakov (2007-08-10 07:58:10)
Re
Eto i est polnaia 4uw. Dokazatelstv nikakix - krome virezok iz foruma i po4ti.
--- [moderator : name deleted] slu4aino natknulsa (possorilsa) na gruppu ludei v internete, kotorie svoe delo znaiut:
1/ Oni umelo podtasovivaiut fakti
2/ Zadevaiut 4eloveka za zgivoe
3/ S celiu vigodi na4inaiut luboi konflict
4/ Megdu soboi obwaiutsa na otdelnom skritom forume
5/ Vsia4eskii podrivaiut reputaciy IGAME iz za togo 4to im ne nravitsa administracia igame i mnogie igroki igame.
6/ Oni zanimaiutsa priamim vreditelstvom na igame. Zabivaiut pustimi soobweniami forum. Zavodiat mnogo nikov i tormaziat turtiri. Zavodiat temi na forume 4to-bi posorit ludei. Izdevaiutsa nad slabimi waxmatistami i MNOGOE drugoe.
7/ Sami oni narkomani i alkogoliki i NE imeiut waxmatnix zvanii FIDE - igraiut tolko v advancechess.
Sergei Ivanov (2007-08-10 10:46:17)
Ilmars
That it will kill --- [moderator : name deleted]'s message of Dmitry, has been placed at a forum:
http: // igt.forum24.ru
It is a forum of command Igame, he closed.
The given message was seen all command Igame.
After the message on murder - captain Igame, has requested acknowledgement of the person who promised to kill Dmitry, that the given message was written by --- [moderator : name deleted] and has received the certificate of master FIDE IM --- [moderator : name deleted].
So there are no doubts, that chess player --- [moderator : name deleted] threatened to kill Dmitry.
Sergei Ivanov (2007-08-10 10:49:31)
Translit
Soobwenie --- [moderator : name deleted] chto on ub'et Dmitrija, bylo razmeweno na forume:
http://igt.forum24.ru
JEto forum komandy Igejm, on zakrytyj.
Dannoe soobwenie videla vsja komanda Igame.
Posle soobwenija ob ubijstve - kapitan Igame, zaprosil u cheloveka, kotoryj obewal ubit' Dmitrija, podtverzhdenie, chto dannoe soobwenie napisal imenno --- [moderator : name deleted] i poluchil svidetel'stvo mastera FIDE na imja --- [moderator : name deleted].
Tak chto net nikakih somnenij, chto l'vovskij shahmatist --- [moderator : name deleted] ugrozhal ubit' Dmitrija.
Wayne Lowrance (2007-08-13 18:37:13)
General comments
Hi all. I really enjoy playing here at FICGS. It is really one of the best places for CC.
Recently there has been a lot of junk discussions, accusations and unfriendly talk. Only in the last couple of months I guess. Some preety bizzare talk. I hope it gets cleaned up and I feel confident that Thibault has taken notice and does not approve.
On the recent post of "unfair withdrawals". My opinion is that players games should be forfeited across the board in a situation like this. Just my thoughts.
I really like this team concept. I am enjoying playing very much. I expect to get our team 1 1/2 points. Those of you who might be interested please check out game number 11987. It is/was really loaded with threats and tactical chess right out of the get go. I cannot and should not comment about it now, but will at its conclusion, I think some of you will get a kickout of it. :)
bfn Wayne
Garvin Gray (2007-08-13 20:51:16)
further information
Let me think about it and I will get back to you. I do think that I am on the right track though.
My train of thought had been that in most round robin competitions, if a person withdraws from the tournament before they have played 50% of their games, all their results are wiped for the tournament and the tournament is decided with one less participant.
Secondly, if a player does not appear at the board within one hour of the starting time, they lose (fide otb rule), so I had just extended that to a ficgs equivalent, which is timing out.
As has been said by Marc, Vovk did not play in any of the five games that he timed out in, so he did not 'appear at the board' so to speak.
Thirdly, ficgs does not rate games which last less than ten moves.
What I had done was combined these three areas into a quantifable rule that is 'easy' to enforce.
I was specific about saying 50% or more, instead of over 50%, because all the tournaments here have odd numbers, so each person potentially players an even number of games in each tournament.
This all being said, I think it really only applies to the World Champ sections and maybe to norm tournaments.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-08-31 09:45:23)
FIDE, Topalov, Danailov & Short
FIDE Ethics Commission rules on Topalov/Danailov and Short
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4083
Much to read... Any opinion ?
Viktor Savinov (2007-09-03 12:27:34)
FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_GM__000001
Two months tournament FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_GM__000001
is not formed. Perhaps, to lower a rating of the admission up to 2490-2470? To admit in tournament of GM FIDE & GM ICCF, having put them a conditional rating 2500? Perhaps, to dispatch players personal invitations?
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-14 02:33:32)
FIDE World Championship 2007
The FIDE World Championship 2007 just started in Mexico. A double round-robin tournament with 8 players and a US $1.3 million prize fund. Players are Vladimir Kramnik, Peter Svidler, Alexander Morozevich, Levon Aronian, Viswanathan Anand, Boris Gelfand, Alexander Grischuk and Peter Leko.
Round 1, all games drawn... Any favourite ?
Philip Roe (2007-09-14 17:53:56)
Andrew Stephenson
Thanks for your explanations. They were helpful.
Let me try to say what I meant by unsynchronised rating systems (maybe I could have found a better word)
The difference between your rating and mine is a measure of how likely you are to beat me, and that relationship between rating difference and percentage score is similar for any
system I have come across.
However, the absolute numbers mean little if anything. There was a widespead belief for some time that US players were overrated, even though the system worked fine internally.
My understanding is that from time to time
organisations check to see if they have drifted too far from FIDE standards.
This sort of calibration works fine for human OTB games, but for anything else it is not easy to see how to "set the zero", and that possible mismatch is what I called "unsynchronised".
I think that standard CC practice is to try to give each player
a rating similar to their OTB rating. I do not know how the engine ratings quoted were tied
down, and I imagine that centaur ratings are very difficult to calibrate.
Vadim Khachaturov (2007-09-15 08:41:49)
FIDE WC 2007
Wthout any doubt, its Anand.
Jason Repa (2007-09-15 13:03:20)
FIDE World Championship 2007
Well there is some doubt there, most remarkably from Anand himself who considered Kramnik to be the favourite here in a pre-tournament interview, despite Anand's higher elo.
I predict Kramnik to win, not out of any personal admiration for the man. Quite the opposite is true actually. I would rather see Anand or Leko win.
At the close of Round 2, Anand and Kramnik are tied for the lead.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-15 13:33:34)
FIDE World Championship 2007
Anand or Kramnik are the clear favourites but what is the 'chancy factor' in such an event and how it can change things... Hard to say.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-17 05:35:42)
To tie or not to tie
Hi Gino !
"I'm in advantage from the start given the tournament rules" : Untrue IMO, according to the current situation (not all games are draw), if the match ends at tie, you'll lose it - at least qualification - in all cases ;)
In 8-games matches, like every WC round-robin tournament, fighting for the score and (&&) for ratings looks quite normal, there's no dishonor to tie, winning or losing the right to move to the next round. Definitely rules have something to do with honor, at least with victory. Is there no honor to win a chess game with White pieces and its small advantage ?
What about ICCF WC tournaments and Sonnenborn-Berger ? .. Somewhat more complex, but ratings decide according to the situation also. What about FIDE World Championship ? .. Did Kramnik win his title / tie his match against Leko without honor ? .. FICGS rules are not more unfair than FIDE WCH ones, I'm playing an 8-games match against Farit Balabaev, his strategy is clearly to draw the 8 games and it may work, there's no dishonor in it, only good strategy IMHO.
But, of course, that's more a question of human feeling than mathematics, so only my point of view :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-20 21:54:21)
WCH knockout vs. round-robin
I don't know about finished money tournaments at Chessfriend, this was just the available rules I read.
About FICGS & IECG WCH, the point is one don't play the same way a knockout or a round-robin tournament, this is not a question to play seriously or not. In every FIDE WCH (knockout) final match, Kramnik and maybe even Kasparov would accept an easy draw with Black, simply because they have to save energy, as chances of win are generally defended with White (actually Kasparov even offered a short draw with White against Kramnik's Berlin defence). In IECG or ICCF WCH round-robin tournaments, draws are to be avoided at any price but many strong players think the same way: White must win, Black must draw. That's very different in matches, so the strategy. I did not play drawish openings in IECG WCH, and I'll accept short draws if I can't expect more, but it doesn't mean I take it more seriously. According to the situation, these 4 draws were quite a good choice for both Farit & me... in a way :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-22 01:36:25)
Rybka vs. Zappa Mexico
While Anand, Kramnik and the other top chess players fight for the FIDE crown, it seems that another match is taking place in Mexico : Rybka vs. Zappa "Mexico".
http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=1239#more-1239
More info at Rybka forum - http://rybkaforum.net
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-09-23 16:53:41)
50 moves rule
Is the 50 moves rule effective (50 moves without striking any figure or moving a pawn) - as in FIDE or ICCF rules? I can't find a hint in our rules.
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-09-23 17:16:54)
50 moves rule (better wording)
Is the 50 moves rule effective (50 moves without striking any piece or without moving any pawn) - as in FIDE or ICCF rules (draw)? I can't find a hint in our rules.
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-09-23 17:35:41)
50 moves rule
Hello Heinz-Georg,
think you for that! So FICS has another special rule, different to ICCF or FIDE!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-26 12:46:06)
Mexico, round 11
Unless an earthquake, Anand should win the FIDE WCH tournament... now leading with 7,5 / 11, by one point and a half, after another great game against Morozevich. That's a very impressive performance but not a real surprise, as he's always been able to play very well... and less sometimes (unlike Kasparov).
What could happen in a 12-games match against Kramnik if he plays at this level ?!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-28 03:01:14)
Invitation to FIDE, FICGS, ICCF GM & IM
Just added to the FICGS chess freestyle cup rules :
"FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the waiting list for free until one week before the start of the tournament ! .. Please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register. You may be asked to send a copy of your passport or ID card."
Strong titled players may be interested in winning the title & prize, other players may be interested in playing them...
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-30 02:04:44)
Anand is world champion !
... again ! (FIDE 2000-2002, 2007-?)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-10-12 22:11:47)
Reminder : Invitation to GM, SM, IM
"FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the Freestyle Cup waiting list for free until one week before the start of the tournament ! .. Please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register. You may be asked to send a copy of your passport or ID card."
One more day for titled players to register for free !
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-02 20:55:37)
Videogames & the future of Board Games
Quite funny to see the same discussion on GoDiscussions.com and ChessDiscussion.com forums :
http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=457
http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4644
<<
Apparently, two years ago there was a major exhibition sponsored by the Asia Society in American museums called "Asian Games: The Art of Contest." I have been fortunate enough to get a copy of the exhibition book. I found a quote there that I would like you to comment on:
“We hope that this exhibition, in addition to persuading visitors of the historical importance of games, will also stimulate an interest in playing board games. As computer gamers sit in solitary oblivion frantically pressing buttons to manipulate images on screens, it is worth considering how such games could have succeeded, to a large extent, in eclipsing real board games. The answer may be that they have appropriated much of the best of traditional board games. But it is also worth pointing out that the appeal of most electronic games is ephemeral. Ask a teenager if he still plays the same game he played two years ago, and the answer will inevitably be no. We can predict with confidence that twenty years from now, of the electronic games currently in fashion, it is only those versions of classic board games—chess, weiqi/go and perhaps backgammon—that will still enjoy widespread popularity.
Does the future of chess, weiqi and backgammon, then, lie solely in electronic media? We hope not. However convenient it may be to play chess or weiqi on the internet, nothing can replace the face-to-face social interaction of real games playing—and indeed the attraction of such games as spectacle. It is no coincidence that there is a trend now among jaded electronic games players to return to board games. This renewed interest undoubtedly reflects the need to compete with a real (as opposed to real-time) person. But there may be another reason for this development. The physical satisfaction of holding a well-crafted gaming piece or die, or of hearing the sonorous click of the pieces as they are placed on the board, does not exist in an electronic universe. No culture better understood the aesthetics of games than the Japanese, whose go, sugoroku, and shogi boards were not only objects of exquisite beauty, but were also designed to enhance the sound of piece struck against board. If, in addition to stimulating more research on Asian games, this exhibition prompts some of its visitors to take up chess, xiangqi, or weiqi—or even better, to work out the rules of liubo—then we will be entirely satisfied.”
Colin Mackenzie and Irving Finkel, “Preface”, Asian Games: The Art of Contest (Asia Society), p. 17
>>
Interesting !
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-08 15:51:12)
The Bilbao rule
Two interesting articles published by Chessbase about the Bilbao rule effects in chess and football (Win : 3 points, Draw : 1 point, Loss : 0 point)
This issue will probably be discussed again and again, as FIDE world chess championship rules... or FICGS chess wch tie break rule :)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4232
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4237
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-09 01:05:28)
Chess sponsorship
An interesting discussion about chess sponsorship started on ChessDiscussions.com (Susan Polgar forums)
http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=504
Several issues : "How to bring chess to the masses ?", "How to make chess a show ?", "What kind of sponsorship is possible ?"
Susan obviously thinks that OTB chess still has a great potential and that organizations could do much better to promote it... Here's my last response in the thread (reminds some old threads here) :
<<<
In other words, you say that chess has a show-potential like any other sport that could be used and that isn't...
For sure traditional marketing methods could help to promote OTB chess, and chess organizations could do much better... but is chess "bankable", just like an actor ? .. I just saw one more comparison between chess & poker in the thread "How to bring chess to the masses", but there's a major problem in chess that doesn't exist in poker or soccer : "everything can't happen", at least at a first sight, actually the way people can see it...
FIDE tried to change some things, ie. time controls, wch cycle but that's not enough, obviously. Anyone can win a lost hand at texas hold'em against any professional player, like any 2nd division soccer team can beat the Real Madrid once... Of course long-time statistics will be always favourable to the best players, but it takes a much longer time... Everything can happen in any event in these games (poker wch, soccer world cup). The probability for a real surprise that makes buzz is much lower at chess, the same best players invariably play the best tournaments, won statistically (ie.) 20% by Anand, 19% by Topalov, 18% by Kramnik and so on... quite boring.
The only interesting chess events follow the same scheme : David vs. Goliath, the buzz-genius 12 boy vs. Kramnik, mystery-Deep Blue vs. Kasparov, Anna Kournikova vs. Fischer & so on... nowadays the man vs. machine match is no more interesting since any home computer is stronger than HAL 9000 or Kramnik and there's no clear world champion (too many FIDE wch, different cycles..)
Chess needs real events and I'm curious to see the ones "that could bring chess to the masses" in the future... Maybe I'm a bit pessimistic, at least for OTB chess, but I'm very interested to see how good marketing methods will be able to transform our chess world... Just wait, hope & see :)
Best regards, Thibault
>>>
I'm now working again on SEO (Search Engines Optimization) for FICGS, more and more players find us via Google... Of course one next step is to sponsor the FICGS WCH & freestyle tournaments but it is a hard task for sure... All comment and suggestions on this issue are welcome :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-11 17:53:24)
2nd FICGS chess freestyle
The 2nd FICGS chess freestyle cup waiting list is open. This 6 rounds swiss tournament will start on november 24, 15:00 server time. Time control is 1 hour + 15 seconds / move. Entry fee is 10 E-Points (10 Euro). Prize is 100% of the entry fees in E-Points.
FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the waiting list for free, please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register (you may be asked to send a copy of your passport or ID card).
Definitely we need strong players to rivalize with SIM Eros Riccio :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-27 22:37:57)
Baduk and chance : 1dan in LG cup final
A Go player ranked 1 dan is about 800 elo points below a 9 dan player (whatever the ranking system ?!), meaning about no chance to win a game against such an opponent, right ?! .. How is it possible to see a 1 dan player at this level in one of the main Go tournaments in the world ?
Of course everything can happen in a Go game, but I suppose it is not the case during a whole tournament...
From IGN Goama newsletter - http://gogame.info
"An interview with Han Sanghoon, 1-dan, the first 1-dan in Go history, who entered the final match of the World Go Championship (LG cup)
- Congratulations! What was the most difficult game in this tournament?
- The last one with On Sojin, 4-dan. It was really close finally and I think, that I was slightly behind until the endgame stage
- You became a professional about 1 year ago. Did you think that you can reach the final match of the World Go Championship so quickly?
- I remember that it was very hard to become a professional. I was almost 18 and it was my last chance to win the qualification among inseis. Of course, I did not think, that I can show good results quickly. I was surprised, that professional tournaments are not much harder than the insei league :)
- What are your weakest and strongest parts in Go?
- I am weak at the opening, but I feel myself confident in middlegame fights. Usually I try to defend my groups solidly, before fighting
- Who is the hardest opponent for you?
- Yun Junsang, 6-dan. I lost him twice and feel that he is much stronger than me. Also his Go style is very impressive
- What do you think about your final match with Lee Sedol, 9-dan. How big are your chances?
- I never played him before, but I saw lot of his game records and I know that Lee Sedol, 9-dan is much stronger than me. Any way, I will try to win the match! Usually I am not afraid of the star opponents at all!"
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...
Dan Rotaru (2007-12-17 17:41:55)
FICGS World Cup
Hi Thibault,
What is the difference between FICGS__CHESS__WCH_TOURNAMENTS and FICGS__CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP ? Is the latest supposed to be a Knock-out tournament? There are no games displayed under this on the Tournaments page. Anyway a knock-out tournament would be interesting. Something like the FIDE World Cup.
Lincoln Tomlin (2007-12-18 20:54:43)
Too many draws
In over the board play, I like Yermolinsky's idea of when two players agree that a position is drawn then the board should be turned around and play continue for at least a preset number of moves. When accepting a draw sometimes a player can see, or thinks he can, some advantage in his opponents position and both players would also have to be confident in what is going on in the position from both sides before offering or accepting.
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 (2008-01-30 19:20:03)
Provisional rating
Hello Hao Nhien, your provisional rating is now 1800 : Ratings not from FIDE / ICCF / IECG give at most a 1800 provisional rating...
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_chess
Thibault de Vassal (2008-02-03 22:22:25)
Rating change
Ok, it seems that Viktor will forfeit his games. Before to find a new rule that could decrease the effects of such a general forfeit, I think it is reasonable to change Viktor's TER & rating to 2507 (current FIDE rating) instead of 2667 (provisional ICCF rating). I think it is fair in this rare case.
Charlie Neil (2008-02-11 23:09:38)
Robert J Fischer Goes to War.
Lets cast this movie. Nicholas Cage or Woody Harleson as R J Fischer. Colin Firth could be Boris Spassky. I think Stephen Fry could get by as Lothar Schmid the match arbiter. Max Euwe, the then president of FIDE .... Well can anyone else cast the movie for me.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-02-15 14:36:07)
Kamsky vs. Topalov 2008
FIDE has announced its decision to accept the US $150,000 bid made by the Bulgarian Chess Federation, unless a country comes up with a US $250,000 bid by April 11th. The Kamsky vs. Topalov match is scheduled for the end of year 2008, after the Anand vs. Kramnik match.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4448
Now, a small test : Who is the current chess world champion ?
(you could also ask to 5 people who don't necessarily play chess around you and leave the results here.. could be interesting :))
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
Thibault de Vassal (2008-02-27 12:55:45)
Morozevich on FIDE Grand Prix
An interesting interview of Alexander Morozevich in Sport-Express (russian) translated in Chessbase.com
http://www.sport-express.ru/art.shtml?154431
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4477
Morozevich shares his views about the new FIDE WCH cycle, its length (that can be compared to a correspondence chess championship) & the lack of informations around it. Anand, Kramnik & Topalov wouldn't play FIDE Grand Prix also. One more call to get back to the original chess world championship format...
Thibault de Vassal (2008-03-30 07:25:30)
Freestyle cup : Rules & start
There was a small conflict in the rules, now corrected : The first game will start at 13:00 server time, not 15:00
Current rules :
FICGS advanced chess "freestyle" cup is a 6 rounds swiss tournament with entry fee and prize, played in a single day. Entry fees are E-Points that you can buy in 'My account'. Read carefully terms and conditions, particularly Entry fees & Prize money sections before to play tournaments with entry fees.
All games are played in 30 minutes + 15 seconds / move. Norms are not possible.
The first round will start at the date and hour (13:00 server time) indicated as "deadline". Next rounds will start at 15:00, 17:00, 19:00, 21:00 and 23:00 server time. Please register carefully as it is not possible to retire from the waiting list. It is strongly recommended to display the chat bar to communicate with the tournament director.
If several players obtain the best score and the best Sonnenborn-Berger, they will share the prize. It is possible to forfeit all next games (that will be unrated for the advanced chess rating list) during the tournament.
FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the waiting list for free.. Please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register. You may be asked to send a copy of your passport or ID card. The tournament might be cancelled if less than 7 players registered before the deadline, in this case entry fees will be given back to the players.
An extra fee, usually 30% of the entry fee, will be added to the entry fee 2 days before the start of the tournament.
Arnab Sengupta (2008-04-15 08:23:25)
RATING
please tell me is the ICCF or FICGS rating recognised by FIDE?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-04-15 10:33:37)
Rating
The ICCF is the only body sanctioned for correspondence chess by FIDE. All ICCF titles, championships and ratings are recognised by FIDE - this is what Wikipedia says and I believe it is correct.
Garvin Gray (2008-04-15 11:46:49)
otb v iccf ratings
To add a bit more to Andrew's answer.
While ICCF is fide recognised?, it does not mean an online player can turn up to an over the board tournament and use that ICCF rating or ICCF title in an otb tournament.
Only ratings attained over the board can be used for other otb tournaments.
Arnab Sengupta (2008-04-15 18:07:00)
RATING
Thanks guys.....
well it would be nice if FIDE itself starts a correspondence game system....
Arnab Sengupta (2008-04-16 18:58:26)
FIDE
guys, wont it would be great if FIDE starts a correspondence game system or server play, which it will recognize....well someone should raise this issue to FIDE
Graham Cridland (2008-04-17 02:09:23)
Anand is currently WC
Incidentally, FIDE extended the bid deadline to let the Ukrainian sponsors try again to get a larger sum under bank guarantee. They say they have $750K!
But they probably don't.
Jason Repa (2008-05-07 06:46:43)
Bird Brain loses in 33 moves!
I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the behavior of this lowlife. After all, I beat him in chess and beat him in debate. I also caught him RED-HANDED telling lies and exposed him for what he is. What else is a sniveling coward to do but dig up old flame wars on the internet from four years ago, that have not an iota of relevance to any of the topics being discussed here. I bet his parents are real proud of him, LOL!
"Black's ...f5 stakes a serious claim to the e4 square and looks towards an attack on White's kingside in the middlegame. However, it weakens Black's own kingside somewhat, and does nothing to contribute to Black's development" My point exactly about 1 f4"
Another typical tactic from a chronic liar....to change the very premise of what was being argued. I'll refresh your memory since you don't have the mental capability of remembering your own words. The statement you made was: "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white". That is what I contested. I never disputed that there is some weakening of the kingside involved here. But some weakening of the kingside doesn't mean it's a poor opening choice. You're trying to win an argument with lies and misrepresentation. Try being honest and sticking to the facts for once in your life.
My otb tournament rating is currently 2010, but my active rating is not anywhere near what you're suggesting. I'm actually much stronger in both 30 minute active and blitz chess. I won more blitz tournaments in 2007 AND 2008 than anyone else in my region, ahead of 2 FM's. And my performance in active events is in the mid 2100's based on all the otb active events I've played in over the last 5 years.
In the region I play in we don't have many active events. So I've only played in 2 that were rated, and that was over a decade ago. The provisional ratings used were far below what everyone was worth (not just me). We had a strong FM who was competing at 1800 and change, while both his FIDE and national rating were in the neighborhood of 2300. Stranger things have happened in small clubs.
Did anyone notice how the coward won't discuss what HIS national otb rating is? We don't hear a word from him about that. Very telling indeed!
Then the little weasel reposts a game that he already posted in this thread earlier. Could it be that the poor loser whom I CRUSHED in chess, has run out of ammunition with which to compensate for the fact that he lost to me? I've lost 6 games, drew 59 and won 117 on FICGS, including the beating I gave to you. I beat you EASILY and I'm HIGHER RATED than you. Keep crying about that. Its entertaining.
Again, crybaby, if 1.f4 is a waste at cc, why did I gain rating points here playing 1.f4. And why did I beat you so easily at chess? I think I proved on the chess board, that you don't know what you're talking about. All you have is lies, slander, and random usenet group flame wars from 4 years ago. I have FACTS:
I BEAT YOU IN CHESS AND I'M HIGHER RATED THAN YOU ARE.
""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." Alexseev lost and the criticisms of IM Sengupta's moves by Mr Repa are quite funny "
You're copying and pasting the same nonsense you posted earlier. Did you even read the words you typed? You're saying "look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as Black", as if he's the one who lost. Then You switch it around and suggest that Evgeny Alexseev was White and say that he played 9.g4. Are you pretending to be this stupid or is this really how you are? As I said earlier, you're probably making the whole game up, or at least changing moves around, etc, because it doesn't appear anywhere that I could find, and you're still not bright enough to figure out how to post the whole game as you were asked to do earlier. It's a pretty sad state of affairs of that's the ONLY game you can think of to try to smear a legitimate and recognized opening such as Bird's Opening. Whoever played White played very poorly. I spelled out for you the moves that White played that were very poor. Did I use any words too complex for you to understand?
" 1 f4 has been championed by GM Jakubiec who is the only GM who has played it regularly"
This is also pure nonsense. There are MANY strong GM's (and super GM's)who haved played 1.f4 in serious games. GM Henrik Danielsen used it as a MAIN MOVE for many years also.
Keep posting lies, slander, and irrelevant 4 year old flame wars from the internet little man. I defeated you in chess and in debate. I proved that what you said is pure nonsense. All you have is hot air!
Jason Repa (2008-05-07 06:57:07)
Bird Brain loses in 33 moves!
I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the behavior of this lowlife. After all, I beat him in chess and beat him in debate. I also caught him RED-HANDED telling lies and exposed him for what he is. What else is a sniveling coward to do but dig up old flame wars on the internet from four years ago, that have not an iota of relevance to any of the topics being discussed here. I bet his parents are real proud of him, LOL!
"Black's ...f5 stakes a serious claim to the e4 square and looks towards an attack on White's kingside in the middlegame. However, it weakens Black's own kingside somewhat, and does nothing to contribute to Black's development" My point exactly about 1 f4"
Another typical tactic from a chronic liar....to change the very premise of what was being argued. I'll refresh your memory since you don't have the mental capability of remembering your own words. The statement you made was: "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white". That is what I contested. I never disputed that there is some weakening of the kingside involved here. But some weakening of the kingside doesn't mean it's a poor opening choice. You're trying to win an argument with lies and misrepresentation. Try being honest and sticking to the facts for once in your life.
My otb tournament rating is currently 2010, but my active rating is not anywhere near what you're suggesting. I'm actually much stronger in both 30 minute active and blitz chess. I won more blitz tournaments in 2007 AND 2008 than anyone else in my region, ahead of 2 FM's. And my performance in active events is in the mid 2100's based on all the otb active events I've played in over the last 5 years.
In the region I play in we don't have many active events. So I've only played in 2 that were rated, and that was over a decade ago. The provisional ratings used were far below what everyone was worth (not just me). We had a strong FM who was competing at 1800 and change, while both his FIDE and national rating were in the neighborhood of 2300. Stranger things have happened in small clubs.
Did anyone notice how the coward won't discuss what HIS national otb rating is? We don't hear a word from him about that. Very telling indeed!
Then the little weasel reposts a game that he already posted in this thread earlier. Could it be that the poor loser whom I CRUSHED in chess, has run out of ammunition with which to compensate for the fact that he lost to me? I've lost 6 games, drew 59 and won 117 on FICGS, including the beating I gave to you. I beat you EASILY and I'm HIGHER RATED than you. Keep crying about that. Its entertaining.
Again, crybaby, if 1.f4 is a waste at cc, why did I gain rating points here playing 1.f4. And why did I beat you so easily at chess? I think I proved on the chess board, that you don't know what you're talking about. All you have is lies, slander, and random usenet group flame wars from 4 years ago. I have FACTS:
I BEAT YOU IN CHESS AND I'M HIGHER RATED THAN YOU ARE.
""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." Alexseev lost and the criticisms of IM Sengupta's moves by Mr Repa are quite funny "
You're copying and pasting the same nonsense you posted earlier. Did you even read the words you typed? You're saying "look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as Black", as if he's the one who lost. Then You switch it around and suggest that Evgeny Alexseev was White and say that he played 9.g4. Are you pretending to be this stupid or is this really how you are? As I said earlier, you're probably making the whole game up, or at least changing moves around, etc, because it doesn't appear anywhere that I could find, and you're still not bright enough to figure out how to post the whole game as you were asked to do earlier. It's a pretty sad state of affairs of that's the ONLY game you can think of to try to smear a legitimate and recognized opening such as Bird's Opening. Whoever played White played very poorly. I spelled out for you the moves that White played that were very poor. Did I use any words too complex for you to understand?
" 1 f4 has been championed by GM Jakubiec who is the only GM who has played it regularly"
This is also pure nonsense. There are MANY strong GM's (and super GM's)who haved played 1.f4 in serious games. GM Henrik Danielsen used it as a MAIN MOVE for many years also.
Keep posting lies, slander, and irrelevant 4 year old flame wars from the internet little man. I defeated you in chess and in debate. I proved that what you said is pure nonsense. All you have is hot air!
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 14:50:21)
ELO ratings
I believe ELO ratings are used for FIDE ratings I did not know you had a FIDE rating. I must say that ELO 2000 is an average to good club player and over 2200 in my experience is a good OTB rating. But looking at some of your OTB games between 1900 - 2000 seems to be the level of chess that I can see. Its ok - but the reality is that players do not improve very much after a certain age ......
Anyway at cc people tend to have it both ways if they win its because they are better players if they lose or draw its not real chess its just computers and it does not mean anything.
I am sure we will play again at cc and then you can demonstrate your skill. If I win I will not place a great emphasis on it. It not difficult to draw a cc game if you have the resources to hand.
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 15:08:20)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that a <1500 otb player, such as yourself Mr. Stephenson, wouldn't be able to figure out something that any normal 6 year old child would have no difficulty with. But then again, during our chess game in which I crushed you, I had the feeling I wasn't dealing with a mental heavyweight, to put it mildly. I'll hold your hand and explain it to you since there is probably no 6 year old child where you live to help you:
The Elo rating system is a method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in two-player games such as chess, GO, backgammon, etc."Elo" is often written in capital letters (ELO), but it is not an acronym. It is the family name of the system's creator, Arpad Elo (1903–1992, born as Élő Árpád), a Hungarian-born American physics professor.
The Elo rating system has been adopted by many different organizations, including the USCF, CFC, FIDE, and others, as well as various online gaming servers.
My national elo rating is indeed over 2000, Stephenson. And yours is under 1500, as you've already confirmed.
I already beat you very easily in chess Stephenson. You're the little guy with something to prove here, not me.
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 15:25:34)
Elo rating system
I trust I didn't use any "biggie" words you were unable to comprehend Stephenson. Hopefully you now understand your error and realize that the elo system is not only peculiar to FIDE chess ratings, but indeed used by many chess organizations, as well as other games.
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......
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 (2008-05-13 21:16:02)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
No, as I just explained to you in the way a small child should be able to understand, elo is not exclusive to FIDE ratings. Not even exclusive to chess in fact. I realized you weren't overly intelligent when we played chess and I crushed you, but this is ridiculous. This has been explained to you already. Do some research and see for yourself.
I normally don't go after someone for grammar, but when I'm dealing with who says down load and data base, I ask myself who's wiping the drool from their chin.
I'm not about to do any serious chess analysis with you. I don't give free chess lessons. Post whatever you like. It won't change the fact that I CRUSHED you in chess. Fair and square.
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!
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.
Benjamin Block (2008-05-26 17:12:58)
Why can new player choose elo?
Some players just choose ELO? Some players just take a very low rating even if they have a real high. Why not let the people choose a ELO only if they already have a ICCF rating or fide?
Jason Repa (2008-06-04 19:21:48)
Poker
As was just explained to you, groves, you're not a 1600 chess player as the result of "bad luck". You have the rating you do for a reason. The fact that you're not intelligent enough to get your chess rating up to even a modest level does indeed relate to your inability to understand concepts in other areas. Go back to your original post and try to understand what this "discussion" is all about. It's about the fact that you can't comprehend my statement that poker is a game which involves more than just knowing when to bluff and managing your money. I even went so far as to try to explain the concept of EV to you as I wasn't confident you would figure out how to look that up on your own.
What's very telling here is that all of my posts contain discussion of poker whereas your just keep trying to be offensive and whining about how you feel "insulted" when I've done nothing but state objective facts about you. I suppose referring to you as a 1600 chess player is also an "insult" Your last two posts are completely devoid of any discussion of poker whatsoever.
I'd tell you to grow up, groves, but at your age I think it's a bit too late for you.
Ilmars Cirulis (2008-07-02 14:36:09)
Re
You can look at infidels.org or richarddawkins.net for atheistic quotes. :)
Don Groves (2008-09-27 06:43:07)
Strategy and tactics
Salut Thibault -- Military strategy and tactics are similar to chess. For example, the US opening in Iraq was flawed -- too few troops, overconfidence, etc., a bad strategy exposed by the insurgents' successful counterattack. On the other hand, this year's "surge" in Iraq was a tactical move, like moving a rook into an attacking position.
Actually, it was more like adding another rook in the late middle game ;-)
Denis Ivanchenkov (2008-09-29 10:25:46)
By the way...
I wrote "deRmocrtats" with intent!
From foreigners it's just a mispelling - just extra letter accidentally appered in a word.
But for the russian speaking guy
it's different! Iouri Basiliev is not alien to Russian - he knows Russian and he knows that "deRmocracy"
in Russian is translated as "shitocracy"!!! :)
from the first his post in this topic
I understand that he must be an immigrant from former Soviet Union. He lives in German. Very probably he is not well adopted in German society - and is treated as person of "lesser quality". and this is the real reason why he so willingly participated in this talk (so imprudently started by Alex). For Iouri it's just an opportunnity (well I guess he thinks this way) to gain self confidence - by building corresponding hierarhcy of "values": he, lesser-rank German, is still "more civilized", "more democratic" than those "stupid barbaric" Ukrainians.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-10-03 21:37:20)
FIDE rating list oct. 2008
FIDE published the October 2008 rating list, the 5 top ranking players are in a 8 points range only...
I still wonder what would happen in case of a come back by the King (Gary Kasparov) .. Great thing to see a player like Morozevich at the 2nd place.
Rank Name Title Country Rating
1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2791
2 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2787
3 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2786
4 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2786
5 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2783
6 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772
7 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2757
8 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2751
9 Leko, Peter g HUN 2747
10 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2737
11 Wang, Yue g CHN 2736
12 Adams, Michael g ENG 2734
13 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2732
14 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2731
15 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2730
16 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2729
17 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2727
18 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2726
19 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2720
20 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2719
21 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2719
22 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2719
23 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2719
24 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2716
25 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2715
26 Bu, Xiangzhi g CHN 2714
27 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2711
28 Ni, Hua g CHN 2710
29 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2705
30 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2704
31 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2703
32 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2702
33 Cheparinov, Ivan g BUL 2696
34 Wang, Hao g CHN 2696
35 Sasikiran, Krishnan g IND 2694
36 Tiviakov, Sergei g NED 2686
37 Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter g ROU 2684
38 Najer, Evgeniy g RUS 2682
39 Bologan, Viktor g MDA 2682
40 Milov, Vadim g SUI 2681
Thibault de Vassal (2008-10-03 21:46:16)
Anand vs. Kramnik
While the match Kamsky vs. Topalov still seems uncertain, the match Anand vs. Kramnik for the FIDE world chess championship is quickly approaching... After many good & bad results recently for both players, any favourite ? :)
As for me, I have no idea... chess just looks like lotery sometimes.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-10-14 16:21:25)
Kramnik vs. Anand
The first game of the match for the Fide WCC started !
You may see the games live at this french site :
http://www.imineo.com/wcc2008
Thibault de Vassal (2008-10-30 12:22:04)
Games 10 and 11
GM Kramnik (2772) - GM Anand (2783) [E21]
WCh Bonn GER (10), 27.10.2008
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nf3 c5 5.g3 cxd4 6.Nxd4 0-0 7.Bg2 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Qb3 Qa5 10.Bd2 Nc6 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.0-0 Bxc3 13.bxc3 Ba6 14.Rfd1 Qc5 15.e4 Bc4 16.Qa4 Nb6 17.Qb4 Qh5 18.Re1 c5 19.Qa5 Rfc8 20.Be3 Be2 21.Bf4 e5 22.Be3 Bg4 23.Qa6 f6 24.a4 Qf7 25.Bf1 Be6 26.Rab1 c4 27.a5 Na4 28.Rb7 Qe8 29.Qd6 1-0
GM Anand (2783) - GM Kramnik (2772) [B96]
WCh Bonn GER (11), 29.10.2008
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qc7 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.f5 Qc5 10.Qd3 Nc6 11.Nb3 Qe5 12.0-0-0 exf5 13.Qe3 Bg7 14.Rd5 Qe7 15.Qg3 Rg8 16.Qf4 fxe4 17.Nxe4 f5 18.Nxd6+ Kf8 19.Nxc8 Rxc8 20.Kb1 Qe1+ 21.Nc1 Ne7 22.Qd2 Qxd2 23.Rxd2 Bh6 24.Rf2 Be3 1/2-1/2
The game and the match are over, Anand will play the final match for the FIDE World Chess Champion title against Veselin Topalov or Gata Kamsky.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-10-30 17:09:52)
Is Vishy Anand world champion ?
I do not understand anything anymore to the FIDE World Chess Championship cycle :( .. Is Anand the FIDE world champion 2008 as I can read it or was this match the semi final in the cycle ? The other match was (maybe in my mind only) Kamsky vs. Topalov .. and as far as I can remember there was some sponsors problems or so... What happened to this match ? Simply cancelled ??
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-07 14:59:07)
Kamsky vs. Topalov
"Kamsky vs. Topalov" to sell...
Roustam Kamsky, father of world championship candidates Gata Kamsky had hard words against FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov : "I do not have any faith in FIDE and Mr. Ilyumzhinov who in front of the whole world breached his word, which is not the first time. Also, I do not have much faith in Mr. Makropoulos, a personal friend of Mr. Danailov."
More surprising, he said a few words about the former match Anand vs. Kasparov : "I would like to use this opportunity to congratulate Vishy Anand on his true victory. This is his third victory at the world championship. I think he could have achieved even more success if during his match against Kasparov he did not have as his trusted seconds grandmasters from the former Soviet Union. I was very impressed by the organization of Anand’s match in Bonn, Germany, except that the match should have been played between Kamsky and Anand. It was unjust to allow Russian GM Kramnik to play three world championship matches, in 2006, 2007, 2008, without a proper selection, just so Russia can maintain the world championship title."
The whole open letter is intersting to read...
Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5002
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5000
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-09 00:08:30)
Fire on board...
Open letter by Gata Kamsky :
"Dear President, gentelmen, Susan,
When I first saw Bill's letter I was happy, because finally USCF has been showing strong support for their representative. Whether there could be a better solution or a more diplomatic one is a good question, but the reality is that there is no time to negotiate and given FIDE's strong-arm history of negotiating, it is not likely to succeed.
When I spoke with FIDE Vice President Mr. Makropoulos in Greece, it was decided that both my team and Mr. Topalov's team would meet during the rest day at the Olympiad in Dresden to negotiate and discuss everything, including technical details. With their last public statement, Mr. Illumjinov not only attempted to revoke his personal guarantee of the match, but he also imposed the time limit of one week for the players to acceed to his demands and at the same time re-awarded the bid to the Bulgarian Federation, which was the original FIDE's intention in the first place. You all are aware of the clause in the FIDE regulation for this "special" match that gave the Bulgarian Chess Federation a privilege of matching any bid that is coming from my side, which effectively ruined any attempt to find and submit a bid from the United States.
Throughout the negotiations with my managers, FIDE did nothing to find a sponsor on their own, despite the fact that it was solely FIDE's decision to create this match, and thus to allow Mr. Topalov a backdoor into the final steps of the qualification proceedings for the world championship title, quite unfairly, I might add.
FIDE's entire purpose, for chess players, for fairness, has been changed into a special interest group organization and I personally believe that any negotiations with FIDE rulers or tsars, or whatever you like to call them, will be unsuccessful.
The time for the negotiation is over and the only way to fight FIDE is to expose their mistakes, and perhaps fight them in a court of law if and when FIDE broke the law. Therefore, I would respectfully request all USCF Board members to unite and find ways to make sure that justice and fairness will prevail.
Sincerely,
Gata Kamsky
Saturday, November 8, 2008"
More informations on Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5004
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-16 21:09:54)
Kamsky vs. FIDE
The match continues... Only the board changed, and the "prize" may increase whatever the way.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5015
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-25 13:45:48)
FIDE Grand Prix
No more FIDE Grand Prix in Doha (Qatar), so why not Elista... The FIDE world championship still in question, John Nunn's views and so on :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5033
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-02 15:30:12)
Chess and doping
"According to the Russian totally non-free chess journalist Yuri Vasiliev (fortunately not the most reliable one whom we know for bringing up the ghost of Alexander Chernenko) Ilyumzhinov has already stated that Vasily Ivanchuk might get severely sanctioned for the doping test refusal after his game against Gata Kamsky." (Alexei Shirov, Riga)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5047
A direct attack from Shirov to FIDE & Kirsan Ilyumzhinov on chess laws and -of course- the World Championship system.
Any opinion ?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-03 11:30:29)
Chess olympiads, Tkatchiev "forfeits"
After the case of Ivanchuk on doping, a new unexplained and undercovered (actually completely missed by the official websites - FIDE, federations, olympiads site...) case at the Olympiads !
France just lost 1,5-2,5 to Azerbaijan, Vladislav Tkatchiev just did not arrive to the board !! .. while the France team has 5 players for 4 boards... One full point lost. No explanation, nothing, maybe a conflict in the team. I hope there will be more information about it. To be continued.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-05 01:06:02)
FIDE Grand Prix & WCH
Magnus Carlsen withdraws from the FIDE Grand Prix 2008-2009
From Magnus Carlsen chess blog - http://blog.magnuschess.com
"We have just informed FIDE by e-mail that Magnus withdraws from the Grand Prix series due to the dramatic change to these regulations approved by the General Assembly. (...) Magnus is simply not motivated to continue the GP series with the dramatically changed conditions approved in Dresden, and the uncertainty related to any future changes that may be decided by FIDE."
Just another 'Grandmaster attack' to the Federation Internationale Des Echecs...
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-08 19:33:05)
Levon Aronian's open letter
Now Levon Aronian comments the latest FIDE's decisions in an open letter :
"(...) With the GA's recent actions, it seems that there is a democratic deficit within FIDE. The GA did not consult the players currently taking part in the Grand Prix in their decision processes. Please keep in mind a very important point – these players, including myself, have a legally binding agreement with FIDE regarding the World Championship cycle and the Grand Prix. Therefore it is FIDE's duty to consult the other party of the contract – the participants.
Does this mean that the chess players have lesser rights than others? The GA appears to act with no concern for the players. The decision to suddenly change the World Championship cycle has damaging effects on the career plans of leading chess players. It is also reasonable to ask: why should we go through several tournaments over several years and fight for a place in a tournament that another player gets by losing a match? The GA's decisions remove the motivation for players like myself to take part in the World Championship cycle."
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5059
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-16 11:22:56)
Ilyumzhinov on FIDE WCH
The latest news...
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5087
To be continued, of course :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-03 19:02:44)
A world champion with no privilege ?!
... finally, looks like even the top GM are decided to kill the show in the FIDE WCH cycle :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5129
>> Address by Mr Henrik Carlsen on behalf of GM Magnus Carlsen
"(...) In a future Magnus would like to see a world championship cycle with a minimum of privileges, or no privileges at all.
(...) What about the privileges of the reigning World Champion? This is a difficult question but we see strong arguments for reducing the privileges drastically or even abolishing them outright. In the past, with the right to a re-match, a reigning world champion had about 75% chance of retaining the title against an evenly strong opponent, leaving only 25% chance for all the remaining chess players in the world. It was ridiculous. Even without rematches, the 50% chance of today strongly favours the reigning champion. This may have made sense in the past when there were few serious contenders for the title, but today, with about 30 top players within 100 rating points of the top, this is no longer fair."
There are many good points but I'm not sure the game will win at the end. Any opinion ?!
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 14:06:51)
FIDE or FIFA
Salut Don !
FIFA has not the biggest problems FIDE has :
1) There are only about a hundred of participants in the world cup before the preliminary tournaments already.
2) A dozen of these participants are stars and will remain the stars, just like clubs in each country, and it is unlikely to change (one reason is money of course but there are many others). Chess, like soccer or any sport, needs stars !
The context is not the same, I don't think one can compare the FIDE & FIFA business...
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-08 21:08:36)
FIDE GM
Hristos is FIDE GM ! Welcome :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-11 18:39:05)
Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
I just watched a french tv documentary on Canal+ : "L'effet papillon" (the butterfly effect), a very rare & surprising topic in France : Kirsan Ilyumzhinov !
The president of Kalmykia & FIDE, long ago introduced by Boris Eltsine at this rank, was clearly presented as a despot in this poor region of Russia, not really far from North Korea (not speaking of distances). The images from "city chess" near Elista were quite terrible, a phantom city, part of the cult of the personality beginning in schools (children learning that GM Ilyumzhinov is the one example to follow)... Images from a few 'sponsor' industries of one competition held in Elista were just another way to suggest how Ilyumzhinov finds the money to keep the hand on the world of chess. Finally we saw a few GM timidly saying that probably everything was not clear in the FIDE.
Well, I do not believe 100% of what is said on tv, that's just what french people saw today, each one is free to make his own opinion after watching this kind of portrait.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-22 10:36:06)
FIDE Grand Prix in Karlovy cancelled
After Doha & Montreux, FIDE Grand Prix in Karlovy Vary has been officially cancelled.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5162
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
Don Groves (2009-02-19 05:33:24)
23x23
Even with Monte Carlo simulation, a statistically significant number of games must be played for the result to have high confidence. A 20x20 board size would add 39 points to the board and hence multiply the number of possible games by 2 to the 39th power. So, a simulation would have to run a much longer time to achieve a result with same confidence factor. 23x23 would multiply the possible number of games by an astronomical number. I could be wrong about this, of course, but that's the way the numbers look.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-02-27 16:23:19)
Topalov beats Kamsky
The bulgarian super GM Veselin Topalov won his candidates match against Gata Kamsky 4.5 - 2.5
So we'll have a match Anand vs. Topalov for the FIDE world championship final match, right ? Any favourite ?!
Thibault de Vassal (2009-03-10 18:25:31)
Topalov vs. Anand
Veselin Topalov vs. Viswanathan Anand [reigning FIDE world champion] is the final match in the current FIDE world championship cycle, but it is now official that FIDE postponed the match already, from September 2009 to (at least) April 20th, 2010, and opened a new bidding process.
Where will the match take place ? To be continued.
Denis Ivanchenkov (2009-03-22 23:28:11)
captured pieces
Thibault, maybe it is just my personal drawbacks but when I set up board I usually look at captured pieces (on letsplaychess.com or chess-online.ru) and see how many of pieces are out - and just count with those on the board to be 16 in total - and become confident that I didn't miss anything. here on Ficgs it usually takes more time to get confident that all pieces on their places. and from the other side it will be easily seeing which player is getting upper hand - just looking at captured pieces (especially when difference is small - like pawn or two or pawn for a piece)
and yes notation
White: 2B, 2N, 3P
Black: Q,4R
would solve the problem
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-01 18:09:47)
FIDE rating list April 2009
The new FIDE rating list is out.
1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2812
2 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2783
3 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2770
4 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2759
5 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2756
6 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2754
7 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2753
8 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2751
9 Leko, Peter g HUN 2751
10 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2748
Veselin Topalov is ranked number 1 again, over the 2800 mark. Magnus Carlsen is more and more impressive.
You may find a more complete list in Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5323
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-05 21:23:03)
Rating calculation : real time or not
Hi Scott, it would be not a nightmare for sure. But the way correspondence chess ratings are calculated is more a question of history IMO, just like FIDE WCH. Many players would probably think this is just a nonsense, while the others may find good reasons for this change. It seems to me that correspondence chess ratings have always been calculated every 2 or 6 months according to the organization. I thought about this question already, there are advantages in both solutions, so I'm not against the idea to open this (big) debate.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-06 21:31:27)
Rating peaks
Among possible problems : It is likely that players could reach higher artificial ratings (peaks) this way, even if we change the complete system & the way tournaments are built. IMO instant ratings mean that games should start as soon as a player enter a tournament waiting list - gradually, like at IECG server - otherwise it would be even harder to predict your opponents tournament entry rating, by the way there is no more TER taken in account in Go rating calculation, that is an advantage in some ways but one of the main problems also]
As for me, the deep reason why I may prefer the 2 months system is this very special "moment" that FIDE players know when waiting for their next rating. The other system makes everything faster & faster, just like the world wide web but finally maybe the passion flies away faster also. My 2 cents :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-14 15:37:00)
Draw offer and rules
Very good point. I quite agree with this but it is now a bit complicated for players (more or less beginners) to know what to do in such a case. We can also imagine the case of a player saying "I resign" without checking the resign box.
FICGS rules are official (FIDE) chess rules when proper FICGS rules don't exist. It may apply there, but I feel we should clarify and why not change the rules to make it clearer & simpler.
Let's see what is your favourite proposal :
1) A draw offer sent in the message (draw box unchecked) should be considered as a real draw offer if the opponent called the referee to accept it and did not reply to the move.
2) A draw offer sent in the message (draw box unchecked) should be considered as a real draw offer if the opponent called the referee to accept it, even if he replied to the move.
3) A draw offer sent in the message (draw box unchecked) shouldn't be considered as a real draw offer because there shouldn't be such human decision in server chess and it could be ambiguous.
The proposition 2) may bring problems IMO, I think 3) is generally better in server chess (maybe even in OTB chess when the sheet in not signed, I suppose the case happened already) as there should be as few human decision as possible, 1) is more fair in a certain way though.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-23 19:54:11)
Move with a draw offer
Such a draw offer should never be considered. Casual online players may not know correspondence chess or FIDE rules very well, I don't think there should be a penalty in this case (but harrassment cases), but I'll include it in the rules.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-28 11:47:57)
K factor & FIDE ratings
FIDE decided to increase the K factor so that ratings change quicker...
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5381
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5376 (bottom)
Does anyone have an opinion on these changes ?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-03 14:14:06)
CC & OTB chess
Hello Ranganathan, you mean that you lost FIDE points since you started to play correspondence chess ?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-06 12:15:23)
Loss / Resignation
You mean here at FICGS or FIDE ? Here, resignation or loss is the same, all rating rules are here :
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html
Michel van der Kemp (2009-06-04 10:01:38)
re
Offering a draw is one thing, offering a draw in several consecutive moves is another. I would think that is harassment, especially when the other player has answered politely he thinks he has chances. Harassment should be fought.
I remember a case in FIDE tournament, where one player would offer a draw with each move. The player was first warned by referee, and when he didn't stop, was expelled from tournament.
One could argue if consecutive draw offers in correspondence chess should still be considered harassment, but it is still irritating to say the least.
Garvin Gray (2009-06-04 10:25:07)
already covered
The fide laws of chess already have this type of situation covered under:
12.6 It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever. This includes unreasonable claims or
unreasonable offers of a draw.
Garvin Gray (2009-06-04 10:27:27)
hmm
This seems odd and if the server does automatically award the draw in this situation you describe, then it goes against the fide laws of chess.
The player has to agree to the draw for the game to be concluded as such. If the player runs out of time before agreeing to a draw, then they have lost.
It seems pretty cut and dried to me.
Normajean Yates (2009-06-05 03:07:37)
oh then minor technical change...
instead of the game having been drawn automatically, referee *adjudicates* it as a draw.
This ensures that fide rules are not violated, because a game result *can* be changed by adjudication: for example:
Suppose OTB, immediately after a game is over, the winning player is found to have a hidden transciever with a *log* showing that moves *were* transmitted and move-suggestions *were* recieved. And the player breaks down in tears and admits to cheating: pleading for leniency - not in re that particular game, but for a shorter ban-from-tournaments than s/he expects to get. In this case, at the very least the game would be readjudicated as a loss for said player, no?
Also, on ficgs the 50-move rule is not implemented; so a game won here which would otherwise be drawn under the 50-move rule - wouldn't *that* violate fide rules? For corr chess, it is more iecc/iccf than fide - fide will come around :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-06-05 14:02:03)
draw offer+timeout
There's no problem with violating FIDE rules as long as it is the best choice for correspondence chess (ie. 50 moves rule), on this suggestion for these rare cases, the player should accept the draw himself in my opinion to deserve the result but well, if most players think that's a good idea, I may change that.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-06-23 17:19:19)
FIDE chess world championship
These rules may give many chess lovers a headache IMHO. FIDE will probably have difficulties to save the chess world championship (also speaking of sponsors) yet.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-07-01 16:20:17)
FIDE rating list, july 1st 2009
The new FIDE rating list is out, Veselin Topalov (2813) still tops it 25 points ahead of FIDE world champion Viswanathan Anand (2788), in third place Magnus Carlsen (2772)...
All players rated over 2700 :
1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2813
2 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2788
3 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2772
4 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2768
5 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2760
6 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2759
7 Leko, Peter g HUN 2756
8 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2756
9 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2755
10 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2751
11 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2740
12 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2739
13 Wang, Yue g CHN 2736
14 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2733
15 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2732
16 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2727
17 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2721
18 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2717
19 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2717
20 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2717
21 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2716
22 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2716
23 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2716
24 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2714
25 Akopian, Vladimir g ARM 2712
26 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2710
27 Motylev, Alexander g RUS 2710
28 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2707
29 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2703
30 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2703
31 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2703
32 Bu, Xiangzhi g CHN 2702
33 Ni, Hua g CHN 2701
Michel van der Kemp (2009-07-02 11:56:00)
Chucky
Ivanchuk lost a lot of rating points, but it would have been OK if FIDE had recognised a tournament he won convincingly, in which case he would have had almost 30 points more. Perhaps this is a hidden punishment from FIDE for Ivanchuk's doping incident during the chess olympiad in Germany earlier this year.
Pity how politics can influence our game.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-08-01 22:28:54)
Maxime Vachier-Lagrave wins Biel 2009
Finally, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave emerged from the 2600 GM field to convincingly win the top tournament of Biel, a category 19 double round robin tournament, ahead of super GMs like Vassily Ivanchuk, Alexander Morozevich or Boris Gelfand. At eighteen and with a FIDE rating of 2703 he may be the next french good surprise in the top class players and bring some fresh blood in such tournaments. Does anyone have an opinion on his style of play or something ? :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-08-04 19:20:34)
Karpov vs. Kasparov rematch
You are probably aware of this promising rematch between former world chess champions Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov. (Valencia - Spain, september 21-24, 2009)
What do you think about the possible games ? Is Karpov now too old, is Kasparov able to concentrate on chess only again ? What can be their state of mind during such a match, 25 years after their first match that became legendary...
It should be a great event anyway, maybe even more interesting than the last FIDE chess championships. (By the way I don't know if there will be sponsors and/or prizes)
Rolf Staggat (2009-08-06 18:20:56)
Valencia-match
I did not find a site about that match, but
<previews.chessdom.com/kasparov-karpov-valencia-2009>
is a report about it, also to find on the <fide.com> site
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 ?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-09-02 18:00:40)
FIDE chess rating list, september 2009
As Veselin Topalov (former FIDE world champion) & Viswanathan Anand (current FIDE world champion) did not play any game since the july rating list has been published, they remain number 1 & number 2 in the top rankings, but their followers played quite many games : Levon Aronian is now number 3 with 2773 points while Vladimir Kramnik & Magnus Carlsen are number 4 and 5 with 2772 elo points.
Here are the 2700+ players :
1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2813
2 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2788
3 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2773
4 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2772
5 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772
6 Leko, Peter g HUN 2762
7 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2757
8 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2756
9 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2756
10 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2750
11 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2742
12 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2741
13 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2741
14 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2740
15 Wang, Yue g CHN 2736
16 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2735
17 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2733
18 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2730
19 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2725
20 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2722
21 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2721
22 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2719
23 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2718
24 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2717
25 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2715
26 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2711
27 Motylev, Alexander g RUS 2710
28 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2709
29 Short, Nigel D g ENG 2706
30 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2703
31 Kasimdzhanov, Rustam g UZB 2702
32 Bu, Xiangzhi g CHN 2702
Thibault de Vassal (2009-09-07 21:51:31)
Carlsen number 1
Now that Carlsen is training with Kasparov, how much time before being ranked number 1 in FIDE ratings according to you ?
Thibault de Vassal (2009-09-08 00:10:04)
A Big Mouth on Rybka Forum
Hi Wayne, does he have any rating (FIDE/IECG/ICCF) ?
I would be curious to see some games by him of course :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-03 11:40:33)
FIDE november rating list
Finally, Magnus Carlsen crossed the 2800 mark and reaches the 2nd place on the FIDE november rating list, ahead of world champion Viswanathan Anand. The next months will be interesting, at last :)
FIDE November 1st 2009 – Top 20 Players
Rank Name Title Country Rating Games BirthYear
1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2810 10 1975
2 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2801 10 1990
3 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2788 0 1969
4 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2786 13 1982
5 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772 0 1975
6 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2758 11 1986
7 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2758 11 1968
8 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2754 17 1976
9 Leko, Peter g HUN 2752 10 1979
10 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2750 0 1977
11 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2748 10 1987
12 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2739 13 1969
13 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2739 5 1983
14 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2736 13 1983
15 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2736 10 1983
16 Wang, Yue g CHN 2734 27 1987
17 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2729 15 1983
18 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2723 12 1990
19 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2719 25 1985
20 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2719 18 1972
More details in the Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5879
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-17 09:05:44)
Bill Gates, chess and Go
Billionaire Bill Gates cites go as one of his personal failures. "When I was young... I wanted to be the world's best chess player and, of course, I didn't succeed. I wanted to be the world's best Go player, too...so I've had plenty of disappointments", Gates said in his 1997 book, Bill Gates Speaks: Insight from the world's greatest entrepreneur (page 227)
http://books.google.com/books?id=Qoho6AIXTksC
Just read in the AGA newsletter.
Did he really try ? Any FIDE or AGA rating ? :)
Hannes Rada (2009-11-29 08:55:25)
FIDE GMs at CC
There are several examples where an OTB GM played cc and could not dominate the other (hobby) players.
i.e.
Young Austrian Fide GM Markus Ragger here at the Austrian cc team championship
http://www.iccf-webchess.com/EventCrossTable.aspx?id=18429
Further I had a draw at chessfriend against FIDE GM Daniel Fridman (Elo > 2660).
As far as I know Fide GM Ulf Anderson played at ICCF without so much success.
Michel van der Kemp (2009-11-30 12:51:02)
Andersson
Didn't Ulf Andersson become ICCF World Champion? At least I remember a game where he beat then world champion Gert Timmerman (2200-2300 FIDE rating) with black. I know for a fact he was at one point the highest rated player in ICCF.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-24 14:28:18)
USCF / FIDE & other ratings
Hi all,
As you know FIDE / ICCF / IECG ratings can be accepted as provisional or established (in the case of ICCF & IECG) ratings at FICGS. I cannot even remember why USCF ratings weren't accepted so far, it should be the case soon. As far as I can remember, the only point is that USCF_rating ~ FIDE_rating + 100 or the other way.
Do you know other official rating lists (that are not included in FIDE & USCF) available on the internet that should be considered ?
Same question for Go, it seems to me that only AGA & EGF ratings are available on the internet. Do you know if chinese, japanese & korean ratings are available as well ?
William Taylor (2010-01-03 11:59:09)
ECF
English Chess Federation grades are available online here:http://grading.bcfservices.org.uk/
They are very different to FIDE ratings, but can be converted fairly accurately using the formula: ECF x 8 + 650 = FIDE
As for go, I believe at least the Chinese, probably the Koreans, and possibly the Japanese do publish rating lists online, but it would be difficult for me to find them - your best bet is asking on godiscussions.com.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-03 14:29:25)
Hosting tournaments
Sure it is possible, I would even create such tournaments for free (if not too many ones) but it would be played with FICGS rules which are slightly different from FIDE rules. About players able to create their own tournaments, closed or not, I would have to think about this, I'm not sure it is really necessary as e.g. I always add thematic chess tournaments that I'm suggested, and "private" tournaments may be not so easy to start, but if there is a strong demand, I could arrange that.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-09-08 00:58:52)
Ilyumzhinov leaves Kalmykia presidency
FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov would fully rely on his reelection at the FIDE presidency (15 years already), "leaving" the presidency of the Kalmykia republic after 17 years...
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6659
To be continued.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-13 21:43:04)
Rating calculation
You have to make the difference between ratings updated in real time (like advanced chess ratings) & the FICGS correspondence chess rating calculation, the idea of those ratings updated every 2 months is to avoid peaks, consequently when you win, draw or lose three games after the last rating calculation, your future rating does not take account of the first result THEN the second one THEN the third one, it is actually completely recalculated by taking account of all results at the same time, so you DO NOT win or lose points AFTER EACH result, your performance is recalculated according to the formula explained in the rules & that looks like the french FIDE rating calculation. One thing that explains "strange" variations after 2 or 3 results only is that the rating calculation is just more accurate when you have many results & particularly when your score is near 50%.
That should answer to the discussions I had with Kamesh & Ralph, but maybe my explanations are not so clear, sorry about that again.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-13 21:57:01)
Anatoly Karpov next FIDE president ?
The former chess world champion Anatoly Karpov announced his candidature to become the next FIDE president, surely it would be a first step to change the negative image of FIDE in the world and to attract new sponsors... It may be something more than to change a visage for FIDE. What do you think ?
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6179
Daniel Parmet (2010-03-14 21:32:10)
Anatoly Karpov next FIDE president ?
I'm hopeful.
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 Leităo, 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!
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-21 01:13:54)
Freestyle Cup: April 2010
Dear chessfriends, the next FICGS chess freestyle cup waiting list is open until april 3. This 6 rounds swiss tournament will start on april 3, 13:00 server time (first three rounds, every 2 hours) and on april 10, 13:00 server time (last three rounds, every 2 hours). Prize is 100% of the entry fees in E-Points + 100 E-Points. FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the waiting list for free, please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register.
To enter the waiting list :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=entry_tournament&tournament=ficgs_chess_cup
Feel free to reply here if you have any suggestions, I hope that this format (2 consecutive saturdays, 3 rounds per day) will be ok for the most !
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2010-04-01 14:03:27)
SITE DOWN HACKED???
must be a conspiration from the fide
Thibault de Vassal (2010-04-23 15:47:05)
Anand vs. Topalov, world championship
So it seems that a FIDE world championship match is to start between current FIDE world champion Viswanathan Anand and former world champion Veselin Topalov...
I'm not even sure if this is a kind of "semi-final" or if this is a final match in the cycle... In my memory, Veselin Topalov beat Gata Kamsky and V. Anand beat Vladimir Kramnik, right?
Anyway a first problem occured with Anand asking FIDE to postpon the start of the match by one day because of the lack of airplanes as a consequence of the icelandic volcano (yes, Bobby Fischer stroke again! :)), the psychological war started and Silvio Danailov already threatened to sue FIDE.
What do you expect to happen during this match? Who is your favourite?
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.
Gabriel Ciobanu (2010-05-19 10:53:55)
Go (weiqi) is...
a game about hiding emotions. Who hides better his emotions, wins... This is a joke!
Go is an unique game, about self esteem, self confidence, respect and concentration.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-05-27 00:13:35)
Number of rated FIDE players
There would be 116,362 rated FIDE players all over the world within 143 federations (most important ones are Germany, Russia, Spain, France and India.. only 26 of them have more than 1000 rated players, e.g. only 398 rated players in China)
A Chessbase article that is worth to read!
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6364
Lazaro Munoz (2010-06-03 19:23:41)
Number of rated FIDE players
FIDE has always had a bit of an elitist streak with rating, but also most national tournament administrator do not send in tournament reports from local events to them so that is another reason why do not the expected bell curve of ratings.
The traditional method for a lower rated player to get a FIDE rating was to play in major open event such as the World Open and hopefully play against a FIDE rated player. But since these events are broken in under-xxxx (by ratings) sections, most lower rated players never get a chance to play against a rated opponent unless they were brave enough to enter to top open section.
ICCF had a similar elitist attitude but that has changed in recent years; however at in countries that have a established national CC federation, you use to need to be a member of one to play; it use to be you needed to be invited by your national federation, but that part has changed and as long as you a member of national CC organization you can enter any ICCF that you qualify for (based on ratings).
BTW, ICCF has announced a Webserver open tournament that is free to anyone that does not currently have an ICCF rating. If you have one (ICCF rating) you can join via your national fed or at the ICCF site; I found that the ICCF site was more expensive than going through the national federation.
--laz
Thibault de Vassal (2010-06-30 22:51:38)
FIDE elections: Karpov vs. Ilyumzhinov
Hi all,
I'm not so aware of the FIDE elections but if I remember well Anatoly Karpov was a supporter of Kirsan Ilyumzhinov during the previous elections... Do you think that all this is just to say "yes this is an election, as you can see there is an opposition" ?
Why there is no other candidates? Too "expensive" ?
Thibault de Vassal (2010-07-03 13:03:04)
FIDE ratings july 2010
Once again, Magnus Carlsen makes the news with the 2nd highest rating ever reached (2826)...
Rank Name Title Nation Rating
1 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2826
2 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2803
3 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2800
4 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2790
5 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2783
6 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2761
7 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2760
8 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2755
9 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2749
10 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2748
11 Karjakin, Sergey g RUS 2747
12 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2739
13 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2739
14 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2734
15 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2734
16 Leko, Peter g HUN 2734
17 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2732
18 Navara, David g CZE 2731
19 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2729
20 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2726
21 Wang, Hao g CHN 2724
22 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2723
23 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2723
24 Vitiugov, Nikita g RUS 2722
25 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2720
26 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2719
27 Almasi, Zoltan g HUN 2717
28 Wang, Yue g CHN 2716
29 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2716
30 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2715
31 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2713
32 Jobava, Baadur g GEO 2710
33 Tomashevsky, Evgeny g RUS 2708
34 Nepomniachtchi, Ian g RUS 2706
35 Adams, Michael g ENG 2706
36 Onischuk, Alexander g USA 2701
37 Nielsen, Peter Heine g DEN 2700
38 Kasimdzhanov, Rustam g UZB 2699
39 Caruana, Fabiano g ITA 2697
40 Fressinet, Laurent g FRA 2697
41 Vallejo Pons, Francisco g ESP 2697
42 Bologan, Viktor g MDA 2695
43 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2691
44 Akopian, Vladimir g ARM 2691
45 Timofeev, Artyom g RUS 2690
46 Short, Nigel D g ENG 2690
47 Efimenko, Zahar g UKR 2689
48 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2688
49 Miroshnichenko, Evgenij g UKR 2686
50 Motylev, Alexander g RUS 2685
Thibault de Vassal (2010-07-04 12:27:47)
FIDE elections: Karpov vs. Ilyumzhinov
The show started... Karpov attacks! :)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6476
Daniel Parmet (2010-09-20 00:13:09)
Corr. Chess Maxims
I'm not attacking you. I'm attacking your silly ideas which I've proven 100% wrong and you have yet to defend in any way. You are attacking me. Therefore, your own quote defeats yourself. Irony for you.
I think its best to finish this note on the fact that most players who play this game have never read the rules. Not for USCF, FIDE, or any of the sites they play on. Try looking up the draw rules sometimes, you might be shocked to find out about the fact that no place would ever honor your maxim.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-09-29 17:56:58)
Ilyumzhinov leaves Kalmykia presidency
...and Kirsan Ilyumzhinov wins again, he will be president of FIDE during 4 more years, 2010-2014. Hard defeat for Karpov.
Kamesh Nookala (2010-10-27 06:35:12)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum
Well not really.
I am sorry if am being candid in stating that my first access to corr world is FICGS. It created the best impression which even ICCF could not. I am confident that your efforts will bring a great change to the rybkaforum. Keep the spirits high my friend, come what may :)
As far as my game vs Vytron, I am not sure where it is leading me
Jimmy Huggins (2010-10-29 11:40:25)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum
The tournament format has been decide. It will be a 2 game a round swiss tournament. Now my working on a pairing system as we spoke. I've been told by garvin gray that he is an official FIDE arbiter who has the latest programs to be used on swiss tournaments. I'll keep that in mind going forward. As everyone here has official rating. It will be my job to work something out with the other players on my forum who don't have ratings. This being a Swiss tournament with having a chance to play with both colors. I should be about to just do subjective pairings and be fine. I have a pretty good idea of were the players stand rating wise. I hope everyone is really for an competitive and enjoyable tournament!
Jimmy
Thibault de Vassal (2010-11-05 23:12:32)
Magnus Carlsen drops out of FIDE WCH
An interesting interview of Magnus Carlsen on the FIDE World Championship cycle and privileges of the world champion.
Always the same question: Should the reigning world champion play the next cycle in the same conditions than the other players... (no IMO, by the way the 16, 32 {whatever} who would play this tournament do have privileges the same way)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6789
William Taylor (2010-12-24 17:46:51)
Chess Christmas song
Hello everyone,
I have recorded a chess-themed Christmas song about the FIDE President, called 'Kirsan Baby', which you can listen to here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_xYiUEDRPU
I'm not a very good singer, but perhaps it'll make you laugh. Let me know what you think. :)
Will
Thibault de Vassal (2011-02-27 01:06:30)
FICGS chess World Championship #9
Starting with a non-FIDE/ICCF/IECG rating, one need to have finished 9 games to get an established rating. 2 tournaments should be ok.
Thibault de Vassal (2011-02-27 21:20:59)
Plea for classical rating help
I don't know if only the defending champion and/or finalist "should" have any treatment after all... That's the whole debate of the FIDE WCH and I wanted to make it quite the opposite way.
On the opportunities for 2100-2200 players to cross the 2200 barrier, your last 4 ratings were 2160, 2157, 2160 & 2135. The tickets system also allow you to enter the CLASS M (2200+) waiting list for 10 Epoints if your rating is above 2150. I'm not trying to sell anything there but it is an option that is dedicated to help in such cases.
On the WCH cycle, maybe another idea would be to "extend" the M Groups idea to the 2200-2300 players. With 2200 to ~2400 players in these groups, there will be more strong players in Stage 2... I'm not sure about the whole consequences but it may be worth a try, what do you think?
Thibault de Vassal (2011-03-01 11:17:27)
FICGS chess World Championship #9
The idea of this championship was to have a tournament looking like the old classical FIDE WCH, so it would be a non-sense to me to make such changes (the chess world will always be divided into 2 categories on this point :)), I'm not opposed to create something like a Cup tournament (the Freestyle tournament is one example) but it would be probably too much already for the addicted players that we are, so the WBCCC is a good alternative.
Glad to see that Daniel agrees on the 2000 prov. rating, does anyone have any opinion on the suggestions I made just after "@Garvin:" in my previous post?
Thibault de Vassal (2011-03-07 21:45:17)
FICGS chess World Championship #9
Well, I see that the idea of "equal chances for everyone" is still in the debate, that's quite strange as I thought it was obvious & accepted that such a thing cannot exist in correspondence chess.
No correspondence chess championship format can give equal chances to everyone because there is no time for this, and to try to do it only gives less chances to the best player to win it.
The way IECG & ICCF do it has probably as many advantages & inconvenients as we do it at FICGS but at the end the efficiency is quite similar to find as accurately as possible the best player among the highest rated ones IMO & everyone have NOT equal chances (either you have to play a few rounds more or there is a TER rule or whatever).
I'm not saying that one format is better than others, some will like the FICGS format, some will prefer other formats, that's all IMO. Do not think that the WBCCC format solves all problems, it tries to avoid the time problem but the number of players is very limited in the running edition.
Finally, why to play another ICCF/IECG championship here?
I think that there is no argument that can justify that all players (including the 8 players of the knockout after all) should play in regular groups, as well as no argument can justify the opposite. It was just a choice to make it different and somewhat looking like the old FIDE championship.
That's why choices 2) & 4) are really best to me. 2) may be better because the range 2100-2400~ may be too large for M groups, but another solution may be to build M (2250-2400)& N (2100-2250) groups like it was done in one WCH cycle, where the number of qualified players were different. Actually the idea of class groups with different numbers of qualified players is really interesting but of course, the chances are not the same for everyone once again.
Whatever the choice, surely it will not be ok for some players for any reason, but I'm now quite sure that a change should be done.
Paul Valle (2011-05-03 23:40:03)
Starting Rating
First of all: This is a great site, and love the fact that the Thib interacts with users to improve the site. Many decent chess sites out there, but this is rare.
When it comes to starting ratings, I would like to add some ideas for improvement:
The point of ratings is that they should reflect playing strength.
Likewise, the goal with starting ratings is that it should reflect actual playing strength.
Rules for both should be as equal and fair as possible.
Assumption:
I) the composition of «Active Players» and their ratings here on FICGS, are a valuable source in guesstimating a new players rating. Most players here play aided by an engine and the site is free, so players here should reflect what comes in the door.
(BTW My minimum definition of an «Active Player», is someone who has made at least one move in the period leading up to the official rating list.)
II) Lightning rating is a good estimate of Correspondence Rating.
I further believe that any choices or complications made to the FIDE rules of one starting rating fits all, should mostly be done to aid good Advanced Chess Players, and good OTB-players. Such complications might not be fair, but essential for FICGS to be relevant to the elite.
My proposal:
«Newly Regs» have a choice of THREE options upon starting to play correspondence CHESS on FICGS:
A) Start with a set rating. I would suggest this be set at the average or median off all Active players. Or a fixed numerical constant times this average. You could of course set up all kinds of formulas, but the main point in should reflect the current composition of FICGS members and not estimates based on unverifiable data given by the player.
Some players might feel that they are way better than this and might be discouraged to join and fight for a long time to reach the top tournaments they feel they are entitiled to play. The seccond option is created to encourage these players to join, and give them a choice to prove their skill relativly quickly and accurately.
B) Play 10 preliminary lightning games (starting with the same rating as in A), and then using the end lightning rating as the starting rating for normal tournaments. These players will get a much more accurate starting rating, and may be well motivated to put in the effort if they care. (If all the 10 games went close to 60 moves, and both players used all their time, the playing time would be around 16 hours)
Then there are the top international correspondence or Over-The-Board players. Why bother these with 10 lightning games?
C) Titled players can start in Master with a higher fixed rating (same as in option A, but multiplied with a higher constant), but must register by credit card to prove identity.
Possible drawbacks and problems
1) Assumption I and/or II is flawed
2) A poor player might be highly overrated choosing option A)
3) Players can dump lightning rating points to a friend
4) Implementation cost – development
-What ya think folks?
reg, Paul
Thibault de Vassal (2011-05-10 12:38:23)
Active rating lists
Hi guys, sorry for the delay for this one... :/
@Don : it may take a while, but I don't feel it's so hard for a good poker player... but it's kind of hard to say anyway.
@Paul : thanks for such a post with many ideas & questions! this issue is really complex of course but I made some observations during these years and my conclusions were:
- in average, self-estimated ratings are best. during the first years all players with no FIDE/IECG/ICCF ratings started at 1400 or 1700 and it quite distorted the list as many strong centaurs started from the bottom. your idea makes sense but it looks more "esthetic" for a centaur with no official rating to start with a 1900 or 2000 rating than e.g. 1937 :/
- your idea of 10 lightning games is very interesting! but not many players are involved in these games (I guess because of the time they spend on corr. games) and not many would accept to play unrated or low-rated players. I'll think about that though...
- about option C, there were early general forfeits by players FIDE rated over 2200, that's a pity and it distorted (not so much) a few ratings temporarily [actually it also helps to maintain a small inflation of ratings, which is logical] but in the other hand FIDE/ICCF ratings given as provisional ratings help to build a rating list with ratings that "tell" something... such choices are not obvious, obviously :)
Thibault de Vassal (2011-07-11 23:26:36)
How come ...
Hello Robert,
The established rating list shows not only ratings built at FICGS but also at IECG or FIDE/ICCF (that are quite similar).
I understand your question and that point is similar to another recent discussion, that's why I'll make an update soon to distinguish players who never played any game at FICGS.
Garvin Gray (2011-07-16 18:02:39)
Case of resignation in WCH tournament
Thibault- I think I can offer you a solution to this from the fide laws of chess, tournament rules section.
These types of situations are already covered: http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=20&view=category
11. Where not all games are played
(c) When a player withdraws or is expelled from a round-robin tournament, the effect shall be as follows:
(d) If a player has completed less than 50% of his games, his score remains in the tournament table (for rating and historical purposes), but the points scored by him or against him are not counted in the final standings. The unplayed games of the player and his opponents are indicated by (-) in the tournament table and those of his opponents by (+). If neither player is present this will be indicated by two (-).
(e) If a player has completed at least 50% of his games, his score shall remain in the tournament table and shall be counted in the final standings. The unplayed games of the player are shown as indicated as above.
(g) Articles 10(e) and (f) also apply to team events; both unplayed matches and unplayed games must be clearly indicated as such.
Thibault de Vassal (2011-11-12 23:38:39)
World Championship
Hello Des,
It has been discussed many times when the server was created. The aim here was to "find" the best player while avoiding the chancy factor (as much as possible) and by the shortest way. It was also to look like the old classical FIDE championship, that was much more spectacular than the current one.
Anyway it will always be matter of discuss :)
Garvin Gray (2011-12-27 08:52:26)
Achieving playing norms
Is there a table to see what it takes to get the titles?
Fide has tables for what it takes to qualify for different playing norms: http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=58&view=article
so I am wondering if there are similar ficgs tables.
Of most interest is at what average rating does the score move from 4.5/6 to 4/6 and so forth.
Thibault de Vassal (2012-04-25 17:29:59)
Anand-Gelfand, FIDE World Championship
The next FIDE World Championship will be held in Moscow from May 10 to May 30, 2012.
Looks like reigning World Champion Viswanathan Anand is ultra-favourite... what do you think about Boris Gelfand's chances in this match?
George Clement (2012-04-25 18:43:08)
Anand-Gelfand, FIDE World Championship
Very slim. I don't think he can match Anand.
Thibault de Vassal (2012-09-20 17:17:14)
5th Kolkata Open Grandmasters Tourney
Just forwarding an announcement...
"Alekhine Chess Club under the aegis of All India Chess Federation is organizing 5th Kolkata Open Grandmasters Chess Tournament, recognized by FIDE and Government of India, from 3rd to 13th December 2012 at Gorky Sadan, Kolkata, India.
The details of the meet are available at : http://www.alekhinechessclub.com/5kolkata/detailsfinal.pdf and the details of the last meet of this edition are also available at : http://www.alekhinechessclub.com/4kolkata/index.html (we attache a few picture from that meet)."
Thibault de Vassal (2012-10-07 19:16:15)
WCH Final match
I'm not sure if there can be a real debate on this issue (but we can try of course)... all opinions are in the nature, when I created FICGS I had in mind the original FIDE WCH and I'm still a huge fan of this system. Now fact is FIDE WCH does not mean anything anymore (its champions as well) after numerous bad changes and I feel FICGS chess WCH makes sense more and more.
12 games is enough to fight for a win IMO and I'm sure that there are a few players able to beat Eros in such a match (doesn't mean it would happen anytime though :)), I'm just too impatient to watch the next ones. Eros is building his name in correspondence chess in multiple places at the same time, and the fact that it happened here so quickly after he joined us makes me think that the system is good! I see nothing to change, the result of his match with Alberto was fully explained by Eros, the score has no importance at the end... and he deserves his other title in the other cycle even more by not having to play the final match... just my opinion of course, as I can understand all systems (ICCF etc.), just a question of personal taste at the end.
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?
Roy Shapland (2012-10-24 14:00:23)
How to amend rating?
Signed up in last 24 hours. Just noticed now that I'm 56 fide points higher then I remembered. The rating is used in tournament pairing so feel that making it correct is helpful to all. How do I get this fixed?
Thibault de Vassal (2012-10-26 23:49:22)
How to amend rating?
Hello Roy,
I can do that, but I cannot find this rating in the FIDE database, do you have any direct link to your FIDE card or something?
Thibault de Vassal (2012-12-01 23:09:11)
Houdini 3.0
It seems that Houdini 3.0 is available as a commercial program for a few weeks at Cruxis website.
The 64-bit 4CPU would have reached a 3334 elo rating on the CCRL 40/4 list. This is about 90 points more than the free version Houdini 1.5a which seems to be a great improvement!
I just read on Wikipedia that Houdini was used by Viswanathan Anand [FIDE world champion]... It seems that it beats Rybka 4 in every match. In brief, Houdini is by far the best chess engine nowadays...
Thibault de Vassal (2013-01-10 22:26:30)
Chess Server Team Tournament
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Dear friends,
I'm very sorry, it seems that only 8 teams can play the tournament and they just found 8..... So we cannot play it.
Maybe 2 parallel tournaments could be possible but well, it wouldn't be the same thing, I guess.
That's my bad, I didn't think this would be a speed race and I was not so confident to find so many players interested. Obviously I was wrong :/
My apologies to all. Anyway, that's a good thing to know that server team tournaments played at ICCF web server are popular in the whole correspondence chess world. We'll be there next time!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Charlie Neil (2013-04-21 19:59:04)
!!! The Next world chess Champion !!!
Now it is Carlsen v Anand. Vishy will find it hard to prepare as as far as I can see Magnus plays just about any opening with confidence. Krammik and Gelfand are theorists while Carlsen is a player.
Neel Basant (2013-06-03 06:48:54)
Playing activity top 20 players
Will there be rating update before starting of the tournament ?
And i think it is not fair to advance to the next stage .[To the player with the strongest tournament entry rating]
As per FIDE tournament standing ( final Rankig)the lower rated player with the equal points wins because.
Thibault de Vassal (2013-06-05 00:06:55)
Wch cycles possible changes?
Hi Garvin!
Some changes have been made for the chess WCH, about 1 year and a half ago, complicating the rules but not so bad IMO.
I'm not against changes but I'm definitely for coherence... as you know, I think that there is no point changing FICGS WCH going to another round-robin one, just an example. It would kill the original scheme & previous championships value just like FIDE killed its own scheme. I gave my opinion on this when launching the very first championship. Also, I'm quite convinced that constant changes always become bad and hide another problem.
I'm still favourable to create the FICGS CUP with another scheme though! But conditions are not fulfilled... we have no new players enough, numbers are very bad these times. FICGS major problem is here... solving it and most changes proposals become useless.
Anyway, do not think that I will have the last word here for ever, that won't be the case... I only hope that the best decisions will be made for the site.
Alvin Alcala (2013-06-21 18:51:04)
Playing activity top 20 players
Blitz and Rapid Fide events are becoming popular fast. I agree with you Scott, Thib should grabe this opportunity I'm sure a surge of new faces will com to play in this site.
Thibault de Vassal (2013-06-21 19:48:27)
Playing activity top 20 players
@ Alvin: you mean Iccf events?! what are Fide rapid events if not games played in less than 1 day?
@ Robert: for 1v1 we have rapid silver tournaments, but there is a stake of 10 epoints (or it would be unrated for obvious reasons).
@ Scott: 10 days + 1 day/move does not seem very different from 30 days + 1 day/move, I doubt it can bring more players. Standard time control remain even more popular here. On large cash prizes, I agree for sure :) ...
Thibault de Vassal (2013-10-08 11:57:05)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president
Is Kasparov back in the chess world?
"Six winning moves" is his program and obviously money is the key.
Do you think he has a chance to unseat 18-year incumbent Kirsan Ilyumzhinov in this 2014 election?
http://www.chessbase.com/Home/TabId/211/PostId/4011444/kasparov-for-president--2014-fide-campaign-081013.aspx
Bogoljub Teverovski (2013-10-18 12:08:10)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president
Garry has a chance. My estimation is 50/50.
Garvin Gray (2013-10-18 14:37:25)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president
Money has nothing to do with it at all. It all has to do with the votes of the dodgy african nations. You know. The ones who have one vote, the same number of votes as federations that have thousands of fide rated players, but do not have a single fide rated player.
One vote per federation, no matter how many fide rated players or members you have. So is it all a matter of how much you can bribe or offer the african nations.
Alvin Alcala (2013-10-18 14:52:47)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president
It's politics, he has no chance.
Dmitri Mamrukov (2013-10-22 21:16:49)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president
Evgeny Bareev: Subjective speculations on the strange Kasparov-Karpov tandem
http://www.onefide.com/2010/05/28/kasparov-and-karpov-are-playing-another-game-this-time-a-political-one-by-igm-evgeny-bareev/
Thibault de Vassal (2013-11-13 23:29:26)
World chess championship Anand / Carlsen
4 games played already in the FIDE world chess championship and the situation remains completely open...
Chances are about 50/50, obviously...
Peter W. Anderson (2014-04-10 11:14:59)
Alvin Alcala in Freestyle Battle 2014
Yes, excellent performance by Alvin.
Anson Williams is interesting. I can't find him on any correspondence sites. I believe he is English but I cannot find any record of an English Chess Federation or FIDE rating for him. The only type of chess he seems to play is freestyle and he seems to do very well at it. He must have a lot of natural talent because there are some strong OTB and correspondence players in that tournament.
Good luck Alvin for the last round :)
Garvin Gray (2014-08-31 10:34:50)
Standard time control abusers
Players are ok with the time control, that is not in dispute, it is this behaviour and behaviours like it.
Any arbiter feels that actions during a game are against the general spirit of the game and bring the game of chess in disrepute, they can always use the fide laws of chess PREFACE:
PREFACE
The Laws of Chess cannot cover all possible situations that may arise during a game, nor can they regulate all administrative questions. Where cases are not precisely regulated by an Article of the Laws, it should be possible to reach a correct decision by studying analogous situations which are regulated in the Laws. The Laws assume that arbiters have the necessary competence, sound judgement and absolute objectivity. Too detailed a rule might deprive the arbiter of his freedom of judgement and thus prevent him from finding a solution to a problem dictated by fairness, logic and special factors. FIDE appeals to all chess players and federations to accept this view.
A necessary condition for a game to be rated by FIDE is that it shall be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess.
It is recommended that competitive games not rated by FIDE be played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess.
Member federations may ask FIDE to give a ruling on matters relating to the Laws of Chess.
And:
Article 11: The conduct of the players
11.1 The players shall take no action that will bring the game of chess into disrepute.
Whilst this is rather broad and rather vague, surely DMD type actions fall under this heading.
Garvin Gray (2014-10-28 23:51:08)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
With the next ficgs wch approaching, I assume this event will now be held under the new rules for the fide laws of chess that began July 1 2014.
Where is the new information contained that states how the new rules will be applied to this event as some of the fide laws chess have had some significant changes and could be make a large change for how some rules are applied on here.
Thibault de Vassal (2014-10-31 15:38:43)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
FICGS rules are based on current FIDE rules so I don't see any major change except I should specify this "default time" (which is the total time here, but in the WCH tournaments). Do you see anything else?
Garvin Gray (2014-10-31 16:00:59)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
There have been quite a few changes. But considering our continual disagreements over many issues and the fact that apart from this event, I have walked away from this site, it is not my job to now go ahead and do your work for you.
I am not your research assistant. I offered you my advice many times over the years and in almost all occasions you flatly rejected them, or took so long to come around to them, that I have taken the decision to walk away from this site.
The new fide laws of chess have been on display since July 1 and have been confirmed in stages since then. I am not going to be your research assistant and now sit down and prepare a full document on what has changed and how it should be incorporated into this event- ESPECIALLY- when I know from your past form- that you will flat reject most, if not all, of my recommendations.
So I am not going to waste my time being your research assistant.
I have my own event to prepare for in 2015 and prepare the rules for in that event, which I am working through.
I can give you a word of warning though. If you think that the default time is the only major change, you are very wrong.
Thibault de Vassal (2014-10-31 19:46:59)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
I asked because you started the topic. I'm not sure why you did it in this context... but thank you anyway. I'm sorry to have disappointed you so many times but not applying some (most or not) suggestions doesn't mean it was not worth to study it, but you know my thought on all this already. Good luck with your tournaments!
Garvin Gray (2014-11-01 22:51:23)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
There was no context other than a very simple request. With the new rules now in operation, I was asking where do we find a copy or further information on what changes have taken place for this event that flow on from the changes to the laws.
The areas I was mainly concerned with are in relation to:
5 consecutive repetition of moves and 75 moves without a pawn move or capture. The arbiter can now step and force the draw, there does not need to be a player claim.
So will the server be updated to match this? There are quite a few other changes as well where current server practices do not match the new rules.
But as I said, it is your responsibility to make sure that the competition complies with the new rules if you advertise that your tournament follows the fide laws of chess where possible.
The reason for my stance is a very simple one. Over the years, on almost every single occassion, when I have made suggestions or recommendations to you, you have gone in the opposite direction in pretty much 100 percent of cases. Or even when you have claimed to 'agree' with my recommendation, you have then given the trial period such a short time to make it practically worthless.
The last saga in relation with Nick Burrows said to me that, except for the wch, I will no longer be playing on this site.
I can tell you directly, your handling of that issue lost you a long time member.
On the format of the wch, if I actually thought this format was fair and even gave me a shot of winning it, rather than being so heavily biased in favour of Eros Riccio winning it every time, to the point of being fixed, then I would use that as sole motivation to win it.
Thibault de Vassal (2014-11-02 14:19:06)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
About repetition and number of moves without a pawn move or capture, FICGS rules already specify that it does not apply here so there is no change to make.
The rest of your message explains the context I was talking about. But we don't have to agree on anything: As I explained when FICGS started and many times after that, I wanted to make it (particularly the championship cycle) different from what already exists (and closer to previous FIDE cycle). Obviously, you prefer the other way, that's not a big deal, and there is ICCF or LSS. I would have been ok to make a cup cycle if we had players enough but that's definitely not the case. What to add? There are many reasons why FICGS has quite few members (real names to start...) but there are well known advantages to this. Otherwise there are chess.com, gameknot, so many sites full of players. Finally, complaining players are probably the most important ones here because they constantly bring ideas. There was many many improvements in the first years and it did not go against the coherence of the site. Your cup cycle idea does not even go against the coherence of the original idea of the site, only the context is wrong here. Changing the WCH cycle for a ICCF-like one would be the worst thing to do in this point of view. But that's only a point of view.
Timofey Denisov (2014-11-04 05:21:48)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
Old FIDE cycle in championship match contained 24 games, not 12 :)
Thibault de Vassal (2014-11-04 19:44:07)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
I said "closer", not identical :) 24 games would have been way too much for players at this level, IMHO...
Timofey Denisov (2014-11-05 06:53:29)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
I'm afraid advanced chess in top too drawish for 12 games :) Maybe first start 12, then "revolve" another 12: after end one of these 12 games server start 13th etc till 24? It won't too extend time of WCH, as I think. In worst case, it only doubles it.
Thibault de Vassal (2014-11-05 23:00:39)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
We already envisage this option, but a cycle would be too long and even worst it would delay next final by 6 months more at least (each round must be 8 months long) and it would be the same for each next final match.
Thibault de Vassal (2014-12-01 01:20:17)
Magnus Carlsen beats V. Anand again
Any thoughts on the recent FIDE world championship final match?
Magnus Carlsen beats Viswanathan Anand with 2 points more before the last game, but a few games were not so clear...
Peter W. Anderson (2015-07-09 09:35:12)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
I have avoided commenting further on this idea because I wanted to see what other people had to say. But now I will reply to the points made.
“Giving a bonus for stalemate is almost like playing for stalemating your opponent, which is not the aim of the game and this would change the game deeply.”
As I said I am against a points bonus, but am in favour of using stalemates for tie breaks. The real question is would someone start a game aiming for stalemate as opposed to start the game trying to win? I am not sure how you would do that – either way you have to try to build up an advantage and if it gets big enough it will lead to mate and if it is not quite big enough it might lead to stalemate. Anyone who gets the choice between a win and stalemate will presumably always take the win.
The one way I think this will really affect the game is by discouraging some very deeply analysed defences that are known to drawn or close to drawn but will almost certainly lead to stalemate. Personally I think this is a good thing, but I accept that the opposite view could be taken :)
“I think you overlooking a little that a good defense leading to stalemate means showing great skill. It´s not all about luck.”
Reaching stalemate as the defending side can be very simple (e.g. king and pawn vs king) or can indeed show great skill. It is almost never down to luck. In the case where great skill is shown that skill earns you half a point instead of no points. Nonetheless, the very fact that you needed great skill to save the game shows how close you came to losing, so I see no reason not to use this as a tiebreak rule.
“And stalemating gamepoints definitely will favour stupid engine playing and not human thinking with endgame skill”.
Like Pablo, I think quite the opposite is true. In fact one of my motivations for suggesting the change was to increase the human element in the game.
“According to me, stalemating an opponent (or having King + Bishop vs. King) reflects who played better ONLY IF rules say it before the game. In some cases, it actually reflects a better play, but in some others, it only shows that the stalemated player (or naked king) found a clever way to draw the game by giving the opponent the illusion of an advantage. Isn't it quite subjective after all?”
I have some sympathy for this viewpoint. If we could play perfect chess and at the start of the game someone decided to take the draw by allowing themselves to be stalemated then that would be a very good example supporting that view. However, I think the reality is different. In most cases when someone gets stalemated (or would be stalemated if the game was played through to its conclusion) it is because they have got a worse position and have little choice if they want to save the game.
If the defending side could achieve a draw by stalemate or by other means, then under today’s rules they could choose either way. Under my proposed rules they might be wise to choose the other method, unless of course they were confident of achieving more wins in the match.
“Maybe the games become more interesting if instead give small extra score for win with black!? Encourage black to play for a better score, just as UEFA do in football.”
This might be helpful for tournaments but I don’t think it helps at all for match play. In reality, if you can win just one game in a match you will most likely win the match. Therefore you don’t need a bonus to play for a win with black in a match situation.
However, I think this point indirectly touches on an issue with match play and how hard people try to win, and I do think the stalemate tiebreak rules would help a little with this.
The problem as it stands is that the higher rated player (or the champion in the case of the tile match) knows that if all games are drawn he will win the match. The higher rated player (or champion) can therefore take a low risk approach to the match, with both black and white (actually I think the low risk approach with white is just as much a problem).
If the higher rated player (or champion) was not certain that all draws would win them the match then they would probably try harder to win. This would give a better chance of decisive games in matches.
One way of a achieving this would be through a toss of a coin if the match is tied with all draws. Personally I would not find this satisfactory.
Whilst the likelihood of stalemate is quite low, it will nonetheless be there, so this rule might encourage the higher rated player or champion to try harder for a win.
I will speak from personal experience on this matter. In most of my recent matches I have been the higher rated player. I still play some relatively risky defences as black (e.g. the modern against 1.e4) and I always try to win with white. However, I have to be honest, if I am the higher rated player, I do not always play the very sharpest lines as white and I do not often play some of my riskier defences to 1.d4. If the stalemate tiebreak rule was in place, I would be taking more chances with both white and black.
So whilst I accept that it is not perfect, I still think the stalemate tie-break rule is a good idea. However, as nobody else has spoken out in favour of it I accept that it is very unlikely to be implemented and I won’t write any more on this matter unless someone asks me a direct question. It is time to concentrate on my matches under the existing rules! :)
Garvin Gray (2015-09-27 12:55:00)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
I will carry this point on a bit. Thibault defense for the current system is that it maintains the old classical system of the world championship.
But even fide has recognised that the draw odds to the champion gave too much advantage, and that is in over the board play, never mind in engine chess.
The defending champion already receives two advantages- the right to be in the final match, and if that match is lost, then is in the next qualifying match.
And then the champion in the championship match also receives draw odds.
When you see it written like this, do you now see how much of an advantage the defending champion actually does receive?
And this all goes back to when the site was first set up.
It is not like Eros had to play through from the first stage against all the beginners and fight his way and defeat the previous defending champion to win the title.
Thibault de Vassal (2015-09-30 23:46:19)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
And I'll say it once more :) FIDE made a choice that may have given more chances to everyone, I agree with that, but it seems to me that the chess world championship lost its aura & legend, just like world champions (IMHO). Also, results are a direct consequence of rules, it does not mean that Eros does not deserve his place (IMO), he certainly would have played differently in a round robin. Finally, FIDE WCH is round robin, ICCF WCH is round robin, why everything should be round robin?
Garvin Gray (2015-10-01 01:01:15)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
The Fide World Championship Match is NOT round robin and has NOT been round robin since 2007. Carlsen defeated Anand last year.
The full cycle is shown here:
http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/regulations_match_2016.pdf
Thibault de Vassal (2015-10-01 01:50:23)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Oh, right... big mistake, sorry :) I was probably influenced by your comment "But even fide has recognised that the draw odds to the champion gave too much advantage" (heard "that's why they changed the format to RR")
Anyway, ok I also recognize that the draw odds to the champion gives too much advantage... but this system still looks better than any other one to me. I also remind that even Eros agrees with this draw issue. Finally, yes I'm open to any suggestion for a change, but we really have to find something strong.
Thibault de Vassal (2016-07-03 00:16:33)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP
I do not agree but anyway, anyone can think anything... The aim of this championship was first to offer something different from the ICCF & IECG championships, something that looked like more the old FIDE champs.
There were numerous discussions on this topic in the forum already.
Thibault de Vassal (2017-01-11 15:28:01)
Adjudications & 7 pieces tablebases
Hi all,
Just a reminder about reasons why some games may be not adjudicated even when the result is announced thanks to 7 pieces (or 6 pieces, 5 pieces...) tablebases:
- FICGS chess rules are slightly different from FIDE rules (no 50 moves rule), so an announced draw may not be a draw here.
- According to the rules, any player (who may not use engines or tablebases) has the right to see the game going until a "quite" clear position.
But any player who estimates that the result of the game is known can call the referee to shorten the game.
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#adjudications
Thibault de Vassal (2017-08-06 17:36:46)
When chess is just beauty
I just lost my chess master.
François Melison was a great friend to me, and a very special chess player as all who played him over the board know.
Actually he was the only one I never saw playing to win, even during a rated tournament (his performances were always 200 or 300 points below his level, often losing on time in winning positions - even when having the time to win, even against fide masters).
It seems to me that his deep motivation was to understand, to touch the beauty and nature of the game... that changed my vision of chess but not only, most probably, even if I was never close to approach his talent and vision of the board. He played correspondence chess when real mail was used, when it was a very special thing compared to this strange time dominated by computers. He was able to play blindfold of course, and some simultaneous games are great memories for a few of his chess friends.
He just played for the beauty of chess, or maybe he played for the beauty only.
He was 54 only. I'll miss him.
Condolences from all his friends at ESIGETEL go to his family.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-01-21 17:06:34)
Conditional chess moves (again)
Now I'm to integrate chess.js & chessboard.js in some parts of the site to remove the flash chess board... one issue with conditional moves would be that FICGS rules are slightly different from FIDE rules: no 50/60 moves rule here. Anyway, to be continued.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-01-23 00:08:33)
Conditional chess moves (again)
The exact rule is "The 50 moves rule is not implemented, please call referee if an obvious draw is not accepted by your opponent. Please note that a forced checkmate in more than 50 moves won't be considered as a draw."
Consequently, if tablebases say there is a draw, it is not always a draw here, e.g. if this is a draw because of the 50/60 moves FIDE rule.
Kym Farnik (2018-01-24 12:39:21)
Laws of Chess - new version
https://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=208&view=article
FIDE have news rulz effective 1/1/208.
Enjoy!
Also: Here are the changes... http://rules.fide.com/images/stories/Laws_of_Chess_2018_-_approved_amendments_-_correction_highlighted_version.pdf
Garvin Gray (2018-02-22 11:22:43)
Norm qualification criteria, incorrect?
In looking at the current group/event that I am playing in, which is Rapid SM 15, according to the current way FICGS sets the scores for norms, to get a FIM norm for that event, FEM is at 4 and FIM as at 4.5 for all players.
It has occurred to me that this is different to how fide works out norm opportunities in round robin and swiss events.
In those events, each players average rating of their opponents is worked out and then that is plugged into the system and then that expected score is used to work out what score they need to get a FEM or FIM norm or higher.
To explain further as that might be unclear.
In the group I am talking about, PoulErik Jorgensen has an equal chance of getting an FEM or FIM norm than someone who is rated lower than him, even though that other player is playing a field who is stronger.
So using the FIDE way and the percentages for FEM and FIM norm, I play and average rating field of 2337.8, round up to 2338. This means that in a category 4 event, I need to score 56 percent, or 3.5 for an FEM and 67 percent or 4 points, not 4.5 for a FIM norm.
Now also doing some further calculating, Alex Wosch is able to score a FSM norm as his average rating of opponents is 2,329 and would then need to score 4.5. Under the current arrangement, he is deprived of this opportunity.
Therefore, I could give a rundown of all players, but I am of the conclusion that the current method of calculating Norm qualifications is inadequate and needs to be refined.
My thoughts were triggered to this from the FICGS world cup when any player to reach a FEM norm needed to score 12/16, which was clearly an outlandish score given the field.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-02-25 22:44:25)
Norm qualification criteria, incorrect?
Hi Garvin! FIDE ? I'm not really surprised... As for ICCF, I don't know much the way it calculates norms but FICGS algorithm looks like the way IECG did it. Anyway I understand your point and that makes sense, of course. I guess that this rule was designed to be not too complex to display and understandable as well. I'm not sure yet about what to conclude on this, but anyway that's true, there is something to dig.
Garvin Gray (2018-02-26 02:50:10)
Norm qualification criteria, incorrect?
ICCF is the FIDE way. As all events are round robin, each player is told the score they need to achieve to get a Norm before the event begins.
Almost any item can be easily understandable if kept simple, but does this mean it is the best system if it does not produce the most accurate results for player performances?
For Comparison with ICCF: Here you have the point total for all players to get a norm in norm tournaments.
At ICCF: In the Points table, they have columns which show what score each player needs to reach to get that particular norm.
So that information is included in the cross table.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-02-27 20:01:33)
Norm qualification criteria, incorrect?
Thank you very much for information! (I must have forgotten... It's about 20 years I didn't play in a FIDE tournament ^^)
I'll have to think about this but I'm not sure it would be easy to keep coherence here. In all cases, you're right, that's the best theorical way.
Gabriele D Agostino (2018-07-29 20:48:31)
On (almost) global forfeits in WCH
Thank you Thibault for trying to improve the rules. There are good reasons in either case, consider all the results or give 1 point to everyone. Any decision will not satisfy anyone.
Such a rule is in the FIDE tournament regulations. (8.2)
https://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/Competition_Rules.pdf
Obviously we can choose a different rule.
Daniel Parmet (2020-04-28 22:59:06)
The State of correspondence chess
I have played correspondence chess now for 13 years. During that time, I have played 983 correspondence games. These days I mostly play at ICCF and some of these issues may be ICCF specific... but since ICCF has no forum and I want to get a sense of the health of correspondence chess in general... I posit my thoughts here.
First of all, I think the number of correspondence players and the number of correspondence games are decreasing across the board on all correspondence websites due to the things I want to talk about.
Second, I primarily shifted my playing to ICCF years ago for two reasons: 1) The higher level of competition available; 2) The norms available. Although I was concerned with their fees which are usually minor but, in many cases, certain organizers do construct outlandish tournaments that you need to be wary of (looking at you Venezuela).
On the first point, I think ICCF is a little more open to high caliber players competing up until a point (they really try to prevent you from playing a 2450+ player until you are 2450+ yourself). And the rating protections get tougher and tougher the further you go but they make it easy to play 2300 players. While most websites outside of ICCF, usually have one annual Cup / WCH or Thematics, these other websites usually make it impossible to play anyone more than a few hundred points above you no matter your rating outside of these few events.
On the second point, I think ICCF norms are somewhat of an illusion. They’ve always been hard and much harder to achieve than OTB norms which received a watering down of requirements of decades ago. In fact, ICCF norms are so much harder than FIDE norms that one actually needs to achieve two norms to receive the prerequisite title in ICCF vs the standard three norms required by FIDE. In the US, for example, there are 116 ICCF Titled players in history (13 GMs, 25 SIM, 78 IMs) vs 828 FIDE Titled players in present (101 GMs 166 IM 561 FMs) [https://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml]. Now however, there is a proposal, for the ICCF GM Title only, proposed by Dennis Doren, ICCF Rules Commissioner who really does a lot for correspondence chess, and SIM Uwe Staroske, ICCF Qualifications and Ratings Commissioner, to remove the requirement to have to play GMs to get the GM Title [leaving IM and SIM untouched] [https://www.iccf.com/Proposal.aspx?id=1280]. This proposal states, “A search of the ICCF data indicates that 21 players obtained at least 2 GM norms across 24 games but failed to get the GM title because of the requirement of "5 GM" opponents. (Only 5 of those players are currently active).” Leaving aside the fact that this proposal violates the very definition of the GM Title, one must beat the club in order to join it, the proposal further outlines the real problems without addressing them, “The GM Title has already become far harder to earn than it used to be, due to the rating suppression caused by the increase in draws.” Wow, let’s unpack that one line because it is a doozy!
Really, this one line, that is easily overlooked, is two huge problems that correspondence is facing: 1) death by one thousand draw paper cuts and 2) rating deflation. I will argue later that there is a third huge problem but let’s start with the ones acknowledged by ICCF itself. Every correspondence player knows the draw rate is going up. As engines and hardware get stronger, players are able to save positions that in the past would have been lost and we are finding ever easier ways to head straight towards 0.00 as Black. I would love to see a detailed analysis that describes how much harder it has become to win as Black against a decent correspondence player (let’s say someone 2300+). In the last five years, I have beaten three 2300+ players as Black without counting mouseslips (one in 2015, one in 2016 and one any day now in 2020) despite playing extremely aggressive openings like the KID (for the record that’s three Black wins out 103 Black draws or 2.91% Win rate). That may be part of the draw problem, but I have witnessed my own draw rate skyrocket 2014: 82.4% 2015: 86.7% 2016: 90.2% 2017: 90.6% 2018: 91% 2019 is still in progress. Often for these norms, you need to score +2, +3, +4 or +5 despite the fact that +1 usually wins the event… and with the draw rate North of 90% in a 12-13 game event that means you are likely to win 1 game on average… but in many events the entire cross table often sees one to three entire wins (look at a recently completed tournament here where I scored my first IM norm that required +0 and I scored +1). My win was one of five wins in the entire tournament 100/105 = 95.2% draw rate! [https://www.iccf.com/event?id=73482]. People love to tell me that’s fine because we are talking about such a weak event as Category 8 [2449 was the rating average]. Fine, I do not accept your argument but let’s look at the World Championship then shall we? Let’s look at the most recently concluded World Championship 30 which finished on 10/2/2019, Category 13 [2562 was the rating average]. This event was won by the new World Champion SIM Kochemasov, Andrey Leonidovich 2540 [https://www.iccf.com/event?id=66745]. Congrats to the new World Champion on his two wins! The event had 8 decisive games out 136 or a draw rate of 91.2% (not far off my own). But wait did I say SIM? I did. In fact, congratulations to the World Champion on scoring his final GM norm as well! This World Championship saw 5 SIMs compete in a field with 12 GMs. While 3 of the SIMs finished 1st 2nd and 3rd, only our new World Champion scored a GM norm. The problem is with all the draws that norms are not just becoming hard, but maintaining or increasing one’s rating is becoming hard. And one’s rating is how one receives any decent invites to have a chance at a norm in the first place.
The draws are a death by one thousand cuts as I recently played one of the ICCF’s proposal’s outlined “21 players that could have obtained a GM norm.” My rating is 2389 and his rating is 2504 (although SIM, he is recognized by all his peers as a GM caliber player). As Black, I obtained an easy draw without ever being in any trouble at all. The player had a rather angry initial discussion with me post mortem about how he felt it was wrong that a 2504 should have to play a player as weak as 2389 where the draw would kill his rating. He felt that his rating was being destroyed by these draws with weaker players and that ICCF should protect him from us. He felt I have it easier as a lower rated player because I can gain rating from these draws. Let’s look at his argument that one is causing the other and it is only happening to those 2500+. At the time that draw occurred, I gained exactly 1.17915 rating points from it (and he lost the same); however, this was the first draw in over 40 games in which I *gained* rating points (this statement is no longer true as a few higher rated players have since given me draws but at the time of the game’s conclusion this was the case). Yes, that’s right, ICCF already does such a good job of protecting higher rated players that it actively hands out advice to new players to be very particular about what invites and events they play because the draws could kill their initial rating. I too have experienced a net negative loss of rating points from draws and still seen my rating going up only due to the fact that wins are easier and ever so slightly more common to come by at my level. However, it means I am not exempt from the draw problem. It is patently false that this problem is limited to those 2500+ as in my last 43 draws, I lost rating in 42 of them and gained rating from 1 of them. Therefore, it appears draws are causing rating deflation and this is the real problem in both norms and correspondence in general. With the exception of matches, perhaps there is a way to have draws not count against one’s rating since there are so many of them? It kind of blends the Chess rating concept with that of Bridge where one cannot lose rating points once earned. What we can see is that the player’s argument that draws are causing rating deflation is probably true. One problem is at least partly causing the other one.
There is a third more devious problem worse than the two outlined above in my opinion. While rating deflation, draws, less players and norms are real issues… they are dwarfed by the change in behavior caused by these issues. I know it is a bit overdramatic to talk about such issues in a time of COVID, but there has been a great increase in the number of players playing Dead Man Defense (often shortened by correspondence players to DMD+ and DMD=). It is important to note that the death rate in COVID for those in the elderly category is markedly higher and the correspondence community in general is also markedly higher. I have heard estimates of the average age of correspondence player being 70-75 range though I haven’t seen any data. Back to DMD, what is DMD and why is it such awful behavior? The players are hoping you die before you win so they can claim either a win on time or if it goes to adjudication then at least claim a draw. The other hope is that you might mouse slip by being forced to play more moves which while that would never happen over the board does surprisingly account for a large portion of wins in ICCF correspondence high-level play. One of the main problems this issue causes is that if someone takes an early draw against a player who then goes on to die, the entire rest of the field gets a free half point and you are punished for playing your game quicker than your peers. Often, players over the board resign once mate is unstoppable or a simple endgame is reached in which the result is known to players of all levels. In correspondence, often even sooner than these players will resign or offer draws, knowing that perpetual check is unavoidable should we play another 10 moves past the piece sac against a bare king? How about when the engine reads +25 +30 or +40? So, for the most, correspondence players draw or resign much earlier than one might over the board due to engine and tablebase assistance. On that note, depending on the tournament, players can outright claim wins and draws either on the 6-piece tablebase (always allowed) or the sometimes allowed on an event by event basis the 7-piece tablebase. It is considered out right rude to make a player play all the way to the 6-piece tablebase to claim. I recently claimed one win in a six piece tablebase up an entire piece where my jolly opponent wanted to discuss the game in a post mortem (rarely done in correspondence in general anyways). I declined to even respond to him even though I was already having a very lively and fun post mortem with a Venezuelan on our extremely interesting draw. A worse example is the 92 move game I played with opposite colored bishops where I had two extra pawns. I offered a draw as white and the higher rated player to my lower rated opponent who declined it, forcing me to play to a 7-piece tablebase claim to end the game. This kind of behavior used to be quite rare. In the past, I would say it happened in 1 out of every 100 games… these days it seems to happen in every other game (1/2!). I have seven different opponents right now that are DMD+ against me where the engine reads +148 (or in some cases even sees mate! The 2504 player that complained about my rating earlier also complained someone was DMD+ him… I remarked that I have no less than 7 players DMD+ me and if they would resign? My rating would be about 2450 right which sort of eliminates his claim about our “giant” rating difference). The issue is that due to rating deflation these players need to artificially keep their rating high as long as they can because that’s how they will get their next invite. With the new terrible time control that is not yet Official (although there is a proposal to make it Official: https://www.iccf.com/Proposal.aspx?id=1282), players only need to make a move once every 50 days to pointlessly extend the game. I have a DMD= draw currently going on 16 months now where the player is just moving Kg1 Kf1 Kg1 every 50 days. This time control exasperates the DMD problem. When I contacted ICCF Officials to point out the severity of this problem, I was told that I should report it to the TD on a case by case basis only if it is DMD+ as they will not look at DMD= at all. However, it is usually the TDs that are the biggest offenders (6 of the 7 players described above were TDs). In fact, it is usually the same general casts of characters which allows for an easy black list to be created that bars these players from play until they can fix their atrocious behavior. This behavior needs to be punished. These players need to be reprimanded. In the end, lack of norms, rating deflation and the draw death will not make me quit correspondence chess. It is DMD+/DMD= that will make me quit. This experience is my personal experience with high level correspondence over thirteen years and I would love to hear from other correspondence players concerning these problems.
Daniel Parmet (2020-12-03 19:09:01)
What happened to all the players?
What happened to all the players? I see we used to have dozens of GMs and SIMs not to mention just a huge quantity of players here in years past. How do we get them back? It has become so hard to play on ICCF. Online chess is seeing this huge surge and even now more FIDE IMs and GMs seem to be trying correspondence for lack of other places to play. Why hasn't FICGS enjoyed some of this uptick as well as DMD, rating deflation and lack of events hurt ICCF.
Thibault de Vassal (2020-12-03 23:55:16)
What happened to all the players?
Hi Daniel, I'm not sure that correspondence chess servers will benefit much from that show (The Queen's Gambit) compared to chess.com & maybe chess over the board. You say that more FIDE IMs and GMs seem to be trying correspondence chess? Or online chess?
Herbert Kruse (2021-06-13 23:03:42)
What is the longest game of Big Chess?
FIDE Laws of Chess:
5.1 The game is won by the player who has checkmated his opponent's king. This immediately ends the game, provided that the move producing the checkmate position was legal.
Thibault de Vassal (2021-06-15 15:36:44)
What is the longest game of Big Chess?
The checkmated player should resign to end the game (and to see it deleted from his list, that is more convenient anyway)
All FIDE chess rules apply at FICGS when there is no FICGS rule. Many rules here are different from FIDE (starting from 50 moves rule)... that is even more true about Big Chess.
Thibault de Vassal (2021-09-07 23:01:01)
ICCF ratings
Hello Juri,
No, FICGS ratings have no incidence on ICCF or FIDE ELO ratings.
Juri Eintalu (2022-03-21 21:23:10)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
FIDE bans Karjakin for 6 months because of his announcements concerning the Ukraine war.
https://www.fide.com/news/1650
Thibault de Vassal (2022-03-22 21:32:39)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
This is tough matter anyway... I just wonder what would have happened if Ilyumzhinov was still FIDE president at that time :/ (fortunately he isn't anymore)
Juri Eintalu (2022-03-22 22:10:27)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
When FIDE decided to complain about Karjakin to the ethics committee, FIDE said that Karjakin was "supporting the unjustified war".
In the decision of the ethics committee, no references are given to Karjakin's relevant announcements.
As a philosopher, I am unable to understand how the chess organization can decide whether some war is a justified war. Moreover, "supporting the unjustified war" may mean that Karjakin tried to show that this war is justified indeed.
While I feel that this war is unjustified, I also feel that FIDE has chosen a side in the complex conflict and is far from being neutral.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-03-22 22:49:38)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
As a philosopher, I'm not sure if "how the chess organization can decide whether some was is a justified war" is relevant when everyone can decide whether some war is NOT a justified war.
As for me I support FIDE decision particularly if such a case is written in FIDE rules... I do not feel that this case is so complex (in example compared to war in Iraq or Syria).
Juri Eintalu (2022-03-23 04:30:48)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
I am sure that not everyone can competently decide whether Ukrainian war is a justified war or not. My personal feeling is that this war is unjustified, however, I do not know all the facts and I have not read the Genova Convention and other such documents either. The case of the Iraq war is much easier to decide because know we do know there were no chemical weapons in Iraq. Also, Iraq posed no threat to the US whatsoever as the US is on the other side of the planet and Iraq did not have intercontinental missiles.
As for myself, I will never participate in any tournaments or events of FIDE after FIDE has chosen a side in the West/Russia controversy and has allowed to weaponized itself.
Juri Eintalu (2022-03-23 10:38:48)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
Very interesting. Karjakin has a Telegram channel "Шахматный Патриотизм" [= "Chess Patriotism"] The name of that channel is evidence that not only FIDE but also Karjakin is politicizing chess.
https://t.me/karjakinchess
Thibault de Vassal (2022-03-23 16:11:20)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
If FIDE punished Karjakin for politicizing chess according to its own rules, then this punishment may not be (is probably not) of politicizing matter... but I couldn't say this with certainty better than many other people around here.
Juri Eintalu (2022-03-23 17:34:51)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
The Telegram channel "Chess Patriot" was established on 13 March 2022. FIDE made its complaint about Karjakin to the ethics committee earlier. Probably it was based on Karjakin's two tweets on Twitter, plus Karjakin's public letter to Putin. The complaint was made only 3 days after the Ukraine war started.
After FIDE banned Karjakin for 6 months, he has started to make a war propaganda on his Telegram channel. He asks "reasonable Ukrainians" not to fight and not to defend the Kyiv regime.
Karjakin's Twitter history is fun. After 24. February, several outstanding chess players should be banned as well by FIDE due to the nature of their replies to Karjakin's tweets.
I am sure that FIDE's ethics code did not contain any demand not to support any wars. There is even not any demand not to talk about the ongoing war during the chess competition, etc.
Moreover, this ethics code was applied right before it will be outdated. Since 1 April 2022, that code used to ban Karjakin is not valid anymore.
I am sure that this code was arbitrarily interpreted to ban Karjakin.
Ilmars Cirulis (2022-03-25 06:21:35)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
Good.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-05-06 16:25:43)
Chess.com blocked in Russia
By the way, I'm still not sure what to think about the exclusion of russian teams (at chess.com) or russian players (even more significant, at Wimbledon e.g.) from certain tournaments... many argue not to melt games & political stuff, but it is probably not as simple as this.
Definitely I'm not in favor to exlude russian players from any competition, BUT if they display their political views in favor of this "special op", just like FIDE did for Sergey Karjakin.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-05-08 02:18:53)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
"A few minutes ago it was announced that the Court of Appeals of the Ethical and Disciplinary Commission (EDC) of the FIDE has rejected the appeal filed by Grand Master Sergey Karjakin against the 6 month disqualification he had been given for having embarrassed the TRUST because of his own Declarations in favor of Russian invasion into Ukraine.
“According to the FIDE Card and the Code of Ethics and Disciplinary FIDE, such a decision can be contested before the Arbitral Court of Sport (CAS) within 21 days”, the sentence reads.
The disqualification, as it is known, will prevent Karjakin from participating in the Madrid nominees Tournament, where he will most likely be replaced by Ding Liren. The Russian player, born in Crimea, said he is considering the possibility of a new International Federation in competition with FIDE."
Bogoljub Teverovski (2023-08-09 14:02:07)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
A self-ban of karjakin continues
Juri Eintalu (2022-05-09 19:58:15)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
Karjakin's Appeal was Dismissed by FIDE
Thus, Karjakin still cannot play in the candidates tournament because he publicly approved the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Karjakin, in turn, writes (on his Telegram channel) as a response that he is proud that his grandfather was a great soldier, also, that there are Nazis in Ukraine.
He criticises Kasparov.
Kasparov demands that Russian chess players who want to play in international tournaments should publicly disapprove Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Juri Eintalu (2022-05-09 20:00:46)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
I am worried about Kasparov's demand that only those Russian players should be allowed to participate in international tournaments who publicly disapprove Russian invasion of Ukraine. This demand seems to be extremist, like Lenin's and Stalin's slogans.
First, not every Russian sportsman can have the luxury of being a dissident.
Second, Kasparov is notoriously inconsistent (outside of the chessboard). From his logic, it follows that FIDE should have banned all the US chess players who did not publicly disapprove of invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-05-10 01:15:10)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
In my opinion, each "war" (war against what?) is different from each other, I have no idea on that point.
Juri Eintalu (2022-05-10 10:32:44)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
The wars can be unique, but they are classified as "just/unjust" wars or "justified/unjustified" wars.
JUST WAR
Encyclopedia Britannica
https://www.britannica.com/topic/just-war
The West is of the opinion that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is an unjustified war.
Karjakin is of the opinion that it is justified war.
My arguments above assumed that if the Ukrainian war is unjustified, the Afghanistan and Iraq wars were even much more unjustified.
Juri Eintalu (2022-07-17 06:30:46)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
Interesting. Russian defence minister Shoigu ordered the Russian army to do everything possible to prevent Ukraine from shelling Donetsk and Luhansk republics.
The next day, Sergey Karyakin appeared in Donetsk's chess club. Karyakin gave a simultaneous chess exhibition in the Donetsk chess club.
Karyakin announces that under the shelling, he understood the following. It is unimportant to have expensive cars, but it is of the utmost importance to stay alive and to have good friends.
On the same day, in the evening, Russia started the heaviest attack on Marinka - the town west of Donetsk, from where Ukraine was shelling Donetsk.
Karyakin invites all chess players to visit Donetsk's wonderful chess club.
No comments.
Patrycja Zerowska (2022-10-06 09:54:59)
Threefold repetition
It seems that there is no way to claim a draw by threefold repetition on this site. In the game 136386, where I have Black, the position that occurred after my 50th move, is the same as that after my 58th move, and will be the same after my intended 60th move, namely 60... Bf7. I therefore claim a draw in this game.
Since apparently there is no "automatic arbiter" to process the claim, I called the "referee" on 1 October 2022 (5 days ago), explaining that I made a draw claim as described above (and mentioning my intended move), but I haven't received a reaction yet.
This particular game has been a dead draw at least since move 35. I offered a draw after my 35th move and on my 59th move. Both offers were declined.
1. Why is there no automatic arbiter which processes draw claims? If I am not mistaken, this site exists more than 15 years already, and yet the Laws of Chess are not yet fully implemented.
2. Why can't I stop my clock when I make such a claim? See art. 9.5 of FIDE's Laws of Chess.
3. Why doesn't the arbiter or the referee stop my clock? Without this, a player making a claim can timeout, or, when she is short on time, may be reluctant to make a draw claim.
4. Why doesn't the referee take action? Is there a referee at all?
In the rules section of this site I read: "Also, there is no way to stop the clocks, players cannot claim that they stopped to play after they called the referee for any reason..." This is a violation of the rules of chess; it implies that on this site it is not chess that is being played, but a weird chess variant. Of course I disagree with this corruption of the playing rules, and so should everyone who call themselves chess players!
Your strange rules also state that the referee will "act as soon as possible", but so far, after five days, no referee has shown up. So you are not even acting in agreement to your own rules.
Finally, I find in your rules the following statement: "All games are played until a player resign, accept draw, or lose on time." This is the most ridiculous "rule" I have ever encountered. Not only renders this farcical rule a win by checkmate illegitimate, it is a blatant ignoring of the Laws of Chess, which allow games to be ended by accepted draw claims, or for any other reason at the discretion of an arbiter.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-10-07 02:58:17)
Threefold repetition
Hello Patrycja,
Sorry for the delay, I just saw the email indeed... As Scott says, you have to play the move anyway before to claim a draw (if the site does not recognize it automatically). It seems to me that's how work most chess websites.
1. Why is there no automatic arbiter which processes draw claims? If I am not mistaken, this site exists more than 15 years already, and yet the Laws of Chess are not yet fully implemented.
> The only way to claim a draw after a threefold repetition is to play the move.
2. Why can't I stop my clock when I make such a claim? See art. 9.5 of FIDE's Laws of Chess.
> FICGS offers (mainly) correspondence chess, that is not OTB chess, and some FIDE laws do not apply here.
3. Why doesn't the arbiter or the referee stop my clock? Without this, a player making a claim can timeout, or, when she is short on time, may be reluctant to make a draw claim.
> FICGS is an automatic place, mainly. Games continue even if the referee has to take action later.
4. Why doesn't the referee take action? Is there a referee at all?
> There is one. But he may take some time... the forum & chat are good alternatives to get answers to any question.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-10-09 01:55:57)
Threefold repetition
Oh ok then... Anyway there are indeed several violations of FIDE rules at FICGS. The first one (the 50 moves rule does not apply) because I found it interesting to try it & to make it different when I created the website. It is specified in the terms & conditions (if you read it).
The other ones exist probably because either I didn't care or know, either because it was technically convenient.
Consequently, I agree with you on this point but it works like this for more than 16 years now and I don't aim to change it until FICGS goes into other hands (that will probably happen one day) for many technical reasons.
About your game, you will have to play that move, just like any other player has to do in such situation. This will prove you agreeded the draw.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-10-13 15:18:41)
Threefold repetition
I don't ask myself, I know that there are many reasons (many players told me why), but one of them may be the one [FIDE chess rules] you mentioned, I don't know, noone told me about this one before.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-25 16:20:13)
I did not win a game since 3 years
The problem with the two opening you suggested is that they're too good. Neither side made a mistake, so the engines will hold the draw every time (barring human error). The King's Gambit is a step in the right direction for a thematic tournament (with engines), and as long as everyone has an equal number of whites and blacks that's fair enough. I still think it's too easy for white to draw in the KGA with Nf3. The KGA with Bc4 is a bit more treacherous though I've explored it enough to be confident that white holds the draw. Anyway, I do think the openings need to be somewhat dubious or it's too easy for engines to draw.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-27 22:06:35)
I did not win a game since 3 years
If you mean John Shaw's book on the King's Gambit, I have that book and he did say that the Bishop's Gambit is refuted. But he qualifies what he means: "In this context I define the term 'refutation' as Black being better in all variations, not winning by force." Not much of a refutation. If you search my game history, I have played the Bishop's Gambit several times and I haven't lost. That's why I'm confident white can hold the draw.
I'd be willing to play in that thematic tournament, and I'd be very well prepared.
Juri Eintalu (2023-03-31 09:09:17)
RUSSIA AND BELARUS NOT SUSPENDED?
To Thibault de Vassal:
Thank you for taking a look at my open letter on Medium.
“... isn’t it a bit short to compare Russia’s war in Ukraine to what happened in Afghanistan, Iraq or Serbia? (that are quite different cases by the way, involving different groups of countries)”
If country A starts a war against country B, the relevant question is whether that war is justified or unjustified, whether it is a war of aggression or, instead, the attacker has the right to do so.
By now, it is a piece of common knowledge that the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were wars of aggression.
Chess organisations FIDE and ICCF have punished Russian chess organisations for the Russian invasion of Ukraine while not punishing the US chess organisations for the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. FIDE and ICCF have not presented any comprehensive analyses about how justified or unjustified some of those wars are. You are turning the burden of proof around and accusing me of not delivering the arguments that FIDE and ICCF had to present.
“It seems that most russians in Russia still support this war (“special op”) while everyone ignored the truth about those weapons in Irak (in example). Any context should be analysed in depth IMHO.”
Excuse me, but I cannot follow what you are trying to say.
You argue that any context should be analysed in-depth, but you fail to hint at why Russia should be punished and the US should not. Your only fact mentioned, “everyone ignored the truth about those weapons in Irak”, remains mysterious. I do not understand in what context you are saying this.
We know already for ten years that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
Concerning your other remarks, I make only one reply. We know that there are saliently some Nazis in Ukraine.
Here, on the chess forum, I technically cannot answer in detail to your several remarks that, in my mind, are all somewhat inexact or vague.
Juri Eintalu (2023-03-31 21:13:22)
RUSSIA AND BELARUS NOT SUSPENDED?
You are quoting me wrongly. And you are doing it intentionally.
Moreover, I was talking about whether FIDE and ICCF decisions were justified. My argument was that these decisions applied some important principles discriminatively, selectively.
Suddenly, you started to talk about whether the Russian invasion of Ukraine was justified. You also started to talk about war crimes.
Let me remind that the ICCF started a process of banning the Russian team just a few days after the Russian invasion began.Thus, your arguments about what happened months later might be pretty irrelevant.
Let me also remind you that you decided to talk ONLY about Russian war crimes in Ukraine. You dismissed the US war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, the war crimes committed during the Donbas civil war (both Ukraine and the separatists committed war crimes there), and, finally, you also dismissed the war crimes committed by Ukraine in the present war.
And now, before I answered to your mess, you managed to attack me personally.
My answer to your provocative questions is that if the political regime will go absolutely crazy, then I will not defend that regime against anyone. But I still hope that it will not go absolutely crazy.
Anyway, I will not discuss with you anymore, because you are systematically ignoring important relevant facts and you regularly change the context of discussion.
Thibault de Vassal (2023-03-31 22:52:44)
RUSSIA AND BELARUS NOT SUSPENDED?
Sorry if I quoted you wrongly... Could you specify?
Yes, first you were talking about wether FIDE and ICCF decisions were justified, but our discussion went on the global case:
you said (quote):
"If country A starts a war against country B, the relevant question is whether that war is justified or unjustified, whether it is a war of aggression or, instead, the attacker has the right to do so. "
"You argue that any context should be analysed in-depth, but you fail to hint at why Russia should be punished and the US should not."
So let's separate discussions: one is about FIDE/ICCF decisions, the other one is about war & its justifications.
About ICCF, I am not aware of a process to ban the russian team just after the invasion, I'm not sure what it means as well... does this mean that the russian team should have played under a neutral banner (that could be understandable), or does this mean that the whole team (every player) was banned?
I have no problem to talk about US war crimes in these countries... if you read my post again, there is a link to a page that deals with it.
I have no problem to talk about war crimes commited by Ukraine as well. There were war crimes for sure. There are proofs of that.
Questions remain: how many, for what aim... Everything will be analyzed.
My additional questions were not provocative, these are real questions to better understand your point of view. But I did not understand your answer (or you did not answer ?!)
Feel free to continue the discussion, you're welcome.
Thibault de Vassal (2023-07-27 19:06:48)
FIDE rating change proposal
Maybe you heard about this strange proposal made by a mathematician to make FIDE ratings (<2000) more coherent against some deflation...
http://en.chessbase.com/post/fide-seeks-proposals-rating-changes
http://www.chess.com/news/view/fide-mathematician-proposes-changes-to-improve-rating-accuracy
I'm somewhat doubtful about this idea to change some data rather than the algorithm, what do you think?
Juri Eintalu (2023-08-09 22:29:42)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
I have not made any political posts on the Forum.
Quite to the contrary: I have criticized politicizing sports.
I am shocked by the answers I received from Garvin Gray and Thibault de Vassal. I do not think their comments exemplify a civilized discussion. The problem is that they are not arbitrary chess players but chess organizers. I conclude that rational discussion with those who support politicizing chess is impossible.
I had already forgotten the FICGS server, but now I have received a notification that someone has commented on my old post.
Bogoljub Teverovski announces on 09 August 2023:
"A self-ban of karjakin continues"
No hints have been made about what event he is talking about—no references, links, or explanations.
I can only understand that Bogoljub regards the FIDE ban on Karjakin as a Karjakin's SELF-ban.
Let me add that 1 e2-e4 is the initial move of the Queen's gambit, and 1 Ng1-f3 is the most popular opening in checkers.
I am logging out from the FICGS not to receive any notifications anymore.
Thibault de Vassal (2023-08-10 00:10:24)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN
Unfortunately, and I find it quite sad myself, everything is politics (at some point at least).
In my opinion, deciding to attack a country, collaterally killing thousands of russian & ukrainian people (to "save" how many? [if it was really the purpose]), while hoping there will not be any other collateral consequences by arguing that sport, trading, culture & so on should not be politicized is surely not realistic. Of course this war was about culture, trading & even sport long time before to bring russian tanks in Ukraine.
The fact that Karjakin is supporting this russian invasion (consequently banning himself) seems very secondary here...
Farewell (or not).
Juri Eintalu (2023-11-05 06:03:45)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
A PUBLIC APPEAL TO CHESS ORGANISATIONS ON THE BOMBING OF THE GAZA STRIP
Israel’s bombing of the civilians trapped in the Gaza Strip has resulted in a catastrophic number of causalities in a very short time. It may amount to crimes against humanity, war crimes, mass murder, collective punishment or genocide, as noted by the UN and several international independent organisations.
I suggest that international chess organisations like FIDE and ICCF should revoke their sanctions on Russia and Belarus concerning the Russian invasion of Ukraine, or they should impose the same sanctions on Israel.
Independently of the decisions of these international chess organisations, I call individual chess players to refuse to play chess with those players who are using Israel’s flag, etc.
The full text of my appeal can be read here:
https://medium.com/@eintalu/a-public-appeal-to-chess-organisations-on-the-bombing-of-the-gaza-strip-be56afd3f5ca
Thibault de Vassal (2023-11-17 20:03:54)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
Then, it would be difficult not to make differences between Ukraine/Russia and Israel/Hamas... the war between Israel & Hamas is very old, very complex & obviously has no reason to end, while the war between Ukraine & Russia is more recent and there is still some hope that it may come to an end (IMHO).
Several things are quite sure to me:
- Israel made bad things for a while in this region. Hamas is an islamist movement that made bad things as well. Most civilians are probably victims of these systems. Recently, Hamas chose to attack civilians instead of Israel (this is a war crime, no ambiguity there), Israel now does everything to destroy Hamas, making many victims among civilians. But this may not be war crimes according to definition. Nothing obvious there, we'll see.
- Ukraine is attacked mainly because Poutine (at least) argues it historically belongs to Russia with no consideration of its recent history & international treaties (and among other reasons because he obviously sees nazis in every people open on what a man/woman/family could look like, meaning many europeans & americans). There are few doubts that war crimes have been committed there.
No, definitely the comparison seems not valid and I see no reason why it should lead FIDE, ICCF or any chess/sport organization to consider it.
Juri Eintalu (2023-11-18 03:11:09)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
Ilmars Cirulis:
"Both Netanyahu and Hamas should be in prison. :(
Poor civilians on both sides."
I have approximately the same opinion.
However, concerning chess sanctions, we can sanction only Israel.
We cannot impose chess sanctions on Hamas, as Hamas is not a state and it is not represented in the FIDE or ICCF.
We cannot expel Hamas from the ICCF because it has never been there.
My essay was about chess sanctions, not about such things as the International Criminal Court (ICC).
However, if to speak on that issue, my view is that both Hamas and Israel should be prosecuted in the ICCF.
Thibault de Vassal (2023-11-18 19:42:16)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
Juri, when you say << For example, I am not sure that Hamas "chose" to kill civilians. >>, I'm not sure if your topic is determinism or something else but obviously you cannot be sure of anything. Did you watch the videos? Anyway, any army killing or kidnapping civilians is a war crime for sure and that's most probably terrorism in this case.
On Israel response, many experts say different things, so it remains unclear yet to me. (it is important not to listen what one want to hear only)
About your text, you seem to neglict all contextual elements to compare Russia, ThaĂŻland, Congo, North Korea, China or whatever situation in any country... No chess organization reacted much when Peng Shuai (chinese tennis star) disappeared, but tennis world reacted! For Rohingya, Karabakh or about war in Irak or Afghanisatan. How many chess players in these countries? That is not the same. Russia & Ukraine are among the most influential chess nations in the world. Russia is the biggest country, has the most nuclear weapons. That's why it seems pertinent that chess players and organizations take position towards not just peace (undermeaning "do what Russia wants"), but a fair and right peace.
You say : "Concerning your political views about the real intentions of Russia when starting a war against Ukraine, what you present dogmatically and without evidence"
The evidence is in Putin's speeches, "Russia defends its interests", obviously Ukraine (another country for a while) should not be free of his choices, in example to join an alliance to protect itself just like Finland or other countries... Obviously Ukraine is Russia's interest and should not join OTAN. Did ever OTAN attack Russia?
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Dgy4vYTp_Jo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxS9YIBeJbY
Watching full speeches is even more instructive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akzr0K0CE0M
Putin's rhetoric remains both crude and manipulative, appealing to people's conservative reflexes. And it works on most people who get outraged at the slightest conspiracy theory, it's no coincidence.
Finally, the argument saying that there shouldn't be politics in chess or sports has no foundations other than a subjective point of view.
You say that these bans by FIDE were out of international laws and that the same restrictions should apply to israeli playesrs... well, so just prove it and make appeal I guess. Karjakin probably thought about that already!?
Meanwhile, these discussions are only point of views.
Juri Eintalu (2023-11-19 00:58:48)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
ARGUMENTS CONCERNING THE RUSSIA/UKRAINE WAR
None of the commentators explained why it was necessary and reasonable to politicise sports and to impose sanctions on Russia and Belarus. No one answered my corresponding arguments from my Public Appeal. No one explained why the sanctions were imposed on Russia for the invasion of Ukraine, while no sanctions were imposed on the US for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
HERBERT KRUSE PRESENTED THE FOLLOWING "ARGUMENT":
"like Ukraine Israel had its "Butcha" at the music festival, so who attacked?
and there were constant rockets on Israel from Gaza, should they just allow it?
and the hostiges should just given up?
if my state can not defend me, maybe u can help?!"
This emotional and psychological manipulation completely ignored all my relevant arguments and explanations.
Now, let us take only the first phrase of this mumbo-jumbo:
"like Ukraine Israel had its 'Butcha' at the music festival, so who attacked?"
My Public Appeal was about chess sanctions. Now, the data are as follows:
2022, February 24:
Russia started its invasion of Ukraine
2022, February 27:
An extraordinary meeting of the FIDE Council was held on the current situation and the urgent measures to be taken after the military action launched by Russia in Ukraine.
https://fide.com/news/1603
Thus, it seems that they waited for the beginning of the Russian invasion and had a plan for how to react, as they responded only a few days later.
Israel had occupied Palestinian territories for 55 years, but the chess federation FIDE had never reacted.
2022, March 16:
Russia and Belarus teams suspended from FIDE competitions.
https://fide.com/news/1638
2022, March 30:
Russian troops leave Bucha (near Kyiv).
2022, April 01:
The corpses in Bucha were discovered.
Now, the first obvious problem with Herbert Kruse's "argument" is that the timeline proves that the chess sanctions on Russia were imposed BEFORE the corpses in Bucha were discovered.
The second problem is that he does not know or pretends not to know the definitions of such terms as "war crime".
The third problem is that, as a matter of fact, we do NOT know WHEN these people were executed, and we do NOT know WHO executed them.
It is so because there were actually TWO massacres in Bucha.
The shelling killed some people, "The Guardian" reported. These people were lying on the streets. The satellite images proved that they were killed before the Russian Army left the town.
However, some people were executed in the cellars. Unfortunately, the satellite images cannot prove the time of the executions in the cellars.
There is one additional problem. Ukraine has not made public the names and personal data of the victims. Therefore, we do not even know what percentage of the victims were Ukrainians and what percentage were Russians.
THIBAULT THE VASSAL PRESENTED THE FOLLOWING SEQUENCE OF ARGUMENTS:
"Ukraine is attacked mainly because Poutine (at least) argues it historically belongs to Russia with no consideration of its recent history & international treaties (and among other reasons because he obviously sees nazis in every people open on what a man/woman/family could look like, meaning many europeans & americans)."
Thibault has no evidence whatsoever for one's claim that Putin "obviously sees nazis in every people open on what a man/woman/family could look like, meaning many europeans & americans)." There is even no evidence to the claim that the Russian administration thinks that the majority of Ukrainians were Nazis. The evidence might be the public speeches of Russian leaders. But I have seen no such speech with such theses. Indeed, Putin has said something else.
I believe that Thibault presents one's prejudices as "obvious facts".
Besides, it has nothing to do with the arguments of my Public Appeal.
"There are few doubts that war crimes have been committed there."
In the Ukraine/Russia war, BOTH sides have committed a lot of war crimes, and it is well documented and proven.
However, the chess sanctions on Russia were not imposed because of the war crimes, as can be seen from the schedule above. The motivation to impose those sanctions was, initially, merely the fact that Russia started a war (not a war crime but a crime against peace).
Moreover, in the Ukraine/Donbas domestic war too, both sides committed war crimes. Ukraine committed crimes against humanity, and there were clear genocidal elements of the behaviour towards the Russian-speaking minority of Ukraine. It is also well-documented and proven. At the beginning of my Public Appeal, I mentioned that Karyakin argued from the premise that Ukrainian ultra-nationalists murdered a lot of Russians in Ukraine.
However, I see that the responses to my Public Appeal have altogether ignored all my arguments, and everyone has preferred to talk about something else.
Juri Eintalu (2023-11-20 02:21:47)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
"Israeli Security Establishment: Hamas Likely Didn’t Have Advance Knowledge of Nova Festival"
Haaretz, 18 November 2023
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-18/ty-article/.premium/israeli-security-establishment-hamas-likely-didnt-have-prior-knowledge-of-nova-festival/0000018b-e2ee-d168-a3ef-f7fe8ca20000
"Hamas had not planned to attack music festival, Israeli report says"
Al Jazeera, 18 November 2023
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/18/hamas-had-not-planned-to-attack-israel-music-festival-israeli-report-says
'“An investigation into the incident revealed an [Israeli military] combat helicopter that arrived at the scene from the Ramat David base fired at the terrorists and apparently also hit some of the revelers there,” the Haaretz report cited an unnamed police official as saying.'
The funniest thing is that after Mr Herbert Kruse claimed that I should be in jail for not thinking that the official narrative on the 07 October attack was entirely true and proven - the very next day Israeli newspapers reported that some unspecified number of civilians were killed not by Hamas but by Israeli helicopter.
The sad thing is that the discussion of the 07 October events is absolutely irrelevant to my Public Appeal.
As I have explained above several times.
Suppose that all the 1200 people killed on 07 October were civilians. Suppose that Hamas is a terrorist organisation (I have not checked their background, I heard the name "Hamas" first time in my life on 07 October). Suppose that the 07 attack was a terrorist attack and all the civilians were killed intentionally.
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING can be inferred concerning my Public Appeal.
I have explained already several times that Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza Strip are in no way justified by 07 October events.
It follows from the international conventions, from the entrenched definitions of "war crime", "genocide", etc.
I have also explained, already in my Public Appeal, that there is no need to impose sports sanctions on Hamas, as Hamas has been announced to be a terrorist organisation by the European Union, shortly after the 07 October events.
Moreover, I have explained above, that one cannot expel Hamas from the chess organisations like FIDE or ICCF, because it has never been there.
I do not want to talk to such demagogues as Herbert Kruse and Thibault de Vassal.
Among other things, both have completely ignored my arguments and the actual text of my Public Appeal.
There is an ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip. Compared to the enormous crimes of Israel, the scale of killing unarmed civilians, the Russian Chess Federation has been sanctioned for small things, while the current racist, fascist Nazi-Israel has remained untouched, with impunity.
Scott Ligon (2025-01-17 14:44:57)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
To be clear, I still don't know if it can be beaten at 10 million nodes. Someone might eventually find a line with white that beats Stockfish 17 at these settings. But the longer the experiment goes without anyone finding such a line, the more confident I will be that it can't be beaten.
Here is a line that beats Stockfish 17 at 5 million nodes.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Nd5 Nxd5 8. exd5 Nb8 9. a4 Be7 10. Bd2 O-O 11. a5 f5 12. Be2 Bd7 13. O-O Be8 14. Ra2 h6 15. Kh1 Bg5 16. Be1 a6 17. Na3 Nd7 18. Nc4 Qc7 19. Bb4 Nc5 20. Ra3 Bb5 21. Nb6 Rad8 22. c4 Be8 23. Be1 Nd7 24. Nxd7 Qxd7 25. b4 Rc8 26. f3 Bh5 27. Bf2 e4 28. c5 dxc5 29. Bxc5 Rfe8 30. d6 Kh8 31. f4 Bxe2 32. Qxe2 Bf6 33. Qh5 Rf8 34. Rd1 Kh7 35. Rg3 Bd8 36. Rd5 Rf6 37. Qd1 Rf7 38. Re3 g5 39. Qh5 gxf4 40. Re1 e3 41. Rf1 Rf8 42. Rd4 Bf6 43. Rdxf4 Bg5 44. R4f3 Qf7 45. Qxf7+ Rxf7 46. Bxe3 Bxe3 47. Rxe3 Kg7 48. g3 Rc4 49. Rf4 Rc1+ 50. Kg2 Rd1 51. Re7 Rd2+ 52. Rf2 Rxd6 53. Rxf7+ Kxf7 54. Rxf5+ Kg6 55. Rc5 Rd2+ 56. Kf3 Rb2 57. Rc4
Ulises Pineda (2025-03-29 17:10:11)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
What I don't get is, what are your other opponents doing? I mean, it took some time, but at all points I had a line that I knew would beat the 10 million strategy if they were followed through, this is an opportunity to always get ponder hits because one always knows what move will be played in all positions.
Are those people aware that the fixed node strategy will lead to a draw, and they play it anyway? That's too weird to me.
I'm confident in a future game against the 15 million node strategy I would find another such line and play it out, just to retire it, but I wouldn't make any moves in the game until I had it, I don't know what those players that know all moves played would lead to a draw are doing.
Scott Ligon (2025-07-08 12:59:43)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
You might still find a winning line as the game progresses. But if you think you have better things to do with your time than trying to refute these strategies, I won't disagree. And you're right, if you refute 17.1 @ 50 million nodes, I'll just double the node count next time.
The whole point of the exercise from my point of view is to find an unbeatable deterministic strategy, keeping node count to a minimum. With Stockfish 17.1, 20 million nodes didn't get the job done and 50 million might, I just don't know yet. Either way, I'm confident that unbeatable configurations exist, and I don't think they're far off if I haven't found one already.
George Jempty (2025-10-07 17:15:16)
Next thematic tournament
Yeah probably too tame for correspondence, interestingly I do intend to play 4.f3 for the most part, but I came up with the 4.Bf4 idea when investgating the Leningrad variation. After 4.Bg5 c5 now 5.d5?! which had been the standard is considered sub-optimal by the engine which prefers 5.e3, and after 5...h6, I concluded that White didn't have to play 6.Bxf6 or 6.Bh4, which is when I started investigating 4.Bf4. I actually may start playing this in FIDE tournaments where I will probably be much lower rated, exactly to get into such a tame line
Ulises Pineda (2025-11-10 17:06:10)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest
Because the optimal defenses by black are so boring! And they don't offer any counter-play, specially against lower-rated opponents that could easily draw as white with those. In uncommon variations they have to think, and that's the only chance they slip.
There's also the aspect of overconfidence, chess engines have gotten so strong one thinks they can defend anything. That was a mistake I made last time I played a Benoni and lost, I thought I played the strongest defense, who knows if my opponent could also have defeated someone else in the same line, but it was a problem of evaluation, not depth, the engine was showing 1.0 scores for positions that were lost, and they were so complicated I couldn't keep up. Near the end my opponent wasn't even playing the moves I predicted and cut the game like a knife through butter.
But I'll always rather lose a game like that than playing the same boring defense that draws against anything but it's a snore fest, apparently I could just play moves from 300 million nodes blindly and draw anyway.
So I continue to play dubious lines and appreciate opponents that deviate from the norm to spice things up, I could easily be over 2300 at the cost of boring games, but I'll be getting there soon anyway and finally find out how people on that tier play against me, since I've never been able to join tournaments of that caliber.
There are 1 results for fide in wikichess.
Normajean Yates (1858)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Nc6 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 Nf6 Qh3 hxg6 Qxh8 Qe7 Nc3
Any thoughts on this line? Someone played this [8. Nc3] against me at another correspondence-chess site, and I am ie Black is already in serious trouble after 8. Nc3 fxe4 9. Be2 Nd4 10. O-O. I don't see any counterattack by black!
I mean latvian-fraser is supposed to be in crisis, but is the old main line [ie until black's 7th move] so bad? Or did I blunder? No, I didn't blunder - except by choosing this line [or, except by playing the latvian ;) ]
PS: I (black) managed to win that game because it was no-engines and white got overconfident, but that's another story :) ] For the curious, here is *that* story:
NN v Normajeanyates
chess.com corr no-engines 2008
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Qh5+ g6 5. Nxg6 Nf6 6. Qh3 hxg6 7. Qxh8 Qe7 8. Nc3 fxe4 9. Be2 Nd4 10. O-O Nxc2 11. Rb1 Nd4 12. d3 Nxe2+ 13. Nxe2 exd3 14. Nf4 Kf7 15. Nxd3 Bg7 16. Qh4 Qe4 17. Qxe4 Nxe4 18. Be3 d6 19. Rfe1 Bf5 20. Red1 Re8 21. Rbc1 c5 22. b3 Nc3 23. Rd2 Bxd3 24. Rxd3 Ne2+ 25. Kf1 Nxc1 26. Rxd6 Nxa2 27. Bxc5 Bf8 28. Rd7+ Ke6 29. Rc7 Bxc5 30. Rxc5 Rd8 31. Ke2 Rd5 32. Rc7 Rb5 33. Rg7 Kf6 34. Rd7 Rxb3 35. Rd2 Nc3+ 0-1
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
FICGS : fide , Wikipedia : fide , Dmoz : fide , Google : fide , Yahoo : fide
My opponents make good moves too. Sometimes I don't take these things into consideration. (Bobby Fischer)
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)
A bad day of Chess is better than any good day at work. (Anonymous)
Back to FICGS , Wikichess