opening
FICGS - Search results for opening
There are 485 results for opening in the forum.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-11 05:24:41)
Statistics
As you may have noticed, the "About" page now contains some chess opening statistics ! Quite interesting. We have a strong bird specialist & already a king's gambit player :)
Hannes Rada (2006-04-12 21:35:40)
Opening statistics
Incredible - The whole world plays Sicilian ... :-)
Walter Rattay (2006-04-14 22:01:49)
Last moves and coordinates on board
When opening our games, the game boards do not show the last moves. We have to scroll down to learn our opponent's move, then scroll back to view the board. Also, because there are no coordinates on the board, we are more likely to make a mistake, especially when playing black.
Glen D. Shields (2006-04-16 18:57:19)
60/10 Too Slow for Me
I'm in the group that thinks 60/10 is too slow. Like Mr. LaCrosse, I like fewer games at a faster pace. Only way 60/10 might work is to set a REASONABLE limit on days per move. ICCF's 40 days is too long and some TD's are much too lenient about extending it.
I hope this doesn't hijack your thread Thibault, but The opposite question I'd like to ask is how many server players find the opening game too fast and like a blur? I make a move and there's a reply waiting 5 minutes later. It won't be long before someone writes a script and connects it to ChessBase to cut the time down to seconds :)
Marc Lacrosse (2006-04-20 21:57:33)
unknown openings
There were already a few 1.Nc3 games but they were classified as 1.f4 (through transposition I suppose)...
... But now that I have begun to play you _must_ add 1.Nc3 to the list of played opening moves in the statistics page.
... nothing but normal : 1.Nc3 rules!
:-)))
Marc
Thibault de Vassal (2006-04-20 23:14:19)
:-)
It's done.
Also other "strange" openings implemented.
Cheers :)
Marc Lacrosse (2006-04-21 03:40:08)
The opening of the future ?!
Wow!
So 8 out of more than 300 games so far have started with 1.Nc3 : 2.3% is a good start ...
With only 4 games more, 1.Nc3 would catch 1.c4 (12 games so far) ...
...nice !
Jose Carrillo (2006-05-01 01:34:24)
Other Chess960 opening positions
Thibault,
When will other Chess960 openings be available?
In FRCEC, we prefer to run tournaments where every game in the tournament begins with a different opening position.
It avoids repetition.
Let see how this tournament develops.
Cheers,
Jose
Jose Carrillo (2006-05-03 00:19:03)
Repetition???
Why? It defeats the purpose of Chess960. Everyone in the tournament is just playing a Chess960 game, not the same opening position. Using the same opening position simulates a regular chess tournament (i.e. repetition). Anyway, at least it should be an option to have differnt opening position per game in the same tournament. It's more in line with the "purpose" of Fischerandom Chess.
Jose Carrillo (2006-05-05 00:32:18)
Chess 4000 ?
Forbid what unusual (non-sense) move?
Castling? Chess960 was meant to be the bigger picture, where regular chess is just one of the openings. Regular chess has castling and so does Chess960. About Chess 4000, without King placement restrictions, and without castling... Sure... I'm sure there are players that will play it. There are hundreds of chess variants. Some more popular than others... In FRCEC we only play Chess960, the bigger chess picture!
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-18 20:10:13)
ECO code
Search by ECO code (actually by opening) is now implemented. You need to disconnect (or open a new window) to use it.
http://www.ficgs.com/directory_openings.html
Find your opening, then click on the ECO code (not on the magnifying glass, that is linked to wikichess) and you'll have results in a second...
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-26 21:19:33)
transpositions...
Hello David. Thanks for your feedback !
That's a big deal. Actually I have a solution to automate transpositions management. But it could bring other problems... In example, a secondary (or totally wrong) line should always transpose to the main line..
Your example (f4 e5 e4) is true, so we should give our opinion about the position (and future moves), not the last move...
About the search function, you're right again, but this point is even more complex ! I'll think about it later, I must care about time processing. Anyway, you can use Chessbase or Chess Assistant to find games sorted by position. So, by now, the search function works for openings, not positions.
Marc Lacrosse (2006-06-09 09:21:54)
I cannot understand ...
To Trent Parker :
you say :
"I think the teams should be geographical at least"
This is really something that I cannot even understand.
In which way is my way of playing correspondence chess related to the place where I live or where I am born???
Is my kind of play "belgian" ?
Or is it "brown-haired", or "butter-cooked", or ...
Why shouldn't I be allowed to find a few friends from all over the world that play the same kind of unusual openings than myself to build a team ?
IMHO this kind of team could well have a better signification than a one made of chess players of the same country or of the same geographical region.
Anyway the idea itself of "correspondence chess teams" is completely strange for me. Does it mean that collaboration between members for the choice of the moves is allowed ?
This is at the exact opposite of what I feel to be the minimum requirement for a meaningful correspondence chess competition to survive : anything allowed (books, computers, databases) except human advice, and at least one single human name alone identified as the single "author" of the moves ...
So, why teams at all...
Marc
Tim Bredernitz (2006-06-18 16:52:34)
Chess Openings
Hi, I'm wondering what openings other players have experienced success with. I've primarily used the Ruy Lopez, but I've grown tired of it. I haven't really explored any queen's pawn openings, and I'm wondering which ones are effective.
Thanks.
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-19 14:53:39)
1. d4
The move 1.d4 offers the same benefits to development and center control as does 1.e4, but unlike with the King Pawn openings where the e4 pawn is undefended after the first move, the d4 pawn is protected by White's queen. This slight difference has a tremendous effect on the opening. For instance, whereas the King's Gambit is rarely played today at the highest levels of chess, the Queen's Gambit remains a popular weapon at all levels of play. Also, compared with the King Pawn openings, transpositions between variations are more common and critical in the closed games.
White develops aiming for a particular formation without great concern over how Black chooses to defend. Both these systems are popular with club players because they are easy to learn, but are rarely used by professionals because a well prepared opponent playing Black can equalize fairly easily.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-19 15:13:45)
Chess Openings
Hi Tim.
What do you mean with Ruy Lopez ? There's IMO no opening better than other, it first depends on you play Black or White, who is your opponent (strength, favourite openings...), time controls..
Maybe you should specify your question... What opening against what move etc...
PS : I hope Amir will take a look at Wikichess, his opinion on chess openings would be very interesting to know ;)
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-19 17:57:15)
Ruy Lopez
Tim,
i am now playing a Ruy Lopez in my game vs Nigel Davies. I will try to show that that old opening still have some surprises...
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-20 16:05:08)
Sicilian opening & Kasparov
I quote from Amir analysis : "But if you want to win, the Sicilian is really the best choice."
I fully agree, I'll just add: but Sveshnikov sicilian :)
Actually, (not a surprise) you just have to see how Black pieces are conducted by Garry Kasparov in sicilian opening to understand what lines to follow, why it is the best choice... and why he became the best player of all times.
He simply always wanted to win, never draw... It is an illustration of a quote in this interesting (but failed) movie by Guy Ritchie, "Revolver" : "To win against a weaker opponent, you have to extend the game field."
Finally, it's the exact opposite of what Bobby Fischer said : "I don't believe in psychology, I believe in good moves". That's not enough IMO, chess openings are a psychologic battle that reflect the state of mind and will. It often decides in a way the result of the game, not by moves, but by the intention.
Wayne Lowrance (2006-06-22 03:44:19)
Chess openings
Nothing could be farther from the truth.. Bobby was right, makes good moves and you dont needs to worry about phoney baloney. Bobby was right no first move is as strong as e4
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-22 15:47:42)
Interesting question for the Gambit's a
Gambits are the schizophrenics of the chess openings. Most players love to play through a finished game that starts as a gambit, but few players dare to play gambits themselves.
Gambits lead to attacking games that avoid the calculated buildup preceding a classic attack. Can the gambiteer justify the material disadvantage? Can the opponent overcome the positional disadvantage that comes with grabbing the gambit sacrifice?
Roger Weber (2006-06-25 16:19:35)
Gambits
Although I am a quite new and inexperienced, I dare say that Gambits are a way of forcing a player to do mistakes. If the other player doesn't know a certain gambit, he will get beaten fast and hard by making mistakes. Players tend to do less mistakes in common openings like the Ruy Lopez, as they have seen so many variations of it and played it so much.
But, when confronted with something new, the human brain can't analyze every possible moves, which leaves an advantage to be exploited by the player that knows the gambit and obviously wants to play it.
Just my opinion. Feel free to correct me.
Gino Figlio (2006-07-04 01:07:56)
Symmetrical games
The format used(8-game match with simultaneous games, 4 white and 4 black) brings up the issue of avoiding symmetrical games. I don't see a perfect way of doing this other than being conscious of the problem, and trying to deviate early on. If I see an opening chosen by my opponent that I am also planning to use, I have waited to respond in one(or more) of the games, until the position reached a point where I would normal deviate, and choose an alternate move with the opposite colour.
Anyone else with better ideas about how to avoid this problem?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-04 01:52:31)
Symmetrical games
Hello Gino.
What do you mean "symmetrical games" exactly ? (time is an important element)
First case, a player copies move after move another game played at the same time (a move after). Cheating is obvious and it's forbidden (rules)...
Second case, a game is symmetrical but moves are not played "at the same time" : It means suicide in the match for the player who has to win, with either Black or White... The same about the games played by the same player as White, there's no interest to play the same openings, as it would save his opponent's energy and loose chances to provoke a fault.
I had seen you were waiting to move with black in your match, but you can play the same opening with Black, it's up to your opponent to play different openings, otherwise it's good for you...
Gino Figlio (2006-07-04 04:06:08)
Symmetrical games
I meant 2 identical games played with different colours usually against different opponents, but in this case against the same person. I'm sorry for not reading the rules, but there is no way to prove in simultaneous games, who is copying who since known theory in certain openings reaches 20+ moves.
However, if someone delays his response until the opponent makes a decision in a critical point of the opening, he can then play the same opening without fear knowing that once that point is reached, he will make a different move.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-04 12:17:36)
Symmetrical games
Playing the same opening until move 20 is not a problem IMO, particularly in correspondence chess nowadays...
John, about the format, that's interesting discussing... Why wouldn't it be "normal" in your opinion ? Not usual for sure, as round-robin tournaments are used everywhere in correspondence chess. So it will be a surprise for hardened CC players, but will it be for OTB players ? Why the "match format" couldn't be an acceptable alternative ?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-04 16:55:10)
Symmetrical games
I don't understand how it could be a problem. If one consider a critical position at the end of the opening (ie. clear advantage for White), who plays White first knows the position is bad for Black... Why would he play the same opening with Black ? It's a wrong question IMO, there are very few cases where there's only a "good" move until the end of the game.
Anyway, this question is even more relevant when playing different tournaments in different organizations (a player may respond moves played by an opponent in a game at IECG in another game at ICCF....) than in two players matches. Nothing can prevent that, but what a shame and where's the satisfaction ? I think it's not a problem there.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-19 02:54:06)
Search : commented games
I've added a link in the 'Search games' page to find all games commented by players... First comment made by David is very eloquent ;)
Feel free to tell me if you have ideas of criterias to search games. Also added in the 'Search games' page : search by opening. Now 3 ways, this new one, Wikichess, and the form below the menu (improved).
Glen D. Shields (2006-07-22 19:50:51)
Interesting Discussion Topic
Thibault - this is a interesting discussion topic. Of course, no one knows the future with certainty, but we can all offer an opinion :)
I'm nearing my 40th year of correspondence play. Sometime later this year I will complete my 1000th tournament game. All my games were played by postcard until the mid 90's. E-mail dominated my CC schedule from about 1998 until 2002. Now I only play server chess. I've played on the FICGS, IECG, GameKnot, ChessFriend, Schemingmind and ICCF servers.
Contrary to many people who've played as long as I have, I do NOT see chess engines as a threat to the game. I think they've changed the game, but not hurt the game. I believe they've increasd CC's popularity and game quality. The same is true for opening and ending databases.
Some of the changes that will occur in CC the next ten years:
- Servers will improve functionality and ease of use.
- Due to engine use we will grow to accept 2200 as an "average" rating rather than "Master."
- Tournaments will be re-structured to include fewer players per section and shorter tournament durations. This particularly applies to ICCF where 15 player sections and slow time rules to simulate postal chess are used.
- New server functionality will be added to allow players the option to SLOW down the game. It's too easy to get caught in a mindless "server flurry."
- New chess software will be developed to analyze games. This analysis tool will give proability estimates on what engine one's opponent is using. That information will allow one to counter and plan against one's opponent.
- There will be more anti-computer books written and theories developed. We will use these techniques to beat our opponent and and improve our chess planning skills.
Bottomline ... I am excited by the new technology. I see continued advances in the way we manage our gameload, the way we send moves, the way we play, plan and analyze our moves. The way we play in the future will be different and will still be fun for those who embrace new technology. My disappointment is I am an old man and unlikely to enjoy all the advantages the future brings. I hope those who follow me enjoy what I will miss :)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-07-23 19:54:58)
Chess thematic tournaments
Hello to all.
The 7th chess thematic tournament (waiting list is open) may be a very interesting challenge...
The opening : 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Ng8
Is it a lost position or not, you can try to respond ! (it is at least very hypermodern style, but is there a name for such a manoeuvre ? :))
There are many other ideas of openings, but you can make suggestions for future thematic tournaments.
Previous ones :
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000001
King's gambit (winner : Josef riha)
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000002
Wing's gambit
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000003
Benko gambit
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000004
Orang-utan
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000005
Danish gambit
FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000006
Scotch gambit
Glen D. Shields (2006-07-26 03:52:31)
Thanks Wayne, but ...
Wayne - you have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to feel guilty about. You're playing by todays rules. One of life's great pleasures is to embrace change and enjoy the fun and diversity that comes from it :)
I look forward to even more change. I'd love to see new analysis tools, new ways to analyze endings, openings, and counter-attack the engines. So much to be accomplished. So many great things still be developed :)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-08-20 21:59:53)
TCCMB exhibition match
Game over, John did it well !
http://www.ficgs.com/game_2222.html
I hoped a miracle until the end. The trap did not work, 28.Qd8+ and it was probably a draw... After 28.Qf8+ ! .. I only can resign. Lots of fun :)
I'll look at the next chess thematic tournament (same opening) with interest...
Thanks to John Knudsen for this nice game !
Thibault de Vassal (2006-08-22 16:48:47)
Thematic Blackmar : 1 day !
Obviously, you were interested in playing Blackmar thematic tournament. The waiting list has been completed in only 1 day :)
I'll try to find more openings like this one...
Benjamin Aldag (2006-08-22 19:18:37)
New Thematic - Tourney Trompowsky !
Hi,
since 3 days i have the Chessbase DVD "The Trompowsky - The easy way" (http://www.chessbase.com/shop/product.asp?pid=249&user=&coin=). Thank you for starting a thematic tornament with the Trompowsky-Opening. The right time, to test my knowledge about the DVD.
Benny
Benjamin Aldag (2006-08-24 20:19:09)
Why do you play corr-chess ?
Hi again,
i play corr-games, because i want to learn more about my repertoire-openings. If you look at my games, you will see every time the same gamestyle and often the same opening. I love the Grand Prix Attack and the closed Sicilian with the white colors. With black i prefer to play Dzindzi-Indian, also known as The Beefeater. Corr-Chess is for me one of the best ways, to try some learned lines and look for better a better continue.
Now my question: Why do you play corr-chess ?
Benny
Benjamin Aldag (2006-08-26 01:37:37)
"NEW" Opening Idea !
Hello,
i would be very happy, to see the following line in a thematic opening tourney:
1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Bc5
4.c3 Nf6
5.d4 exd4
6.cxd4 Bb4+
7.Nc3 Nxe4
8.0-0 0-0!
ok folks, i am searching for this line in my database and found just a handfull games, played by low rated players. I am searching in many books for this line, but i found nothing ! I've analysed this line and i believe, this line is good for BLACK ! What do you think about this line ??? Do you see more than me ? Do you have any GM-Commentary about this line ? Maybe in an ebook or something else ? Please help me to find the answer, why this line is never played by some very good players. It would be helpful, to start a thematic-tourney'bout this nice line.
Benny
Don Burden (2006-08-26 18:51:54)
Opening Idea
I'd say it is a fairly big advantage to black. He's a solid pawn up and threatens to win another. Found two games in my database with higher rated players:
[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Majewski, Jan"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2335"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "122"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8.
O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. Ba3 Nxd6 14. Bxd6
cxd6 15. Qxd6 Ne8 16. Qd5 Nf6 17. Qd6 Ne8 18. Qd2 d6 19. Ng5 Nf6 20. Rad1 d5
21. Bb3 h6 22. Ne4 Bg4 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. f3 Qb6+ 25. Qd4 Be6 26. Bxd5 Bxd5 27.
Qxb6 axb6 28. Rxd5 Rxa2 29. f4 Rc8 30. Rd3 Rc2 31. Ree3 Ra8 32. h4 Raa2 33. Rg3
Rd2 34. Rde3 Kf8 35. Re4 b5 36. Re5 Rab2 37. Rc5 b4 38. Rc8+ Ke7 39. cxb4 Rxb4
40. Rxg7 Rxf4 41. Rh7 Rf6 42. Kh2 Ke6 43. h5 Rd5 44. g4 Rd4 45. Kg3 Rd3+ 46.
Kg2 Rd6 47. Re8+ Kd7 48. Rf8 Ke7 49. Rhh8 Ke6 50. Re8+ Kd5 51. Re7 b6 52. Rf8
Rf4 53. Kg3 Rdf6 54. Rc8 Rf3+ 55. Kg2 Rf2+ 56. Kg1 R2f4 57. Rg8 b5 58. Re3 b4
59. Kg2 Kd4 60. Rb3 Rb6 61. Kg3 Rf1 0-1
[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mathias, Manfred"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2370"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "110"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8.
O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. dxc7 Qxc7 14. Qb3 d5
15. Bd3 Be6 16. Rb1 b6 17. Qc2 g6 18. Bb2 Ne8 19. Re2 Neg7 20. Rbe1 Rfe8 21.
Qd2 Nd6 22. c4 dxc4 23. Qc3 f6 24. Bxg6 hxg6 25. Qxf6 Qf7 26. Rxe6 Qxf6 27.
Rxf6 Rxe1+ 28. Nxe1 Re8 29. Nf3 Re2 30. Be5 Nf7 31. Bd4 Re6 32. Kf1 Rxf6 33.
Bxf6 b5 34. Bc3 Ne6 35. h4 Nf4 36. a3 Nd5 37. Bb4 a6 38. g3 Kg7 39. Ke2 Kf6 40.
Ba5 Nd6 41. g4 Nb7 42. Bd2 a5 43. Bg5+ Kg7 44. Ne5 c3 45. Kd3 b4 46. Kc4 Nb6+
47. Kd4 Nc5 48. axb4 axb4 49. f3 Nd5 50. Nc4 Ne6+ 51. Kd3 Nxg5 52. hxg5 b3 53.
Na3 Kf7 54. f4 c2 55. Nxc2 Nxf4+ 0-1
Elmer Valderrama (2006-08-27 11:17:48)
opening idea
..aparently everyone was/is impressed by
the game Spielmann-Cohn, Carslbad 1907...
--> White get such a big advantage in development that it's hard to think Black will get away with anything best than a draw here..
Mikhail Ruzin (2006-08-30 18:14:32)
Opening Idea
What about 15. Bd5 in the first game (Majewski-Chorvat)?
Dinesh De Silva (2006-09-07 06:40:18)
Re:
I'm almost certain that Kram. will dump the 1.e4 opening, as his only Achille's Heel seems to be all out tactics (which Top. is brilliant at), and some blunders (but that was when he was ill).
Regarding Leko.......he might fancy his chances if he meets Kram. again, but I don't see any sorta match up, as Anand is waiting in the wings to have a shot at either Kram. or Top.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-10 14:31:47)
Sudden death games !
Hello to all.
Does someone have any idea about chess openings that would give White 50% chances to win & Black 50% chances to win OR draw, or reverse ? (in absolute, not ie. blitz statistics)
Thinking about 1.e4 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 or 1.Nf3 d5 2.Ng1, in examples... but it's hard to know. Databases can't help much as very few games with obvious errors have been played. So mad gambits could be real challenges to play & analyze, with no draws at the outcome...
Your feelings ?
Ulrich Imbeck (2006-09-10 22:54:54)
Not only the opening
With normal openings that you like only the personal power matters.
Don't pay attention to such bullshit openings.
It is worth to think about 1.b4, 1.g4 or 1.a3. These 3 examples are the border.
Dinesh De Silva (2006-09-11 05:32:27)
Re:
Well, maybe a better idea might be to not allow d4 opening or e4 opening or Nf3 opening, and to allow other openings. Then there maybe a better chance for a result.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-11 13:38:25)
Openings
It could be fair in tournament cases (but without any interest, just a thematic tournament more). But it couldn't have any sense in a 1 game match. That's the problem...
Ulrich Imbeck (2006-09-12 01:07:36)
White to win
What's the matter with 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Lb7 3.Ld3 f5? I think it's won for white.
You should look for a position hat would give White 50% chances to win & Black 50% chances draw.
Only well known openings can give an experience for a score.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-12 01:08:25)
Traxler Counterattack
Hello Ron.
That's an interesting opening... Ok, we'll use it for the next thematic tournament...
Thematic tournaments waiting lists are filled quickly now.. but often by the same players. Maybe we should propose some boring openings too, to help them to have a rest & slow down the rhythm... :)
Ilmars Cirulis (2006-09-12 16:07:05)
?!
Does any boring opening exists?!
I know no one.
(:
Benjamin Aldag (2006-09-12 23:36:53)
Yes ! There is an boring one !
The Latvian Gambit is really boring. An opening is boring, if there is a better way to play. With the Latvian-Gambit, you will do all wrong, what you can do in the opening.
Benny
Hannes Rada (2006-09-13 19:27:19)
Boring openings
> Does any boring opening exists?! I
> know no one. (:
The Queens Gambit definitely ...
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-16 12:24:20)
2-games matches
Well, why not such a thematic tournament soon (after Traxler)... The one with opening :
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Ng8
.. is 100% wins for White so far !
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-19 20:43:18)
Traxler Counterattack
HAHAHA :=)
I see you're to solve the Traxler counterattack in Wikichess ! (at least this line 5.Nxf7)
http://www.ficgs.com/wikichess_611.html
I don't think I'll play this tournament :/ .. I've already too many running games, and a lot of work, yes... That's a pity, this opening is really interesting !
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-20 02:07:42)
Traxler thematic tournament
The waiting list is filled already for this 14th thematic tournament ! .. The last player who entered is Benjamin Aldag :) (Benny, this is not reasonable ;))
This opening was definitely a good idea :) Thanks, Ron.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-20 03:25:45)
It is a draw...
Ilmars, I'm convinced it is a draw :) .. I think I'll stop there, we can't analyze all lines. This is one of the most interesting chess openings but there's no time enough...
One interesting thing at chess : When there's a way to obtain a draw in a bloody good line, there's always a way to obtain a draw in all other bloody good lines :) (maybe it doesn't mean anything, but I understand myself ;))
Benjamin Aldag (2006-09-25 20:51:27)
ERROR
Hey,
this is a WM-Fight !!! And i dont want to see !7! Questionmark-moves in 2 games. This is not a man vs. machine game and the blunders are no openingblunders. Here are the two best chessplayers at work and blunders like 57..f5?? in the first game are absolutly lame !
Get well back Topa !
Benny
Benjamin Aldag (2006-09-27 23:19:09)
WOW !!!!
This opening is one of my favorit openings !!!
Thank you for this ! You can find some good lines at wikichess by me ;-)
Benny
Ilmars Cirulis (2006-09-30 15:25:13)
Can I play it with white?...
... against Benjamin Aldag. It is one of his favorit openings, but I think it's good for white. (:
Cirulis.
Benjamin Aldag (2006-09-30 15:57:58)
e4-Line !
The e4-Line is the only line, which gives white the possibility of an clear advantage. All other lines are really bad for white. The point of this opening is, to have with the black color good knights versus a bad bishop-pair of white. Roman Dzindzihasvili is the founder of this Defense and i think, "Beefeater" is not the right name. I call it "Dzindzi-Indian-Defense". There are many interesting lines and some of them, transpose the game to other openings (Pirc, Sicilian-Dragon, Kings-Indian etc.). The move 5...f5 was played to prevent black of 6.e4, but 6.e4! is the best move, white can play. I've played last year in Litomysl in a Simultan versus GM Sergey Movsesian this "Dzindzi-Indian-Defense". Sergey played 6.h4?! and after 15 moves, we draw the game. The Dzindzi-Indian-Defense is an easy to learn opening and i've got good results with it in many tourneys. Last time i've saw this Defense at the Chess-Olympic, played by players around 2400-2500. 6.e4! is the best move, but many many players don't know it and the possibility for black, to get a good result in a game is very high. I can say, i know all variations about this opening and this thematic tournament will be my first tourney here, where i will not use computer-assistence. Its funny to see, that an Engine (Rybka,Fritz etc.) dont understand the ideas behind this defense and without an opening-book, engines dont see that 6.e4! is the only way, to get an advantage.
I luv Dzindzi-Indian-Defense
Benny
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 (2006-10-03 15:28:14)
50%
The point is not always winning for sure... playing good chess or learning are others.
Some very strong players just like to try & analyse unusual openings ie.
Glen D. Shields (2006-10-04 17:52:20)
Yes Thibault - Thanks for Asking
Thibault -
I see a need to offer player defined delays. My desire would be that when a move is sent, I have the option to post the move immediately or 1, 2 or 3 days later (using my reflection time during the delay). This option allows players to stagger their games and better manage the pace particularly at the beginning of a tournament.
Servers like FICGS have become the meeting place for postal players, e-mail players, correspondence server players and real time server players. It's a diverse and interesting group. Server chess is nothing like postal chess, but it shouldn't be a substitute for OTB chess either.
Starting a server tournament is like a ping pong match. You send a move and ten minutes later you have a reply. One can't ever keep their inbox empty.
Once the opening is over, the match then moves into "Groundhog Day" mode. You wake up to an inbox full of moves, you work all day on them and then wake up the following day to an inbox of moves from the same players. It's tiring.
I'd like the option to send a move, forget about it and then chose whether it should be visible to my opponent immediately, 24 hours, 48 hours or 72 hours later. The delay allows me to manage my game load better and gives me some flexibility how fast I want to play.
Server chess has grown rapidly the last five years. Its benefits are fantastic. Curiously, however, this year is the first year since e-mail chess was officially introduced that ICCF is reportedly (unoffical source) seeing an increase in postal chess. One of the biggest reasons talked about for this change is players are worn out from the fast server pace. I can relate to that. I'd hate to give up server chess because it makes so much sense. I know no one twists my arm to move fast, but why not give me server tools to help me manage my game load? I let the server count my time, keep my game score, chase my opponent when he forgets to move and report my results. Why can't it also help me manage my game load and slow down the pace when it needs to be slowed?
You asked ... so here are my two cents :)
Elmer Valderrama (2006-10-04 22:31:46)
engine use
I believe a player should be stronger than an engine
(in terms of positional understanding) to get a feeling
of where the centre of gravity (of the analysis) should go
to have a "win".
If left alone/by themselves, the engines would make very stupid things,
that's why they are in severe need to be told what opening
to choose, eventually what line, and in the line, what
series of moves -so called "plan". The difference in strength
-given that engines are now public/free and very strong-
lies in the difference in playing skill between players, if
not in the computer power owned by them, in my opinion.
Rodrigo Jaroszewski (2006-10-05 11:42:35)
Re:
Basically, I'm playing to force myself to learn. In July, when I began my first game in FICGS, I knew nothing and had nobody to teach me. Since the probabilities of me ever having a tutor are dim, I knew I had to learn alone.
FICS won't cut it, because the guys at my level generally memorize a line and go for it until the bitter end. Having no opening knowledge I would generally end up in a bad spot until the midgame, where I can handle myself better. I rarely got past move 15 there.
OTB won't do for me, because I don't even know if there's a chess club in my city. I had a neighbor that used to play with me, but I quickly got past him on knowledge.
Studying database games is just not my style. I can't get drawn into the game if I'm not playing. If I choose the bad move I have to feel threatened by it, it has to have a consequence to me.
Thus, I'm here at FICGS. Before every move I'm able to analyze it and how the line goes forward, to understand why it is a good move. Plus, I'm able to test the moves that come to my head and check them (generally to find out they are outright suicidal).
In the end, I think my opponent wins something back, which is an entertaining and hopefully instructive game.
P.S.: BTW, just so you know, I play clean on FICS and OTB. I think those are, after some time at FICGS, becoming instructive environments on their own right.
Rodrigo Jaroszewski (2006-10-10 05:27:08)
Re:
Use Toga II if you're looking for a freeware one. Crafty was simply too unreliable. 15 minutes of brute-force search, returning ~18-ply results with slight advantage; then I'd play them one by one and about the 10th ply, *bang*, a blunder. Very nice if you're trying to emulate Topalov-Kramnik, but not nice if you want to get some good advice.
The trick is to have a general understanding of the opening, and notice when the game has entered the realm of the middlegame (this is still very blurry for me, but I'm getting the hang of it). Then you just have to try to learn as much as you can about basic middlegame concepts. That's as far as my understanding goes up to now, tactics and strategy are not within my grasp yet.
Of course, this is for total noobs like me, if you know more you'd like to test more advanced concepts.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-12 17:21:24)
... rapid games
Huh.. I've no idea... All I know : They played a blitz game just before the match and it was a draw (dutch opening) :)
Maybe we'll have surprises (at last) in the openings, but the result will be so aleatory...
Dinesh De Silva (2006-10-14 06:45:39)
Re:
Hi, Utesch, Rada & Thibault, I guess this thread is about me?! Let me clarify...... I am in over 80 games at this time in FICGS, ICCF, LIAPE, and IECG. Quite a few of the games are world championship final matches, world candidate matches & world champioship matches. So I have to naturally concentrate on those critical middle games & end games matches mainly. I'm only human. I have a severe case of catarrh due to break of rest. So in ccertain games I get into time trouble, but as you can see I try to be very creative/original in my games & try to find new variations even in openings.
Scott Prestwood (2006-10-21 02:42:17)
Moderation in everything
I find it easy to take on too many correspondence games my self. I prefer to have time to analyze as this is the tradition of coorespondence chess. I often feel busy (zeitnot as you call it) with just 15 games with long time controls.
Some principals I use in moderating my challenge rate are;
1) I dont start new games if I have a game under 15 moves in progress, opening require less analysis, and the mid game is where most of the work is done.
2) whatever the estimated days per moves is I limit myself to 1/4th of that as my limit of games. i.e. if the average days per moves is 12 days I will try to keep around 3 games going if possible.
These limits work well and I'm on several coorespondence sites.
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-10-21 12:09:00)
Best game
The "Best Game" should be a figurehead of the FICS-Site - but is it? I don't think so. That so an exotic opening experiment (particularly with black) will run in a real loosing position, is not very suprising. And also the praised last move is found by several engines in a very short time! What we (this site) need is a very high classed game with surprising twists - which engines never can find. And it must be with very good comments on most moves. Looking for this - that is the real challenge for all of us! Wolfgang
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-21 12:11:22)
Tactics / server chess
You just have to be a bit more creative or to play different openings in your 3 games as White & Black in a tournament... Anyway, with online databases it's quite easy to know any player style & opening book.
There are many psychological tactics with server chess & CC time controls IMO, ie. it may be quite important to manage your unlucky opponent spirit during a tournament :)
Wayne Lowrance (2006-10-22 05:13:08)
Best Game
Without revealing my engine it find Qf8+ in 5 seconds, so your statement needs correcting.
The game is "probobly lost accoring to my engine.
Excuse my bluntness. But what a stupid opening for black. Thats where all the trouble began.
I would not try and defend the black position here....My two cents worth Thibault de Vassal
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-10-28 17:32:08)
Chess quizz :-)
8) Peter Schuster will win the first FICGS-World Championchip! He's playing the most variable chess and his opening repertoire is the largest.
John Acre (2006-10-30 22:09:15)
lowball
I absolutely use an engine. The permitted use of engines is the only reason I'm at this site to begin with..... ........... ........... ........... ............. .............. ...........
Engine assisted games can be a great study tool, if used correctly. I analyze each position to the best of my ability, record my candidate moves. Select one, record it, and then feed the position into Fritz to see how it evaluates the position......... ........... ............ ............. ........... ............. ............... .............
If my move is in the same ballpark, I make my selected move, I feel fricking great, and I await my opponent's reply. If my move is substantially inferior to Fritz's selection, I try to figure out why, and then I play Fritz's move. This way, not only do I get to understand the positions rising out of my chosen opening in a depth I could otherwise never approach without professional guidance, but each step of the way, I learn to play the next move's position as if the strongest move had been played............. ............ ........... ............. ............ ........... ........... .......... ..........
If an opponent blunders in a big way, I mostly let Fritz finish him off, because the game is of no study value to me beyond that point. I don't care what my rating is, except that it be at a number where I can join a variety of rated tournaments (to face a variety of opposition). I don't play at this site to win, or to lose. I play here to get as close as a ~1600 OTB player like me can get to understanding the objective truth of the game............ ........... ........... ........... ........... ............. ............ ........
Sorry if that upsets anybody, but that's the whole reason I'm here. The community isn't big enough to have much independent value as a non-engine-assisted place to play correspondence matches. And why would one bother? There are a million of those places on the web. This place, however, is a one-of-a-kind goldmine. If engine play were to dry up or be outlawed here, what would be the point?....... ........... .......... ........ ........... ......... ........ ........... ............ ..........
Anyway, to answer, from my viewpoint, another question asked in this thread, I'm currently self-rated at 1500 for this site. I'm playing in tournaments at about that level, and am admittedly using Fritz 9. My record, out of 20 or so games, looks like it's going to be about 4 wins, 6 losses, and 10 draws......... ............ ........... ............ ............ ............ ........... ............. ......
Only two of those wins are going to be miniatures, and both of those against the same guy. So playing with engine-assisted strength of around 2500 on my slow-ish machine, I'm going to score around 45%, with about 17 out of 18 opponents playing at or above my machine-enhanced strength............... ........... ............. ............ ........ ............ ...........
People guessing 50% of users here use engines are lowballing, bigtime. I estimate around 95%. And I have no problem saying that I'm one of them.
Charlie Neil (2006-11-06 11:57:11)
Chess is dead.
What Fischer said about Capablanca on the chessbase interview in regards to openings could it apply about himself in relation to say Krammik or Anand. It is good to hear that he is toning down some of his views in his old age and that Iceland has taken him in.
Is the FBI warrant still out to arrest him if he returns to the USA?
He is still a World Champion of Chess and a personal inspiration to me ,in chess only I hasten to add. I am of the generation that were brought to chess by Fischer v Spassky 1972.
And finally, Thibault and team good work putting these links into the Forum. I find myself checking out the Forum when I login before I go to my games.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-12 15:41:35)
Chess problem
In wikichess you "just" have to follow the opening, then enter all new moves of your game until the position or complete game (but you would give the solution)... You may 'sign' the game at the end with this comment :
End of game : W. Utesch - Opponent : 1-0 (ICCF)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-13 15:36:42)
Challenge!
I'll defend these openings :)
I sent an email to you.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-14 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
Dinesh De Silva (2006-11-15 02:17:33)
Re:
He will most probably play semi closed openings & defences, which gives a slight/miniscule advantage or equality somewhere, avoiding early tactical open positions. So we might not see any Sicilian at all as Black in his repertoire. He'll try his best to outwit the computer by sometimes introducing deviations or novelties in the first 25 moves or so.
Ryaad Aabid (2006-11-16 09:28:27)
Suggestion
All openings became known nowadays.
If the opponents ends the openinig step, the clock will automatically be changed from 30 or 40 days to 7 or 10 days.
If the player has no time enough to visit the website during 7 or 10 days, he/she should take vacation, otherwise to leave! instead of bothering his/her opponents.
Thank you Thibault,
Ryaad
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-16 13:02:24)
Suggestion
The idea to jump the first time control (not to add 40 days at move 10) would have been interesting if we knew 'where' ends the opening, but that's quite impossible... The real problem is some players can't connect so often, or play so quickly !
It may be frustrating in some cases but that's correspondence chess... I connect about 20 times a day but I have many games and I feel in zeitnot in some of them. As for me it depends more on the game than on the time control...
Marc Lacrosse (2006-11-24 09:27:56)
completely unfair and thus impredictible
The fact that the match conditions have been arranged on such unfair rules has two immediate consequences :
- we already know for sure that Kramnik himself is sure that he could not succeed on a more fair ground
- final result is unpredictible and probably already arranged beforehand
Marc
By the way the rules are really incredible.
Just an example : not only does Kramnik have the final opening book of Fritz at home for preparation, but moreover he will have the right to see Fritz's opening book _during_ the games with the various moves that could be played by the engne according to the player's intended move, together with the associated statistics. so in the unfortunate case where Kramnik could not remember is home killer preparation he will have the various choices presented to his eyes during play. Pretty incredible !
and there are quite a dozen rules like that ... (including the right for Kramnik only to call for an adjournement with subsequent overnight computer- or fellow-GM-assisted analysis ...)
For those who would like to have a look the complete rules are on Susan Polger's blog : http://www.susanpolgar.blogspot.com/
Lionel Vidal (2006-12-02 09:54:32)
A lone engine in CC :-)
Suppose I make the following test (it has certainily be proposed before, but let's do it again, for the fun of the argument):
- I buy a recent engine (say the new Fritz10)
- I play in some CC tournaments (I do not want to pay fees, so let's say, here at FICGS of course :-), and at iecg)
- I choose the first moves of all my games based on some statistics made on a CC base (just to avoid some openings statistically bad in CC)
- starting from a few moves before the engine goes out of its opening book (to be defined, maybe 4 moves) I let my average computer run 10 hours by move (around one night per move... I know, I sleep too much :-)
- I *always* play the very move the engine finds as best
- I play as many tournaments as I can, considering the time constraint that limits the number of games (just to get a meaningful rating as fast as possible)
Now, what rating do you think I can reach at most, strictly following these guidelines?
(note that if I know some basic maths to do the stats, I do not even have to know chess rules... although a basic knowledge is assumed to ease the play in practice)
Are you ready to bet on your guess ? :-)
In pratice, the test does not work, because the tester dies from boredom long before he gets any rating :-))
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-06 00:05:33)
Deep Fritz 10
... wins the match 4-2
It's a shock (even if Kramnik said it and repeated - deeeep fritz is favorite). It's hard to explain such a result.
Deep Fritz - Vladimir Kramnik
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Bb3 Qc7 9.Re1 Nc6 10.Re3 0-0 11.Rg3 Kh8 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.Qe2 a5 14.Bg5 Ba6 15.Qf3 Rab8 16.Re1 c5 17.Bf4 Qb7 18.Bc1 Ng8 19.Nb1 Bf6 20.c3 g6 21.Na3 Qc6 22.Rh3 Bg7 23.Qg3 a4 24.Bc2 Rb6 25.e5 dxe5 26.Rxe5 Nf6 27.Qh4 Qb7 28.Re1 h5 29.Rf3 Nh7 30.Qxa4 Qc6 31.Qxc6 Rxc6 32.Ba4 Rb6 33.b3 Kg8 34.c4 Rd8 35.Nb5 Bb7 36.Rfe3 Bh6 37.Re5 Bxc1 38.Rxc1 Rc6 39.Nc3 Rc7 40.Bb5 Nf8 41.Na4 Rdc8 42.Rd1 Kg7 43.Rd6 f6 44.Re2 e5 45.Red2 g5 46.Nb6 Rb8 47.a4 1-0
It seems to me it was allowed to Kramnik to consult Fritz opening book, so first why to play 8. ...Qc7 !?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-11 03:58:47)
Portuguese opening
Did you know this one ??
Miguel shows interesting lines in Wikichess... A future challenge for Ilmars ;)
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=wikichess&article=3731
Daniel De Noose (2006-12-13 14:29:26)
Rybka clearly the best ?
This week I have tested Rybka againt 3 others engines.
The parameters :
----------------
Intel Centrino 725 (1,67 Ghz), 64 Mb Hash Tables, games in 10 minutes (+ 2 seconds per move) for each "player", Shredder 9 interface, 20 games' matches, HS-Masterbook Opening book .
The Engines :
-------------
Rybka 2.2 W32, Gambit Fruit 1.0 Beta 4bx, Toga 1.2.1a and Shredder 9.
The Results :
-------------
1) Rybka - Shredder 9 :
15,5 / 4,5 (+13,-2,=5)
2) Rybka - Toga 1.2.1a :
12 / 8 (+8,-4,=8)
3) Rybka - Gambit Fruit :
13,5 / 6,5 (+10,-3,=7)
The comments :
--------------
Rybka seems to be clearly the best for the moment ... I would like to test Rybka against other engines like Fritz 10, Shredder 10, ... but I don't have these engines. Perhaps later... ;-)
Do you have comments about this ?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-23 05:26:35)
The games
Here are the games so far :)
Traxler counter-attack :
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Nxf7 Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7.Ke3 Qh4 8.g3 Nxg3 9.hxg3 Qd4+ 10.Kf3 d5 11.Rh4 e4+ 12.Kg2 0-0 13.Bb3 Rxf7 14.Qg1 Qf6 15.Rf4 Qe6 16.Nc3 Qh3+ 17.Kf2 Be6 18.Nxd5 Nd4 19.Rxf7 Bxf7 20.Nf4 Qf5 21.Bxf7+ Qxf7 22.Qd1 g5 23.Qg4 Qf6 24.Kg2 Rf8 25.b3 Nxc2 26.Rb1 Ne1+ 27.*
Latvian gambit :
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxh8 Kf7
8.Qd4 Nf6 9.Be2 c5 10.Qe3 Nc6 11.O-O Nd4 12.Na3 Bd6 13.f4 Ng4 14.Bxg4 Bxg4
15.h3 Qh4 16.d3 Ne2+ 17.Kh2 d4 0-1
So result will be most probably Cirulis : 0,5 - de Vassal : 1,5
Thanks Ilmars for very interesting games ! These openings are really good weapons... (for Black :))
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-26 22:40:28)
Double round robin
In 'theory', that's fully right... I finally chose single round robin because double round robin means 6 games more per tournament, meaning less tournaments, less opponents and so on. As thematic tournaments are friendly - not rated - score is not so important, it's more interesting to play different openings IMO.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-28 11:30:57)
Amazing
That's funny to see how this thematic tournament (portuguese opening) attracted players from Portugal.
I wonder if french players would fight for french defense the same... :-)
A high-rated one with a very strong correspondence chess player !
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000020.html
Lawrence Nesko (2007-01-07 14:10:17)
Quick Draw?
Hello, all. In one of the tournaments in which I am playing, a game has been agreed drawn on the third move. I'm not saying that there's anything underhanded about it. But I am trying to understand what would lead to such a situation. I'd appreciate if someone could enlighten me. Are certain openings recognized as nearly certain draws? Could drawng situations be recognized so early in a game? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Marc Lacrosse (2007-01-08 14:53:13)
My new little chess site ...
... is located at http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info
There will be some computer chess related stuff (opening books, collected ICC games, database processing tips, tests results ...) together with a few games, analyses, and maybe some historical data and so on.
Not that much so far, but I wish and hope that the baby will be growing fast :-)
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-01-19 17:19:28)
Other forums that I visit daily
A few other computer-chess-related ones :
Winboard forum :
http://wbforum.vpittlik.org/
WBEC Ridderkerk forum (associated with one of the most reknowned engines evaluation site):
http://f27.parsimony.net/forum67828/index.htm
CSS-forum (german):
http://www.computerschach.de/forum/
Le Fou numérique (french):
http://f50.parsimony.net/forum200321/
And a very nice yahoo group devoted to unorthodox openings :
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/UnorthodoxChessOpenings
In another category I like the two following blogs where there are very lively daily discussions on every chess-related news :
Susan Polgar's one :
http://www.susanpolgar.blogspot.com/
Mig Greengard' daily dirt :
http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/
Marc
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-26 22:30:32)
Scandinavian defense
Hi Miguel.
That's a nice idea. Great opening with interesting recent developments.
Waiting list is now open ;)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-27 02:04:53)
Scandinavian
Do not listen to Miguel too much... there would be a portuguese variation in every opening ! :)
Ron Keyston (2007-01-29 19:04:14)
Specifics and Examples
OK, one PC is a 3.2GHz P4 w/1GB RAM running XP Pro. 256MB Hashtables with an ~800MB Maximum possible. The other PC is an Athlon X2 4600+ w/2GB RAM running Vista Ultimate (RTM.) It has 1GB Hashtables with ~1.5GB Maximum Possible. I can pretty much guarantee that it is not a hashtable issue though as the problem is with the legality of a move and only arises after saving into a database, closing the game and then re-opening it from the database. Also, if I open the same saved game from the database into Fritz 9, castling long as black is perfectly OK.
As for some examples, I will give the same five games that I sent to Chessbase. Some of these are contrived examples, whereas some are from my games here at FICGS:
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Bg4 6.O-O Nc6 7.d4
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Be7 6.Bxf6 gxf6 7.Nf3 b6 8.Bc4 Bb7 9.Qe2 Nd7 10.O-O-O c6 11.Rhe1 Qc7 12.g3
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c4 7.Qg4 g6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Nh6 10.Qh3 Nf5 11.g4 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Qb6 13.Bg2 Nc6 14.Qh6 Nxd4 15.O-O Bd7 16.Bg5 Ba4 17.Nxd4 Qxd4 18.Qg7 Rf8 19.Be3 Qxg4 20.Bc5
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 a6 6.Be3 Nc6 7.Qd2 Bf5 8.Bd3 Bg4 9.Be2 e6 10.O-O-O
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3
Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c4 7.Qg4 g6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Nh6 10.Qh3 Nf5 11.g4 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Qb6 13.Bg2 Nc6 14.Qh6 Nxd4 15.O-O Bd7 16.Qg7
In all five examples, it is black to move from the final position. Also, in all five examples, castling long/queen-side is perfectly legal and likely one of the best moves. BEFORE the game(s) is/are saved into the database, Fritz allows black to castle long (and it is at or near the top line in infinite analysis mode.) AFTER saving the game into a database, closing the game window, and re-opening the game from the database, Fritz treats castling long as an illegal move.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-01-31 18:21:40)
1.e4 c5 2.f4 d5 3.Nf3
This is the line for the next chess thematic tournament :
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__THEMATIC_TOURNAMENT__000023.html
A line played several times here already by SM Wladyslav Krol, and a really interesting opening that produced the current 'best game' :
http://www.ficgs.com/game_864.html
Does anyone know a name for this opening, or may I call it "Krol attack" :)
Anyway, it should be a spectacular tournament !
Wladyslaw Krol (2007-02-01 16:30:27)
THANKS!
Thibault, nice thanks for your initiative and call my favourite gambit in sicilian opening ...
Best wishes, Wladyslaw
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-02 00:59:47)
Bryntse opening ?
http://hem.passagen.se/tjmisha/bryntse.html
This was played in the sixties by former swedish CC champion A Bryntse.
Very interesting indeed !
Marc
Wladyslaw Krol (2007-02-02 17:01:05)
Bryntse opening ?!
Marc, thank you for publish very interesting article. It is new for me.
Wladyslaw
Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-05 12:44:56)
Bryntse opening
Really interesting. Thanks Marc.
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 (2007-02-16 22:56:01)
Openings
As usual, Peter plays some risky & interesting openings :) .. Do you know a name for this one ??
http://www.ficgs.com/game_8065.html
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-24 21:22:11)
not so simple ...
"I think Kasparov is the best for his aggressivity, Capablanca for his semplicity, and Alechine for his tattics."
This is way too simple...
Remember Kasparov drawing game after game for recovering after Karpov led by 5-0 in their match ...
Capablanca's play was full of tactics (I would better say full of sophisticated ways to avoid tactics - which _is_ tactics at a supreme degree).
Alekhine's tactics were most of the time allowed by too weak opposition. Among great tactical geniuses far stronger than Alekhine in this field I would cite Bronstein, Tal, Spassky, Nezmetdinov, Fischer, Shirov, Kasparov, Topalov ...
But there are also :
- Positional geniuses : Morphy, Capablanca, Botvinnik, Petrosian, and an entire class above them all Karpov, Ivanchuk, Kramnik.
- Opening prep geniuses : Botvinnik, Fischer, Kasparov
- Endgame geniuses : Rubinstein, Karpov, Korchnoi...
Well a difficult question because all top class players had several masterpieces in any of these fields ...
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-02 11:57:24)
Big chess. An idea
I saw another chess variant with about 16 squares on the horizontal and 8 lines on the vertical... I don't feel it's interesting enough... A kind of "double-chessboard". But you're right, pawns won't participate in the opening battle... What's interesting IMO is the many ways the middle game could happen :)
Now I'm discussing "theory" with some of my opponents.. :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-09 15:11:18)
Kingston Defense !
While looking at links poiting to FICGS.com, I found this Wikipedia article and realized that one of the Kingston Defense's fathers was among us :)
http://www.ficgs.com/wikichess_3670.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Defence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Wilson
"Crack the Frutch : How to play the Kingston Defense"
.. by Gavin Wilson. ISBN 0-9514103-0-X
The opening is fully commented in Wikichess by Gavin... Quite funny :)
By the way, this opening looks interesting ! .. I just launched a thematic tournament. Thanks for all your comments in Wikichess, Gavin :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-10 15:43:17)
Playchess Freestyle Tournaments
Hi Elmer.
1h+15 is worth 1h10/40 moves... 2h/40 moves is the longest time control before correspondence chess (games that don't finish the same day it started) and I think it's long enough so that human can do something else than operate Rybka :)
About Silver/Gold Thematic game, if White/Black obtains much more than 50%, I'll change the opening until to find one that give about 50% chances. What do you think ? .. About this opening, I think chances are about 50%, I would play it with both colors :)
Don Groves (2007-03-26 02:04:20)
Computer Go
Yes, we were saying the same things about Chess 30 years ago. This is one reason I feel as I do, the fact that computer capabilities are still increasing just as fast as they did over that period. From experience, using the past 30 years as a guide, I just cannot bring myself to doubt there is much they won't do in the next 30 years. The reason I mentioned neural networks is that they are very good at pattern recognition which must be a large part of the solution if computers are to excel at Go. I do not think a brute force approach, or even a statistical one, will ever succeed at computer Go except in the endgame where they can dominate as they do in Chess once the number of possible moves becomes small enough. But if neural nets can be trained to recognize good shape and then apply basic fundamentals in the opening and early middle game, we already know they will excel in the endgame. It's the latter part of the middle game where I think the action will be in designing computer Go programs -- where fundamentals are not enough and there are still too many moves available to use brute force. But, if computers are ever good enough to get to a winnable endgame, watch out ;-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-26 18:59:43)
How Politics Imitates Chess
Garry Kasparov is probably not a philosopher, however it is not obvious to me that Chess Imitates Life, as (you said it) there's nothing bigger than life... Chess is a part of life. On the contrary, we could say life imitates chess because some decisions, sometimes, can be reduced (as far as possible) to chess strategies like reality can be reduced to science. The same, How Reality Imitates Science makes sense to me, whereas How Science Imitates Reality doesn't.
"How politics finally does not imitate Chess" by Garry Kasparov should be much more interesting :-) .. with a preface by Vladimir Putin : "How life doesn't imitate politics" :>
In France, the election sometimes makes me think to a.. more than chess, a Go game... I think Nicolas Sarkozy uses some chess(Go)-like strategies and knows openings/Joseki & tactics best. At least he may know very well the work of Arthur Schopenhauer : "The world as will and representation" & "L'art d'avoir toujours raison". In comparison, Ségolène Royal and other candidates seem to use faith and "religion". Anyway, the result should be quite the same as life doesn't imitate politics much nowadays :/
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-29 17:53:03)
game 6909
There was great games following this opening in the past, I remember particularly one by Judit Polgar.
Ok, let's see.. 10. ...Ng8 then.. brr, this position is simply frightening, does it really need an explanation :) .. if 10.Nfd7 then 11.Qh5, 12.O-O-O actually there's no particular line to justify 10. ...d5 IMO, the attack simply looks so strong in other cases... At least it obviously deals with obvious weaknesses in Black's position by giving some air.
Any other try to explain this hard opening ? :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-31 16:14:34)
Grand prix attack sac. against Caro Kann
I always look with interest the games played by Wladyslav Krol :)
We discussed last month this explosive variant with 3.Nf3!? in Grand Prix attack, now Wladyslav used the same opening against Caro Kann !
1.e4 c6 2.f4 d5 3.Nf3 ...
I found 3 results on Google about this opening, 2 come from FICGS :
http://www.ficgs.com/game_6886.html
http://www.ficgs.com/game_8263.html
http://www.chesspublishing.com/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1160671893;start=all
It would be interesting to have comments from the players for this interesting opening, out of the books at move 3... Could be a new thematic tournament very soon :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-07 18:52:59)
Lightning demo game
Finally it was a lightning (time control 30 min + 1 min / move) game.
A lot of thanks to Catalin for playing this nice game... another one with this funny thematic opening 1.Nf3 2.Ng1 3.Nf3 4.Ng1
All seems ok, but it would be better if the page isn't refreshed until the position change on the board. I'll make some improvements this way.
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-09 23:43:22)
Thematic tournaments suggestion
A small and hopefully interesting suggestion :
When we go to the list of running and/or finished thematic tournaments we just see "tournament 001", tournament 002" and so on.
It would be nice to have the start position (as a PGN line) immediately under each tournament title so as to see at a glance which opening was played.
Marc
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-16 16:45:13)
Fortunately...
... chess programs are not strong enough to generate good correspondence chess opening trees :)
Achim Mueller (2007-04-22 00:42:15)
Some more answers ;-)
@Don Burden
Full ack! If the rules stay as they are now it definitely makes sense to have groups of 11 or 13 players with e.g. 2 qualifiers.
@Mikhail Ruzin
Believe it or not, I would have been glad to play in group 02! There are seven "life" players and I bet a score of 4.5 or maybe even 4 points may be enough to qualify. In group 12 it's only 4 life players, and a result of 5 points (maybe 5.5 points) won't be enough for one player. There are only two remaining games, and all three strong life players have 4.5(one game to play), 4.5(1) and 4(2).
In this special situation exactly three games will decide who will quailify if you take a deeper look at the results and the contents of the games.
@Thibault
I never said it's easy for a 2300 ELO player if he plays for a draw only. But it's a big advantage for a player in a region between 2200 and 2500 if is aware that a draw will have the same quality as a victory against a certain competitor. Take a look at the world class cc players. There is a ~70% draw rate in the big tournaments, so the probability will be more than 70% if a player seriously tries to force a draw by choosing a certain opening and avoiding complicated variations.
Ciao
acepoint
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-22 11:59:10)
win against Anand :-)
Yesterday world number one Vishy Anand played a 90-minute simul against 19 opponents on ICC to raise funds for his favorite charity in India.
I had bought a seat and intended to play an unorthodox opening if possible.
I happened to be lucky enough to get the opportunity to play my favorite Basman-Sale sicilian defence...
... and I won !
In the very next days I will publish the game with a few comments on my site at chessbazaar.mlweb.info
This is the most beautiful day of my chess life :-)
Marc
the game :
[Event "ICC 90 5 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.04.21"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Anand"]
[Black "Bluesette"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2786"]
[BlackElo "2155"]
[Opening "Sicilian defense"]
[ECO "B41"]
[NIC "SI.41"]
[Time "12:04:06"]
[TimeControl "5400+5"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Nb3 Bb6 6. Nc3 Ne7 7. Bf4 d5 8.
exd5 Nxd5 9. Nxd5 exd5 10. Bb5+ Nc6 11. O-O O-O 12. c3 Bf5 13. Qd2 a6 14.
Bxc6 bxc6 15. Be3 Bc7 16. Bf4 Bb6 17. Rfe1 Qf6 18. Be5 Qg6 19. Qf4 Be4 20.
Qg3 Rfe8 21. Bd4 Bc7 22. Qxg6 Bxg6 23. Nc5 a5 24. b3 Bf5 25. f3 h5 26. g3 f6
27. Kf2 Kf7 28. Na4 g5 29. Rxe8 Rxe8 30. Bb6 Bxb6+ 31. Nxb6 Rb8 32. Na4 Rb5
33. Rd1 Be6 34. Ke3 c5 35. Kd2 c4 36. bxc4 dxc4 37. Kc1 Rf5 38. Rf1 Re5 39.
Rf2 Re3 40. f4 gxf4 41. Rxf4 Re1+ 42. Kb2 Re2+ 43. Ka3 Rxh2 44. Nc5 Bg4 45.
Ne4 f5 46. Rf2 Rxf2 47. Nxf2 Kf6 48. Ka4 Kg5 49. Kxa5 f4 50. gxf4+ Kxf4
{White resigns}
0-1
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-22 12:58:58)
win against Anand :-)
No I don't play serious chess over the board any more (last serious games were something like ten years ago)
But here I was very well prepared and I have considerable experience with the unusual opening I played, both from blitzes and from my correspondence preparation.
I just counted : there are more than 4900 lines of personal analysis in my Basman sicilian files ;-)
I was just lucky to get the opportunity to play this line...
Marc
Sandor Marton-Bardocz (2007-04-30 11:54:47)
WCH Stage 1 rules
Hi everyone!
Let me introduce my self :-) I'm the highest rated player in the Wch stage 1 group 12 "the blocking guy" how Achim described me...whatever that means..
1. there is no dead draw in my opinion likewise there is no absolute winning lines, openings in a chess game...And this is most true in our "centaur, human-engine tandem" era where lines are very "unstable" to say the least..so I
don't believe that one can play for a absolute draw without any risk..avoiding complicated variations...the variations complexity is very relativ...line can be "cristal clear" for one and most complicated for other..In my opinion high rates of draws among world class cc player isn't because they all play for draws ...It's a tendency..like it was in otb chess among super gm-s...not long ago...until the "no draw alowed" rules were aplied...i don't want to speculate why this happens..
2. If someone really want to win...then should play for a win ...no matter what regulations are applied for that particular tournament
3. I think that if someone might want to take a look to the game that I played against mister Deeb in the same tournament ...starting from the move 17 of mine...hardly can to argue that I wanted to play for draws just to achieve equal points to advance. I think that none of the engines can even "smell" the outcome of the game in that position after 17..d5!?...so...saying that nowdays it's easier to achieve draws because of engines....it's a little bit
exaggerated The plan started with the move 17 ...d5!? that I have played it was an absolute rejection of a drawish (by repetation) position...and it was played just because i wanted to ...play.. not to advance in a higher stage of the tournament or something...even though the final outcome ( just in my opinion! and this isn't an absolute true by far) is probably ...still a draw.
4. The regulations regarding the advance in the higher stages of the tournament..now this are definitly arguable!there are pro's and con's...and always be. We don't have plausible answers for this kind of issues...because it's is a subjectiv matter. I'm not convinced too that "higher rated player advance"is the right regulation..few examples...just look for example ...Kramnik - Leko WCH .
a. ..challenger and his fans can say.."hey he didn't beat him...why should remain WChampion?! He didn't proved that he is better!"
b. ..Wchampion and his fans can say.."hey u want my crown?! than beat me, and take it! draw isn't enough!"
The line of examples doesn't stops here ..i don't want to prolong this subject...No rule can satisfy both sides...polemics, flame are always present :-)
5. None can predict what will be the process in a group...If 2-3 or even 4 players changes they mind and doesn't
really play..that's it, and none can't do a thing about that ...maybe some sanctions later...i don't believe it will do any good anyway...
6. In the game betwen me and Achim...I don't think that I choosed a draw line...I think that I had the initiative but probably it wasn't enough for a win, Achim overforced it ....which isn't a bad thing but probably not with the plan he had preferred.
good day for everyone!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-01 00:57:44)
Achim's answer
Achim Mueller asked to close his account, but he wanted to respond to Wolfgang & Sandor, here's his answer :
"A last clarification:
@Wolfgang Utesch:
I wasn't aware of the "ELO-prefering" rule and I still don't find it
here on the webpage. I opened a thread here in this forum and
besides "then win all your games" or "in this case we ensure that
the better player will qualify" there were no substantial arguments
for this pretty unused and unknown rule (not that I agree with these
two "arguments"!). Nonetheless I accepted the rule for this
tournament.
My decision to give up and leave this server is based on an easy
calculation how many games I have to play here to get a - what I
call - competitive rating that somehow equals the advantage, players
with a nominal rating of 2200 - 2500 will have in every tournament
where this rule exists. Because my time is limited my decision was
to leave the server, that's all. I don't complain, I don't take
anything as an excuse. It's simple as it is: I gave it a try here,
became aware of the rule and decided this is the wrong place for me,
ok?
@Sandor Marton-Bardocz :
I didn't say with any word that you are a blocking guy. This was a
_general_ thesis how the player with the best rating can take an
overwhelming advantage at this ruling. All good players (ask anyone
in the region of 2400up at remoteschach, dbf, iecg or iccf) will
confirm that it is most difficult to get 3.5 point out of 4 if at
least 2 players know how to use computers and choose certain
openings.
Finally ... ficgs is a nice place to play, the interface is good and
I assume Thibault put a lot of work into it. So, enjoy your games
here, but also accept that from time to time there might be
players that will leave because of certain issues.
Ciao
Achim"
Rules (and chess WCH rules) - http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html
Thanks Achim. Best wishes & have good games :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-09 14:16:55)
Re: suggestion
Strange openings :) .. Why should Black play first !?
Nicola Lupinacci (2007-05-09 17:54:04)
Re: Re: Suggestion
Becuose same gambits or critical openings start whit a white move,
i.e. King gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.f4
and now black can play 2. ... exf4 or 2. ... d6 or 2. ... Nc6 ecc. ecc.
I think that in certain thematic tournament whit opening like this 1st move would be made by black...
but i don't know how thematic tournaments work... :)
Nick Burrows (2007-05-10 00:04:13)
Mike Surtees
If you are ever short of ideas for thematic tourney's check out the openings of Mike Surtees...always interesting!?
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-10 03:21:12)
Thematic tournaments
Nicola, there's no rule for thematic tournaments.. every mad opening is welcome :)
Nick, what are these famous openings played by Mike Surtees !?
Nick Burrows (2007-05-10 07:24:54)
surtees
He is a player from my home town rated about 2200. He plays many weird and wonderful openings that he's worked out himself (eg French 4 pawn gambit!?) should be some games on Chessbase...
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-13 14:04:07)
Thematic tournaments
Hi Ilmars :)
Yes, you can now transfer money to FICGS account. (see "My account")
It is not possible to choose your opening in the money thematic tournaments in waiting lists, but I can create the games handly. If you don't find an opponent, I'll play it.
Best wishes.
Ilmars Cirulis (2007-05-17 22:52:42)
Challenge!
Who want to defend
- Evans gambit with white
- Traxler counterattack with black?
I will be happy to play Silver Ligting game and try to kill that UCOs.
Wait and I will add more openings to that list. :)
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-05-19 17:34:44)
Sveshnikov
I think, openings like Sveshnikov have much more secrets as engines alone can analyse!
Phil Cook (2007-05-21 08:56:19)
Challenge
Your 2 games Vs my two games
I'll play Petrov,if you accept opening
I'll accept Petrov If you play it
Ilmars Cirulis (2007-05-21 22:20:10)
Ok.
Experience is good for me always. Even I don't get money.
I suggest play our games without any money stakes. I don't have enough money for donating. (Maybe after some years. :) )
As I understand, you want play all three openings by both side.
IMO Traxler counterattack is 1-0 and Evans gambit is 0-1. I don't wish play openings that I believe to be lost (with losing side).
Phil Cook (2007-05-22 08:57:09)
ok
Now to agree on what time limit to play,I'm usually online most (my nights Gmt +10 I'm in aussie till 31st May then back home NZ 1st June-11 June then back to aussie on that night,11 June)
I'm not sure about traxler opening,but I think,I could get a drawn game Evens.
Btw: The 2 Petrov lines to follow:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 *
our
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 *
The donate is for Thibault,as he would have to setup the 4 games.
Albert H. Alberts (2007-05-23 14:49:38)
shesnikov
To Wolfgang Utech:
ALL openings have more secrets can the engines can detect.Invariant of the program Fritz, Rybka, Junior, whatever.Question is to unveil them.It is more difficult with greater processing speed/deeper depth. In "so-called "free style" chess (allowing use of machines) players go over ELO 3000 no draws, so some of them should be able to beat machines with ease.
Albert H.Alberts,www.howtofoolfritz.com
Nick Burrows (2007-06-05 01:53:27)
Round 3
What a wonderful first round of games! I was lucky to watch them all on icc, and managed to pick 6 winners.
Hats off to Magnus Carlsen, what a fearless display of chess. I now believe he will be a long reigning WC in 3 0r 4 years time.
For the next round i will unadventurously choose Aronian/leko/grischuk/gelfand
they should all be tight, id like to see Gata win, but fear his openings will be too weak against Gelfand.
I eagerly anticipate the games!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-11 21:00:44)
Pirc
I would :) .. Anyway, any opening can be a good weapon over the board, if played by a specialist.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-15 17:12:39)
Online chess today
A few links to discussions at TCCMB (The Correspondence Chess Message Board) on chess servers nowadays, future of ICCF, correspondence chess [once more] and so on...
http://ancients.correspondencechess.com/index.php?topic=105.0
http://ancients.correspondencechess.com/index.php?topic=109.0
In the second discussion I tried to answer on the future of correspondence chess & chess engines :
1) Like the 'tour de France', it is impossible to organize a "bicycle race" at chess without doping today IMO. Also there are so many 'products' : Various books, databases, engines, human help.. so it seems to me that it is a non-sense to try to make it like an OTB tournament. Online chess is "motorcycle races" & freestyle, nothing else.
2) The ratio of wins does not decrease much in computer games & advanced chess (blitz), and correspondence chess games will never be all drawn IMO. We just have to follow the horizon line... Engines still have difficulties when there are 32 pieces on the board... Make the position more and more complex & critical, play Benoni structures, East indians and English openings... There will probably be more and more draws but when looking at CC 2500+ games, the ratio is still quite good. The problem at CC is mainly the style of play with humans 'humanly' trying to remain in known positions where they can win and can't lose.
'The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy', 'Opportunities multiply as they are seized' (Sun Tzu)
A solution is to make rules that motivate players to avoid draws, particularly when playing against a higher rated opponent. (ie. the rule for FICGS 8-games matches)
3) We feel that engines play almost perfect chess because of our poor human's level of play (I should say ratings)... But engines & computers have to improve a lot yet - not obvious they can do it in a more or less near future -, the horizon line is not so far, each version of Rybka wins about 30 elo points... We'll see engines at level 3200, 3300 maybe much more... (4000 ?)
4) If too many players have their CC rating between 2750-2800 in future, we can make new rules : Ratings wouldn't be calculated on the basis of each game, but on the basis of ie. 8-games matches... Then strategy would be more important & we would see rating gaps again between the best players...
Finally if I'm completely wrong, play Big Chess ;D
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-18 20:50:23)
Big chess theory : "Queens opening"
The first rated Big Chess tournament started a few days ago... I like this game more and more, no theory, no databases, no chess engines, many strategies & many queens captured already ;)
Every opening seems ok, we still don't know if taking pawns with the queen during the first moves is worth something or not, the value of the pieces is quite unpredictable... Many players now play 1.Nh4 to threaten 2.Qo7 then 3.Qc7 if needed, winning a pawn. What is the best response if you want to keep the same material ? .. Anyway that's very interesting to see a side with 1 or 2 pawns more, giving some rooks activity to the opponent.. Still looks like a draw theorically.
My main line is : 1.Nh4 Nh13 2.Qo7 No14 3.Qc7 Ql13
Any other suggestion ?
See Big Chess waiting list in Chess Special Tournaments.
Glen D. Shields (2007-06-23 00:14:24)
Chess Engine Strength
Thibault - I've been following the TCCMB discussion. I think it's impossible to answer the question what rating Rybka can achieve under the uncontrolled circumstances we play. If Rybka were playing only against humans, it would achieve a 2600+ rating. Since it plays mostly against itself and other top engines (with little human intervention), the typical results are win a few games, lose a few games and draw a lot.
Since tournaments are mostly set up so that players face opponents with similar ratings, a 2220 rated player using Rybka enters a tournament against other 2200 players. That player wins a few games, loses a few, draws a lot and leaves the tournament at approximately 2200. We conclude from that pattern that Rybka can achieve a 2200 rating.
Conversely, a player (like Uri Blass) who enters tournaments at 2600 and plays other 2600 rated opponents using Rybka wins a few games, loses a few games and draws a lot. He leaves the tournament rated approximately 2600. We conclude for that situation Rybka is rated 2600.
IMHO, it is impossible to answer the Rybka rating question under our typical tournament circumstances.
I think an even better question than worrying about Rybka's strength is "does anyone REALLY enjoy CC anymore?" Today's CC's is a race to buy the fastest hardware and make sure SSDF's top rated programs are installed. I'm playing beginners who can't explain what "en passant" is, but by parroting Rybka they compete in top tournaments and claim to hold titles that once upon a time had to be earned through hard work. After passing through the opening, it doesn't take much effort to figure out what program your opponent is using. At that point one can predict with high probablitlty every move your opponent will make for the rest of the game. Rarely do I see a move that I can can beat. The games are boring and pedictable. Those blunders and surprises that we once wrote funny stories about are long gone. IMO so is the fun.
Sorry to sound so "pessimistic," but until these problems are addressed and the fun is restored I find it just as easy to play against my computer. I can play at my pace, chose the engine I want to play, and unless my computer crashes I no longer have to worry about DMD :-)
Thanks for such a well run place to play chess. You do a great job maintaining it.
My best,
Glen
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-23 06:06:29)
Chess Engine Strength
Hello Glen !
I see your point, that's quite true and a consequence is what I called at TCCMB "the extensive nature of elo rating", however rating rules are more dynamic at FICGS.. So, let's say Rybka playing the FICGS championship against players of all kinds of ratings in the round-robin cycle... Anyway 2200 is only my feeling.
I understand your views about "rybka" [correspondence] chess nowadays, even if I don't agree with it completely. I saw some of your CC games played at IECG, and it looks much more like 'good old' chess with some unusual and beautiful tactical openings than typical 'correspondence computer chess' nowadays. I do believe there will be a place in the next CC years for more weird openings like bird, king's gambit, english... Also take a look at Peter Schuster and Wladyslav Krol games here !? .. Nothing boring with them, chess engine or not :)
Also advanced chess games with fast time controls could be quite interesting to watch in future as a way to see granmaster games with chess engines avoiding blunders 'only' (ok a bit more). We don't know exactly the human part in it, but draws won't be the rule for sure.
What is "boring" at correspondence chess (not new) is that achieving a top rating take a long... very long time ! .. But this is a great challenge yet IMO.
At last, thanks for you kind words :)
Best, Thibault
Albert H. Alberts (2007-06-25 14:36:49)
World Computer Chess Championship (WCCC)
All:
JUNIOR has won over Fritz in Elista.RYBKA wins Olympiade Amsterdam.
It got me thinking: instead of being an 'engine-to-engine contest can it be that the whole thing is a book-to-book contest? The program that has the best opening book with novelties will come out on top, invariant from the engine.
Is that why RYBKA is so good? IM V.Rajlich?
The future WC will be the program with the best book. The future WC tournament chess will be the one who knows this book. Maybe they will be one and the same person? Great news for the sport I think.
Greetings Albert H. Alberts,Amsterdam www.howtofoolfritz.com
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-25 15:17:50)
Rybka's book
Sure the secret of Rybka is not its/her opening book ! .. But that's very important matter anyway.
Alexander Shalamanov (2007-06-26 11:26:12)
Books or technique?
It's as simple as that: Rybka just outplayed her opponents in middlegames. Books have something to do, of course, but not that much. She just plays better in opening to middlegame and middlegame to ending phases. Oh, Junior, you are still better! And mind you, I'm not betraying while saying that. Amicus (mihi) Plato, sed magis amica veritas! (Plato is my friend but the truth is more precious!)
Ilmars Cirulis (2007-06-30 19:45:47)
Searching for opponents.
I offer to play Lightning Silver Blitz now.
If anyone want to defend those openings, write. And we will find time for our game.
Wishes of happiness. :)
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2007-07-01 15:48:37)
Re
These are times of glory, old lines will be refuted, new systems will be invented and the games will be used as examples in the opening books to come, and we will have the right to say " We were there!!!"
Garvin Gray (2007-07-29 07:40:12)
another idea
Thibault de Vassal- It seems this time control is ok for most players who use it (sometimes even too slow yet)... If you feel it's difficult, more reasonable would be to play standard class tournaments.
Another suggestion is that I make sure I play the opening moves of any rapid game rather quickly, so I dont get into time trouble early :)
Andrew Stephenson (2007-08-06 03:23:55)
Search games
How do you use the search by opening facility of the search games option? ECO clssification did not work nor the general name.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-08-06 13:39:42)
Search by opening
Hello Andrew.
Did you try to enter a line ie. 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 .. or.. e4 c5 Nf3 d6 ?
By name or ECO, feel free to try this link :
http://www.ficgs.com/directory_openings.html
Mladen Jankovic (2007-08-14 14:06:49)
I've done worse in the past
I've made some stupid moves that I knew that were stupid, but forgot why. And the worst thing I did was resigning during an opening that was actually to my advantage.
Christophe Czekaj (2007-09-01 12:43:09)
Free of chess engine
Thanks Thibault for reconducing me to this past forum. Very interesting. The part about "real" elo and correspondance elo is edifying. I know correspondence players could have a huge better elo than their real life one (if they have any) : more time to think, no stress, no pressure (or less) but I believe players who play without engines have a coorespondence rating approximately equal to their over the board one. Personnaly, I play coorespondence chess to try new opening, to train generally since I cannot play over the board so often since 2 years. I often play from the office, wtih sometimes a couple of minutes on a move, or sometimes I go home with the moves to think about my response in over the board conditions (30 minutes maximum on one move). My correspondence elo is around 2000 (with a good start with a peak to 2098, but declining since ;-D) and my over the board rating is now 1990 (with a peak to 2040 last year, and a rapid elo around 2100). So I sometimes feel a bit fed up with playing against chess engines, notably, but perhaps I'm wrong I have remarked that since I got an advantage, often opponents defend very very well, like computers in fact. Ok it's part of the game, and I know t could be a good training, fight hard to win a game, display a good technique, etc. but it could be disappointing to have the impression of play with a human opponent and have to finish with an another, i.e. the computer. Perhaps could we compare over the board elo, with correspondence elo to know if there is computer help or not ?
Anyway, a special category of tournament will be great, and I'm eager to play with other ficgs "OTB-correspondence" players.
Glen D. Shields (2007-09-06 04:20:15)
Engine Use - My Take
The switch from postcard to server chess has been a wonderfully positive experience.
The transition from human chess to silicon chess on the otherhand has left me bored and wondering if there's still a purpose to the game.
Every tournament is the same. The tournament starts with 6 to 10 players. The moves transition out of the opening at lightning speed, then "Fritz and Rybka time" begins. Turn on your favorite engine and there's a >95% probablitity that your opponents' moves mimic the top engines. There are no surprises, nothing interesting, just boring repetition.
Only a few percent of the chess world can outplay the top engines on fast hardware. Human intervention is like adding a drop of water to a bucket of water and thinking you've made a difference. Most matches are one computer versus another computer and the results are predictable: 1-2 wins, 1-2 losses, most of the games drawn.
I don't oppose engine use. There's no way to enforce it, so there's hardly a reason to forbid it. I do question, however, its purpose. It's just as easy and entertaining for me to play against my computer as it is to play your computer ... and I can do it on my timeline not yours.
I played a friendly young man earlier this year in the ICCF. He was vocal and proud of his high rating and good reults. He'd been playing for less than a year. He eventually admitted through our friendly chat that he hardly knew the moves and rules. He had no idea what "en passant" was or the basic theory of the openings. It took everything I had to save my position and earn a draw from him. That game was "my epithany." I made up my mind to take a break and reconsider what CC is all about. Engine use has been a great technical accomplishment, but has it made CC more enjoyable? Not for me. I hope most of you feel differently.
Good luck and good chess to all :-)
Hannes Rada (2007-09-06 21:28:07)
FICGS Hardware + Software
In my opininon it would be interesting to know on which hardware + software (Opening system, database) our server is running ?
So Thibault, hope that's not a big secret :-)
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-06 22:10:04)
Rybka
Hi Thibault
Could you say a bit more about Rybka how it has changed things? I have only ever used Fritz. CC for me is about chess research finding the truth about certain positions and openings and it helps in "real" chess. Its a fairly level playing field as all the programs are affordable but it sounds like us non rybka folk are at a disadvantage! And in the real chess world computer assisted work is obviously a huge part of the game.
Dirk Ghysens (2007-09-14 09:28:07)
Openings
Why is the Indian Defense so strong?
Because there are more than a billion Indians.
What is the best weapon against a Sicilian?
An AK47 ... or fleeing.
Why doesn't anybody play the American Defense?
Because its moves are 'classified'.
Why wasn't the Scotch popular in the 1920's?
Because of the Prohibition.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-09 16:17:20)
Waiting list is open
The rules are : "FICGS chess no engines tournaments are unrated single round-robin tournaments, involving 7 players. The special rule for these tournaments is that chess engines, databases and opening books are strictly forbidden.
All games are played in 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves. Norms are not possible."
Hannes Rada (2007-09-09 21:26:43)
board diagrams + conditionals
Not for the imput of my own moves.
For scrolling down through whole tournaments it is in my opinion more logic to see first the notation and then the current position on the diagram.
I think it is quite hard or difficult to implement conditional moves.
The ICCF-Webserver has this feature, but it is disabled.
We had a perfect solution on the chessfriend server (silent conditional moves - great for saving reflection time and to speed up to game).
Somte openings like the Grunfeld or the Sveshnikov are 'pefect' for conditionals :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-09 21:43:59)
board diagrams + conditionals
I understand that some openings are quite "boring" to play :) .. and I saw conditional moves on Chessfriend server. Why is it disabled at ICCF server ?
Conditional moves is a quite difficult feature to implement, that's true (even more with several games). Also there are many ways to imagine it ! .. But the main question is "would it be fair" ?
Mark Noble (2007-09-11 08:02:09)
France are a JOKE
Well as to France losing opening game
that would have to be the easy cash I have won in a long time since they have only beaten Argentina once in the last 8 games .
As to the winners All BLACK's all the way!
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-10 23:31:53)
chess engines
Hi Jason
As Thibault post indicates Toga is a fruit flavour ie fruit variant. Check CEGT rating list for single version engines (http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/rating.htm) Toga II is at no3 and Fruit 2.3 is at no 5 position. As for our game no engine is ever going to save me! Maybe 28 ..Rc8 would have held but earlier on 14 exd6 Bf6 15 Bxf8 Kxf6 16 Qf3 looks really disgusting for black. I am not going to blame the opening but Fritz and I are back to the Najdorf! Apparently Aagard had a book out on offbeat sicilianl ines in which he could find no way for white to gain an advantage in this Prins line hmm Im sceptical.
Thibault - thanks for expanding on your comments. I note your point about calm positions. The game I cited is the sort of wild position where Rybka is not so good later in the game it is convinced that 19 ..Nxf2 is good for black a move which loses and which fritz rejects fairly quickly.
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-12 16:51:49)
Gene
ok Gene let me give you my experience as to why you should use an engine in cc. 1) I have learnt a lot about certain openings and I remember lot more effective systems 2) finding the truth about a position is fun and instructive 3) I have acquired some endgame knowledge I never would have got. 4) Generally I wil try to understand why the engines like certain moves and drill down into the position trying altrentives until I get it. Sometimes in very wild positions its tough. Most of the the time this reinforces principles of develpoment pawn structure piece dynamism and I find it rubs off on my understanding. One proviso - if you take on too many games a lot of this wont work!
Facing a much lower rated player you have to do research and prepare something - trotting down the main line poisened pawn Najdorf may not be the way to go. A lot of top players go for catalan and english openings hoping to utilise their chess knowledge and research.
One thing is for sure always playing the best move of your engine is going to drop 1/2 points and lose some games and that includes Rybka. Finally all this stuff is done by all the top professionals in the otb chess. One example I faced the line that Kramnik got crushed with by Topalov playing b5 and f4. I looked at the game notes and databases and couldnt find a good response 45 minutes with fritz and I cracked it and in the process gained some insight into the opening. In fact its a harmless variation if you know the antidote but over the board one slip and Kram was toasted
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-13 06:35:12)
Ratings
Hi Phillip
I don't know what "an unsynchronised rating system" is. However at the rate of play 40/20 for example I am not sure I would be able to improve so much on the engines first choices. At the free style tournament stand alones do pretty well. If I needed 45 minutes to find one best move in the Topalov Kramnik line..... So yes a centaur can easily have a higher rating than the engine(s) he is using at cc time rates (on the same hardware). For one thing the centaur can use different engines and for another its a bit like taking a move back all the time and pushing past any horizon limitations plus there is the restrictions of opening books that all engines have. However I am not going to play my own cc games against Fritz 10 (Fritz 9 in my case)by giving it 1 day or even 10 minutes per move because I am not motivated - you need the human element for that. Hope that helps.
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-16 05:29:56)
Kramnik
I fancy Kramnik to win because his black game is a bit more solid and his white openings are more flexible than anand. Anands game 1 for example was a bit ropey. On the other hand he scored a cracker against Aronian as black.
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 :)
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-25 10:28:20)
Match
I have to say guys having worked quite a bit now with Rybka (single procesor version) it has some flaws defending against attacking positions - sometimes underestimating the attackers chances and not just in irrational or very complex positions. So whatever the role of opening books (obviously big) I am not surprised at the result so far. Thats to take nothing away from Rybka - great program.
Wayne Lowrance (2007-11-25 01:22:13)
FICGS vs IGAME.RU
Nice games Silkin. I thought I was in deep trouble after the opening.
Best Wishes
Wayne
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 (2007-12-01 15:02:34)
time counting
Hello Ulrich.
Yes, this is the only tournament where this problem happened, simply because the thematic opening starts at Black move number 10 :/ .. So the program added time to player Black when playing his first move, not to player White (at move eleven). I did not think about that when the tournament started, but anyway this advantage or disadvantage is shared (3 games with, 3 games without). Sorry about that.
Hannes Rada (2007-12-20 23:27:22)
Unfair ?
Thibault,
Why do you think conditionals are unfair ?
There are some openings which are perferct for conditional moves.
For example Grunfeld. On chessfriend I offered my opponent the first 10 or 12 moves as conditionals.
And the game really started on the first day with an interesting middle game position (avoiding to enter the boring and well known opening moves step by step).
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-07 14:58:27)
Search games
Feel free to try "Search by opening" text field at :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=search_games
ie. "1.e4 c5 2.c3" or "e4 c5 c3" should work the same way...
Philip Roe (2008-01-11 20:49:15)
game search
At present the "search games" facility allows to search by player's name or by opening. It might be convenient also to be able to search by game number. For example when a particular game is mentioned in the forum by number.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-22 18:30:35)
FICGS vs. IGAME.RU
My pleasure, Gaetano :)
This match was really interesting, and the result quite surprising even if our "team" is quite young yet, some forfeits, and some of our strongest players did not play. The russian team played good chess and logically won the match. Moreover, I'm to lose my second game against GM Sumets who did it very well since the opening... Gaetano's result, once more, is not just luck ;)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-02-10 14:55:28)
opening novelties
Thibault there is a section for best games which receives votes. I was wondering whether it would be possible to do the same thing for opening novelties?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-02-11 02:00:06)
opening novelties
Hi Andrew, I'm not sure it is good to multiply these sections, even if it would be interesting... but it is possible to talk about novelties in wikichess and/or this forum.
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-02-12 13:32:16)
Icelandic Gambit ...
i have an old opening book, semi open openings written by Ludek Pachman, and it does not mention the Icelandic Gambit, so there must be plenty of "unexplored country" in it, so ... I am in!!!
Can we one day have a Centre Opening thematic ? I used to play it very often when I was young, happy and unemployed.
Mladen Jankovic (2008-02-16 15:00:33)
re:
The new interface seems to be mainly graphical, and I doubt that Links has JavaScript implemented. I prefer to input moves using notation manually, regardless.
The command line browsers I used so far were various variants of Links. I use those if I'm stuck with just the terminal for one reason or another. Or if I'm playing certain openings and don't bother switching to graphical interface.
Marc Lacrosse (2008-04-28 23:12:00)
Is it a joke ?
" In correspondence chess i let my computer think 0-1 min "
In correspondence chess I never let my computer(s) think less than several hours on one move.
I also analyse on my own with computer use for at least 30-60 minutes per move.
I also prepare openings for at least one hour per day _everyday_ even when I have no game at all running in the opening phase.
I built one of my computers specially for chess, an overclocked quad with efficient watercooling.
I will go for an eight-processors one in the very next months.
My main weakness is that I like playing unorthodox openings
So it's a bit difficult to go higher than 2400 elo here ...
So if you let your computer go 0-1 min per move we probably do not play the same game ...
But I cannot imagine your pleasure when playing a move that has been decided by a "0-1 minute" engine analysis.
Marc
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-01 13:50:35)
hours for the computer
I don't se much benefit to letting the computer think for hours frankly wants it gets to 20 + ply. There all sorts of horizons in positions that letting the computer run for a year wont sort out. Marc why are you playing this c3 stuff against the sicilian with such great kit? You play the same openings all the time and I thought it was because you had not much time!!!
Marc Lacrosse (2008-05-01 18:03:17)
to Andrew
"I don't se much benefit to letting the computer think for hours frankly wants it gets to 20 + ply. There all sorts of horizons in positions that letting the computer run for a year wont sort out."
There are other ways to use engines than letting simply one of them run for hours.
You may interactively walk along the various branches of the tree going from current position with one or several engines running.
You may also have engines playing some kind of test matches against each other from the current position or from any critical position that you identify along the possible continuations.
You can use Rybka randomizer against itself or against other engines for more exhaustive evaluation through test games
And so on ...
"Marc why are you playing this c3 stuff against the sicilian with such great kit? You play the same openings all the time and I thought it was because you had not much time!!!"
1. I never played this disreputed c3 stuff against the 2..d6 sicilian (with or without the 4.Be2 pawn offer) before january 2008 in my 140+ former serious correspondence games
Indeed I did choose it because I erroneously enrolled in three new tournaments simultaneously and I feared to miss time for serious analysis due to heavy workload at that time.
Results are a bit disappointing with it : five draws so far and two unfinished games that I should win (one win is sure and the other one is probable).
This should lead to a 64% result and a 2333 elo performance. Not shining but not that bad insn't it ?
2. I like playing unorthodox openings in correspondence play.
I do not see any interest in beginning my games with 30 moves of overanalysed theory.
Most often I decide for a side variation and I do play it in as many games as possible simultaneously : I do the analysis job once for all while being fully "in the mood" of a similar set of positions.
Then I change for something else
I won't probably ever play any more game with the line I played against you.
3. An exception is the Basman-Sale Sicilian (2..e6 4..Bc5).
I like it a lot and even have a web site devoted to it (http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info/basmansale/index.html)
I am in a running series of more than twenty corr. games without a single loss with it and decided not to stop using it until defeat happens
I probably analysed it more than anybody : I have several thousands of analysed lines in my files.
I am just busy to consider switching to something more agressive for cases where I need to play for a win as Black.
Regards
Marc
Benjamin Block (2008-05-03 21:14:21)
How fast is you´re computer?
I also prepare openings for at least one hour per day _everyday_ even when I have no game at all running in the opening phase.
I built one of my computers specially for chess, an overclocked quad with efficient watercooling.
I will go for an eight-processors one in the very next months.
How many GHz do you have?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-05 12:50:53)
From here to eternity
Yes there might be some variations that are survivable especially OTB but at cc its tough to give up a pawn so early on. I think f4 is a perfectly ok first move (like b4) I just think it does not give any prospect of an opening advantage at cc because there is no surprise value and the black player has the time to research and find a response that equalises fairly quickly. That is why very few GM's have F4 as a main white weapon - it does not give enough prospects for an advantage - at the highest levels. Please note that qualification. I quite agree real chess is between people in real time and cc is a form of research competition. Getting experience for real world chess is a great reason to play a line at cc. There are exceptions OTB I often play the exchange french and have had good success (played by Kasparov Tal Morphy and others) I would not play it at cc though! In fact OTB I always play e4 but at cc gave it up because I see no way to get any adavantage against the caro kahn. Just relaying the moves the computer suggests does not, I think, give much chance of success against good players at cc.
As for the From I do not believe in g5 white has to avoid the tricks and develop and is a pawn up. Not so easy otb!! - but at cc not so much of a problem. As for Nc6 yes I was talking about this move after 5 g3 and you are probably right I will try to look at the game you gave and do some analysis. As for the Mestel variation I thought black would get the pawn back unless e3 and d4 are played but again that was based on a quick look. Anyway perhaps the thematic tournament wil provide some answers.
Jason Repa (2008-05-06 03:59:45)
Bird's Opening
Comparing 1.b4 to the Bird's Opening is just revealing your lack of chess knowledge. There have been many books written about the Bird's Opening. It has it's own discrete chapter in MCO, and its played in serious games in professional chess still today, as I've already mentioned to you. I wasn't making an argument that it should be someone's "main weapon", and I don't use it as a "main weapon" myself. Your original statement that I was contesting was: "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white".
I'm significantly higher rated than you are on this site, and I beat you quite easily when we played last year (only took me 33 moves if I recall), so I don't think you're any authority in cc either.
And you shouldn't equate a lack of an "opening advantage" with winning potential. Chess is a complex game, and its not about simply trying to make the best theoretical move all the time. It's about defeating your opponent. Theory suggests that 3.Nc3 is the strongest objective continuation for White against the French Defense, yet you still see 3.Nd2 quite regularly and even 3.e5 sometimes. There is more to think about than trying to get an opening advantage when it comes to winning a chess game. There is positional maneuvering and jockeying, as well as psychological factors to consider.
Additionally, trying to win the most games on an online correspondence chess server isn't everyone's goal. Some of us play real chess and use the information garnered here to assist us in our over the board play.
Jason Repa (2008-05-06 04:24:31)
Bird's Opening
Here's a few more wins played on this site I obtained with 1.f4
http://members.shaw.ca/winnipeg_chess/birdsopening.htm
I've actually never lost a single game with this opening. Hardly seems like a "waste" to me.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-06 12:10:33)
Strictly for the birds
Thanks for the link for the games they are nice. Obviously playing the From or the approach adopted by black in these games is not an accurate response! Better to play like Of course 1f4 does not lose or lead to a worse gane for white - it just allows black to get equality very quickly and easily. The "waste" is that white has the first move and a lead in development and chances for an advantage. 1 f4 doesnt develop any piece (except the king!) and is a bit committal and slightly weakening of the king side.
I would like to show with analysis exactly what I mean. Black has many good systems here is one. 1 f4 d5 2 Nf3 g6 3 g3 (e3 is the other way to play more on that) Bg7 4 Bg2 Nf6 already black is equal IMO. GM Jakubiec (2524) played this position 3 times last year as white against Rozentalis (2581), Bartel(2608) and Kadziolka (2295) and won all 3 games! He would 0-0 play Q-h4 and g4 f5 and roll them over! In every game black got an advantage in the opening and lost but at cc thats not going to happen. In each game it was easy to see blacks mistakes and to see the right move to maintain an advantage for black.
The other set up for white is to play 3 e3 (instead of g3)Bg7 4 Be2 (4 c4 is interesting)Nf6 5 0-0 0-0 6 d3 and now after c5 its level but I would rather play black. 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. These Dutch reversed attacks can be scary to face otb but they are harmless at cc. Conclusion: 1 f4 is a dangerous move otb especially where the opponent is not expecting it but against an accurate cc player it does not offer any hope of an opening advantage - its a waste if the goal is to get some opening advantage - its productive if the goal is to gain experience and insight into f4 for use in real chess.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-06 15:01:06)
A bird in the hand
I think comparing f4 to b4 is quite reasonable - they are both off beat openings. On the question of chess knowledge I do not know how much he knows about b4? It can also be a dangerous practical weapon and can pose the black player more problems than f4. It is played by serious professional chess players in tournaments eg GM Christian Bauer (2626) has played it several times successfully this year and quite a few IM's regularly play it with success.
Now to comparing rating sizes something I confess to not having done since I was in short trousers. My current rating is 2225 with a future rating of 2247 but with 2 rapid games in the pipe line this should be a future rating of 2300 + shortly lets see. Mr Repas rating is 2281 with a future rating at the moment of 2316. How significant is that? Well I had the opportunity to look at his games to see what his rating is made up of. 10 of his wins have come against the same opponent Sandor Porkolab and in 7 of these Mr Porkolab abandoned the games in level, drawn or in some cases better position for him. Given that in these "wins" he was often rated over 2100 or in one case over 2200 this has boosted Mr Repa's rating significantly. He has not so far had much success in WCC not having got past stage 2.
As reference to my loss was made I can say that this was in a variation (the Prins of the sicilian) that I believe is unsound. Actually I overstepped the time limit while on vacation although I think the game could not be saved I learnt my lesson and do not play dodgy openings any more.
I have never on the other hand been busted after 17 moves in a main line opening at cc as sadly Mr Repa found himslef against Bucsa Loan (Game 1249),then rated 1700. Then again I have stopped trusting the books and analyse for myself.
Still less could I imagine being lost in a cc game after 16 moves in an exchange French (by tranposition) An instructive loss to Torsten Opas ( game 4388)- won with simple developing moves - worth playing over. Incidentally proves what I was saying about the exchange french it can be dangerous - although not of course, at cc.
Finally there is Mr Repa's pet Bird shot down by Mr Kotlyansky in the approved way as follows 1 f4 d5 2 Nf3 g6 3 e3 g7 4 Be2 Nf6 5 0-0 0-0 6 d4 c5 7 dxc5 Qc7 and Black was fine winning in 72 moves. Never having lost with f4 did not include this because I suppose it was a bullet bronze game.
I am afraid I am naive enough to think that people play chess on the server to win and increase their rating - clearly there are people who play to learn and strengthen their game and for whom results and rating are secondary. No doubt such people would not be interested in anything so vulgar as comparing ratings. Neverthe less its all just opinion and we are all free to express it within the rules of the server. So: f4 is a waste of time at cc little more than an invitation to draw and the From is unsound and almost like resigning.
Jason Repa (2008-05-06 21:54:09)
Bird Brain loses in 33 Moves!
"Obviously playing the From or the approach adopted by black in these games is not an accurate response!"
That's not obvious at all. What's obvious is that I beat you quite easily when you and I played cc so you're far from being any kind of authority whatsoever!
"1f4 does not lose or lead to a worse gane for white - it just allows black to get equality very quickly and easily"
I just finished trying to explain to you, in the way a young child should be able to understand, that there is more to think about in chess than trying to play what current theory considers to be the best try for an opening advantage. Yet here you are rambling on about the same nonsense you were in your previous posts. Was Fischer's 2.d3 against the French the objectively strongest move? Even against (and perhaps especially against) computers, it can sometimes be better to play sidelines or moves which may serve to confuse an opponent. Is the King's Indian Attack the best try for an opening advantage for White? Probably not. But it was used by Kasparov to defeat Deep Blue. If you still can't understand the concept I've been trying to teach you, after several posts, I don't know what more I can do for you. Just keep mindlessly playing what established theory tells you are the strongest lines,(without having even the incipience of an understanding as to why) and keep mindlessly trusting the evaluations your program gives you, and you'll keep getting CRUSHED by guys like me.
"1 f4 doesnt develop any piece (except the king!) and is a bit committal and slightly weakening of the king side."
After this statement, if I didn't know better, I would have thought you were someone who just learned how to set up the pieces. It might be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard anyone say. Does 1.e4 develop a piece? How about 1.d4? I suppose those moves are "a waste in cc" as well. We should all be playing 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 according to you, lol.
1.f4 grabs space. It stakes out influence both in the center and on the kingside. It effectively prevents 1...e5 (lest White goes into a dubious gambit system) as an alternative to other moves which achieve this. There are also other intangibles that are part of the picture, such as the psychological effect the move may have, the lack of preparation an opponent may have against it, etc. If you ever began to understand chess at a level beyond just plugging moves into a program, you might start to appreciate that allowing concessions (such as the slight weakening of the White kingside resulting from 1.f4) is all part of the game. Fischer's famous quote: "you gotta give squares to get squares" is a famous example. If allowing static liabilities were something to be avoided at all cost, you'd never see a Sicilian Scheveningen. It allows all sorts of weaknesses.
As for your so called "analysis". It's a complete joke! For starters, you're "analyzing" a game resulting from the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening. I line I've never played in my life, let alone here on FICGS. Is this how you try to win an argument/debate? By misrepresenting the facts? An intelligent person who genuinely felt that their argument had a leg to stand on, would simply take one of the 4 games I provided to you and do some analysis from there. Showing where Black could have improved. Then finally, after trying to "score points" with examples of the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening, which I have never played, you post a game where White played poorly and lost to a lower rated player. As if that's never happened before in chess, lol. You don't even know enough to post the date of the game. I couldn't find this game on any of my databases(totally over 4,000,000 games), so if you didn't just make it up out of thin air, perhaps you got more wrong, such as the actual moves that were played, in addition to incorrectly stating:
"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."
Is it Black that lost here or White?
I took a brief look at the game, and it's hardly representative of proper play by White. 7.h3 was dubious at best. I prefer 7.Ne5. White then misses another opportunity to play the knight to e5 after 7...c5. Then 9.g4? is a gross thematic mistake. The only thing this game proves is that you're completely incapable of discussing chess in an intelligent way. Real chess players look for games that illustrate the critical lines for both sides, and try to arrive at some actual insights.
There is a reason I crushed you when we played cc last year.
Jason Repa (2008-05-06 23:08:30)
Bird Brain loses in 33 Moves!
"I think comparing f4 to b4 is quite reasonable"
You would. But we all know what happened to you when you and I played chess. I beat you in 33 moves. And we can see how not only do you not provide a game that's at least somewhat representative of the critical lines of the opening, but you can't even figure out when the supposed game was played, or whether or not White or Black won, and you only post a tiny fraction of it to boot. So evidently, what YOU think is not exactly to be regarded in high esteem here. Most people wouldn't have required my explanation where I described quite clearly how there have been many books written about the Bird's Opening. It has it's own discrete chapter in MCO, and its played in serious games in professional chess still today. They would already understand on their own, or would at least be intelligent enough to look up the information without having to have their hand held and have it spoon fed to them. But even after all this, you STILL don't understand. And you mention Christian Bauer who only pissed around with 1.b4 when he was playing opponents 400 elo LOWER RATED! One of his fabulous wins this year, that you were alluding to, was against 1861 rated Jacques Decamps, lol. The rest of the time they were 2100-2300. Has he ever played 1.b4 against another GM? (never mind super GM, as 1.f4 has many times been played against)
An opening move like 1.b4 might be fairly compared to something such as 1.g4. You won't see any dedicated chapter in MCO to either of those openings, but they're at least interesting enough to warrant some discussion in the "misc flank openings" chapter. 1.f4 might better be compared to something like Larsen's 1.b3. A sound sideline.
You want to talk about ratings? I've had to build up my rating from starting at the default of 1700, by winning 117 games (one of them against you), because I wasn't aware when I opened the account that the admin would let you start with your established elo. It's not surprising I played Sandor Porkulab a lot of times, as we both were very active playing a lot of games. Unlike you who started with the advantage of an inflated rating, which was somewhat tempered after that beating I gave you last year.
Sometimes in correspondence chess people abandon games and don't log in again. This was the case with Sandor Porkulab, although I had already beaten him a few times in games that were played to completion, and he wasn't better in any of the games that were abandoned. You're lying through your teeth there, or perhaps you're just too incompetent and dishonest to assess the games objectively. Why would Porkulab have 7 games against me where he was "level or better" when I had already beaten the guy every time we played before that? Did you even look at those games? Or is this just your pathetic way of trying to "score points" by using lies and deception? Additionally, the way the elo system works is that even if you do get a few easy points from say a win from an abandoned game that perhaps might have ended in a draw, that gain is quickly diluted and your rating naturalized as you play more games, because you win less points when you win,(or draw a higher rated opponent) and lose more when you lose (or draw a lower rated opponent), than you would have if you didn't receive those points. I've played many games since then and my rating here is probably where it would have been If I had not played Porkulab at all. Or if not already will soon be. So this is a pretty weak argument from you. A better argument is the fact that I CRUSHED you in 33 moves when we played. Porkolab at least gave me a decent fight when I played him. That's more than I can say for you. I felt like all I had to do was outsmart a machine when you and I played. I didn't have to worry about any human judgment from a real chess player getting in the way of my victory!
As for me getting a lost position after 17 moves against someone? For starters, I've played about 190 games here. What have you played.....32? And I think that's a testament to the fact that, unlike you, I'm a REAL chess player, so my goal here isn't to simply try to win the most online CC games to try to give myself some artificial illusion of ability. I don't always play what I consider to be the objectively best moves because I like to experiment and LEARN SOMETHING from the time I spend here. But having said that, I STILL outperform you greatly, and crushed you when we played last year. I'm also higher rated with a higher future rating, even though you had the advantage of started with a boosted initial rating. So much for what you "think" you know about the strongest moves in cc, lol.
And your future rating is only 2247, not 2300+. If you want to discuss what might happen after some of your current games are resolved, don't sell me short at 2316, which is already a given. Talk about the 2370+ I expect to have after some of MY current games are resolved. If you want to argue/debate with someone, learn to do it in an intelligent and fair way. So far all you've accomplished is to lose the paltry amount of credibility you once had.
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 06:52:38)
Don't be a poor loser Stephenson!
The conversation was civil, until you flipped your lid when I reminded you about the beating I gave you over the chess board. You also couldn't handle being proven wrong about what you said about the Bird's Opening.
Can anyone guess why this coward won't post HIS national rating???
Go ahead, repost my loss to Torsten Opus a few more times. Until everyone reading this thread knows what kind of a waste of skin you are. See if posting that game over and over again gets them to forget about the fact that I CRUSHED you in chess and am much higher rated than you are.
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!
Jason Repa (2008-05-07 13:10:18)
Declining the From
"From's Gambit ...
Hi, is there a valid way to decline the From's Gambit without falling onto the Kings Gambit?"
That's the usual way. Although I can't see why anyone would want to decline the gambit. All variations indeed seem to be quite good for White.
"Even if the Froms Gambit may not be sound, I do not like to be defending, especially against players stronger than myself."
In that case you might want to switch to 1.Nf3 or 1.b3 with the idea of transposing into the Bird's Opening later. This is what I often do in OTB play. Of course Black doesn't necessarily have to allow you to transpose, though.
-------------
Moderator : This topic is closed. As a reminder :
11. 1. Netiquette
(...) No player may post in forums or send to another member any voluntary message that contains abusive, insulting, provocating, advertising, vulgar, foul, racist, sexist or other discriminatory or politically sensitive content. Doing so may lead to being immediately and permanently banned. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic, comment or message at any time should they see fit. Responding to a provocative message is strictly forbidden and will lead to get a limited access to the server during one month a first time, two months the second one and so on. In this case, please just warn the moderator or webmaster in private.
-------------
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 08:25:55)
When will this troll stop?
This is hilarious! You've got a guy (and I use the term loosely) who goes WAY out of his way to insult, harass, and annoy, now trying to pass himself off as holier-than-thou. He's even following me around from thread to thread with the sole purpose of abuse and provocation. If I say the sky is blue, he'll say green. If I say 2+2=4, he'll say there is no proof of that. This character will not stop trying to provoke, as this thread proves.
I start an innocent thread describing an interesting game I played with someone. He immediately starts criticizing my choice of chess openings, made all the more laughable because I CRUSHED the guy in chess, and am significantly higher rated than he is. Perhaps this is what is fueling his little tirade. He then proceeds to post links to off-topic discussions that occurred 4-5 years ago as further harassment. And this is the same individual who is whining about, of all things, Netiquette? Irony to the EXTREME!
His latest tactic is to incessantly suck up to the site admin by making repeated hybrid posts which are intended to harass me while worshiping the admin. We'll see his signature phrase "I agree with Thibault" over and over again ad-nausiam. As if this somehow buys him respite for the provocative and abusive comments he CONTINUES to make towards me.
Although you're probably used to being in that position, please get off your knees and stop brown nosing Stephenson. It's pathetic. And before you start talking about Netiquette, please learn what the term means yourself. We wouldn't be having this discussion if you did.
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.
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-05-13 14:10:21)
Books .....
I have the opening books of Ludek Pachman, 1976 edition, in Spanish. A little old but still good!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 14:12:54)
Advice
The recommendation was freely given if it does not interest you thats fine. My point remains cc helps opening accuracy im not sure it translates into much else OTB
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 14:19:23)
Pachman
Yes its true there is a lot of great stuff in these old books Rudolfo but I like to check 'em I have got some Nunn stuff from the same time - incredibly accurate he may have been the best writer of opening books of modern times. Although I am basing that on his Najdorf books not other stuff on the Pirc etc which I dont know so well.
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 14:22:42)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
Actually, you really don't have a point Stephenson. You're a <1500 otb player with delusions of grandeur, nothing more. I've already beaten you and your chess program in correspondence chess, and I'm more than 500 elo stronger than you in otb chess, so what exactly was your "point" again?
I can't speak about what correspondence chess could do for a <1500 otb player such as yourself. But for someone with an otb rating >2000, such as myself, cc chess is valuable in many ways, not just for opening accuracy.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 14:33:15)
Opening books
I think the truth is that a lot of opening books are not always objective and someimes do not give the best lines or give assessments that are not always accurate. Active GM's someimes keep things back for there own use .. which is understandable I suppose. John watson seems to be an exception to this and produces very high quality opening work. The bottom line is you have to check them all IMO.
Incidentally I am not sure there is much need to keep databases up to date - I suppose that refers to downloading games from TWIC. Most databases are up dated automatically.
Hannes Rada (2008-05-14 20:10:41)
Jason's query
Jason, I gave up OTB chess some 20 years ago. So I have no OTB rating (anymore)
Playing in my chessclub was not and ist not compatible with my working hours.
CC is perfect for me. Analyzing and making move later in the evening when I am returning from work, or whenever I can find time.
It's wise to play the strongest possible opponents.
But cc rating does not implicitly say anything about chess strength.
Too many variables may influence the players chess abilities.
(Too many games at the same time, lack of motivation, ....)
On the other side an ambitious 1800 Elo newcomer can sometimes more dangerous than an "old" CC-GM.
FICGS is quite a nice community.
Here you have the chance to raise your rating and play against the higher rated players pretty soon compared with ICCF.
But your "strong opponent experience" will end here around 2500 - 2550.
Raising your rating in ICCF takes much more time (because tournaments are slower) but when you've established yourselve at a certain level than you have the chance to play the > 2700 guys like van Osteroom & Co :-)
But at this level correspondence chess is no fun anymore. I've talked to GM Peter Hertel from Germany several years ago and he told me that he had to analyze and work on his cc - chess positions around 10 hours per day to compete at this level ....
if you are retired or jobless and a billionaire (van Osteroom) than you have the best chances of winning an ICCF championship final .... :-)
Do you think the playing cc helps to improve your otb abilities ?
I've talked to several players regarding this issue and I received different answers.
From: Yes I benefit from my cc-opening experience
To: No, these are absolutely different stories.
OTB requires the abilites to calculate deeplines correctly and to maintain concentration for a couple of hours.
All things which are absolutely not necessary for cc.
My experience for the short time frame when I played both otb + cc is that for the purpose of improving the otb abilities it would have been better to study chess books and solving tactical exercises than playing cc.
Jason Repa (2008-05-14 21:31:38)
corr. & otb
"But cc rating does not implicitly say anything about chess strength."
I disagree. But first be clear that I'm talking about correspondence chess strength. I never said that corr. chess strength has a 1 to 1 relationship with otb chess strength. I know too many guys who are better corr. players than me that I could mop the floor with at any time control in a live chess game.
But having said that, I believe that people have high corr. ratings for a reason. At a minimum they're good at employing interactive chess engine research and have good updated databases. I think overall chess knowledge and judgment are factors as well. Stronger chess moves win more games. Yes, I understand that sometimes an ambitious 1800 can beat a higher rated opponent, on occasion, but it's overall results that are important, not anomalies. The same is true otb. Sometimes experts and national masters beat GMs. That doesn't mean they're a stronger chess player than the GM.
"Do you think the playing cc helps to improve your otb abilities?"
I'm not surprised you're getting differing stories. Like anything else, it depends on how you use the experience and of course on your individual aptitude. Some people will just memorize the opening theory they learn from corr. chess, if that. Others will do much more with those games, such as developing technique, increasing their strategic knowledge, learn more endgame theory, etc. I think it is without question that corr. chess can have great benefits for your otb chess game, if used properly. Just being forced to comb through opening books and game databases alone is useful.
"OTB requires the abilities to calculate deeplines correctly and to maintain concentration for a couple of hours"
I agree that the ability to concentrate well is important for otb chess, but I think you're overvaluing calculation. The reality is that otb is all about COMPETITION. It's a mental fight. I know guys are are great analysts, and with the right hardware/software would probably be great corr. players, but they don't handle the pressures and stresses that go along with competition very well. Judgment and competence, especially while under stress and duress, are of the utmost importance in otb. You can calculate as deeply as you want, but if you're expending energy calculating lines that you should have rejected, or mismanaging your time by thinking too deeply in a spot where it's not necessary, you won't get good results in otb.
I don't have any desire to try to get anywhere near 2700 level in corr. chess. And I agree with your analysis that it would not be fun anymore and become a huge drain of time sitting behind the computer. Perhaps not unlike what a professional chess player has to go through in order to prepare for their tournaments, with the chief exception that the professional chess player gets paid for such a sacrifice.
"...for the purpose of improving the otb abilities it would have been better to study chess books and solving tactical exercises than playing cc."
I don't see why these things have to be mutually exclusive. For me I get more motivated to study my chess books and look through my databases when the positions occur in games. I also think about what I'm doing and analyze the positions using my own mind when I play corr. chess. Maybe that's not the case for everyone, but it is for me. As for tactics, I think blitz/bullet against strong opponents can be very useful for developing that.
Hannes Rada (2008-05-14 22:04:53)
Opening Favorites and taboos in cc chess
It's quite interesting to look at the top level cc - player's opening favorites.
Against 1.e4:
Almost everybody is playing Sicilian, Sveshnikov and Najdorf
No more Dragon oder other Sicilian lines seems to be playable at top level.
1.... e6 (French) and 1....c6 Caro Kann are rarely played.
A little bit more frequently is 1....e5. But I think that also the old Ruy Lopez is not really popular among the cc cracks.
Against 1.d4:
Here seems to be more diversity:
But I think The Slav is definitely the most popular Black's defense, followed by Nimzo Indian, Kings Indian and Queens Gambit.
Benoni and Wolga Gambit seems to be dead here.
What do you think, is there no more space for French, Caro Kann and Aljechin Defense in todays cc practice ?
Is Dutch and Modern Benoni no longer playable ?
In the sixties Hans Berliner won the ICCF championship with Aljechin Defense
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 04:10:11)
Openings
Hi Hannes
I think the Modern Benoni is playable but needs a lot of work. Hector Walsh 16th on the IECG list (2497) used it in the IECG Cup 2002 final (just ended!) with games that started in 2006. He played it 3 times including the critical line 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5 4 d5 exd5 5 cxd5 d6 6 e4 g6 7 f4 etc and got 3 draws against opposition of 2150, 2300 and 2400.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 10:11:02)
Benoni
Hi Garvin
No f4 occurred in just 1 game but Hector played the sequence Nf6 and e6. This year Topalov, Aronian Malakhov and Gashimov have all allowed f4 in the Benoni but it only happened in the Gashimov game. Top GM games seem to have a bias towards Sicilians Slavs and Semi slavs. Is it true that the Ruy Lopez is not so popular at top cc? It is extremely popular at GM level perhaps this reflects a bias at cc at the top level for Queenside openings. It certainly seems a lot easier to get a draw against e4 at cc.
Hannes Rada (2008-05-15 23:06:25)
Openings
Hi Andrew,
" It certainly seems a lot easier to get a draw against e4 at cc."
I've the same feeling.
But the top player vanOsteroom prefers definitely 1.e4 !
Does anybody know if 1.e4 or 1.d4 is played more often here at FICGS ?
"He played it 3 times including the critical line 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5 4 d5 exd5 5 cxd5 d6 6 e4 g6 7 f4 etc and got 3 draws against opposition of 2150, 2300 and 2400."
Can this be considered as a success ?
50 % against lower rated opponents ?
Normally Benoni is played when you want or have to win with black ...
However Hector Walsh seems to have some fighting spirit.
Andrew do you know the IECG server ?
From time to time I get invitations from the IECG guys for their tournamengs, but never played there.
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!
Marc Lacrosse (2008-05-15 23:29:59)
no taboos !
Hi Hannes
Although I am not a top level cc player, I still feel I do not too badly here (I will be over 2400 at next rating)...
... and I _never_ play main stream openings!
In fact I played quite a few disreputed lines here like these:
- 1.Nc3
- 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d3?! Nf6 4. Be2 ?! or 4.Bd3 !?
- 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3. d4 cd 4.Nxd4 Bc5 !?
- 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.Qd3 !?
My one and only loss in 43 games at FICGS was in a very doubtful but interesting gambit against one of the strongest players here.
So I cannot see why such evidently interesting openings like non-Najdorf-non-Sveshnikov sicilians should not be played at cc chess any more...
at least at my modest ~2400 Elo level ...
Marc
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 23:36:07)
IECG
Hi Hannes
Your right Hectors Benoni didn't draw blood but I guess its playable. Actually I dont like to play against it as it provokes a crisis very early on and the hard work starts quickly!
On FICGS I think queen side openings are preferred by the top players eg WCH knockout matches - the exception is Peter Schuster who seems to play e4 a lot and is successful with it.
Thanks for telling me about Van Osteroom's e4 preference I am keen to see what he plays against c6! - I mean the classical variation.
Sorry I dont know too much about the IECG server.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-05-16 00:15:26)
Openings
Here are the current openings statistics (see /about.html) .. sorry, it is not Chessbase but I'll try to improve it with ie. a formula with ratings to see better what is played most at top level.
Chess openings :
Opening_name #games Line
Scandinavian 310 1.e4 d5
Modern 127 1.e4 g6
Pirc 260 1.e4 d6
Alekhine 208 1.e4 Nf6
French 674 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
Caro-Kann 487 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5
Grand prix attack 91 1.e4 c5 2.f4
Morra gambit 173 1.e4 c5 2.d4
Alapin 196 1.e4 c5 2.c3
Closed sicilian 228 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3
Sicilian ...d6 1323 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
Sicilian ...e6 243 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6
Sicilian ...Nc6 759 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6
Petroff 355 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6
Spanish 1038 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5
Italian 354 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4
Ponziani 18 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3
Scotch 224 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4
King's gambit 207 1.e4 e5 2.f4
Vienna game 89 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3
Other e4 ... 1524 1.e4 ...
Dutch 181 1.d4 f5
Slav 353 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6
Queen's gambit acc. 181 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4
Queen's gambit dec. 353 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6
Albins counter gambit 18 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5
King's indian 203 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7
Grünfeld 104 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5
Catalan 36 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3
Nimzo-indian 302 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4
Benoni defense 136 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5
Budapest gambit 22 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5
King's knight opening 601 1.d4 Nf6 (... d5) 2.Nf3
Other d4 ... 1442 1.d4 ...
Reti opening 691 1.Nf3
Sleipner 136 1.Nc3
English 858 1.c4
Bird 177 1.f4
King's indian attack 84 1.g3
Orang Utan 143 1.b4
Grob's attack 12 1.g4
French attack 21 1.e3
Mieses opening 10 1.d3
Anderssen 21 1.a3
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-16 18:19:42)
Beating FM's
If you have beaten more than 1 FM in a classical time control ie not rapid or blitz or bullet that is good on the other hand in short time controls it doesn't mean much at all I agree.
Its tough to improve or learn about chess from blitz or bullet unless you go over the game ie for opening accuracy or tactical shots missed and make notes.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-16 18:32:40)
ELO ELO
"I was talking about updating the database with current theory and critical lines. "
So what are you doing if not examining the latest games played and what better source is there than TWIC? How do you examine these if not downloading and filtering out the openings you are interested in by high rated players?
Anything else is going to be taking other peoples selections eg New In chess opening surveys or subscribing to a chess opening service. Even then the best way of keeping a database up to date is with TWIC.
Lincoln Tomlin (2008-05-17 19:07:03)
Don, Thibault, Jason...
Thanks. I usually do make a habit of copying to the clipboard before hitting any butons but, well, you know that ONE time you forget etc. :)
Not to worry. I just wanted to add what a powerful study tool FICGS can be in analysing structures, plans and ideas in openings for your OTB repertoire. I really think that this form of chess is undervalued in really trying to get an understanding of target middle and endgame positions for use in club and tournament play. I use a lowly 1.7Ghz Celeron based laptop and Chessbase along with an older version of a 'weaker' (not telling which) engine for checking line and ideas but mainly try for lines that I want to head for in games against humans. Unless they prove to be truly disastrous of course. 8|
Thibault de Vassal (2008-05-19 06:35:14)
Major update (may 2008)
Hello to all, a new update including :
- Regular tournaments with prizes (see thread "Free tournaments with prizes")
- Norms, titles and prizes are now announced by email.
- Players with Epoints are shown in the connected players list (My messages).
- Affiliate links : For each new player referred by your link (see My account) posted on the world wide web, 1 Epoint will be added to your account.
- Search games function improved : You can now search games by opening and by rating (White & Black)
All feedback welcome :)
Hannes Rada (2008-05-19 17:55:07)
Opening - German Translation
The German Translation for opening
reads: "Eröffnung" not "Öffnung".
"Öffnung" means hole ..... :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2008-05-19 18:11:56)
Opening - German Translation
Oops, thanks :)
Benjamin Block (2008-05-25 15:38:13)
New idea
Hi, Thibault
It is very nice with the filter game search. Is it possible to filter the game in "download all games". I want this because i download the games and put it in my openingsbook but i get bad games too. :(
Have a nice week end!
Benjamin
Thibault de Vassal (2008-05-26 12:19:28)
Rybka vs Rybka
Ok, we all know that engines are not free will. With no randomizer, the regular start position, "normal" settings (do not avoid a draw at any price, regular values) and a large opening book [which is a quite good randomizer itself], I'm quite sure statistics after 500,000 games will look like 50% if Rybka 3 #1 & #2 play as both White & Black, 51 to 53% if Rybka 3 #1 play as White only while Rybka 3 #2 play as Black only, about the same (but not exactly) for Fritz 11 or other engines.
Ilmars Cirulis (2008-06-02 17:00:26)
Another one...
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 b5 8.Bd3 a6 9.e4
c5 10.e5 cxd4 11.Nxb5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 axb5 13.O-O Qd5 14.Qe2 Rb8 15.Bg5 h6 16.Bh4 Bd6 17.f4 Kf8!
If not 17.-- Kf8!, white feels good. But Kf8... I can find anything against that. Any idea?
It's just opening analysis. :D
Wayne Lowrance (2008-06-08 06:24:35)
Rapid chess entry rating
Jayson Repa has a point but I think he is missing my point. If Engine help was not allowed, I would agree 100%.
But with engine help, in practice mostly Rybka, a 2100 player is grossly under rated, I mean gross. So that is a huge barrier to overcome for a 2200+ rated player.
It is not obvious that a 2300 player climbing the ranks against 2400 players has a larger barrier than a 2200 player reaching 2300.
\The point I am making is: It matters little the ratings in correspondence chess with very very long time controls. Rybka does not know or care, the lil girl just makes best moves anyhow.
The skill comes in when the human selects the best opening and is the most capable of steering his engine consistant with his chess knowledge.
Heck Mr Repa I would love to play 2400 players, my chance of loosing is no greater than losing to a 2100 player, both would be using Rybka or engine of their choice.
With respect sir
Wayne
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-06-10 08:45:20)
Thematics ...
It would be nice to have the Ponziani opening, I know, it is unsound, but it is a nice opening.
Wayne Lowrance (2008-06-10 16:44:32)
Rapid chess entry rating
I am pleased that Thiabalt has/is taking steps to put a stop to this bickering and name calling here at the chess site.
For my part I would like to apoligize to all for opening this "Rapid chess entry rating" topic in the first place. It is my bad ! And I will not repeat this mistake again.
It was never my intension to creat such chaos. I thought it was a harmless topic and was giving an opinion.
I feel bad that one individual has such a dislike for me. I have been playing c hess on internet for perhaps 20 years, and in all of that time I have never had anyone dislike me, I confess it does bother me.
Wayne
Henrik Jonsson (2008-07-02 23:13:12)
Openings that leads to open games?
I have a rating of 1800 at ICC. But I don´t know very much opening theory. I like open games. So I would like to learn openings, where a lot of pawns are exchanged, that leads to open games. Any recommendations?
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-07-04 07:17:27)
Open Games
Try the scotch opening, the central pawns are exchanged early.
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-07-16 20:32:14)
Cannot work ....
.... within opening theory - this could be more than 20 moves in a game!
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-17 02:36:56)
Mirroring moves
If you understand well how mirroring moves are done, it is very (very very..) unlikely that all moves dates prove it by coincidence in a whole game... Maybe 3 or 4 consecutive moves are possible in the opening, no more.
It is possible to mirror any move, so check or checkmate.
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-07-17 04:57:26)
In example ....
... Both players of a match decide to play Sveshnikov with white and black, so it is normal that the first 8 moves are mirrored, may be that both players decide to play a special way in this opening with white and black, it can be that 20 moves are mirrored. Where is the problem? What can be wrong?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-17 06:34:33)
Mirroring moves
Hi Wolfgang,
Your example is ok but you do not take account of the date of each move... Even in Sveshnikov (let's say until move 16) there's a difference between playing the same opening and mirroring moves !
BTW, do you live in New-Zealand too ? :)
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-07-17 16:03:58)
May be I'm a fool ....
...., but what is the simple difference between playing the same opening with black and white over 10 and more moves and MIRRORING?
When is ending the first and when beginning the second?
Garvin Gray (2008-07-19 10:57:17)
Rybka opening book
Wayne,
Do you really mean MUST? or is it that if you want the super duper Rybka opening book, that is will cost extra, but if you dont, then you can just use any of the older opening books?
Wayne Lowrance (2008-07-19 22:19:10)
Rybka Opening book
Howdy Garvin, My bad I should not have said "must" meant to say " if you wanted Rybka3.ctg you must buy it seperately.
Wayne
Wayne Lowrance (2008-07-20 02:38:48)
Rybka Opening Book
In fact I will share an opinion that I have become to trust. That is, even the best books offered have a very short life expectancy. Certainly less than six months with active chess players such that play on "play chess" and even here. Book lines soon become refuted by these centaurs and a new private book of theirs emerges. I will admit that such is the case with me here on Ficgs. I have/use recognized good books that are available, but have my own small book that I consult.
Just an opinion and hope this shared info is taken in the helpful way I intended. So this would indicate that R3.ctg probobly is a great book, but against active centaurs will soon reduce its effectivity.
Thanks
Wayne
Marc Lacrosse (2008-07-27 19:36:41)
The specifics of match play ...
Tanks to FICGS championships interesting formula I just entered Wch 005 in a quarter final 8-games match (against GM Balabaev).
This is the first time I have to play several simultaneous games against the same opponent in correspondence play.
There are interesting questions related to this unusual kind of tournament.
First of all, what kind of opening(s) should you play, and more precisely is it better to vary or to go for the same opening in several games?
Having had a look at my opponents former games I had prepared quite a few options.
As Black I decided to rely on my favorite Bc5 sicilian defence
Four identical games developped and very soon it appeared that these games should be decisive for the whole match
For long I was afraid that my opponent could come with some decisive prepared analysis leading to a 4-0 lead ...
But the opposite happened and all four games ended (draw by position repetition) before I had left my opening prep, after less than one month of play.
Thus I am left with four games where I am white
A considerable advantage IMHO ...
On this precise topic I wonder what is the opinion of top players here : is it better to be the one who vary early or should you go along your favorite analysis as long as your opponent won't diverge himself in case of match play
I have never read anything on this topic anywhere ...
Marc
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-28 00:27:32)
The specifics of match play ...
Hi Marc.
There was discussions about the 8 games match format already... and you may have seen that I used this strategy without success before with Farit as my opponent :)
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__WCH_QUARTER_FINAL_3__000003.html
Anyway, the choice of openings and to vary the lines is a very complex (and interesting) question IMO, that depends on too many factors, so I probably may change my view in certain cases, whatever the results.
Marc Lacrosse (2008-08-03 20:34:52)
No extra qualification required!
Hi all
To Andrew : I really did not ask for this invitation: i am already unable to face all tournaments for which I qualified.
- I just won WCH-04-group M01
- At the same time I just began to play my quarter-final match in Wch-05
- and if I am not wrong I am not far from winning WCH-03-stage2-group02 (possibly ex aequo with you)...
... so really I do not need to get extra qualifying opportunities !
Marc
PS If I remember correctly you had some critical comments on my recent opening choices. It seems that they did not work too miserably so far.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-08-08 19:44:16)
Longest game : 129 moves
Now you can find some additional statistics for the longest games in the page http://www.ficgs.com/about.html (at the bottom, below opening stats)
Go - http://www.ficgs.com/game_9942.html
Chess - http://www.ficgs.com/game_10806.html
Chess 960 - http://www.ficgs.com/game_8791.html
Big Chess - http://www.ficgs.com/game_15403.html
Thibault de Vassal (2008-08-12 03:19:21)
Latvian opening
Ilmars, where is Ilmars ? :)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-18 16:06:16)
translation
I will have a go off the top of my head at giving a sense of the interview in english (I dont know the phrase tonitruand but I am guessing it means dynamic!)?:
Hi Xavier and first of all congratulations on your success in the candidates final match against IM (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Peru]
You had to avoid drawing all the games and finally you succeded with the black pieces. How did that happen?
Xavier: Hi thank you. Its true that if all the games had been drawn then under the rules Figlio would have won whereas if the match was drawn but with a win and loss I would win. Because of this I had to take risks and attack. It was with Black that I did this because I thought that Gino would play safely to be sure of a draw.
- Tell us how you approched the match and how the different phases of the game went
x: Its quite simple, I was not the favorite I have 200 ELO less on FICGS and Gino is an IM on ICCF with a 2480 rating. I did not think I could survive 8 games at once - in a single game anything is possible but 8 games .... it was a big challenge for me! In the openings I chose 4 different moves 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nf3 Gino chose 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nc3 I was surpised by 1 Nc3 because I was expecting dynamic openings and it was then that I decided I must take some risks with black. I kept most of the games balanced with a draw in hand and concentrated on 2 games 1 white and 1 black to get a result. In the end I got 3 wins which seemed an impossibility given the quality of the games Gino had played on this site to reach the final.
- you have not lost any games in the championship and you have fantastic statistics 78% against an average elo of about 2200. What is your secret?
x: My secret? I havent any secret and if I did I would not say because I would not win anymore! I think I have been a bit lucky because in the the Round Robin final there were 3 of us on the same score and I went through under the rules because of my rating. As for my statistics I was helped by mistakes by opponents who allowed me to win some drawn games.
- What do you think of the system for the FICGS championship (round robin and knock out matches)and what changes would you make?
x: Very good question. The matches are a bit too fast for me - 1 day per move when there are hours of analysis needed to exploit a complicated position its difficult when you have several games running Particularly if you are working. Perhaps that is why my opponents have made errors or failed to exploit my mistakes.
But this time limit has an advantage over ICCF where it is 5 days per move the games here are 5 times quicker! Having 8 game matches is an excellent idea and obliging the favorite to draw all the games and the challenger to get a at least 1 victory is very well thought out. The change that I would suggest is to have 15 days extra starting time that is 45 days at the start instead of 30 and also the possibilty to take holidays for tournaments for example take 7 days for championship games and to be able to play big chess go or another chess tournament during the holiday. To be able to choose the start of a holiday in advance would also be good.
- Why do you like cc and how does it compare to blitz and normal chess?
x: I prefer cc because of the time factor. Classical chess is often played at the week end at a fixed time and you have to travel to the tournament. The advantage for me at cc is that I can connect at any time to play a move which allows me for example to have meals with the family at the weekend. Late night moves for example are not possible at classical chess.
- You limited the number of your games on the site to a reasonable amount throughout the championship. Do you think nonetheless that cc is addictive? Does it affect your daily life?
x: Yes! Limiting the number of my games is essential to try to have games of quality not quantity. Having a lot of games going at the same time is something very difficult to handle. It is perhaps the key to my victory against Figlio - I looked at his games - he had not less than 80 games going on at ICCF this must have affected the amount of time he could spend analysing his 8 games at FICGS. The effects on daily life are felt by the family because the reality is if I spend more time analysing the games I spend less time with the family. Thats difficult for me. But when the results come I dont regret it!
- What do you think of the role of chess engines (Rybka Fritz etc)in cc. What are for you the important skills of a cc player - to supplement the machine?
x: Chess engines are used in cc by 95% of players. You have to adapt yourself and know how to use the engines. To play just the best move of Rybka 3 Fritz 12 or Hiracs 12 without thinking leads to a draw if your opponent does the same or to a loss if your opponent is thinking. You have to choose bewteen 4 or 5 moves with a similer evaluation from the engine during a game and sometimes the best move is not among these.
- You play Big chess. Interest or curiosity? What do you think of this strange version of chess?
X : Curiosity and amusement and I think Rrybka 3 cannot yet play Big Chess! This version is new and I did not know it and the inventor has done a good job! By the way I would like to ask is it possible to castle at Big Chess?
[No its not possible]
- Finally the question that everyone is asking particularly Francois and Wolfgang who are contesting the 2nd candidates final. Do think you will be able to defend your title next year? :)
x: Definitely I will defend the title I would like to know if possible the date and time limits for the match. I wish Francois and Wolfgang a great match! I would also like to express my appreciation for this tournament which has been well organised!
- the match should start in the first week in January next year the time limit will be 30 days plus 1 day per move. Thank you for your answers and once again congratulations on a great performance.
x: Thank you. Cheers. Best wishes to everyone and good games!
Normajean Yates (2008-08-21 05:25:54)
it is! llmars is on the vive-greco team
So the greco countergambit [latvian gambit] is alive, and as long as llmars is there it will stay alive:)
I am not so courageous - I play it only in no-engines chess :) [although engines cannot help much in the opening - this being a *real* gambit - can they?]
No, actually I *am* courageous! In the ongoing chess tournament I am playing here I did play the greco [latvian] against Taoufik - it is a pity that Taufik decided to forfeit all his games on time [incl. mine on move 5 :(] ...
Thibault de Vassal (2008-08-22 17:50:17)
Team challenge : Latvian gambit
Based upon an idea by Ilmars, let's try to create a special Latvian thematic tournament that could start at the beginning of september, consisting in two teams : Latvian gambit "defenders" and latvian gambit "refuters" (that will play either Black or White), this could be interesting to improve the theory in this opening.
Any player who wishes to play this tournament may post in this thread "I am in as White (or Black)" and I'll make pairings in a few days/weeks.
Benjamin Block (2008-09-02 18:58:21)
organize?
On this site? Yes it would be funny.
I think it will be hard to ask the rybka team?? Have they time? But if some one that we trust can use the computer 30+1 to don´t get to much electricity. How are inveted to play? The openingsbook Random?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-12 14:39:49)
Rybka 3.0 about 2300 at FICGS ?
According to Larry Kaufman from Rybka team in the discussion linked above :
"If we assume that both sides have the same opening book, then I think two things are fairly safe to say:
1. A good human chessplayer (or even a bad one with good centaur skills) + same Rybka will win a long match from unassisted Rybka.
2. In any individual game, the chance of a draw is fairly high. (...) I mean more than half the games, but not way more. The actual draw percentage depends very heavily on the opening book used."
I agree with that, so I assume that Rybka 3.0 thinking at least 24 hours per move would have a correspondence chess rating of about 2300 at FICGS.
Any opinion ?
Wayne Lowrance (2008-09-13 00:47:03)
Rybka 2300 @ FICGS
That is interesting Tribault. Do you mean the program running unassisted, no player help, Rybka choose own book moves ?
If that is your basis then I say no Way Rybka on FICGS get this rating. There are very many sharp Centaurs playing here. With excellent tuned books. That is the main thing. CC games are won/lost on opening book.
I am of the opinion that centaur + program is too strong for Program itself. Results on ICC have demonstrated that.
Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-15 20:54:47)
Wikichess : Update !
Now you can see strong improvements in Wikichess articles :
- Opening ECO code
- Name of the opening
- Moves played at FICGS
- Find games played at FICGS
- Statistics (White wins, Black wins, Draws)...
Thanks to report any bug.
Michael Aigner (2008-09-23 14:38:05)
Oh my god!
Oh my god, is this opening bad!
I knew the lavtian gambit ist not really a sound opening joice but I never realized how bad it is.
Good luck to the Blacks - we will need it ;-)
Michael
Denis Ivanchenkov (2008-09-24 15:48:33)
some info
Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latvian_Gambit
says that ECO code of Latvian gambit is C40
but
http://www.chessgames.com/index.html
says that C40 is actually
"King's Knight Opening (C40)"
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 ;-)
Benjamin Block (2008-09-29 15:06:47)
Copy game to fritz?
If you mean in fritz openingsbook you can do this.
You do this in frtitz 11 i just have that and fritz 6
Start the program fritz 11
Press "Edit"
Press "openingsbook" and "Improtgames..."
Now you choose the databas you want to use in this question you want the game from ficgs. I don´t rember the file name. But i think you can found it.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-03 22:42:17)
Psychology
I give an edge to Kramnik not in terms of chess ability or strength but he seems stronger psychologically more able to take the pressure. On the other hand the match is a bit short 8 games which I think is good for Anand. Finally Anand is favourite in the tie break games. For me the key opening questions are: Whats kramniks e4 defence? my bet is at least 1 outing for the Marshall which Anand has performed badly against and the Caro Kahn (which Kramnik has hardly ever played) and no Petroff at all! I think Anand will stick with his semi slav. After his problem in the Leko match Anand will not be able to surprise Kramnik with 1 d4! My prediction: either 1 win and the rest drawn for Kramnik in the classical games or an Anand win in the rapid tie breaks.
Iouri Basiliev (2008-10-06 12:30:18)
Latvian gambit
My first two games with Michael and Rodolfo simply confirmed - "LG is bad opening". 15-20 moves and black can resign. I choose 3.Nxe5 as most difficult for black. 3.Bc4 has been played with Denis. Do not expect more than 20 moves here as well.
Sebastian Boehme (2008-10-06 19:39:00)
Sort of a hierarchy here
Well it is quite simple, the best engine on best hardware. Anyway good that at least Junior and Cluster Toga managed to get a draw from Rybka.
Too bad Hiarcs played such a bad opening, or there had also been a chance for maybe a draw.
Anyway congrats again to Rybka team for this win!
Benjamin Block (2008-10-08 18:11:30)
Why a mobile?
A mobile can never run that fast like a computer. And not even that big openingsbook and endtable? Why not test a other computer? Anyone know where i can found the game? Want to see how fast the mobile lose?
Iouri Basiliev (2008-10-21 14:10:51)
LG
The games are over. Steel do not 100% sure about 3.Bc4, the game Ilmars-Michael needs to be analysed, but 3.Nxe5 simply wins. Anyhow, it was nice to study deeply this opening imho. Thanx to all players!
Michael Aigner (2008-10-24 19:38:43)
The only draw wa a lucky one!
Unfortunately I have to say that my draw against Ilmars was lucky becaus he mixed two moves. Until that White was clearly better.
I played my games without any information about the openeing theory of the lavtian gambit - only brief analysis.
Now I can say this is not enough to defend this opening. On the other hand there might be ways to survive with black if one knows ideas, plans, opening theory ....
Is there any good book with more or less reliable analysis of this opening?
Next time better opening preparation is definately needed ;-)
Normajean Yates (2008-10-26 08:03:34)
ive seen those chesville articles before
http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Openings/LatvianGambitRevisited.htm
http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Openings/LatvianGambitRevisited_PartTwo.htm - not bad for a starting uderstanding.. but the lines - dont follow them blindly! doublecheck with latest databases and - with llmars :)
Iouri Basiliev (2008-10-29 14:36:03)
Latvian gambit
Latvian Gambit is bad opening for blacks:
e4 e5 Nf3 f5?? is Kings Gambit(KG) (trans)position with extra tempo for white. KG is not playable at high level due to white can achieve draw at maximum. Extra tempo gives whites at LG anormous advantage in comparison with KG. Whatever "theory" is talking about. Sorry.
Benjamin Block (2008-11-02 17:13:30)
We can try
I thinked a bit today. Computer have a bit problem (closed positions.) And humen are long from cleared it. Some cool positons. I played some games vs my self. And it was very funny :UP:
The computer will not fix it very fast. First we need to make a openingsbook before the computer can fix the game.
Why not test?
Don Groves (2008-11-05 08:02:06)
8 x 8 chess variant
There is another way to foil the computers and re-energize chess: A screen is placed between the two sides of the chess board and each player places their pieces on the board in accordance with two rules: (1) one pawn on each file; (2) no piece past its own third rank. Then the screen is removed and the game begins with White's first move.
Opening books become useless (requiring the computer to begin using its clock from the first move) and the usual endgames will rarely occur (although endgame databases are obviously still useful).
Knowing your opponent's tendencies becomes even more valuable than in the normal game.
Ben Milton (2008-11-05 14:51:33)
opening book
I have downloaded the games played on playchess and was wondering how i could make an opening book based on them?
Benjamin Block (2008-11-05 15:14:48)
Build openingsbook in fritz 11.
1.You need to extract the files first.
2.Start the program fritz 11.
3.Press edit->Openingsbook->Import games.
4.Choose the extracktet files.
5.Take 1-????? if you want all. ????=the highest nummber. (you get it in the start.
6.Choose how many moves you want in every game. MAX 100.
7.Press "ok".
You can say thanks by giving me the links you download the games.
Ben Milton (2008-11-05 15:45:54)
new book
Thank you for the helpful reply, however your method adds new games to an already existing book (e.g. rybka 3.ctg). What i was looking for is to make a new opening book completely based on these games. Is that possible?
Benjamin Block (2008-11-05 16:40:58)
I think i see.
What you want is a new openingsbook with nothing!
1.Press File->New->Openingsbook...
(skift+ctrl+alt+F11)
2.Choose a good name.
3.Start on 3 in the other message.
4.Please answer my question where i can download the games.
Normajean Yates (2008-11-06 03:35:52)
re-opening topic: to Rada
"In the sixties Hans Berliner won the ICCF championship with Aljechin Defense" - well I was - I still am - a Berliner fan [I like his harmless eccentricities also], but there were no *engines* then to speak of!
Ben Milton (2008-11-06 16:47:28)
Downloading games
Is there a way to download all the long games (non blitz, bullet, etc) above the rating of 2200? Im sure a very strong opening book can be made from that considering that most of the people use engines here...
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-07 10:30:11)
Downloading games
Did you try 'Search games' on the menu ?
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=search_games
Here you can download all games or search by player (and rating) or opening...
Normajean Yates (2008-11-07 20:36:31)
but I found lots, + wait for hashtables
but Mr Milton, *I* found loads of 2200+ v 2200+ sicilian games!
Hashtables haven't been implemented yet, but thibault said they are soon to come. so will not yet, but soon in the future, find transpositions into a sicilian, and at present but not in the near future you *will* find games that transposed *out* of sicilian...
What *did* you search for? In 'Opening' type 1.e4 d5, and for both black and white elo type 2200 - and you will get the sicilians, with the provisos I mentioned above
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-11-08 10:03:24)
Games ...
What I do is to download ALL the games and I use a freeware chess database tool called SCID to get the games with the opening I want.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-08 23:52:27)
Correction
I wrote previously : "Here you can download all games or search by player (and rating) or opening..." -> I meant : "Here you can download all games or search by player or opening (and rating)..."
Consequently (to Ben) you can download all (minus hashtables) sicilian games played by players rated over 2000 this way.
Normajean Yates (2008-11-09 04:26:24)
Rodolfo, I do *exactly* the same thing!
"What I do is to download ALL the games and I use a freeware chess database tool called SCID to get the games with the opening I want." - I do *exactly* that!
Specially, the newer versions of scid are *very* convenient! [I am using scid 3.6.23 - but 3.6.26 is available I checked.]
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-09 15:19:50)
All games...
Doing the same as Rodolfo is clearly the best method, the FICGS search by opening is limited to 500 games.
Normajean Yates (2008-11-11 12:32:58)
God is elsewhere... maybe...
I dont see any god, I am concerned with epistemology. If there is/are a/_ God/s, he/she/it/they are busy elsewhere...
I dont see it/them (God/Gods), just like I don't see the forced mate in chess's opening position ;)
Ben Milton (2008-11-22 18:13:24)
...
Also is there a way for me to increase my chess rating? since i am a centaur player using Rybka 3, fritz, zappa, with strong opening books such as perfect 15 (tuned) and at this rating many of my opponents are not even using engines and it the games are not challenging. Regards
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-11-30 11:43:57)
Is Marshall attack ....
... good enough for a win on high level correspondence chess???
You can make your own mind with a look at 4 games of WCH_CANDIDATES_FINAL_000002 (# 23018, 23019, 23020, 23021) where Black played an unusual defence which could have fundamental importance of judgement this opening!
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-11-30 21:01:56)
Good for white !?
Hannes, with best play on both sides White will have always a small advantage in this opening I think. Mostly not enough. For your game all the best - may be your opponent has missed the best defence.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-01 15:34:03)
cant argue...
..with your results Marc. However the current champion won FICGS with exactly the strategy I favour and exactly the opposite to your strategy. So thats powerful evidence in favour of the varying openings approach. Well done on winning your match - lets see how far you get with your strategy. As for these side line sicilians I never called them silly Marc your being over sensitive. I thought that it was easy to equalise against them and get a draw at cc. I still believe that and proved it in our game. However I do think your opponent (as black) was playing ambitiously to win! Now thats a different story .....
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-01 15:37:40)
cant argue...
..with your results Marc. However the current champion won FICGS with exactly the strategy I favour and exactly the opposite to your strategy. So thats powerful evidence in favour of the varying openings approach. Well done on winning your match - lets see how far you get with your strategy. As for these side line sicilians I never called them silly Marc your being over sensitive. I thought that it was easy to equalise against them and get a draw at cc. I still believe that and proved it in our game. However I do think your opponent (as black) was playing ambitiously to win! Now thats a different story .....
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-12-01 18:53:45)
Why not both strategies ?
I have been surprised also about my opponent's strategy - 4 games the same opening - but it can work sometimes. I don't know whether another strategy would have been better? I think Francois has been surprised also about my answer 1.e4 e5 four times. In the past I prefered 1.e4 c5 mostly. The openings beside Marshall attack for the other games has been very well prepared by my opponent.
Hannes Rada (2008-12-01 20:58:47)
Marshall Defense
And the conclusion is:
This opening should be renamed as Marshall Defense :-)
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-12-01 21:31:30)
15...a5!?
May be easier! Are there known any games?
My idea was it to show, that white endgame ressources (neither by material nor by development) are not big enough for a win! Would be a fundamental investigation of this opening's worth.
But Hannes is right - better to name it Marshall defence.
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-26 20:26:06)
Pichelin - Utesch
Hi Hannes, as far as I experienced, Xavier is an excellent chess player, beyond Rybka & chess engines, with a very good understanding of the game and very efficient ideas, also in quiet positions. Wolfgang is able to make very deep & accurate analysis in complex or strange positions while playing fastly, really hard to play. Moreover both have a coherent, maybe different, global match strategy.
In my opinion, we may see quite surprising and long games, that could be decided in a way since the opening, I mean psychology could be the key in such a match. The way the pieces will be dealt may show some things.
50 / 50 :)
Thibault de Vassal (2008-12-31 00:37:01)
One player, one strategy...
I suppose everyone has a personal idea on this, it all depends on the time you want to spend on each move. The very best players obviously use Rybka 3, recent databases and may search games played by their opponents (you may use the "Search games" option) to avoid the openings they master.
Ben Milton (2009-01-05 16:00:41)
CHALLENGE!!!
I hereby challenge all to 2 games one as black and one as white, to whoever believes they can beat Rybka 3 using tuned Perfect 15 book and depth 23 after opening. This is ofcourse to win my E-points. Any one interested at all?
Marc Lacrosse (2009-01-05 23:17:16)
First flaw is in the book
There are many published lines crushing perfect15.
I am not sure that sedat already corrected all the known ones for the coming perfect16.
Either you publish your ctg at the beginning of the games or you cannot affirm that you run a "modified" perfect15 without providing proofs that you are not playing yourself during the opening phase
So i fear it's a flawed challenge
Apart from this I suppose that any player among top-50 here is ready to play against a pure R3. If we were not ready to accept this, then this would mean that correspondence chess has come to its end.
Marc
i must admit that in case your opponent plays postman chess with his engines, times have become tougher for those who try to demonstrate something, and much tougher since rybka 3 appeared. But so far there are still players who keep achieving 70% against opponents who probably all use top engines ...
Ben Milton (2009-01-06 03:22:29)
.
Im not sure what exactly move mirroring is. Also as i said my opening book is perfect 15 book BUT it is tuned. Thibault Id have put 100 E-points on the line if i had it. At the moment i only have 12. Does anyone believe they can beat the conditions i proposed and are willing to have a game?
Hannes Rada (2009-01-08 19:55:05)
Tables
Hi Thibault,
Just a few ideas.
I mean 'spreadsheet-like' tables with cells where you can not only see the points, but also the results (1,0, 1/2) between all players.
Furthermore on the tournament page I would prefer to see the notation first and then diagram of the actual position. I think this is more logical to see first who is playing and what has been played (the moves) and then the actual position.
I think it is also an idea to show only the running games on the (main) tournament pages and to show the finished games for a specific tournament on a second page per tournament.
Chess fonts (?) on the ICCF Server looks a little bit nicer then those here.
I have been playing now my first tournament on the ICCF server where (secret) conditionals are allowed (chessfriend had this feature already many years ago). And I am a big fan of it. Conditionals can help to speed up to game significantly.
Some openings like the Grunfeld, the French, and The Sveshnikov really cry for conditionals :-)
I don't see any disadvantes regarding the introductions of conditionals (maybe except for the programmer :-).
Why are you against them ?
But finally I have to say that I really appreciate playing here.
I can imagine how tough and how much work it is to maintain such a server as a 'One man show'.
I really appreciate your efforts.
Tom Smith (2009-01-14 19:13:17)
Reply again
i also forgot to respond to a couple of points.
No I dont consider any engine use cheating, or using opening books etc.I am a average player I think, I dont have a rating or anything and I get whipped by computers, that is why I wondered if it was common practise here to use a computer to play for people as I would just constantly lose in 10 moves if that was the case, this was why I made this thread to see if I can expect to lose every game or whether some people would be like me and just play.
In hindsight I couldve made my point a little clearer to have avoided any bad feelings which is why I am now trying to explain more clearly.
Francisco Gramajo (2009-01-29 03:42:30)
Poker insults Chess...
My friends:
Years ago I was addicted to poker, losing a lot of money on line, also in real casinos.
I was a chess player since 13, but dont like the openings, I was tired to play same thing... e1-aggg! same faces... and a lot of fake players on line.
I discover this place by mistake, I was so happy because keep my fix with chess in peace. Playing with decent players. Not only doing regular openings...
Then you install poker...
how come poker? again... I am playing in my local casinos again, and afraid to tell about his site, because I don't want a lot of people playing here making this place full of poker players.
The finest, the few, the chess... te best.
I suggest you Thib, separate ficgs from poker, and create a really server to play poker in a table with many players a time.
Play poker heads-up one to one, is bored, the winner is not always the best.
The future of ficgs is compromised with poker, but not for bad...
go ahead and crate... fipgs...
Best Regards!!!!
Thibault de Vassal (2009-02-25 14:52:12)
Risky opening
The games played with Black by Tomas Civin are worth a glance, nice to see this opening at this level (quite hard to play for sure)
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=29043
Maybe a thematic tournament to follow :)
Wayne Lowrance (2009-02-26 19:04:11)
Risky Opening
There is a 200 ELO TER difference, I suspect that is enough 4 sure, I will watch with interest.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-02-28 03:35:14)
Svante Carl wins FICGS Go WCH (again)
Congratulations to Svante Carl von Erichsen who keeps the FICGS Go champion title by beating Ke Lu 5d on an impressive 5-0 score, also reaching a rating of 2653 !
A rematch just started between our two top Go players, as Ke Lu convincingly won the 3rd FICGS Go WCH preliminary tournament by 7/7
You can follow the games here :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000003
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match :
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, first of all congratulations for your win in the FICGS
correspondence Go championship final. Your opponent was Ke Lu 5 dan, you
won 4 games out of 5 already (the last game is not finished yet), how do
you explain such a result?
Svante Carl -
Hello! Thank you very much! It is certainly astonishing for me that I
was able to hold my own in these games. I believe that the main factor
that helped me in getting on even terms with such a strong player was
that I could spend much more time analyzing each move than in a
face-to-face or online direct playing situation.
FICGS - Did you have a particular preparation or plan before to start the games?
Svante Carl - The only things I planned beforehand was to really give my best, and to
make the games as distinct as possible.
FICGS - The site will now try to attract more correspondence Go players from Asia
(with a few chinese, japanese or korean words on the home page already),
what do you think about the games format played at FICGS
(30 days + 1 day / move, chinese rules komi 7.5 points) and the championship rules?
Svante Carl - I like the format. I am also interested in the rules of Go as well as
the rules that surround Go, like tournament rules and time settings.
My current conviction is that the "real, pure" Go rules are area rules
with superko, and territory rules should be seen as a shortcut which
should give the same result. I have come to think that the "Taiwan
rule", i.e. White gets a point of compensation if Black got the last
play (before the first pass), is a sensible part of the rules. FICGS
has taken a very easy route by declaring the rule set and leaving
negotiation of the result to the players. While in the end, it is only
important who won, I think that showing a result as e.g. "White+3",
"Black+Resign" adds a lot of flavour.
As a time system, I think that bonus time (a.k.a. Fischer time), like on
FICGS, is a very general and sensible approach to timing a game like Go.
I think that many "real-world" tournaments and internet servers will
switch to that in the future, for all, blitz, speed, normal, slow, and
correspondence games.
The championship format is quite nice. I like the title
holder/challenger way of tournament series. The only thing I would like
to see is some sort of nigiri to determine the colours in the odd game.
Attracting players from Asia is really a worthwhile goal. I look
forward to playing players from all over the world.
FICGS - Does correspondence Go bring you something more than real time Go?
What is more addictive according to you?
Svante Carl - Since I think that analyzing is a forte of mine, I might be a bit
stronger at correspondence Go than at "real time" Go. I don't think
that one is more addictive than the other.
FICGS - Do you often play real time Go online? What servers do you prefer?
Svante Carl - I usually play on KGS, but not too much, perhaps one or two games per
week on average, often in "bursts". KGS is quite nice, but not perfect.
Sometimes I play at CyberOro, but there is much less communication; I
like to watch pro games there.
FICGS - Do you use softwares that assist you in your games (FICGS rules allow
this)? What do you think about computer Go in general nowadays?
Svante Carl - I only use a board or a simple SGF file viewer for analyzing. There are
no playing programs that could help me. The programs have advanced
quite much recently, but I think that it will still be a long time
before they can beat me in an even game. Currently, most tests of these
programs are against professional players with high handicaps, and I
think that this is a good situation for the bots, since they get
exponentially weaker the further the game is from the end -- high
handicap practically eliminates the opening, their weakest spot. I
would like to see more tests against amateur players at the bots' own level.
FICGS - Do you play other games (board games, video games...), what is your
favourite one?
Svante Carl - Go is certainly my absolute favourite. I also know chess, although I am
really weak at that. I also like "german board games", there are some
really nice pearls there. In video games, well, there are also some
pearls, but they get drowned by a mass of ... not so good games..., I
don't waste time looking at that scene any more. I also played some
online poker, but it wasn't able to keep me interested.
FICGS - Will you defend your title again against Ke Lu who also won
the 3rd wch tournament?
Svante Carl - Of course, I am looking forward to that!
FICGS - Could you give us your impressions on the games, how it
went from the beginning to the end, do you think that
time pressure were a non-negligible factor in the result
(the clocks of Ke Lu were quickly near 1 or 2 days left)?
Svante Carl - I was a bit surprised that he let his time drop to such a low level
right at the beginning, perhaps he was not familiar yet with the vacancy
feature at FICGS. I can't see his reasons for this, or how much time he
actually could spend on his games. I was ahead in each game when it
timed out, though.
I think that game 2 was quite even from the start. The skirmish in the
lower left resulted in me capturing a little group, but he got a nice
framework on the lower side. My prospects of reducing this were a bit
hampered by the fact that my right side group was not completely
settled. I found a way to sacrifice some stones to settle my group
while fixing the framework's extent and keeping sente to secure my top
side, at which time, the game was still almost even, but I think that I
was a few points ahead then. Later, I could seal the top side with some
extra points through some rather blunt forcing moves.
In game 3, my opponent made an approach with White 24 that is usually
regarded as bad in this situation, because the pincer Black 25 works out
very well in conjunction with the stone on the left side. He tried to
settle with White 26, but I refused to make things so easy, even though
the result from the usual joseki would not have been bad. He resisted
Black 27, but I think that White 28 is an overplay. The resulting fight
left me with nice profit in that corner and sente, while he made some
centre thickness. I then tried to carefully neutralize this thickness,
but I may have played some slack moves in the course. Later, I was able
to keep a little moyo in the lower right centre, and then I poked into
his right-side territory where he had left a serious weakness earlier.
Game 1 started out with an interesting fight in the upper right. After
White 42, both the three captured black and the two almost captured
white stones retain some serious aji, which I came back to fix on my
side a few moves later. When I could set up a splitting attack with
Black 77, he was able to connect his two weak groups, but in bad shape.
I continued to keep this dragon separated from the top, planning to
invade the top side afterwards. However, with White 110, instead of
connecting by playing B6, he saved some centre stones, and I proceeded
to separate and kill the dragon. He may have overlooked that my upper
left side group was still able to live after 110 and 111.
In game 4, after White 22, Black's stones on the left side have a
strange relation. The three stones in the corner are a bit far from
C10, but putting another move here is way too slow. He tried to remedy
this situation with the following moves. After Black 27, there are
weaknesses left in both sides' shape. When I entered with White 32, I
thought that his weakness at F13 would let me settle easily, but he
attacked very hard. After White 60, there are some weaknesses in my
shape, but he also has a weakish group in the centre. Playing at K10
with White 76 before taking the two stones with H2 felt very important
to me. At move 94, I couldn't find a good move to complete my moyo at
the top, but I thought that I had found a good point to invade. This
was much harder than I thought, since after Black 95, the 3-3 point
fails to live. With 96 and 98, I thought that I would get a ko, but he
played a line that I had excluded earlier on account of too many cuts in
Black's outside shape. However, with Black 107, he made things very
difficult for me, since cutting at P16 doesn't work out too well -- my
inside group doesn't have enough liberties. I cut at Q14 instead with
the hope to at least get some outside forcing opportunities that might
have been able to keep me in the game. I think that Black 115 should
have been at R12, because after White 116, R12 and N16 have become miai.
Black 117 just doesn't work at all. I really got lucky in the end here.
These impressions are naturally one-sided, and I would be really
interested what stronger players might say about these games.
FICGS - Thank you very much and have good games !
Svante Carl - Thank you!
Michael Aigner (2009-03-07 20:34:56)
Unrated Tournaments
Sometimes I would like to experiment with some more or less unserious openings (e.g. to "improve" my OTB opening repertoire).
I would not like to this in serious rated tournaments, therefore I would be happy if we could have some unrated tournaments (special tournaments area) similar to thematic tournis.
What do you think about this?
Josef Riha (2009-03-07 22:33:06)
Unrated...
Good idea, I agree with you. Here we could test ALL kinds of openings.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-03-07 23:56:15)
Unrated games
Hi Michael, that's a very good idea ! (why didn't I think about it before :))
Now thinking about this : If it is unrated, shoult it be a tournament ?! .. or a 2 players 1 or 2 game match ?
Also we may find a funny category name to suggest that this is a place to test new or unusual openings...
Any ideas ? :)
Marc Lacrosse (2009-03-09 16:19:53)
Unserious openings in serious games!
"Sometimes I would like to experiment with some more or less unserious openings"
For what regards myself I do it all the time in rated games !
For example in my wch-05 semifinal match against D. Ghysens I am busy trying the Hampe-Algaier gambit (not a real success so far) and a Alekhine-Chatard one (much more promising) ... :)
So no need for special unrated tournaments for experimenting IMHO ...
Marc
PS you should have a look : this match will win the price for the most excentric openings in high-level correspondence chess (well I hope so).
Michael Aigner (2009-03-13 16:58:32)
@ Marc
Hi Marc,
in general you are right when you say you can play unserious openings in serious games - of course.
The little problem there is, you can´t if you want to win.
From time to time I can´t hold back and try it myself. In most of this games I am very happy if I am able to "win" a half point in the end.
Have a nice day
Michael
Thibault de Vassal (2009-03-28 19:30:21)
New category : Unrated tournaments
Finally, a new chess tournaments category : "Unrated tournaments" in FICGS__CHESS__SPECIAL__TOURNAMENTS
A place to test new ideas & openings... Thanks to Michael Aigner for the good idea :)
Philip Roe (2009-04-05 08:21:08)
Will the games be viewable?
I see that the first unrated tournament has begun, but it doesnt seem to possible to view the games (There is no entry under "Tournaments").
Since the players have expressed an interest in trying opening experiments, it might be interesting to watch their adventures.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-28 09:55:31)
Actually, Don did *not* say it...
From the chat archives :
devassal thibault : :o) .... Hi Francisco & all ! (2008-12-05 00:05:41)
gramajo francisco : hey Yates... are you smoking something? (2008-12-04 23:45:49)
yates normajean : may be call it the P.O.U.M opening? (2008-12-04 23:17:54)
http://www.ficgs.com/display_chat_country.php
Now the topic can be closed, I think :)
Scott Nichols (2009-04-30 23:58:53)
Rated or unrated?
I would play either way. Usually, I only will play rated, but I would think this format would work just as well unrated.
The theme I think is fun here, with fun names. I was thinking of all kinds of bizarre openings to try, but would need to think twice about opening choice if it was rated. It sorta goes back to Michael Aigner's point on unrated tournaments IMHO. Thank you for having this new style.
The incentive in rated games is simply not to lose points if you lose, or to gain points if you win. In team chess, this incentive is not needed. The incentive is that you do not want your teammates to beat you up if you lose. ;-)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-06 11:57:15)
Scoring
I agree with William on this point, if a team scores 4-0 or 3-1, it is 2 points for the team, 1 point if the score is 2-2, 0 otherwise.
This time the games will be unrated as a test (maybe this will be a rated tournament next time), I think it is a good occasion to play more unusual openings, this is for fun after all :)
Normajean Yates (2009-05-11 02:07:31)
thoughts on Big Chess... and tips...
I find bigchess more and more fascinating.. I Think it is a wonderful creation of Thibault's (I presume it is Thib. who created it: any way he offers it seriously on this site...) - the starting position is very well-concieved..
I think Bigchess needs more publicity. This is about the only place one can play it - and here there are 2-3 top-class players; less than 20 middle-standard players (including me); others try it once or twice and for some reason get scared or overwhelmed and give up - I see no reason why..
Bigchess gives no advantage on account of huge memorisation of theory, or of better engines: there are *no* theory books; and there are no known engines in existence (probably there isnt one - too little demand, and writing a *good* engine is somewhat laborious, coming up with a *good* static-eval function is tricky, fast board-implementation issues...), so it is all wits...
In fact last week I spend part of two days writing down whatever theory I could discover [with help from top games], it comes to half a page..
Tips for people who want to try bigchess:
1. Bishops are much more powerful than Knights. (because of much longer range compared to 8x8 chess).
The consensus on the values of bigchess pieces is David Grosdemange's valuation:
pawn=1
knight=2.5 (written 2,5 in the continent, of course)
bishop=4
rook=6
queen=11
2. In the opening position, the c,f,L and o-pawns are unprotected.
So, if white's opening move is with the j2-Knight ( freeing the queen), then on move 2 white can move the Queen and threaten to pick up a pawn by forks.. Similarly for black.
*However*, such pawn gambits are quite playable because the Queen can be forced to make many moves to capture a pawn, while the gambitting side develops their pieces.
3. Most Important For Many People: board for offline analysis.
Best of course, is to take time to draw a 16x16 board on paper and stick it on cardboard. And get hold of four sets of chess pieces.
Another way: print a position, and after a move is made - just update the position using correction fluid (typewriter/printer-ink erasing fluid) or something. That way you don't have to keep printng a lot of positions.
Sophie Leclerc (2009-05-11 23:36:33)
Names
All goes with the thème.
If we can call ourselves, the dragonriders, Assuming we play the sicilian dragon.
the phantoms, If we defend yugi's new opening, f4 c4 Nc3 Nf3, in any order. This name would give us more then invisbility, it tell our opponent that we will survive (you can't kill a ghost.)
Gambit lover, if we love to play gambit, it would suit us very well.
chess angels, if we are not too guilty, that would suit us, but I am very guilty....
Pterodactyl guild, if we play the system with white and black ( for black, c5, g6, Bg7, Qa5. Black radical way to prevent d4. You can't say they are not original.
Your choice.
Normajean Yates (2009-05-11 03:52:01)
Daniel, I think you underestimate Rs...
you give B=4, R=4.5 but in the endgame specially, the Rooks pull their weight..15th ('7th' file), escorting Ps to promotion, ...
About people playing on to mate after being a Q down or so without counterchances, well a bigger player-pool is needed ... plus I understand some newbie players not being so sure that mate is easy in a given pos (though much lengthier than in chess) - so, we need *more* non-newbie players!
And a non-newbie begins as a newbie: however, I agree that's not the whole story -- some people *will* play on to mate...one sees that in chess (8x8) too -
lets see: my bigchess record: 17/17 - wow! (with 1 pending: it is still in the gambit-opening stage)
Normajean Yates (2009-05-23 07:50:33)
wikichess: extra goodies! but why ..
If you access wikichess *without* logging in; you will see the following extra goodies:
1. '... or enter a line' [below which is a form to enter an opening line for search]
2. 'Or find an opening in the chess openings directory.' [link to chess openings directory]
3.'Openings most analyzed :' [at present:] Traxler counter-attack, Latvian gambit, Kingston defense [all hypertext links]
These goodies are excellent! But Thib. has forgotten to make them available if you are logged-in. Thib, please rectify! (Or is there a reason why you have to be logged-out to access these? I can't think of any...)
Scott Nichols (2009-06-03 03:09:30)
Chess is dead? Not hardly.
In his book "The world of chess" by Anthony Saidy the following paragraph appears. "Later in his (Capablanca) career, his play became ever more technical and drawish. He expressed the idea that with the perfection of modern knowledge it would soon be impossible to win a game against a master. Chess would soon reach a "draw death". He even proposed interchanging the initial positions of the Bishops and Knights to inject new life into the game."
An exact quote found earlier in this same book exemplifies more of what this thread is about---In reply to a Steinitz comment Tchigorin replied "Chess is a limitless forum for the human imagination. Each position is a fresh challenge. Rules and book openings, to the creative player, are no more than guidelines to be transcended. Individualize. Each position is new--terra incognita that may contain the seed of a beautiful combination. Gladly give up a pawn in return for the attack. Play chess with joy."
Hannes Rada (2009-06-03 18:55:58)
Dead positions/openings
Hi Thibault,
Which positions -respectively we should also talk about openings - do you think are dead ?
I have some ideas about dead openings, but would like to hear your opinion first :-)
Normajean Yates (2009-06-03 19:35:22)
Thib. excellent point re human nature...
"The problem is that human nature make us reproduce known positions much more than unknown ones" - excellent point! So many opening variations, you will still find no mention, or something abou 'there is little match-experience with this position'.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-06-03 19:59:43)
Dead positions/openings
Good (and so large) question, Hannes... I did not exactly mean "openings", this is really beyond my own understanding already :) .. I did mean some endgames (which can be the end of a few openings, at move ~25) in example... On openings, I prefer to be really careful as e.g. there are some really interesting lines (incredibly complex) in Berlin's defence or Petrov's -russian- opening, whose reputation is/was to be drawish.
This could be an interesting debate, does anyone else have some elements on this ?
Hannes Rada (2009-06-03 22:28:52)
Openings very important for corr chess ?
Well about 3 weeks ago I had a discussion with Austrian's only ICCF world champion.
And he told me that in his next world championship final he is going to chance his opening repertoire completely. Instead of 1. e4 which he prefered so far, he is now going to play another move (1.d4 most probably), because after years of studying chess his conclusion is now that 1.e4 is the weakest choice (compared to 1. d4, 1. Nf3, ...)
The same 'ideology' was also published by former ICCF World Champion Hans Berliner in his book "My System".
.
Dead Endgames: This is another interesting topic to be discussed ....
Thibault de Vassal (2009-06-04 00:23:27)
On chess openings...
That's an interesting point of view, for sure. My opinion is that this point (e4 vs. d4 and others) quite looks like the openings in the game of Go !
When improving one's play at Go, one change of mind on the complete theory of the game very often... will I play "territory" or will I play "influence", and how... every thing one learn at Go may change one's mind about this because one must manage territory and influence at the same time.
I changed my mind several times about e4 and d4 these last years, in my opinion if a player still change his mind, it may only mean he just improved his play... again :)
Most of us will probably change our mind again & again... fortunately !
Benjamin Block (2009-06-05 17:19:42)
Opening not too importent.
1.e4 is still possible and will be it a long time more. The problem is that many players are afraid of new variants and it is why they think the move is draw.
Sophie Leclerc (2009-06-08 04:08:17)
some are not discovered
I believe some opening still wait their explorer.
1.f4 d6 2. c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 still wait for people to play it.
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2009-06-08 09:07:04)
To Sophie Leclerc
Mr Leclerc, didn't you experimented already with this opening and gave you no benefits, even a lost game played in the Rybla forum?
Normajean Yates (2009-06-09 00:40:56)
Thanks a lot! Much appreciated!
30 days / year can be exhausting. Specially, then, there is a tendency not to take unrated games seriously, so e.g. quality of thematics (and hence opening theory development) suffers.
Sophie Leclerc (2009-06-09 22:56:31)
the opening
actually, I did not, Yugi played that system to me to me with black piece and I let him build a big pawn,, it was too late for me.
This opening is the same thing as his but with one extra tempo..
White can go in a number of way..
I am waiting to see plenty of thingss, will you play a bird or an enlish ?
Thanks thibeault
Normajean Yates (2009-06-12 09:04:06)
1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3: hyper-hyprmodern?
In the 1950-60s larry evans once wrote that 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 will be the openings of the 21st century. [in 'New Ideas in Chess (1958)' IIRC]. Well not even 9 years have passed, so...
(The 1st century began on 1 AD (retroactively) as there was no 'year 0'. So the 21st cent. began in 2001.)
[2001 joke: y2k+1 problem: how to provideemployment to people who were trained only to deal with the y2k problem :)]
Sophie Leclerc (2009-06-16 19:40:04)
hyper-modern
That strange opening just look too-hyper modern, biside controlling the center fromthe flank,, what will white do if black has no center.
Hannes Rada (2009-06-16 22:10:24)
Hypermodern
I would not consider 1. Nf3 as hypermodern (whatever this is :-)),
as it will mostly convert into such orthodox openings like Queens Gambit, Queens Indian, ....
Marc Lacrosse (2009-06-19 23:24:59)
FICGS commented on rybkachess
Quite a few comments regarding FICGS and correspondence chess opening preparation in this recent thread on rybkachess forum :
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?pid=165142;msg=ReplyPost
Your opinion ?
Marc
Michael Aigner (2009-06-21 22:44:42)
Suggestion for thematic tourny
I am interested in the Cochran Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Sf3 Sf6 3.Sxe5 d6 4.Sxf7)
and would be happy if we could play a thematic tourny with this opening - some day.
All the best,
Michael
Thibault de Vassal (2009-06-22 16:41:00)
Discussion at Rybkachess
That's an interesting discussion... Once more, the confusion reigns between Freestyle chess (commonly played at classical & blitz time controls) and Correspondence Chess, particularly for centaur players who did not experience correspondence chess at a 2500+ level.
IMO (in brief) on several points :
1) All these made-for-engines books have no other interest than to "manipulate" chess engines & other made-for-engines books, actually this has almost nothing to do with correspondence chess (where they are completely useless at a high level, let's say 2300+) or even chess.
2) Many players do not realize the multitude of factors that appear to be more important that the basic strength of centaurs once the correspondence chess 2400 mark is reached and that still increases at 2500 and 2600... The higher the level, the more "opening books" depend on the recent games played by the opponent (and his level), the number of current games played, the score to reach in 8 games matches, the importance of rating, the goal in life, even the month/season for a few players and many other things according to the persons... Actually these "openings books" just live the time to use it one time, so a better term is preparation, actually opening books do not exist anymore in correspondence chess at a very high level, at most it may be useful against weaker players.
3) The previous point is enough to explain the rating changes of most 2400+ players ! In example...
- GM Farit Balabaev is a very experienced player who constantly has(had) more than 100 running correspondence chess games at several places for years, he's also a fast player, it is quite logical to me that he looks for quiet games and fast draws (or lose sometimes to very strong players who want to win more)
- Wolfgang Utesch, FICGS WCH finalist, like many players at one time in their life, decided that other things were more important and that correspondence chess was too time consuming, particularly once the 2500 mark has been reached...
- Eros Riccio obviously decided to win every correspondence chess competition at FICGS while playing a high number of games at several places AFTER having topped the FICGS rating list with the highest rating so far (which he did), so it is natural to look for a few quick draws in matches if 8 draws mean a victory for him (and a few rating points lost, that is quite inhuman anyway :))
- Michael Aigner tops most FICGS rating lists by playing only games at 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves time control, which is an enormous performance as obviously the longer the time control, the higher the rate of draws. I do not know how many current games he's playing at ICCF or IECG and other organisations but I suspect he plays a quite reasonable number of games.
- Xavier Pichelin may top the FICGS rating list this year as he's an incredibly dangerous player with White and Black and with a reasonable number of running games.
Many strong players also choose to play some tournaments for "fun" or to experiment openings and may lose some points while their real strength is over 2500 or more... so it is quite hard to make the difference between the real strength and correspondence chess ratings. So many parameters... It is likely that we'll see one day a 12 games match between Eros and Xavier (Michael do not play fast correspondence chess time control, yet I hope), we all wonder what rating could achieve Vasik Rajlich (Rybka's creator) and other very strong freestyle players but it is very hard to predict only by knowing their results in freestyle tournaments. Correspondence chess is a mirror of real life.
Don Groves (2009-06-24 04:13:16)
Strange joseki
Hola Alejandro and thanks for the compliment! I hope I can live up to it in these games ;-)
My feeling about opening on the 5,4 point is that (1) if the opponent invades the corner, I can keep her/him to a small territory there and gain a lot to the outside, and (2) if s/he does not invade the corner, then I could achieve a fairly large corner.
I would greatly appreciate hearing comments from Dan players about this strategy.
Normajean Yates (2009-07-10 22:26:08)
mistype: I meant 1.Nh3 and 1.Nc3:
I meant 1.Nh3 and 1.Nc3 in my prev post that quoted larry evans... (not 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 of course: 1.Nf3 was routine even in 1958 or so when larry evans wrote that.. not only for hypermodern openings, but to begin KIA without opponent interfering...)
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2009-07-29 00:41:23)
Unusual doesn't mean bad
I think that this is a perfectly valid opening. There have been much stranger openings that have been played by professionals, even though they appear to be "obviously inferior to standard play" (which this opening does not, in my opinion). I'd like to hear a solid reasoning for the stament that Black's first two moves "can't be best".
Ulrich Imbeck (2009-07-30 00:41:46)
opening score statistics
Do opening score statistics exist in Go?
Don Groves (2009-07-30 04:44:35)
opening statistcs
Hi, Ulrich -- I googled "fuseki statistics" and found several links.
Daniel Parmet (2009-08-11 20:08:24)
Quotes!
The following 11 quotes are all by me:
1- "Experiences are the keys to life."
2- "Happy endings are just stories that haven't finished yet."
3- "If you expect nothing then the following will happen: either 1) you will receive nothing and thus can be happy your expectations were met or 2) You will receive something and thus be happy you have received something. And.... Happiness ensues..."
4- "Step up and face your fear or you will never be what you should be."
5- "A mistake is only a mistake if you let it happen twice. Otherwise it is a learning experience. your experience."
6- "Life is painting a picture over many years with different paints and tools."
7- ""Horney concluded that love was at least a temporary escape from all her anxiety and insecurity" - Karen Horney
Does anyone else think that someoe named 'Horney' shouldn't be talking about love?"
8- "Take each event in a singularity and say if time passes will any of this matter?"
9- "Plans are ideas that never come to fruition."
10- "You should only get upset about the little things cause you have no control over the big things."
11- "Causing another problem without fixing the initial problem just makes the initial problem worse as time continues"
The following are classic quotes:
11- "If you lose the game you should win the analysis!"
12- "Every passing minute is a chance to turn it all around." - Vanilla Sky
13- "Life is pain my dear and anyone who says otherwise is selling something." - Princess Bride
14- "The 7ps: Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance" - U.S. Military
15- "Water water everywhere but not a drop to drink!" - Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner
16- "You can get in way more trouble with a good idea than a bad idea cause you forget the good idea has limits" - Warren Buffet
17- "Teach a child to be polite and courteous and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to merge his car onto the freeway."
18- "Experience is the thing you have left when everything else is gone."
19- "There is no tomorrow without the pains and pleasures of today" - Gabriel
20- "If life weren't this complicated, it would be nowhere near as fun. Why? WHY NOT!" - Catch-22
21- "When you've done things right people won't know you've done anything at all." - Futurama
22- "The right perception of any matter and a misunderstanding of the same matter do not wholly exclude each other." - Kafka's the trial
23- "the Trausi follow the normal practices of Thracians in general, except in one particular- their behaviour, namely, on the occasion of a birth or a death. When a baby is born the family sits round and mourns at the thought of the sufferings the infant must endure now that it has entered the world, and goes through the whole catalogue of human sorrows; but when somebody dies, they bury him with merriment and rejoicing, and point out how happy he now is and how many miseries he has at last escaped." -Herodotus Viv
24- "When a Persian herald demanded the surrender of arms, the king shouted back 'come here to get them'; and when he had seen that he was surrounded, he commanded his men to have a good breakfast since their dinner would be served in hell." - Herodotus
25- "I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it"
26- "Why, we don't even know what living means now, what it is, and what it is called? Leave us alone without books and we shall be lost and in confusion at once. We shall not know what to join on to, what to cling to, what to love and what to hate, what to respect and what to despise." - Fyodor Dostoyevsky Notes from the Underground
27- "Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep." - Scott Adams
28- "Nobody is always a winner and anyone who says otherwise either is a liar or doesn't play poker."
29- “The darkness immutable tranquility holds sway.” - Jun’ichiro Tanizaki
30- “People who are constantly asking 'why' are like tourists who stand in front of a building reading Baedeker and are so busy reading the history of its construction, etc., that they are prevented from seeing the building.” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
31- “Either move or be moved.” - Ezra Pound
32- "The real meditation is the meditation of one's identity..... You try finding out why you're you and not somebody else. And who in the blazes are you anyhow??" - Ezra Pound.
33- “The image is more than an idea. It is a vortex or cluster of fused ideas and is endowed with energy.” - Ezra Pound
34- “The thought working its way towards the light.” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
35- “There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer.” - Ansel Adams
36- “When words become unclear, I shall focus with photographs. When images become inadequate, I shall be content with silence.” - Ansel Adams
37- "Wanting to think is one thing; having a talent for thinking is another." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
38- “Philosophers use a language that is already deformed as though by shoes that are too tight” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
39- “Nothing is more important for teaching us to understand the concepts we have than constructing fictitious ones” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
40- “don’t for heaven’s sake, be afraid of talking nonsense! But you must pay attention to your nonsense” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
41- “In a conversation: One person throws a ball; the other does not know: whether he is supposed to throw it back, or throw it to a third person, or leave it on the ground, or pick it up and put it in his pocket, etc” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
42- “I really do think with my pen, because my head often knows nothing about what my hand is writing” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
43- “What I am writing here may be feeble stuff; well, then I am just not capable of bringing the big, important thing to light. But hidden in these feeble remarks are great prospects.” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
44- “I ask countless irrelevant questions. If only I can succeed in hacking my way through this forest!” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
45- “Even to have expressed a false thought boldly and clearly is already to have gained a great deal” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
46- “Don’t concern yourself with what, presumably no one but you grasps!” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
47- “when you are philosophizing you have to descend into primeval chaos and feel at home there” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
48- "You cannot step into the same river twice." - Heraclitus
49- "Eternity is a child playing, playing checkers; the kingdom belongs to a child." - Heraclitus
50- "Nothing endures but change." - Heraclitus
51- "For a guest remembers all his days the hospitable man who showed him kindness." - Odyssey Book 15 Line 75
52- "Watching [GM Nigel] Short peruse the photos of young women, I had a fanciful notion that the development of specialized skills and character traits in early childhood is like a country fair in which you are alotted a fixed number of tickets to spend on the various concessions. This particular fixed number of tickets to spend on the various concessions. This particular fair is of short duration and happens only once in a lifetime. Nigel took the chess roller-coaster a dozen times, and rode the honesty ride twice, and so he had insufficient tickets left to take the Train Beyond Adolescence more than a stop or two. I myself missed the athletic concession, and I should have ridden -damn it- the chess coaster three or four times." - King's Gambit: A Son, A Father, and the World's Most Dangerous Game by Paul Hoffman page335
53- “I don’t know, but I do know with great precision why nobody else knows either.” - John H. Cochrane
54- "One must have chaos within oneself, to give birth to a dancing star." - Friedrich Nietsche
55- "I created chaos on the chess board and my strength lay in finding hidden harmonies. I always cultivated being at peace in chaos. manifest your unique character on the chess board." - Josh Waitzkin
56- "Leave numbers behind and ride the wave of the game." - Josh Waitzkin
57- "The weakness of an artist is dogma." - Josh Waitzkin
58- "Everything i've learned, i've eventually unlearned. I spend more time unlearning than learning. You must challenge your own micro thought constructs." - Josh Waitzkin
59- "It is like a tunnel, the deeper you get into the more you see there is to learn." - Josh Waitzkin
60- "Your emotions are there for a reason. Observe their ripple." - Josh Waitzkin
61- "The same mold, teachers have learned a certain way. great teachers should listen first." - Josh Waitzkin
62- "Change from psychology and technical errors, transition from opening prep to first middlegame decision or tactical to strategical." - Josh Waitzkin
63- "There is some part about any discipline that should appeal to any person." - Josh Waitzkin
64- "Identify thematic connections by breaking down the walls between different disciplines." - Josh Waitzkin
65- "You know your country is dying when you have to make a distinction between what is moral and ethical, and what is legal." - John de Armond
66- "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
67- "When you stop learning you start dying." - Scott Adams
68- "If you could buy some people for what they are worth, and sell them for what they "think" they are worth, there would always be a profit margin."
69- "Don't compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about."
70- "Life is too short to waste time hating anyone."
71- "When in doubt, just take the next small step."
72- "When it comes to going after what you love in life, don't take no for an answer."
73- "Frame every so-called disaster with these words 'In five years, will this matter?" - Ellis
74- "If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back."
75- "Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need."
76- "There are three sides to every story: your side, their side and the truth." - Bablyon 5
77- "Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher." - Japanese Proverb
My apologies if some of the classics are in the ficgs quote file already as I just keep my own (and pull quotes from everywhere). I tried to cull out the duplicates.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-09-27 01:40:59)
Fritz 12, your opinion
From Chessbase news, Fritz 12 will be out on October 7, 2009 (new opening book by Alex Kure)
http://www.chessbase.com/shop/product.asp?pid=467
Did anyone lucky test it already ?
What about the interface & engine ? A serious opponent for Rybka 3 ?
Scott Nichols (2009-09-26 03:34:48)
One more javascript
One I would love to see is a box opening up after a pawn reaches the eighth rank giving you a choice of Q-R-N-B. The current way is confusing for beginners like when it happened to me and cost me a berth in the second round of the WCH.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-09-29 20:17:35)
Carlsen leads the Nanjing tournament
The Nanjing tournament starts quite well for Magnus Carlsen, who won his first game with the scotch opening against Peter Leko (maybe the influence of Garry Kasparov), and won his second game against Veselin Topalov !
John Smith (2009-09-29 21:23:50)
Human/Centaur
Hi again,
Thank you for replying, therefore a NO_ENGINES flag is not present I better use engines as well as I don't think is meaningful to play vs a human-computer hybrid who probably is rated 1000+ Elo points above me (following the rationale centaur > rybka > SGM > GM > IM > me)
Not 100% what I was looking for but on the other hand this approach has the merit of studying the opening part of the game in great depth as positions can be analyzed to a great extent.
Nick Burrows (2009-10-09 20:09:13)
Game from today
Michel van der Kemp (2009-10-10 09:26:50)
Weekend
I agree the weekend will be better for most people, so I vote for the Friday, Saturday, Sunday option.
But maybe the c option is viable as well. From my experience freestyle is more a matter having better opening books and then a faster computer, and faster time controls is not necessarily a bad thing.
But I like to hear Eros Riccio's opinion on that.
Lazaro Munoz (2009-10-28 03:07:17)
Crazyhouse
There is a website of chess variant database at http://wildchess.org/. The interesting thing is that popular openings are very similar to bughouse but that should be no wonder: avoid fianchetto's (weakness in g7,b7) to a drop pawn is deadly and avoiding pawn conflicts since pawns are lot more valuable off the board then on, etc.
Hannes Rada (2009-11-05 18:42:10)
Sicilian Najdorf
Candidates Final 04
Riccio - Brunner: 8x Najdorf
Quarter Final 2 06
Noble - Gueci 8x Najdorf
Although the games are really interesting
Guys, isn't it a little bit boring playing 8 times the same opening ?
Maybe I am hypercritical today :-) but are chess openings reduced to Najdorf only ? Is this the only valid opening for cc nowadays ?
Any comments on this development in cc ?
Any comments ?
Sebastian Boehme (2009-11-06 23:00:55)
Interesting topic
Hello Hannes and the others,
in very official and important games I still highly rely on the Najdorf. But I also test openings like : French, Russian Petroff, Modern Defense with e4 g6 or for what it's worth e4 e5 followed by Ruy Lopez
But the tendency for many is to go with fashion. And fashion currently still is Najdorf.
So who to blame?
Anyone's own choice what they want to play, I would guess.
Kind regards,
Sebastian
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-07 02:28:21)
Najdorf vs. Petroff
When I have no time enough - that is quite often - I also tend to play Najdorf in all my games (white & black), as IMO it looks like more a perfect geometric shape (kind of spiral) that looks quite "simple" & that chess engines & humans 'generally' play quite well/logically. Also it gives more chances with both colors, particularly against a weaker opponent, as most pieces stay on the board while avoiding symetrical positions.
Finally the Sicilian Najdorf looks quite reassuring, that defines most often the human choice... I used to play many other openings more often, some are much more interesting in some ways with more psychological, strategic & tactical issues, but I must recognize that the more I play against or with engines, the more I play like them, particularly when I feel a general "zeitnot".
Eros Riccio (2009-11-11 23:49:00)
Knockout Final 05
Emails should have been sent by default to him when tourney started and when I sent him my first 4 moves... I am also disappointed, I had never played him before, and I was happy when I saw I was paired with him, I was looking forward to testing his "unusual" openings...
John Smith (2009-11-13 02:56:53)
Introduction to Centaur Chess
Hi all,
While I have played allot of chess, so far I only used my computer for an occasional analysis and mostly for the database features.
I am assuming it takes to know engines quite well to become good at advanced/centaur chess, so any advice would be really helpful.
1) Which engines are better at what type of positions? Is Deep Junior best at unclear sacrifices?, Rybka best for positional play?, Schredder best for endgames?
2) Which engines understand different pawn structures better, e.g. which is the best engine to study a stonewall-structure game and which is best for a King's Indian Mar de Plata game?
3) How to interpret the engine value for the position? e.g. if I, say as White, sac a pawn and the evaluation is -0.1, that is less that 1 pawn, does this mean I have enough positional compensation for the pawn?
4) Which engines take long-term weaknesses into their evaluations, even if they can't see anything concrete within their horizon?
5) Which free engines are worth consulting? toga? stockfish? Glaurung? thinker? Which of these are good for complex positions, which for quiet ones?
6) Are there any engines which improve their play during time, that is they learn? e.g. if in a position guiding the engine by hand proves that another move than its preferred one is best, will it be able to spot the move again, if the same position is re-entered?
7) Which is the best interface for analysis?
8) Is there a page with statistics of how each engine performs in every opening?
Thanks!
Garvin Gray (2009-11-13 17:50:34)
can't view team mates results.
I have just tried viewing results from other tables via the links provided and am still having problems opening the links in a new window. I know I have mentioned this before, but thought I would point out that the issue still exists.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-19 11:08:27)
Chess programming wikispace
Someone updated the chessprogramming wikispace for Marc & reminds us that he was also an opening book author for the chess engine Fruit (by Fabien Letouzey).
chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Marc+Lacrosse
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-02 14:21:48)
Marc Lacrosse memorial
Dear chessfriends, the waiting list for the next chess thematic tournament is open, this thematic #100 will be named the Marc Lacrosse memorial in honor of our lost chessfriend, we will play one of his favorite openings, the Basman Sale sicilian : 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5
Best wishes,
Thibault
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-02 17:50:27)
Major update : Go openings (joseki)
A major update just occured, finished FICGS Go games (chess & poker as well) are now analyzed by the server that gives the name of each known joseki [the first 2 moves at the moment] played in each corner, sometimes it also gives the way it should be played...
See an example at the bottom of this page :
http://www.ficgs.com/game_2481.html
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=2481
Finished games are not analyzed in real time, but this update opens new perspectives to see one day a function to search games by joseki.
Please do not hesitate to comment this update or to report any bug you may see.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-02 18:28:19)
Major update : Chess openings & endgames
A major update just occured, finished FICGS chess games (Go & poker as well) are now analyzed by the server that gives the name of each known opening & classifies the games by endgames, castlings & promotions !
Best, now you can find games by material on the board (like Chessbase) for endgames with less than 10 pieces. Just click "Search games" in the menu, eg. enter KRPP vs. KRP (whatever the order of the letters & colors), and you'll find among others this game (see the description of the game at the bottom of the page) :
http://www.ficgs.com/game_3724.html
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=3724
Note : Finished games are not analyzed in real time, but this update clearly opens new perspectives :)
Please do not hesitate to comment this update or to report any bug you may see.
William Taylor (2009-12-05 17:22:48)
Opening theory
I remember Marc publishing some material about this opening on his website. Unfortunately it seems like the material was not transferred when his website moved. He had accumulated a lot of knowledge on this opening and it would be a shame to lose all his work on it - I don't suppose anyone knows if the material is available anywhere do they?
Wayne Lowrance (2009-12-12 20:07:17)
Rent Rybka
Can you imagine renting Rybka for CC ?, I sure cannot. And even if it is on fast hardware, it will be slowed down by all the activity I would guess. For blitz chess it makes no sense either because of the internet delays. Bah, Vas has flipped his lid.
I would get along just fine here on FICGS without Rybka anyhow. More inportant here is the opening and the skill of the Centaur.
Wayne Lowrance (2009-12-12 20:13:50)
Renting Rybka
Follow up. I learned a long long time ago that the choice of opening book and move selection is the number one important parameter. Number two is the strength and skill of the Centaur. Here most all is using Rybka as the primary program so it figures that the last dependent variable is centaur skill.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-23 21:08:35)
Curious opening
What do you think about this opening (by Luc Olivier Leclerc in Wikichess) ?
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=wikichess&article=8732
1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.c4 d4 4.b4
Complex.. may be a future thematic ;)
Hannes Rada (2009-12-28 21:45:47)
Sicilian ?
I see only 1 Sicilian in this match.
And I see many different openings. That's good - That's more entertaining than 8 times Najdorf ....
So no need to advertise for this Sicilian. It will be anyway played to much for my taste :-)
Originally it was very doubtful for me to play 8 times the same opponent. But then I realized that it can be quite interesting. At least when you're rating is better than those of your oppoent .... :-)
Kamesh Nookala (2010-01-24 19:34:39)
Resign before 10th move
Hello HOST,
I didnt know about this forum earlier and posted in the International Chat. I am sorry for that stupid mistake of mine. But the problem which i faced now is this. There is a guy whom i defeated in all 4 meetings where i played vs. him. This poor guy found me yet again and having known by now that he cant beat me, he simply resigned. I have no grievance against him. But in my very first Rapid B tour here at ficgs, i got an advantage of +-1.00 (approx.) vs. a player who simply resigned after my white 10th move. This meant that though I am awarded with a win, yet because my opponent resigned simply instead of playing the 10th move, he denied me earning some elo. That also implies that he saved his elo by simply resigning.
I dont know much above this site as i am pretty new to this. However, i have been already a victim of this sort of activities. For e.g., I could simply resign when i play bad openings and evals dip before 10th move and i can simply save my elo. That means i can simply resign vs. Big Guys as Black and play as Black only vs. weak players.
Just thought to express my views. Rest upto the moderators
Daniel Parmet (2010-01-26 01:01:46)
SuperGMs watch Corr?!
Carlsen mentioned to the media after his game with Shirov that the improvement in the game of 22... Bc3 was taken from a Correspondence game he found. (Carlsen's own old novelty was 22... Be5 where he lost to Shirov). This is at least the third time i've heard Carlsen using correspondence games for his own opening research and I know also Peter Leko does this. How many supergms you think are accessing all the correspondence sites around the world looking at our opening ideas?! Cute thought!
Ilmars Cirulis (2010-02-19 19:49:44)
Curious opening
cxb4: 15 games, White ELO av: 1752, Black ELO av: 1832
1-0 : 50%, 1/2-1/2 : 0%, 0-1 : 50%
Ilmars Cirulis (2010-02-19 19:50:51)
Curious opening
7.5 (!) games won by white
7.5 (!) games won by black
smth wrong
Thibault de Vassal (2010-02-20 01:31:33)
Curious opening
... or e.g. 10 finished games (5 : 1-0, 5 : 0-1) and 5 unfinished ;)
Ilmars Cirulis (2010-02-20 10:18:49)
Curious opening
thanks!
Lazaro Munoz (2010-02-27 16:46:21)
Hosting tournaments
Would FICGS be able to host a closed group tournament? For instance lets say some chess club, or group wants to have a tournament. Could they, after getting themselves an id on FICGS send you a request to create a tournament for that group?
As an enhancement for the future you might want to create a group(s) concept that can be stored in each users profile, so that one can in the future create group tournaments that are open to that group. Since this site is built in the spirit of openess it need not be enforced but people should understand that some groups many not want to be so open so they should request it from someone, so maybe the group info should have the user and email of the moderator for that group who will give the ok to join the group.
For instance some groups may want specific language so they converse in their native language in the chat box, or geographic area. Or even opening specialist can create thematic openings (although it could get tricky there if someones enters one these thematic groups and decides to play a different opening).
There really isn't anything like it for free anywhere, ICCF will host tournaments however they charge a fee, for instance.
Wayne Lowrance (2010-04-23 01:11:29)
Wider rating range tournaments
Garvin, you have a very good point. I have been there and so I know how your feeling. It is very difficult to advance that is for sure.
Garvin It can be overcome, I have! please refer to my rating climb. I started off at rock bottom despite the fact that I had a rating of 2300++ going in here at ficgs. I did know know I could transfer part of my rating (1800 I Think) but I started at the bottom (1500 if memory serves).It has taken me for what seems forever to arrive to where I am now. I have worked very hard to achieve the Title and it's rating. I have a nice comp now, but the first couple of years I grew in stature with a 1.8 ghz single cpu. Have used that cpu most of my stay here.
What is my secret ?. Answer I have non. First is I have a excellent CC book (lousy for blitzing). I feel the real only way to advance here on FICS is outbook and out think your opponent in opening lines (ask Thibault :)
So MY thoughts are that it would follow that I am not in favor of your proposal. Having said that, I will support what ever way Thibault goes with your ideas.
Good luck my friend, I am behind you, but honestly cannot say I will support any new rating grading.
Wayne
Hannes Rada (2010-04-27 23:52:33)
interesting games and rating
I think interesting games as well as boring games can be played in every class ...:-)
And rating means nothing nowadays.
1800 Elo player can be as strong or weak as a 2600 Elo rated player.
It's quite interesting: on the ICCF-forum the people are complaining that it is not possible to win a cc-game anymore.
Here people are claiming that it is not possible to increase the rating anymore.
Guys simply play chess, try different openings + ideas and you will have again fun, even if you don't win the game or you don't increase your rating :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2010-04-28 08:53:55)
Careful wht you do with our loved F
Very true Hannes...
Many players try to reach the highest ratings before to relax and play more for fun & more openings (there is often a period to learn to lose &/or break the ego at correspondence chess, unlike Go)
A way to find more fun may be in faster games, with more madness and wins/losses... I hope that more players will try bullet games here :)
But that's not a reason not to talk about the ratings issue to try to make it more coherent if possible.
On the rate of draws, I'm not sure if it is so high yet, games played at the highest level may have less draws than in the category below as players do everything to avoid drawish lines. It is probably always too high anyway :)
Mircea Hrubaru (2010-04-28 22:14:49)
Anand vs. Topalov, world championship
I think we should put aside the first game. In my view black played allright until the blunder 23...Kf7? which gave white the chance to blow away black's position with 23. Nxf6!! (Anand saw the pawn in f6 under the threat Nxf6 and that's why he defended with the king, but I think he didn't consider the immediate capture).
In games 2 and 4 Anand showed a superb preparation in an opening that haunts Topalov since his match against Kramnik. Game 2 showed a Topalov looking for deadly attacks and ignoring the lack of sufficient force in the attack. Until now the game with the highest quality is surely game 4, where 10. Na3!? caught Topalov offguard. Between them Anand showed in game 3 that he can chill out and play for safety.
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2010-05-12 19:31:36)
Rybka 4, news, tests & results
By the way it is stated here http://www.chessbase.com/espanola/newsdetail2.asp?id=8300 (article is in spanish) by Cheparinov that Topalov's team had access to Rybka 4 during preparation. Also new Rybka opening book author, Jiri Dufek, was on Topalov's team.
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2010-05-13 03:25:06)
Rybka 4, news, tests & results
This was posted in the Hiarcs forum by Harvey Williamson:" Now it is all over it is time to share a little secret. The day before the World Championship final in Sofia started I had a conversation with Vishy's team. For the duration of the match they have had access to my fast 8/16 core machine as well as all my databases and Hiarcs opening books. Also, of course, all the engines on my machine. I Hope this managed to negate slightly the fact that Topalov had access to the latest Rybka on its Cluster for a few months leading up leading up to the final."
Daniel Parmet (2010-05-14 10:41:15)
Rybka 4, news, tests & results
you know an interesting thing i've noticed by listening to these post match interviews with Anand...
He is saying he expected Topalov to switch openings alot and not be so persistent. I wonder if Topalov was so persistent because he had Rybka 4 and he knew Anand did not.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-06-06 00:56:52)
New fields in Preferences : Profile
You may now complete your profile by answering a bunch of questions (24 so far) more or less relevant, such as your favorite engines, favorite chess player, favorite chess openings, spoken languages, your personal website and so on... feel free to suggest other questions!
Thibault de Vassal (2010-06-28 20:44:06)
Encyclopedia of gambits
I guess that many of you read the interesting Chessbase article by Kavalek :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6460
The link to the encyclopedia of gambits by Marco Saba was a surprise to me... really interesting, and a huge work!
http://studimonetari.org/edg/
I picked up a few ideas for the next chess thematic tournaments, so there may be the next ones in the future :
Aasum [Van Geet: Hector Gambit] 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 de4 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.f3
Abonyi-Tennison [Reti: Tennison Gambit Accepted] 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 de4 3.Ng5
[KGA: Allgaier Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 h6 6.Nf7
"Anti-Stonewall" [Dutch: Alapin] 1.d4 f5 2.Qd3 d5 3.g4
[Budapest: Alekhine, Balogh Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.de5 Ng4 4.e4 d6
Banzai-Leong [French] 1.e4 e6 2.b4
Batavo [Bird: Batavo Gambit] 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.e4
Beyer c.g. [Blackmar-Diemer: Beyer Countergambit] 1.e4 e5 2.d4 d5
Birmingham [Polish: Birmingham Gambit] 1.b4 c5
Blackburne - I [Scandinavian: 2.exd5] 1.e4 d5 2.ed5 c6
Böhnke [Scandinavian: Böhnke Gambit] 1.e4 d5 2.ed5 e5
Breyer [KGA: Breyer Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Qf3
De Smet [Nimzowitsch Defence: 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5] 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.de5 d6
[Diemer-Duhm Gambit (DDG) vs. Slav/Caro-Kann] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e4
Gaga [King's Gambit Accepted (KGA)] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.g3
Halasz - II [Sicilian: Halasz Gambit] 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cd4 3.f4
Hickmann [English: Anglo-Dutch] 1.c4 f5 2.e4 fe4 3.d3
Hjoerring c.g. [Benko Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.e4
Jerome [Giuoco Piano: Jerome Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bf7
Krejcik [Dutch: Krejcik Gambit] 1.d4 f5 2.g4
Lasa [Open Game: Lopez/Mcleod, Lasa Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.c3 f5
Lasker - III [Bird: From Gambit Accepted] 1.f4 e5 2.fe5 f6
Omega [Indian: Omega Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.e4
Vector [English: Vector] 1.c4 d5 2.cd5 c6
Wheeler [Nimzowitsch Defence: Wheeler Gambit] 1.e4 Nc6 2.b4
Zilbermints - III [Queen's Gambit] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 b5
"Zurigo" [Queen's Pawn Game] 1.d4 d5 2.g4
If you notice more interesting openings, do not hesitate to suggest it here...
Thibault de Vassal (2010-08-03 12:46:54)
Congratulations to "FSF en passant"
Finally here are the final results !!!
"FSF En passant" won this very interesting tournament by 1 point ahead of 2 teams !! The suspense was until the very last games to know the final team ranks.
The fact to note: Yellow Blue warriors finish second while they were actually 3 players in the team, Yura Lemekhov played an amazing tournament (5.5/6 , perf 2456) ... (the last player stopped to play :/)
Thanks to all players, it was lots of fun! I'll try to make the things clearer in the tournaments pages for the next edition...
10 points for : FSF En Passant
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)
9 (tot: 15.5) points for : The knights who say "Ni"
Michael Aigner (2602)
Xavier Pichelin (2577)
Hannes Rada (2559)
Thibault de Vassal (2473)
9 (tot: 13.5) points for : Yellow-Blue Warriors
Iouri Basiliev (2173)
Dmytro Romaniuk (1937)
Ostap Hladky (2176)
Yura Lemehov (2171)
8 points for : The Dark Knights
William Taylor (2140)
Scott Nichols (2089)
Don Groves (1991)
Josef Riha (1989)
4 points for : Happy Pawn
Stephane Legrand (2209)
Garvin Gray (2125)
Daniel Parmet (1961)
Ilmar Cirulis (1805)
2 points for : Our team King
Alexander Blinchevsky
Stanimir Denchev
Benjamin Block
Ranganathan Raman
0 point for : The Ghost Knights
Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden
Ni FSF Dark Happy Blue Ghost King
Aigner 1 = = = = =
Pich 0 = = 1 1 1
Rada = = 1 = 1 =
DeVas = = 1 0 1 1
0 Lehnh = = = = =
1 Koslo = = 1 1 1
= Boehm = 1 = 1 1
= Marku = 1 = 1 1
= = Taylo = = = =
= = Nicho = 1 1 1
= = Grove = 0 1 =
= = Riha 1 0 1 1
= = = Legra = = =
= = = Gray 1 1 1
0 0 = Parmet 0 1 =
0 0 0 Ciruli 0 1 1
= = = = Basili = 1
0 0 0 0 Romani 0 0
= = 1 1 Hladky 1 =
1 = 1 1 Lemekh 1 1
= 1 = = = Khacha =
0 0 0 0 1 Inving 0
0 0 0 0 0 Lecler 0
0 0 0 0 0 Orden 1
= = = = 0 = Blinch
0 0 0 0 1 1 Denchev
= 0 = = = 1 Block
0 0 0 0 0 0 Raman
"Team 1" - "Team 2" : points (score)
"Ni" - "FSF" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Ni" - "YB" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Ni" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"FSF" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"FSF" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"FSF" - "YB" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"FSF" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"FSF" - "King" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "Happy" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Dark" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Dark" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Happy" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Happy" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Happy" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"YB" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (2.5-0.5)
"YB" - "King" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Ghost" - "King" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
Definitely, even if the "Knights who say Ni" team decided before the match to play unusual openings in most games, this tournament shows again that the strength gap between top players and players rated 2150-2300 is not big at all as many of these players tend to reach the 2400 barrier...
Thibault de Vassal (2010-09-17 00:29:38)
Svante Carl von Erichsen on Go WCH #4
As you probably read in the news, Svante Carl von Erichsen won the 4th FICGS Go WCH, beating his challenger Huayong Yang 3-2, Svante Carl wins the Go championship for the 4th time in a row!
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000004
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match & computer Go:
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, congratulations once again for winning
this match against a surprising challenger who started here a few
months ago with a 10 kyu rank, Huayong Yang, now rated 2438 after
scoring 2 points in your 5 games match (which is a great achievement
for sure). What did you think about his play & yours in these games?
Svante Carl - I think that he greatly underestimated his rank initially. As far as
I know, he had not played for a long time and believed that his
ability had therefore deteriorated. I do not think that you can drop
more than one or at most two stones, though -- it is like cycling or
swimming, you never unlearn it. I had the impression that we were
quite evenly matched in summa, but our strengths are in different
aspects of the game; I cannot really put my finger on the difference,
though.
FICGS - After a previous win, you said that you spend a quite long
time to analyze, which probably helps you to reach a higher level
than 2 dan (your EGF rating) compared to OTB play... It looks
obvious to me that correspondence chess moves generally ask for much
more time than Go moves at a high level but I may be wrong, how much
time did you spend on your longest analysis during the match? Do
you remember for which move?
Svante Carl - I usually spend at least a few minutes on each move, except when the
continuation is obvious. I often use more, and if I do not find a
satisfactory move then, I will even postpone the move to another
day, so that I can sleep over it and let my subconcious work on it.
FICGS - Do you watch other games played by your future opponent
before starting your match? Do you think that this is really important
in preparation like it can be in Correspondence chess?
Svante Carl - I sometimes glance over the games in the championship qualification tournament, but I do not try to prepare this way. I do not think that such preparation has any value in Go, especially in correspondence Go,
since you have time during the game to do deep analysis. I usually
try to take each game out of standard fuseki patterns pretty quickly,
anyway. Of course, I know that my opponents in these title matches
are always very tough and demand my utmost respect.
FICGS - Do you still follow the recent developments in computer Go?
What do you think about the latest Go engines? How much time do we
have yet before the best Go players are caught by computers according to you?
Svante Carl - I have the impression that the currently most promising technology
(Monte Carlo/UCT) has the potential to achieve a rank of about 2 or 3
dan (EGF/KGS). I think that the next fundamentally new idea or
breakthrough might add 2 stones, to get to 4 or 5 dan. I do not have
any idea where it might go from that, but I think that it gets always
harder.
What I would find interesting is having more intermediate board sizes.
The best bots are almost on par with the best professionals on 9x9
now. I would propose to try to achieve a similar level on 11x11, then
13x13, then 15x15 etc.. Regarding 9x9, I think that the currently
predominant komi of 7.5 points is too big, and that this has a
negative impact on the experiments because the bots do not play in a
balanced environment. It might be worthwhile to introduce the Taiwan
rule (last move compensation) to get more fine-grained scores.
FICGS - What programs did you use this year to analyze? (just trying, of course it may be part of your secrets ;))
Svante Carl - It is not a secret. I just use an editor, usually EidoGo or CGoban3, to visualize the variations I imagine.
FICGS - Finally, what thoughts would you like to share on your 5
games, that could help us not to miss the best times or to help us to understand the most complex moves...
Svante Carl - I cannot give a detailed commentary, but I can try to summarize my impressions.
I think that Game 5 was quite balanced until move 21, but I think that
the white invasion was a bit ambitious then. Of course, White did not
need to die there, but after moves 32-33 I think that Black had a good
result anyway (move 32 should go out faster in my opinion; note how
E14 helps Black in enclosing White).
In Game 3, I think things got quite difficult for White in the lower
left, but I let him take the initiative by backing off at move 35 (I
should have simply closed off F10 then). White gained control of the
centre as a result, and in the large endgame, I lost too many points there.
In Game 4, I fell behind in the opening through some slow moves (there
was some discussion on the Life-in-19x19 forum about this, see the
link in the comments of that game). In the endgame, Black then lost some points in the centre, so that I was a bit ahead when the game timed out.
In Game 1, I made some bad decisions on the left side, and never
managed to turn things around. I think I was behind by about 5 points in the end.
In Game 2, I think that Black should not have ignored move 24. After
I got quite some territory from my moyo and also reduced his top side, I could play it safe.
I look forward to the games with Olivier Drouot that recently started,
but I also hope that Yang Huayong will re-enter the championship cycle.
Scott Nichols (2010-09-19 00:07:15)
Corr. Chess Maxims
It is precisely our game Daniel which brought up the draw offer maxim idea. To offer a draw every move or two is clearly distracting. Plus it also included the other maxim about rating differences. You were Black, about 80 points lower in rating, so I had the most to lose by accepting any draw offer.
Maybe in the endgame when it is a book draw, either player can offer the draw "once". But our game was barely out of the opening. Of course these are just "general rules of conduct" and each game is different. So I stand by my original ideas.
Daniel Parmet (2010-09-19 00:17:31)
Corr. Chess Maxims
Our game was already a draw by my first draw offer on move 19. I offered a second draw on move 26 and the third and final draw which you accepted on move 38. You achieved zilch from an opening which has been known as a draw for 100 years. I could have offered a draw on move 4 and most people would accept it in that position.
Sorry but you have to prove your rating should be higher by playing real openings and outplaying the other person in them. Just stating well my rating is higher therefore you are never allowed to offer draws!!! is the most absurd logic I have ever heard.
Your own words on accepting the third draw offer were "You're right, this is a complete draw. Sorry for dragging it out."
Scott Nichols (2010-09-19 01:45:45)
Corr. Chess Maxims
I remember that game now, it did end in a draw. And you are right about what I said at the end. But I also remember the repeated draw offers that were rejected each time. You were Black, lower rated and we were barely out of the opening, so it was a distraction. I play OTB chess also and believe me, continued rejected draw offers would get that person a loss for that game. A person shouldn't have to ask someone to please quit doing something irritating, most people get subtle hints. Also, I disagree about "telling a person so", that should be done by the TD or Webmaster. That could be another maxim. "in case of any disagreements, please consult TD."
A "maxim" is just a suggestion, not a "rule". So people, especially newcomers, can know what IS and IS NOT proper during the course of a game.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-10-13 17:25:44)
Lightning time control
Hi Garvin, I'm not favourable to this change for the following reasons:
1) This would be the 2nd change for this time control in a few months...
2) Bullet & lightning would not be different enough.
3) The freestyle time control has its reasons IMO : 30 mins. for the opening/database & key moves analysis, 15 sec. inc because longer would be too long, while the lightning time control is designed for better analysis during the whole game. A 30+15 time control would be great also but it would be one too much :/
Scott Nichols (2010-10-20 20:06:33)
Freestyle Fun
Freestyle tournament is only 11 days away and already it promises to be an exciting event. Hopefully more will join, especially our friend from India, :)
We have an exciting array of players already though...,
Yuriy Perikov-a new player from Russia who has raised his rating almost 100 points in just two games.
David Evans-Last years winner. I am sure he will be looking to repeat. A definite threat.
Uh-Me-I'll be trying, :)
Marcel Jacon-I don't know anything about Marcel, but I'm sure he will be a tough opponent!
Garvin Gray-A longtime player with much experience. He seemed to improve dramatically after his computer went into the "shop" for a week towards the end of our 24 game drawn match. He will have to be watched out for.
Ruben Comes-What can I say? He is a definite favorite in this event. With his powerful openings, middlegame and unerring endings, he will be hard to beat.
Robert Mueller-I don't know Robert, but I hope to one day if I can ever get up to his level. Another strong favorite here. With an 80% win rate against top level competition, how could anybody bet against him!
Jose Moreira-Another strong unknown to me. Very experienced and I am sure a threat.
Thibault de Vassal-Our glorious leader! If his connection can hold out, we all know Thib is as strong as anybody. It would be nice to see him pull this off.
Sebastion Boehme-Don't be fooled by Sebi's relatively low Advanced rating. He is very strong, experienced Freestyle player. Another shaky connection cost him last year. I consider him to be right in with the favorites of this event.
So there it is "so far". Exciting huh?
Hannes Rada (2010-10-21 23:44:57)
ICCF forum closed
That's what I would like to find out, by opening this thread, Thibault :-)
Jimmy Huggins (2010-10-29 14:18:04)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum
well I guess something like 25 days for 30 moves could be possible as only to think that most of the 30 moves could be opening book depending on which opening is choice. Then 10 to 15 days per 20 moves after that. I guess I should follow the time controls here a little closer
Jimmy Huggins (2010-10-29 14:58:17)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum
I would agree with your assignments. I was thinking about 25 days to 30 moves as most of that is possibly opening then 10 to 15 days for 20 moves?
Garvin Gray (2010-10-31 14:41:18)
Creating an opening book
No, I do not except people to give away their opening secrets, but I was wondering.
How does one create an opening book? I have just been changing options in the fritz or rybka books from green to red and vice versa, but I assume that quite a lot of the decent players on here have proper opening books.
What process did you go through to create these books?
Thibault de Vassal (2010-10-31 18:24:57)
Creating an opening book
Well, you may probably enter all your lines in a single game, then use the option that makes a book from it !? (as far as I can remember... definitely I should do it again)
Or maybe you can buy it to Ruben :)
Sebastian Boehme (2010-10-31 20:11:04)
Creating an opening book
Hi Garvin,
Book making ia for example in my case always been a very time-intense and manually tuned process. I never do import any outside games to my book.
Guidelines on how to starting out in creating an opening book you can find (or probably have already found), here:
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=11798
That site got some useful links
General rule of thumb, work on each system one by one. My favourite example: I as white play 1. e4 and Black replies 1....f5, so the Elephant Gambit arises.
Now I want to find good white moves for it, so I enable in my Book allow move adding and check my Correspondence and Playchess Games database for the replies of white. Also I see what major engines think about the moves offered by the database in say 1-2 minute analysis and what these engines themselves gotta offer. This way a reply to the elephant gambit (or maybe more) for move 2 of white can be found.
Also not in any case 1-2 minute analysis will be sufficient. You need to figure this out for yourself.
The less time intensive process: Create a database where you import games filtered by very well chosen criteria (for instance recent games i.e. 2008-2010). Then import the database games into a new empty book.
That's all I know about how it could be done.
Sebi
Garvin Gray (2010-11-07 11:23:10)
rybka 4 opening book
Hello all,
I downloaded the Rybka 4 opening book and have had no end of problems trying to make it work.
I have read the rybka forums on adaptors and how to install, but they make about as much sense to me as a foreign language does.
I have contacted chessok and now am in back and forth emails about this topic and my dis-satisfaction with the products.
Is someone able to explain how to get the rybka 4 opening book to work in aquarium and Fritz 12 in really simple language. No coding please.
Jimmy Huggins (2010-11-07 19:03:11)
rybka 4 opening book
Did you buy the Aquarium Rybka 4 book or just one called Rybka 4 Opening book? If not I maybe able to help. Sent me a PM and I can give you some assistants
Garvin Gray (2010-11-08 09:47:13)
rybka 4 opening book
I bought the Aquarium Rybka 4 book. Big mistake as I do not like Aquarium, but anyways it was my mistake and I am still determined to work in Aquarium how to load the Aquarium opening book.
And I have also had no luck with the adaptor provided. I found the threads on RybkaChess useless as they were too technial for me.
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2010-11-08 16:34:09)
rybka 4 opening book
Hello Mr Gray did you check the info from here: http://aquariumchess.com/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Using+the+Rybka+4+Aquarium+Opening+Book&structure=Technical+info , maybe it helps.
Jimmy Huggins (2010-11-08 16:51:04)
rybka 4 opening book
I sent you a PM that may help you.
Paul Valle (2010-11-12 23:08:30)
Harding's Database
I was very disappointed when recently learned that Harding has discontinued his Corr-Database... just when i planed to buy one....
I was therefore wondering if any one with this database could do a search for me on a unorthodox opening. I need it for an article.
Paul
Thibault de Vassal (2010-12-12 14:38:22)
Who's the favorite in the WBCCC?
That's what I say to myself each time I lose a game after having played a move too fast :) Computers are still really weak in some complex positions (also in the middle game) but for some reasons we trust it... At the same time we always try to play openings that allow such positions, so not everything is lost yet.
The 80's were a great period for correspondence chess indeed. A friend of mine became very strong while playing corr. chess only during these years.
Jai Prakash Singh (2010-12-30 07:48:50)
Chess Course by GM Igor Smirnov
You may get excellent Training courses from GM Igor Smirnov at the link
http://chess-teacher.com/home#oid=1014_5
I recommend "An Endgame Expert", "GM Opening Laboratory" and "How to beat GMs".
Thibault de Vassal (2011-01-30 21:07:31)
Eros on his win in the 4th chess WCH
Eros Riccio kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his win in the 4th FICGS chess WCH, and explained how one particular game influenced another one that he finally won:
- Hi Eros, first of all congratulations for your latest outstanding results at FICGS, you won the Freestyle tournament, now two chess championships in a row... When the privilege of the champion is to defend his title without playing the preliminary tournaments, you are involved in all championship cycles & a few regular tournaments, do you plan to avoid that anyone can even reach the championship final in the future? :-)
Thanks! I must admit that this is really a magic moment for me in chess... if you consider that despite my recent ICCF Grand Master Title, probably I will also soon win my third italian Correspondence Champion Title out of three participations in the Italian Final Tournaments. And now also this huge satisfaction of being the FICGS Champion! I look forward to seeing a new challenger soon, I wonder who he will be, but let me enjoy the next few months for now ;-)
- What are your impressions on the games? Did you have any strategy from the beginning to the end? Finally did it work or was there another factor? (without revealing your secrets, of course :))
The games in the opening were as I expected, all Najdorf Sicilians except one game where I played 1.d4. My goal was to win at least one game, so I tried different aggressive variations as White (6.Bg5, 6.f3, 6.Be3 and 6.h3) with the hope of catching Edward unprepared on at least one of these, but uff, he was very well prepared on each one of them! A curious thing is that my biggest chance of winning happened in a game where I had the Black pieces! So Edward had to take some risks in one of his games where he had Black (the games where he had White were already finished or all very drawish) he was forced to avoid an easy draw he had (the 6.h3 game) and eventually he lost that game. Happy of having reached my goal of winning at least one game, I accepted his draw offer in that other game (6.f3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.Be3 Be7 9.Be2) where I had good winning chances.
- You probably noticed, like many correspondence chess players, that the hardware still fastly improves while chess engines are continuously getting stronger, particularly since that "supposed" clones of Rybka (some may be even stronger than Rybka herself) appeared in the race. Do you think that the rate of draws will be so high soon that it may definitely kill correspondence chess? Do you have any opinion on these new engines?
I think that despite the big improvement of Hardwares and engines, we are still very far (and we will still be in the next 5 years, hopefully) from a situation where all the games will most probably end in a draw. So I think we can enjoy correspondence chess for many more years in the future, even if of course the Draw percentage at the highest levels will be higher and higher.
- I remember that you were surprised to win your match against Alberto in the Candidates Final of the 5th cycle (the reason why you do not even have to defend your title this time), the WCH rules (particularly the co-existence of the round-robin tournament & knockout tournament) are obviously not well understood by all players, what do you think about this system and the tie in 8 games matches? Are there changes you'd like to see in the future?
Yes, I really was! We were both convinced that with all draws, the higher rated player would have won (Alberto was higher rated than me in that match). Anyway it was our fault, as we didn't read the rules carefully. I am not sure what changes could be done in the future... maybe this is anyway the best setup, no new ideas are coming to my mind right now.
- Do you have a few more words for Edward after these nice games? Maybe also for your future opponents? :)
It was a real pleasure for me to play him, not only for the interesting games we played, but also for the friendly chats we had during the exchanges of the moves. I hope to play him again in the future for a rematch.
- Thanks for your answers and congratulations again!
Welcome, and thanks ;-)
_________
It is very interesting to see that a even a player like Eros prefered to minimize the risks (avoiding mouse drops or whatever) as much as possible by accepting a draw in a game where he had winning chances. Correspondence chess is definitely not all about chess, that's probably the lesson.
Also it is reassuring to read that correspondence chess is NOT dead yet, nor soon :)
Paul Valle (2011-02-03 01:27:33)
Creating an Opening book
Hi guys,
a couple of chessbase/rybka questions that I hope you can help me with:
-how do you create a completely new opening book?
-How do you start en engine tournament from a set opening position?
Paul
Scott Nichols (2011-02-04 00:27:30)
Creating an Opening book
You click on "file" and then "new" and then "opening book". Name the book whatever you want. Then import games or books into by clicking on analysis, opening book, import games.
Part 2, I don't think there is a way, :)
Paul Valle (2011-02-04 01:48:42)
Creating an Opening book
nice! thx Scott
Josef Riha (2011-02-04 08:21:04)
Creating an Opening book
Click on engine-tab and then enginematch. A dialogue appears. Chose engines you like and don't activate any book. Then click on button Opening DB and chose the one you want. This DB contains only opening moves.
You can create this by entering moves only with few opening moves and save in a DB you want.
For more info click the help-button.
Scott Nichols (2011-02-04 18:04:19)
Creating an Opening book
I never thought of it that way Josef, I guess I knew it would be possible, just never went that far. Now, what you said opens up a lot of possibilities, thanks Josef! :)
Josef Riha (2011-02-04 18:11:29)
Creating an Opening book
No matter, Scott :-)
Josef Riha (2011-02-04 22:37:18)
Creating an Opening book
A little correction: Click on tournament not on enginematch!
Paul Valle (2011-02-08 01:06:02)
Creating an Opening book
Thx Josef!
Jimmy Huggins (2011-02-12 04:18:32)
WBCCC Round 1 Update
This is the first update for the WBCCC, I guess some of you have been following some of the games there. There have been a lot of interesting games and some surprises a lot the way. As I'm reporting on the FICGS forum I will make most of this about the FICGS side. Here are some results so far and starting at the top boards.
B2 Uly(Vytron) vs Gino Figlio- Gino does a good job of defending a ..2.e6 line of the Sicilian. And both players agree to a draw after 34 moves.
B4 Daniel Parmet vs Sebastian Boehme- This was a Poison Pawn line of the Sicilian. The game ended before it even got out of book. A short draw, I think both people agreed that it was a good result for each player.
B6- Matt O'Brein vs Omprakash- A surprise if only for how short the game was. Matt shows his tactual muscles when his higher rated opponent much of had and oversight in this defense. As 23.g6! h6 24.Bxh6! and it looks like black has burned his bridges in this game.
B8-Stephanie vs Ruben Comes- This maybe the biggest surprise in round at least in terms of the bigger name on the FICGS side. Stephanie what looks to be a prefect opening all of the B90 lines and everyone agrees 32.Bc3! to be a new novelty and a very good one at that. Stephanie went on to grind Ruben down to a lost endgame. I very interesting game that has be to be seen to believe, I guess this going to show, that not all B90 lines lend to draws.
B13-Scott Nichols vs indrajit_sg- This was a long fought draw. When looking at the game early I thought white may have some chance to take advantage of his open g-file. But not a lot materialize later in the endgame(form the engines point of view).
B14-donkasand vs David Evans- David enter into dangerous territory with this B90 line. At move 19 he played ..Rb8 which looks to be a move to get out of book, because the other moves didn't look so good. Credit to David for finding a draw line in this game. Its another game with a look.
Kamesh Nookala vs Jimmy Huggins- What can I say I played an experimental opening and it backfired :) A well played game by Kamesh. Thanks for the chance to have a good fight with you.
Now on the 2nd set of games(Each player has 2 games in each round)
B3 Ramil Germanes vs Moz- Ramil here played a safe line in the B90 form the white side. So this looked like and easy draw.
B4 Sebastian Boehme vs Uly(Vytron)- Vytron plays and interesting side line of the Crao-Kann and play was very shape, but I got the feeling black played to ambitiously and had the worse of the position. He found a good defensive sacrifice and the good was hold to a draw. I think Sebi had winning chances, but I will have to look over the game to come up with an idea on that one. Anyway a great game to look over.
Ruben Comes vs Matthew O'Berin- Maybe the sharpest and most ambitious game in round 1. This goes in the the B97 lines, but Ruben goes for the Qf3 side line and produces a complex position after Rd3. I love this game so much I want to post the link again for everyone to please watch this game and post a comment about it.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20213
B13 Fulcrum2000 vs Scott Nichols- Scott tries his luck to be ambitious and backfires with his Bh4 idea. Even when looking at the game. I was thinking it to be a good idea, but as it turns out. It goes as just losing a tempo. I thought this was one of the more instructive games of the round. I liked the way white played the endgame.
And the last result I have for the round for the FICGS players is
B17-indrajit_sg vs Kamesh Nookala- This was an interesting draw were white plays and early sideline in the Sicilian that tends to be drawish unless black forces the play. Another well played game by both sides.
I just want to say there are a lot of games one should look at. As more results come in on the FICGS side I will posted. In my opinion one should follow Wayne's games I have enjoyed his play so far. He had to comeback some in his wild game with black vs deka, but I get the feeling this game will ended in a draw. I would also follow the underrated Matt O'Berin in games to come. He has proven to be a great player so far.
Thibault de Vassal (2011-03-15 14:08:19)
ChessVibes openings (get 10 issues free)
For correspondence chess fans who like to follow the openings theory, I just received an interesting offer from ChessVibes that I copy/paste here:
__________
Dear correspondence chess lovers,
First, we'd like to thank the administrator of this forum for giving us the opportunity to showcase our product which is especially interesting for this audience, we think. So, here we go:
Subscribe to ChessVibes Openings and get ten issues for free!
Which openings are hot in top level chess? Which are not? Receive the latest opening novelties right in your mailbox with ChessVibes Openings, a weekly PDF magazine (+ PGN!) covering the latest openings news, co-authored by International Masters Merijn van Delft and Robert Ris and published by ChessVibes since January 2009. If you subscribe and mention 'ficgs' in an email to us, you'll receive the last ten issues for free!
What is it?
Every issue consists of a PDF Magazine and the accompanying PGN file. The PDF consists of four pages (A4 size) with the following contents:
- What’s hot? A round-up of this week’s important opening developments, with statistics about the frequence and score of the week’s most important opening novelty (page 1)
- What’s not? Which openings are not recommended at the moment, according to the top players? And why not? (page 1)
Game of the week Each week you’ll find the theoretically most important game analysed by our two IMs, with a detailed survey of the opening phase (page 2).
- This week’s harvest Four more new important opening ideas from this week (page 3) revealed and described with explanation of the opening and early middlegame (page 3).
- It’s Your Move An interactive element: every week two exercises, of which the solutions/explanations will follow one week later. This will improve your understanding of certain opening, middlegame or even endgame themes even further.
Which opening variations have been discussed so far?
You can download an index in PDF here.
http://www.chessvibes.com/plaatjes/cvo/CVO_index_114.pdf
More info & subscribe: You can find more information about ChessVibes Openings, and subscribe, at:
http://www.chessvibes.com/openings/
By subscribing you would join several GMs and IMs, who have responded very positively to our relatively new chess magazine!
Best regards,
Peter Doggers
Editor-in-chief,
ChessVibes
P.S.
If you subscribe and mention 'ficgs' in an email to us at info {at} chessvibes.com, you'll receive the last ten issues for free!
Thibault de Vassal (2011-03-24 15:36:57)
5th Go WCH, analysis by SC. von Erichsen
Svante Carl von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion... for the 5th time! After his win in the match that opposed him to Olivier Drouot, here are his analysis on the games:
_______________________
- Congratulations for this 5th win in the FICGS Go championship! By seeing the score you give less and less chances to your opponents who seem stronger each time though... Several games may look quite mysterious to weaker players. What happened during these games?
- Svante Carl von Erichsen:
Hi!
I do not have the impression that my opponents have less and less
chances. I also make many mistakes, and was in a clearly bad position
in at least one game. Olivier made many very unusual moves in the
opening, which were difficult to handle in a calm manner.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47578
In game 3 (47578), this is apparent at move 18. White has gone for a
very centre-oriented game, while Black has made more direct profit.
It is difficult to say who got the better deal. Move 18 itself is
very unusual, and I am not sure whether the result was satisfactory
for me. I think that moves 41 and 43 were important, as stabilizing
the group in the centre takes priority when the centre is dominated by
White like this. At move 53, it is clear that Black needs to stabilize
the top group, but D18 seems more important in retrospect. Move 62 is
a bit odd---I think that living with S16 instead would be better. I
think that Black got a territorial advantage here. Since White got
additional central strength, Black turned to make his central group
safe again, which should be enough to win now. White 94 tries to
shake up things again, but getting separated on the lower side makes
it very hard for him.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47580
In game 5 (47580), Olivier chose a very unusual move again at move 8.
I think that the outcome until move 17 favours Black, however. At
move 36, it looks like Black will have to live in the corner, but the
white enclosure does have its holes. Alas, White's response to the
forcing move at P10 was a severe blunder, as Black can take back the
right side. Move 55 was big, but I had not anticipated that the fight
after move 56 would be so hard for me. I think that after move 93,
White put too much emphasis on hollowing out what once seemed like
prospective black territory. The ponnuki in the centre was worth much
more than what White made on the second line. With that strength,
reducing the white framework on the left was no question. I think
that White then tried too hard in the centre.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47576
Game 1 (47576) was characterized by a big fight starting from the
joseki in the lower right corner. I guess that a stronger player
could point out several mistakes by both sides. It resulted in a big
exchange, where quite some aji remained in both positions. Move 90 is
an unusual idea, it would be more normal to extend on the side. 91
and 95 were intended as forcing moves to give some support to the top
side. I think that Black has good prospects after move 99 and
especially after 113. White started an interesting invasion on the
left then, which was however stopped by the blunder at 138.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47579
Game 4 (47579) again featured some unusual moves in the opening,
namely moves 7 and 9. I think that immediately plunging through at 10
was not good. It was quite difficult for me to keep territorial
balance afterwards. I think that my invasion at the top was
premature, but it seemed like I could not keep up without it. The
attack at L13 was severe. I got lucky that Black kept back a bit, so
that I could get the cut at E7, which was more important than the six
stones around N13. It would have been possible to save them at move
98, but at the cost of letting Black break through L10. Sacrificing
them allowed me to cement the centre to put me comfortably ahead. L9
was then the start of a desperate attempt to reduce the centre. I was
quite sure that I could capture it, even though simply connecting
would most likely have been enough. I then made a big blunder again
with move 130 (I had to double hane), allowing a game-deciding ko.
Black had a lot of threats against the lower right corner, and I think
that this exchange would have put him ahead. However, he thought he
had an internal threat at D10, which I think was not one, as there was
no additional eye in the centre yet.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47577
In game 2 (47577), he got me in the opening with another of his
experiments (move 7). I think that I could have been satisfied if I
simply played the keima to P2 at move 14. However, I activated the
central stone instead, which led to Black getting solid positions on
both sides, while I lived small in the corner and struggled in the
centre. I then succeeded in making him overconcentrated on the lower
side, but at the expense of a quite large corner and not making many
points myself. Move 80 tries to stir things up more. I think that if
Black had secured O13 with move 97, the game would have been over.
However, things only began to look good for White after move 127,
which had to be played at R8 (it is sente against the middle group
then, so Black can live with S5). It is still not over, however, as
White has two weak groups to take care of. The lower side group can
live locally with a ko at G1, but the other group has to struggle---it
would be nice to find a clean sacrifice plan here, because it is hard
for the two groups not to compete for eye space. This was the last
game to end, and my opponent seems to have chosen to resign all when
he did not see a way to win the overall match anymore.
All in all, these were very interesting games where I think I learnt a
lot. I wish to thank my opponent, who played very well.
Thanks!
Svante
Scott Nichols (2016-05-30 18:42:28)
Random position from Traxler with Bxf7+
The "Evans" is my favorite opening of all time, :)
Jimmy Huggins (2011-04-29 11:23:50)
WBCCC-New stuff and Round 2 Update
Hello everyone! Its been a while since the last time I have updated. I would like to talk about recent happening. Then I will give an update on the games for this round.
I have had some talks with a few players. And I would like to announce that starting next year there will be more prizes. Besides the money prize next year. I haven't decide yet how many of these I will have yet. And its possible there could be more ideas to come by. Please also know that there will be money prizes still this is just something on also to add to the interests.
1.Subscriptions to annotated games. For example Chess Today, Chessvibes, chesspublishing.com and Opening Master. There can be others, these are just examples. If you have other good ideas here please post. Most likely this will be a combined prize here.
2.Rental time on the new Rybka Cluster- Not sure how exactly this one would work. It could be a lot different in a years time for the Rybka Cluster. But I think this would have some interests.
3.Hardware- Again not sure how I would do this. But I would probably have it as a middle to high end setup for a prize. Hardware is always a every changing process its hard to know what is good at that time.
Any other suggests are welcome. Probably the best realistic prize is the first one. If I have multiple prizes like this. The way it would probably play out is like a lottery system. Start with the winner and work your way down. On what they want and go 2nd, 3rd etc...
The last prize to talk about.(And maybe the best) I have had talks with the people of chesspublishing.com and next year. Whatever game is voted for "best game of the round". Will have there game analyzed, by one of the titled players on that site and have the game published. I will try and have it open to everyone that follows the games for the WBCCC.
The next thing of interest for next year. Is that we will have a conditional move system in place. It was thought in a blitz setting to be a great asset to have. For example if your opponent is in a different time zone than you and the next move to you would be a force move. It would be nice to have this option to make the forced play. Without having to say up late at night to make this obvious move. This is all the new stuff. Round 2 Update to come.
Jimmy Huggins (2011-04-29 14:45:26)
WBCCC-New stuff and Round 2 Update
The last round was very exciting! And this round has had some great games as well. To speak of there is just 4 games left. Here is the report of the most important games this round.
Starting at the top boards. We have have...
B1-Loboestepario (Gino Figilo) vs CumnorChessClub (Kevin E.Plant)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21163-
This game followed a Catalan. Gino makes ambitious choice to go with 5.Nbd2! I gave this move a ! Not because of its theoretical standing. But because it will lead to a position were white will give up a whole pawn for rapid development. Never the less, black is equal to the task and managers to hold on to the pawn for most of the game and keep the game balanced. With my human eyes, I thought for sure white had an advantage! After move 20.Be4, It looks like white has 2 racking bishops. While black has one black locked in! But in depth analysis shows, that black can hold on. And shows great defensive technique. Down the stretch. Well played by Gino and Kevin. On of my favorite games to follow.
B3-Mark Eldridge vs David Evans
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21165-
David has gotten tested in both his black games in this tournament. And this game was no different. We had another B90 line in this game. And ...8.h5 was used. This is becoming a common line in this tournament. Mark's treatment on the white side was great! I think his future opponents will think twice before trying this line again. At move 22, the game reaches the sharpest point. After move 22.fxe5! I thought that Mark had a chance vs David. But David founds some good moves to exchanges pieces and hold for a draw. The best of which was the combo of ...33.Rf3 and ...36.Rxg3! This was a nice find by him. Great job to David and Mark! I look forward to seeing both these players again.
B4-Stephanie vs Fulcrum2000
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21166-
I would normally just post FICGS member games here. But this maybe one of the top 2 or 3 most important games of this round. In what turns out to be the most exciting game of the round IMO. White has shown that they are quite good in the opening phase. At move 18 they choose 18.b3 which was suggested as being the novelty move. White gets a very strong game and after a king tour to capture the pawn. It looked like a win for sure!, but it seems a mistake was made at move 38. Instead of 38.Qc1!? the move 38.Qe8! seems to be a near winner. I thoughts on why this move was missed is because, White was in time trouble in both games. I have to believe this was a favor. As we speak Stephanie is close to defeat in the other game that I will talk about shortly. I would watch her for the reminded of the tournament. I think they will learn form this experience and be even stronger going future. Well done by both players.
B5-NATIONAL12 vs Kamesh
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21167
Two of my good friends battling here. This was a B90 battle. The novelty move was the straight forward looking 27.h4, but after some exchanges. White has to settled for equality. A good match to follow, the one other note made was this was a line pioneered by Eros Riccio.
B7-Wayne Lowrance vs tomski1981
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21169-
Wayne plays a good line vs the french vs tomski. In fact by the database expert, it was in a 100% win line!! But after the queens come off the board. It burns out to a quiet draw. Wayne has had good opening results, but has yet to get in the winners column. I have faith that Wayne will win a game very soon. Good game to both in this one.
B8-Uly vs indrajit_sg
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21170-
This was a nice game to follow. A french defense was chosen. The point in which it gets interest is the choice to play 19.bxc3!? Which leads to 21.Nh6+!? I loves this sires of moves! 27.Rh3! was also a good move here. But its seems black has just enough resources to hold the balance. ..54.Bxg6! was a good finally touch. Well played by both players.
B9-Balabachi(William Fuller) vs Sebastian Boehme
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21171
What was talked about as a drawish Ruy position. I found to be quite a game with all the early fireworks. I also liked the material imbalance in this game. Sebi has a rep of being very difficult to beat with the black pieces. This helps when you have the Ruy and the Posion pawn line of the Sicilian. As two of your best weapons. ;)
B10-Schachmatt (Matt O'Brein) vs Weirwindle
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21172-
This was an interesting Richter-Rauzer game. 15.Qf4 was the novelty move, Form there it got crazy. 21.Nb3 seems to invite a pawn race. Which in the end white loses. This was a tough game for white. I think he should have been able to hold it. But it was still a good game to follow.
B11-donkasand vs Ruben Comes
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21173
This was a nice positional game by Mike (Donkasand), This was a 6.h3 Sicilian. And we get the usually good defense here. ..7.h5 White gets great positional pressure for the whole game and even gets a pawn, but Ruben wholes for a draw.
B12-natmaku vs ralunger (Ramil Germanes)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21174
This game was a Petroff with 5.Nc3. This kind of move gives white rapid development. Its seems black equalize pretty quickly. And on move 21 a draw was agreed on.
B13-Scott Nichols vs Omprakash
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21175
This was an interesting King's Gambit game. I think Scott didn't study his opponents rep. :) The King's Gambit is Om's specialty. So this was an easy draw for black.
B14-Keoki010 (George Clement) vs deka
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21176-
In this game black returns to his pet line of the Sicilian with 2.a6(Which he played in the last round) I believe this is called the O'Kelly variation. This time around he goes for ..7.Qb6 which looks a little better than ..7.Bb5!? A draw probably should have been possible, but George was able to grid out a win. Well played by both players.
B15-parmetd (Daniel Parmet)vs SpiderG (Peter Marriott)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21177
This was a King Indian by black. And white does a good job of out playing his opponent in this game. Unfortunately it seems Peter has gotten busy in his life. This game was decide by time.
B16-Banned for Life vs TheHug(Jimmy Huggins)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21178
I face off against Alan who has the white pieces. And is consider to be one of the best players when playing 1.b3. It was a difficult game for me as I decide before hand to play a dangerous line. Needless to say I lose this game after a few small mistakes on my part. I am founding that all the players in the WBCCC are good, I maybe better off being a commentator lol, but no one would have that.
This was the first set of games.
Here is the 2nd game of the 2nd round in the next post.
Jimmy Huggins (2011-04-29 18:36:20)
WBCCC-New stuff and Round 2 Update
B1-CumnorChessClub (Kevin E.Plant) vs Moz
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21180
Kevin makes an interesting choice here with 2.a4!? vs the Silicon Defense. Not exactly sure what he wanted out of the opening. I can only guess he wanted to mix it up here. Anyway, black equalizes fairly quickly and is better. But after 18.a5! He finds the best way to equalize and both agree to a draw.
B2-jitan vs Loboestepario (Gino Figilo)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21181-
The somewhat unknown Jitan has had a good tournament. And is given his ICCF SM opponent all he can handle. In a game that is still going. Gino is down a pawn, but it appears to be a draw and I would guess the game is about to finish. This was an interesting approach by Gino who gets in b5 and h5 very early in this game. And Jitan plays the most naturally looking sac. 13.Nbxd5! it looked like for a long time Gino was in trouble, but he has found enough resources IMO. A well played game by both players.
B3-Fulcrum2000 vs Mark Eldridge
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21182
This was a nice French game to watch. The novelty move was ..11.Na5, OTB I would like white in this game and I had a feeling that white possibly could have risked an attack, but this game came down to endgame play and White was able to outplay black in the end.
B4-Kamesh vs Stephanie
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21183-
In my opinion this is the most important game the round and it is reaching its fianlly stages. I believe Stephanie to be one of the top players in this event. She has been doing well, but Kam has played the near perfect opening and got her in trouble. If you remember my previous post you remember I talk about Stephanie was in time trouble. Which has not help the cause. The one move I enjoyed the most so far in this game was 36.Ra5!, this was a nice exchange sac. And its given Kam nice pass pawns on the Queen-side. I would guess this game will be over soon. It has been a nice game to watch.
B5-David Evans vs National12
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21184
A battle of the English Countryman here. :) This was the Open Defense of the Ruy. Form the comments I got, it seems that the opening was played about as perfectly as you can get. David posed some problems to Paul(National12), but it ends in a fairly easy draw. One finally note ..10.d4 IMO is a very difficult move to beat.
B6-ppipper vs jitan
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21168-
This is one of the finally 4 games still playing. What looks like to be a draw here. The white black has been dancing for a few moves now, but blacks back rank is weak. That equals a drawish game. :)
This game started out form B90 and so has a ton of theory.
B7-indrajit_sg vs Wayne Lowrance
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21186
I fairly quiet B90 game. I don't think white got much out of the opening. Well played by Wayne here.
B8-tomski1981 vs Uly
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21187
A battle of good friends here. IMO I thought white played the this Queens pawn opening passively. And so we had an early draw at move 26.
B9-Sebastian Boehme vs Schachmatt (Matt O'Brein)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21188-
This is one of the 4 last games. And I have to say its been a good game. We had an interesting Sicilian position. I had thought black was in trouble. But after he tripled up on the d-file. Then got massive exchanges. He looks like its headed toward a draw.
B10-Weirwindle vs donkasand
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21189-
This was a nice positional Sicilian game. Although it ends in a draw. Its a must see game! Watching the drawing combo at the end is very beautiful. It starts with ..27.e4! and you can watch it form there.
B11-Ruben Comes vs Balabachi(William Fuller)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21190
Ruben opened up this rep with 3.h3!? and we ended up with a closed type of Sicilian. But his opponent stayed strong. Though out the game. Even if it looked like Ruben had some pressure. In the finally position.
B12-ralunger (Ramil Germanes) vs keoki010 (George Clement)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21191-
This game saw the Exchange variation in the Queen's gambit. It has a high rate rate. But to Ramil credit he manage to give George a couple of weak pawns in the endgame, but not enough for any real advantage.
B13-Omparakash vs natmaku
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21193-
I would have hoped for more in this game. As I'm a lover of the 6.Bc4 (Sozin) Sicilian. After 14.e5!? this forces unneeded exchanges. After which, the game looked like a draw. And that is how it ended.
B14-deka vs Scott Nichols
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21194
Usually the Exchange Slav is pretty drawish. And this game was no different. But both players did try to mount some kind of advance. Both had good posts on each others side of the board. But a drawish opening is a drawish opening.
B15-TheHug (Jimmy Huggins) vs parmentd
(Daniel Parmet)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21195
I tried my luck in an opening that was not something with e4. And it didn't go as well I had hoped, Daniel was able to get a equal position fairly quickly. In my try at making new theory in a very uncommon line vs the King's Indian Defense.
And finally we have this last game.
B16-SpiderG (Peter Marriott) vs Banned for Life
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21196
This would have promised to be a nice Larson Attack game. By alas Peter timed out in this game as well. I would have loved to seen this attacking game with both sides castled on opposite sides.
Well that would do it for my reports for this round. This was a great round, and the next promises to be great as well. I will post info for the next round after the last game is over with.
Any feedback is welcome!
Jimmy Huggins (2011-05-15 13:34:12)
WBCCC Round 3 links and more
After 2 rounds FICGS has 5 of the top 10 places in the standings in the WBCCC 1. With Kevin #1 and Kamesh #4 at the top with 3 points and Gino #6, David #7, and Sebi #10. Well Rybka Forum has 4 of the top 10. Fulcrum2000 #2, ppipper #3, WeirwindleX #8, National12 #9.
Many of these players are facing off against each other. Here are just a few games you that are must watch for this round.
Banned for Life vs Ruben Comes- Banned for Life (Alan) is one of the best with 1.b3. It should be interesting to see how Ruben combats this expert with the Larson System.
Sebastian Boehme vs David Evans- These two have crossed paths before on the freestyle field before. I took great interest in this match because Sebi has 1 on the highest winning % with the white pieces in the field and hasn't last a white game on FICGS. That I have seen. I can bet on some fireworks in this game.
Kamesh vs ppipper- Kam put on a good show with the white pieces vs one of the toughest opponents in the field (with my human eyes) and ppipper has done great with the black pieces. With both of his wins coming with the black pieces! O_o Should be fun :)
jitan vs Sebastian Boehme- Jitan is showing to be one of the top tier players in this event. I truly enjoy the tactical opening he played in his only win in the tournament so far in round 1 vs George. And gave Gino all he could handle in Round 2 (With my human eyes again) :)
A lot of the other games speak for themselves. Also keep on eye on Board 1 with Kevin. :)
Jai Prakash Singh (2011-08-02 05:12:20)
A strong Opening Surprise
hi friends,
now watch an original new video analysis by GM Igor Smirnov
A Strong Opening Surprise by White 1.b3 (Part 2-All Black replies except e5)
at http://chessthinkingsystems.blogspot.com/
Thibault de Vassal (2011-08-02 15:04:21)
A strong Opening Surprise
Could be an interesting future thematic tournament...
Thibault de Vassal (2012-02-04 14:54:47)
From Gambit Thematic Tournament
Let's go for the Lasa gambit (1.e4 e5 2.c3 f5) :) we'll try a more classical opening after that
Costantino Proietti (2012-02-08 22:24:03)
annotated games
I don't see annotated games in Wikichess, but just an opening database with few annotations about early moves.
Garvin Gray (2012-03-30 08:30:05)
Thematic request- Sicilian Dragon
I would like to request a SD Yugoslav Attack thematic.
I have found that this opening is rarely played on here, especially compared to its Najdorf and Schev cousins.
The starting position would be:
r1bq1rk1/pp2ppbp/2np1np1/8/3NP3/2N1BP2/PPPQ2PP/R3KB1R w KQ
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O 8. Qd2 Nc6
Don Groves (2012-04-12 12:34:37)
King's Gambit solved!
How long will it take to do the same for other popular openings? Will Chess survive or gradually become a relic of times past?
With that much computing power (and no end of advances in sight), will a human ever win a another game against the best computer?
Don Groves (2012-04-19 01:38:09)
Slow tournament entries
@ Michael: You got that right! Not only losing interest but also losing track of what your plan was after weeks of waiting for your opponent to move.
I agree with Garvin that our standard time controls are too long. Another problem is that some players have so many games running simultaneously that they can't keep up. I've noticed two different kinds of these players:
(1) Some players will ignore their new games until they've finished older ones. Thus they don't move at all in new games until they are forced to by the clock.
(2) Others will ignore their older games to play the new ones (openings are fun) and return to the older games only when their clock demands it.
In either case, this kind of behavior is what leads to games lasting 6 months to a year in some cases.
Alvin Alcala (2013-04-02 17:46:55)
!!! The Next world chess Champion !!!
Anand. Experience + Good opening preparation. Maybe in next WCCC cycle Magnus will prevail.
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.
Thibault de Vassal (2013-05-07 13:17:57)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH
As you may know, Eros Riccio won the 8th FICGS chess championship by beating Jeroen Van Assche (who remains undeafeated though, he did not lose a single chess game at FICGS yet) in the candidates final, preventing him to play Eros again in the final.
Eros kindly accepted to answer a few questions:
- Hello Eros. First of all, congratulations for winning this 8th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, you did not even have to play the 12 games match to defend your title as you won the qualifying tournament. In these conditions, the challenge was really tough for Jeroen Van Assche, in despite of his prodigious chess. He had to beat you consecutively in the candidates final (8 games match), then in the final (12 games match). How did things go in this candidates final?
Eros: Hi Thibault, thanks again! I was also worried to have to play a very strong player like Van Assche, but fortunately I had again the advantage that all draws were enough to win, and so my strategy was again not to take risks in all my games. As White it was easy... and surprisingly also as Black. The only game where I had to be more careful than others was this one: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qf3 h6 8.Be3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.Qg3 b5 11.a3 Rb8. Here Jeroen surprised me with an interesting novelty, 12.Kb1. The two times I had played this position I was White against Gueci and Kruse, and in both games I continued with 12.Bxb5 but couldn't get more than a draw. The idea of 12.Kb1 is to sacrifice a Pawn for the initiative after 12...b4 13.axb4 Rxb4 14.Nb3 Nxe4. The White Bishops are very strong after 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Bd3 Ra4 17.Bd4 and fully compensate the Pawn less. Anyway I managed to defend, and when I was finally able to trade the Queens we agreed for the Draw.
- You also won the ICCF Umansky Memorial a few weeks ago, the italian correspondence chess championship (again) as well, obviously you played numerous games last year, what do you plan for the next months? By the way, Jeroen already qualified for the candidates final of the 9th cycle, meaning that he may play you in the final match next year if you defend your title again, is there a chance that we can see a revenge?
Eros: Yes, like in the past, also last year I have played a lot of games... anyway for the future I am planning to reduce my games a lot. At the moment, except a few games in minor tournaments, I am only playing for the italian colors at the Olympiads and European Championship, for ICCF. I didn't register for the new Italian Championship this time... I prefer to wait that another individual top ICCF Tournament starts. And of course I am also waiting to meet my next challenger for the FICGS Final! Maybe it will be Van Assche again, we have to see if he beats his opponent in the semifinal (actually next candidates final).
- It looks like a few chess engines reached a certain maturity, I mean algorithms. As a consequence, the computer speed may become the major evolution factor during the next years, that is generally slower than the program's improvements (but the future may have surprises, of course). What do you expect from the computer chess world in the next few years and its impact on correspondence chess?
Eros: As I have already said in a previous interview, being chess probably a draw with perfect play, the more engines get stronger, the more draws we will see. That's quite obvious.
- You probably do not play chess over the board so often, yet you have a quite good ELO! (about 2200, while many correspondence chess masters are rated below 2000 or not rated at all) By the way, I can certify that you are a strong blitz player after we met a few years ago. Do you still play tournaments?
Eros: I am not playing otb chess for a few years, my peak was 22... and a few points, I don't remember exactly. One of the main reasons why I stopped is because later, when analyzing my games with an engine... every time I got frustrated a lot seeing all the blunders I was making.
- Do you estimate that playing OTB chess is good to improve at correspondence chess?
Eros: Yes, it's useful especially if you develop a strategical style, then also in your corr. games you can see more easily "long-term-strategy" plans, which is still the "weakest strenght" in all engines.
- Do you feel that you're still improving at correspondence chess? If yes, is it mainly a question of opening book or something else?
Eros: Improving at corr. chess... hmm... I will surprise you with my thought about this matter! I think I can evaluate my strenght according to the speed of the computer I am analyzing my games with. When I bought this computer, 3 years ago, I felt like I could beat the corr. World Champion. Now... as my computer is becoming older and older, I feel like my play is getting weaker each day it passes. So my answer is that I am still getting worse at corr. chess, not improving.
Garvin Gray (2013-05-10 04:42:58)
Thematic tournaments?
I think one idea that could be worth exploring with these thematics is to set up some kind of opening position that is topical, or could help to explore a bit more.
I think just saying lets have a french, or sicilian does not mean much as players get them in their normal games.
These thematics should have some goal more than just more games, like contributing to expanding opening theory.
Some kind of endgame thematic could be worth exploring as well.
This being said, I do fear that we could have too many options, so playing resources are spread too thin and very few can get regular corro games.
Attila Ba (2013-05-11 16:56:56)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH
Do you ever overrule the engine? ( I mean, have you ever made a move which was considered inferior by the engine. )
Are you willing to make moves suggested by opening books even if there valued less then optimal by the engine?
Eros Riccio (2013-05-11 17:32:04)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH
Attila,
sometimes it happens that I play a move that is not the first suggestion of the (supposed) best engine. Anyway I usually use more than one engine for analysis and it may happen that they all suggest different best moves, so it's not always easy to say what is a best move, also because even if you analyze with one engine only it may change his best move if you give it more thinking time.
Anyway it happens very rarely that I play a move which is not in the top 3 houdini suggested moves.
As for the second question, yes, I would trust (not always of course) a good opening book, as if the book has a good score with that move it means that it contains games which led to wins. It also depends on the quality of those games, but a good quality book should contain high-level games, so why not trust it?
Jeroen Van Assche (2013-05-21 22:16:19)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH
Garvin, to the far right of the address bar, maybe a shield is displayed. Click on it and then click Load unsave script.
To Eros, congrats again. I definitely need to improve my opening play if I ever want to beat you.
Ilmars Cirulis (2013-07-29 15:47:14)
Gossip about Evans gambit
Here's nice Evans game, where I played with white (at the end I made mistake and resigned):
(From http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=25194;pg=2 )
Anyone else want to share his Evans gambit CC games?
Thibault de Vassal (2013-07-30 23:32:50)
Gossip about Evans gambit
You're the only one to play those mad openings Ilmars :p
Ilmars Cirulis (2013-07-31 12:41:09)
Thematic tournaments?
Dann Corbit (2013-07-31 20:22:59)
Thematic tournaments?
It takes guts to play that opening as white, because it looks like a serious disadvantage to me. Of course I like the Orangutan, which is theoretically weak for white as well. I will examine game 2032 to see how it came out
Philip Roe (2013-10-03 21:01:42)
Tablebases and no-engines tournaments
Bogoljub,
When you enter the tournament by clicking on the waiting list, you are told that "chess engines, databases and opening books are strictly forbidden". I guess the idea is to reproduce OTB conditions as closely as possible.
Lazaro Munoz (2013-10-14 15:43:45)
Tablebases and no-engines tournaments
But most endgame books (I assume books are allowed) these days use tablebase results, for that matter so do many opening books on computer analysis results.
Peter W. Anderson (2014-07-13 10:54:56)
FICGS WCh results summary updated
I have given the question of the format of the WCh matches a lot of thought.
There is no doubt that having the advantage of the draw is a huge advantage at correspondence chess, much more so than at normal chess, simply because the draw rate is so high amongst strong correpondence players.
However, there are disadvantages to other formats. It is true that a tournament final gives a better chance of having a new champion. But the outcome is dependent upon the results of players who are not necesarrily fighting hard for the prize (perhaps they have an early loss, perhaps other parts of their lives become too busy). You might hope that in the final this would not happen, but if you look closely at the games in the round robin finals you will see some strange results, clearly drawn games being lost etc. If it can happen in the round robin final it could happen in a championship final.
Having more games in the final is a very logical option. However, as Thib has pointed out, this will create a big workload. It would make it almost impossible for a serious challenger to enter consecutive championships without having to withdraw from later ones if they reached the final (this is already very difficult witouht more games!).
Another option would be an advanced chess play-off. I would be concerned that this would be too dependant on who had the biggest hardware with less chance for human skill.
Finally, there is the chance to decide a tied match with a toss of a coin. Not a great way of picking a champion.
This problem is not so much an issue with the format as with the game itself - chess is almost certainly drawn with sensible play and as engines get stronger it is going to become harder and harder to win games.
All in all, I think the current format is very reasonable, perhaps the best.
One final observation re Neel's comment that a top player can draw a game if he wants. Perhaps, and if this is 100% true then the draw problem is realy severe. However, I am a little more hopeful. Eros Riccio sometimes beats even very strong players playing the same openings he plays - it is not as if the openings he plays are guaranteed draws in practice. He finds ways of putting them under pressure and sometimes they make a mistake. Perhaps eventually he will do so too (we may have to wait for him to get old!). Or to put another way, chess is almost certainly drawn but it is not an easy draw even at correspondence if white plays really well!
Ilmars Cirulis (2014-08-15 17:02:41)
Friendly thematic games or discussions
Does anyone want to play Sokolsky-Orangutan opening (1.b4) with white? For any theoretical, practical or other reasons - without any prizes, just friendly game for purposes of exploration.
Also I want to explore such variation of Traxler counterattack: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Nxf7 Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7.Ke3 Qh4 8.g3 Nxg3 9.hxg3 Qd4+ 10.Kf3
Two will be enough for me now.
P.S. Sorry for disappearance some time ago with lots of unfinished games.
Ilmars Cirulis (2014-08-27 15:27:33)
Friendly thematic games or discussions
Definitely enough that I wouldn't play it with black but in thematic games for fun.
But I can't say that it's "definitely losing". Maybe I'm too old for fast, unfounded judgements. And too busy for too frequent and big analysis. :D
Sokolsky opening is just a nice opening which I would play with white too, actually.
P.S. I wrote this post during sad mood, it wasn't claim of Traxler refutation but invitation to, probably, small talk about chess.
In these 12 days the situation has radically changed and everything is okay, even very good. :)
Thibault de Vassal (2014-12-01 15:56:08)
Thematic tournaments?
Ah, the "famous" Norfolk Gambit of Nimzovich Attack, right?
Very interesting opening, indeed... So, next time!
Thibault de Vassal (2014-12-20 23:21:25)
Thematic tournaments?
Norfolk Gambit of Nimzovich Attack is in place... a very funny opening :)
Thibault de Vassal (2015-01-09 20:46:20)
Eros Riccio on his win in 9th chess WCH
Eros Riccio kindly accepted to answer a few questions after his win in the 9th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, his answers are worth to read... including probably a few surprises and valuable informations for most of us!
_____________________________
- Hello again Eros. Congratulations for this new win! So you played Jeroen for the second time in a row, this time in the 12 games format. There were 12 draws but it does not mean a lot. How did things go?
--> Hi Thibault! Nice to answer your questions again :-) I managed to resist again Van Assche's assaults, this time he was well-determined to win, as he made me really suffer in a couple of games. The first game was a semislav, me as Black. He played a rare variation (starting with 14.Be2 followed by 15.Qd3) that was new to me. At first the engines were giving 0.00 evaluations, but after the move 22.Qg3 they started to realize that Black's position was difficult, and they kept increasing their evaluation in White's favor move after move. That was quite a scary thing to see, and I really thought that I could have lost the game. I had to use all the thinking time (leave included) to be able to resist. This new variation impressed me so much that I decided to use it as White myself as a surprise weapon, and in fact it allowed my engine on autoplay on my old I7 980x to win a lot of games as White and a 500 dollars prize getting first place in a strong tournament on Infinity Chess. The second game was a Spanish, me as White. After his 7...0-0 I decided to avoid the Marshall (that would have probably happened if I had played 8.c3) trying the AntiMarshall variation 8.d4. I am now convinced that this variation gives nothing good to White, but I didn't know that yet when I played it! Already after the rare strong move 11...c5! things were starting to get difficult for me. He simply continued with c4 and d5, getting space advantage with his Pawns on the Queenside, while I could find no attack at all on the Kingside. Again I had to be very careful to escape with a draw.
- What can you tell about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you're now ranked #9 with an outstanding rating of 2639 ?
--> My ICCF elo in the past few years has raised. Slowly, but it has raised. I had no defeats and a couple of wins in the Olympiads and European team tournaments started in 2012. I am satisfied of that, as winning nowadays in top correspondence tournaments is very difficult. Important is to remain undefeated.
- Last year, you said that you felt like your play was getting weaker each day because your machine was getting older, did you finally upgrade it? But maybe this is a secret...
--> No. As I wrote earlier, I haven't updated my machine. Fortunately cpu's general speed has kept increasing not as quickly as in the past, so my I7 980x can still compete.
- Did your vision of computer chess evolve after these last 18 months? What do you expect for the next years? Do you plan to become a chess cyborg? ^^
--> Fortunately for our hobby, computer chess isn't rushing towards the "all draws" situation that I talked about a couple of years ago. That's because, fortunately, increasing cpu's power and engine's strenght is getting more and more difficult. Yes, some main lines already lead to all draws often, but chess gives so many openings options that to avoid that, you can simply play subvariations. When played a lot, also subvariations will become main variations. Then again, when the draws rate gets too high, you just pick another less played opening. It will take many years to cover every opening to a high draws rate.
- Your next challenger is Peter W. Anderson, who made a convincingly path through the round-robin cycle before to defeat SM Igor Dolgov 5-3 in the 10th candidates final (by the way he's also playing the 11th candidates final). It seems that you never played him before. How do you feel this match? Do you have any words for your opponent before that the games start?
--> I am happy to play a new player! We have just started our match, again, all my first moves as White were 1.e4. What to say... it's up to him to avoid main lines as Black (he already did it answering with 1...g6 in three games) if he wants to try to win with the black pieces. But the real challenge for him of course will be to try to win with the White pieces. It will be interesting to see if he can find holes in my Black repertoire like Van Assche was able to do. Let's wait and see!
Peter W. Anderson (2015-07-02 16:20:58)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Yes, this could be a small but deep change. Perhaps some drawing opening lines would be less attractive because they will lead to stalemate. I see that as a good thing as it will lead to more fighting chess.
As nobody has objected perhaps it should be implemented :)
Jan Ohlin (2015-07-06 09:34:18)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=78874
Stalemate points as favour for black´s good opening play or white´s strong middle and endgame play?
Jan Ohlin (2015-07-11 07:14:05)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
We all agree about that the drawing problem occur when top players playing matches against one another they avoids taking risks, and overall that the likelihood of stalemate is quite low in chess?
Then maybe we should play more risky openings and as well more closed positions also. I see we don´t do that now.
Pablo Schmid (2015-07-12 02:09:18)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Here is most examples of my ficgs practice (corr and Advanced chess). This represent a low percentage of my games. These games are food for thought from my own assisted experience against that rule that I call "+1 decisive advantage chess". I believe you could already burn a lot of chapters in ending's book. Most of my games show balanced games until the end, sometime, the "punished guy" could have played another drawing defense, sometimes not, unfairly to me. The game would be more safe, with less sacrifices of piece vs 2 or 3 pawns and things like that because of fearing an ending with king vs king + piece or king vs king + pawn even if the sacrifice was sound and well played.
Game 22895 and 84758 I would probably have been punished by the rule in the ending of game 22895 (and my opponent in the other game), and that type of ending in general (piece + pawn up vs piece when the king cannot block the pawn).
Game 37122 Shame on me, my advantage in that ending was not sufficient to force my opponent to sacrifice his bishop for my last pawn. This is why I only deserve 0,5!
Game 37920 That king of pawns vs piece + pawn would become lost for the player without the piece, what a way of punish some balanced sacrifices for pawns!
Game 54907 and 20704 That kind of opposite bishop ending would be "lost" for the guy pawnless even if the transition into an inferior but drawn ending was the intention of the "inferior guy".
Game 74870 The ending is perfectly balanced but my opponent couldn't finish the game the way he did because of the rule.
Game 74875 I would have been half-losing in the pawn ending after a nice defense in an interesting unbalanced material line.
Game 74880 the ending knight + h pawn would have been "half losing" for me even if we can't say that I was clearly worse overall.
Game 76734 and 76764 Technichally this game is not directly concerned by the rule but it is very close. I was on the verge of defeat but I have managed to defend stubornely. If he have played well to get a winning position and then the win disapear because of bad play but still finish with a draw, he would get a bonus because he played better overall? The way I managed to defend would not be rewarded?
Game 77809 In this game the whole deep opening line would probably be "half losing" for Black in the ending because of the new rule.
Game 80954 Suddenly it seems that I would have been punished for my defense in the final position.
Game 85106 I did not play specially badly but... I would have been punished for my way of finishing the game!
Jan Ohlin (2015-10-01 07:00:57)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
While we wait for the solution, we can consider that engines do not tell the truth in closed positions with any pieces left. The question is also how much they understand openings as Benko-gambit? We have too much respect for the engines evaluations. And it counts in me too...
Jan Ohlin (2015-10-14 07:08:13)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
If playing a lot more games it is like forcing mistakes instead of good games?! Social life will become ruined... Whom will bother about become a "world champ"? Not me who also have small kids to take care of.
And the opposite, if instead play fewer games it will force the challenger to play even more risky openings. The games will become more exciting to watch.
Jan Ohlin (2015-10-14 17:12:18)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Garvin: I´m maybe the crazy one who wants to play less or equal (!) games as now and think it then will be acceptable for the challenger to play openings as Benko gambit, closed Spanish etc. I see that we have not been sufficiently clever at exploiting engines weaknesses.
Jan Ohlin (2016-01-06 09:34:33)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
I usually prefer the simple, easy to understand solutions. We have not yet fully tested using reliable gambit openings alternatively closed openings and if it does not feel good with the other proposals, as then, there is still no reason to rush off
Dann Corbit (2016-01-07 22:20:18)
Thematic tournaments?
May as well advance one full move to get variety. Everyone will respond:
3. .. Nf6
followed by:
4. Bb2
That is quite an interesting opening and much more rarely played than the standard
1. b4 e5 Bb2 Bxb4 Bxe5 Nf6 e3 d5
Dann Corbit (2016-01-07 23:52:11)
Thematic tournaments?
Analysis for BDG:
rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/3p4/3PP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - acd 37; acs 2548; bm dxe4; cce 35; ce 30; id "gentest-5125"; pm dxe4 {2629} e6 {408} c6 {293} Nc6 {16} c5 {16} Nf6 {14} a6 {1} e5 {1}; pv dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 c6 Nge2 h6 Bxf6 exf6 Nxe4 f5 Nd2 Bd6 g3 O-O Bg2 Be6 O-O Nd7 c4 Nf6 Qb3 Rb8 Qc3 Re8 Rfe1 Qd7 Rac1 Rbd8 Nf3 Ne4 Qe3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Ne5 Bxe5 dxe5 Bxa2 Bxe4 fxe4 Qxe4; white_wins 1092; black_wins 1345; draws 800; Opening Blackmar-Diemer Gambit: Fritz Attack. ; CaxtonID: 197 ECO: D00;
Garvin Gray (2016-01-08 00:55:45)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
For the stages concept:Without an entry fee, it will be critically important to go from advertising start, to entry close to competition start and games playing at a fast rate. They can not be allowed to sit around and gather dust.
The longer the time period between when players sign up and when they actually have to play, the more chance that some will not actually end up playing. Hence the discussion of a commitment factor (entry fee).
I have no issues with a no entry fee event, just that if we go with a no entry fee event, it needs to go from ENTRY OPENING DATE to start in a quick period of time to reduce the number of non players.
Jan Ohlin (2016-01-11 06:30:26)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Lesser time and more games per opponent in connection with more difficult openings to handle for chess programs, could be crucial so chess skills will decide, not computer skills.
Garvin Gray (2016-01-28 23:12:19)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Hello Roger and thanks for your reply,
I would not like to see groups of fewer than 8 players to remove luck as a factor and to make ties less likely.
Garvin- Yes, this is something, at least from my point of view, is what I am trying to avoid. It also reduces the impact of any withdrawals in a group.
I would not like to see groups of more than 12 players so they are not overloaded.
Garvin- Unfortunately, Small number of groups, two stages, and if a large number of entries means something needs to give. So it could be the size of the groups. But hopefully they can be kept to a maximum of 11.
Also the tournament should always end in 2 stages so people know it won't be too long, and in case of a tie the winner should be the player with the most wins in the whole tournament.
Garvin- In my suggested version- I covered the two stage part. I take it your second comment refers to what happens if two or more players end up on the same score in the second stage?
Roger- And one more thing, please implement rules to reduce the number of non players and careless time losses. Like a minimum Elo, a minimum of finished games, and require 2 to 5 E-Points to enter.
Garvin- Quite a few of the withdrawals have come from top players in the past. The most important aspect to reduce the non players is to go from announcement, to closing date of entries, to start a quick and orderly process with no delays.
So after the rules have finally been worked out, have quite a period of time of publicity, then two weeks enter and then Thibault has to close entries straight away, get the draw done and games going.
The longer the lag period between announcement, entries opening, entries closing and games starting, the more chance of players 'going walkabout'.
Roger- Some of this would be valid for the WCH too. For example, stage 2 with only 5 players is ridiculous, because luck can play too big of a role.
Garvin- In the current WCH rules, it is already covered that Double round robin can be used if there are 5 players. I have complained previously to Thibault when he has not implemented this rule when put in a five player group.
In my reworded version for this competition, I asked, at what point should the second stage final for minimum qualifiers move from a double round robin to single round robin?
6 players, 7 players? It does seem like 6 players is the correct number. If only six players qualify from the first stage, then the second stage is DRR. If seven or more qualify, then it will be single round robin.
Practically, this would most likely mean there were 6 groups, and each player won their group outright. Or 5 groups. And 4 groups were one outright, with the other group having 2 players finishing tied for first and both advancing to the second stage.
Jan Ohlin (2016-08-09 11:52:23)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP
In WCH Quarter Final 000016 there will be more wins because this time we play more closed openings. It´s the best chance in advanced chess to win I think.
I will never forget last game Kasparov - Karpov 1987...
George Jempty (2016-09-09 17:56:01)
Player of the Year
The game I am the most proud of the past 12 months is http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=89124 a draw against Ortiz in the first tournament mentioned above. I got a poor position with a poor opening and around move 30 was down around 0.6 to 0.7.
I took all 45 days of my vacation before December 31st and devoted almost all my analysis to this one game, with a new 8-core, 32 GB RAM machine, as well as buying Komodo 9.3 (I'm now up to 10.1). Ortiz did not play so accurately and by move 45 the engine evaluated me as completely even in a few lines but they were complicated and I was much lower on time than my opponent.
However I found a forcing line of about a dozen moves that the engine thought was inferior, but I knew was a dead drawn ending: R+2P vs. R+3P all on the same side of the board, with me also having a sufficiently active rook. So I went for this simpler solution which also let me gain time on the clock as I'd analyzed everything out beforehand. Finally after about a dozen moves in the ending Ortiz offered the draw.
Francois Caire (2016-11-12 16:48:17)
Stockfish fixes memory leak in Syzygy
I tested it and after a 24 hour analysis in an endgame position, stockfish was using only 2.6 Gb of ram with 2Gb hash size.
http://abrok.eu/stockfish/
Author: Marco Costalba
Date: Sat Nov 5 07:55:08 2016 +0100
Timestamp: 1478328908
Rewrite syzygy in C++
Rewrite the code in SF style, simplify and
document it.
Code is now much clear and bug free (no mem-leaks and
other small issues) and is also smaller (more than
600 lines of code removed).
All the code has been rewritten but root_probe() and
root_probe_wdl() that are completely misplaced and should
be retired altogheter. For now just leave them in the
original version.
Code is fully and deeply tested for equivalency both in
functionality and in speed with hundreds of games and
test positions and is guaranteed to be 100% equivalent
to the original.
Tested with tb_dbg branch for functional equivalency on
more than 12M positions.
stockfish.exe bench 128 1 16 syzygy.epd
Position: 2016/2016
Total 12121156 Hits 0 hit rate (%) 0
Total time (ms) : 4417851
Nodes searched : 1100151204
Nodes/second : 249024
Tested with 5,000 games match against master, 1 Thread,
128 MB Hash each, tc 40+0.4, which is almost equivalent
to LTC in Fishtest on this machine. 3-, 4- and 5-men syzygy
bases on SSD, 12-moves opening book to emphasize mid- and endgame.
Score of SF-SyzygyC++ vs SF-Master: 633 - 617 - 3750 [0.502] 5000
ELO difference: 1
No functional change.
Jan Ohlin (2017-01-11 17:05:09)
Defeating Draw Death
I think it´s reasonable with extra elo points for a win. I take high risks playing some opening variations. And I do play chess with a World Champ in every match. Stockfish with some kind of human alias... :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2017-01-18 03:32:56)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Finally, here is a new interview with FICGS correspondence chess champion GM Eros Riccio, who gives us his (surprising?) impressions on his latest win in the championship, his current match and correspondence chess nowadays... A good matter to think about!
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000012
____________
- Hi again Eros... Once more, congratulations for winning this final match in the 12th FICGS correspondence chess championship. This time, it seems that things went quite differently than in your previous matches (you scored 9 out of 12, which is a huge performance at this level), could you tell us what happened in these games?
--> Hi, yes, finally we have seen some wins after a very long series of draws. I was surprised too, I didn't risk to lose any game and I could even win one as Black... What to say, my opponent was simply not as challenging as the previous ones.
- It's a long time since you won the previous match, would you like to tell us about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you now rank #9 with an outstanding 2643 rating?
--> My latest final on FICGS were my only games of 2016. On ICCF I have taken some rest, the too high draw rate didn't incentive me to start new tournaments, also because drawing all games with a high rating means losing points.
- In the next final match (13th cycle), you play Peter W. Anderson for the 3rd time... so you probably know each other's opening book quite well. What do you expect for in this match?
--> Anderson is a very tough opponent, it's not a coincidence that he reached the final for the third time. I tried to win at least one game as White, but he's incredibly hard to beat. I experimented with almost anything possible against his modern defence, but I could never find a single weakness in his repertoire. I will see what to invent this time against his terrific 1...g6.
- As you probably know, another Go champion (Lee Sedol) lost a 5-games match to AlphaGo this year, while chess engines (now Stockfish 8, Houdini 5 Komodo 10...) slowly but surely continue to improve... Still waiting for the quantum computers. How do you feel things should go in the next years? Did your way of playing advanced chess or correspondence chess change these last years?
--> I have said a lot already about the very high draw rate of the recent years... I am surprised that some changes haven't been done already, like switching to chess 960, even modifying some chess rules, or at least giving 1,5 points for one win. Otherwise a lot of players will lose interest in seeing a series of all draws in the tournaments they play. I am one of those players who lost interest in correspondence chess, and even in blitz chess, engine vs engine, as we can see the extremely high draw rate situation there too.
- Finally, what can we wish for you for the next year? :)
--> Wish me to lose the match with Anderson :-) even I got bored of seeing myself there over and over in the final! That will bring some new air and that way I can take some total rest in corr. chess.
- Many thanks for your time, have a great match!
--> Welcome, and thanks.
Roger Llull (2017-01-18 04:33:20)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
I have an idea. Make it more of an spectator sport like engine vs engine is, by letting people offer Epoints to the winners of thematic tournaments in the openings they choose. Let others interested in the same opening add to those Epoints and discuss changes in time controls, starting position and Elo limit. Those studying openings can this way effectively pay for great line analysis, and if this is done well and takes traction, it could even be a source of income for the best players.
Jan Ohlin (2017-01-18 09:34:24)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Reward a game win in one or more way so people risk more in the opening. DO NOT change the way how to play chess.
Pablo Schmid (2017-01-19 13:16:24)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Maybe a thematic match with some risky opening in the same match for elite players?
Pablo Schmid (2017-01-19 22:32:57)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
How to choose the opening, maybe random in a pre select list, or the whole small selected list, or the choice of the players like 4 choices each. For example I could ask 'I want this subline of the king's gambit" and I should not ask a too risky one because the idea is to try to win the Black(or even White) side while surviving when the color is reversed.
Ilmars Cirulis (2017-01-20 09:08:41)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Maybe it's possible to make prediction market for chess opening variations or even positions? :)
Thibault de Vassal (2017-01-20 17:31:22)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw
Poll! :)
According to you, what are the most interesting chess thematics that are the less drawish (with the lowest chances of draw)...
Of course, this is in the idea of a possible future championship that would keep the historical part of chess & chess openings (chess 960 is another game IMO). But this is only an option for now.
As for me, I'll start with King's gambit, that is not only chess, but (IMHO) the most romantic & beautiful part of chess...
Your opinion?
Pablo Schmid (2017-01-20 18:05:27)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Why would a thematic disfavour Black? That's not logical, it just depends of the thematic! If we take the King's gambit accepred as example, Black is not worse and may be the opposite! Even if you lose as Black because of the thematuc, you have chance to win the game where you have White against it... At least the idea would be interesting to play very interesting lines and games that fear does not allow in normal time and to contribue to chess theory in wild opening.
Garvin Gray (2017-01-22 10:00:16)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Absolutely bloody not. There has already been a long discussion and a lot of work put into getting a somewhat agreed format.
Thibault, this is exactly what I expected you to do with this ficgs world cup, try and renege on the agreement at the last minute and attempt to change the format.
And with this concept of some kind of thematic championship, no one is going to agree on which opening to play.
We have an agreed format for the ficgs world cup and all you have to do is open the entry list for it, which starts February 1st for play beginning March 1st.
You renege from this and I will almost certainly walk from this site.
Roger Llull (2017-01-22 12:55:21)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
I'd prefer to have something different created from the ground up with mainly top players in mind, where the draw problem really is. But top players' time is precious, that's why I proposed bigger prices sponsored by people who are interested in specific openings.
This cup seems especially favorable for intermediate players, and the chance to score a few draws against higher rated ones may actually be a good thing that would be lost with complicated openings.
Peter W. Anderson (2017-04-19 08:46:20)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw
One possibility would be to take a selection of openings from the last TCEC final. These were deliberately unbalanced to reduce the drawing chances. They were a superb set of openings. To make it fair people would have to play both sides of an opening.
I could also provide you with some hard to hold positions from the modern defence (I won't be playing, so there will no unfair advantage).
Re the previous suggestions:
- benoni with early Bf4 is a good choice
- czech benoni is definitely overscored by engines but will be a tough hold nonethless; I would watch these games with interest
- Hennig Schara is great fun and I have never lost with it on FICGS, but it really is awful if white plays the best line (but I am not going to say what that is!).
- KID would depend on which line was chosen; some lines have been analysed almost to death, others have plenty of scope left.
One other possibility - a Breyer Lopez. Quite a tough hold IMO and therefore a good choice if everyone plays both sides.
Peter W. Anderson (2017-04-19 13:42:06)
WCh and other ramblings
Congratulations to Eros for retaining his FICGS world title again. A casual glance at our 36 games might give the impression that I did not put him under much pressure apart from in game 95512. Actually it is more a case of him making it look easy. He generally plays extremely accurately in the opening and avoids deeply hidden pitfalls in the middle game – I always get the feeling that I am playing someone who understands the game well rather than someone purely reliant on engines.
I have decided to give up playing normal correspondence chess. Engines have simply become too strong and the amount of human input into my games has decreased over time. Human input remains (games 95516, 95512, 93727/87343 being good examples), but there is far too much hard work with engines these days for my liking. I am sure a GM would add a lot more value but I am a mere mortal! I will probably play some big chess instead. I tried this a couple of times and really enjoyed it. I just hope nobody writes an engine for it.
With regards to the format of the world championship, we need to recognise that with engines getting stronger the draw odds is a bigger and bigger advantage for the champion. Despite that I personally think the current format is fine. I generated a significant advantage in 2 games – in addition to game 95512, I believe game 87337 offered real chances if I had not forgotten to play 25.Nb4 as intended (I could barely look at a chess board for a month after screwing that game up, but that is another story). If people keep trying they may eventually beat Eros. The bigger issue to my mind is Eros’s own statement of boredom with defending the championship. So time for a change when the current cycles are finished?
Thibault de Vassal (2017-04-23 15:11:50)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw
Pablo said it all...
Thanks for these advices Peter! To be more accurate, we may discuss the full lines added to the opening names from now... One move can change everything :)
I'm particularly interested in important King's gambit lines for this first edition. The maddest, shortest, non-linear line from engines point of view but still theorical may be the best :-) (yes, not so easy to find) Maybe one with the queen to be trapped, that produced numerous incredible games...
Garvin Gray (2017-10-01 06:36:44)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Quick observation from beginning of final round. Players are not stuffing around and taking forever with their opening moves.
Knowing they have 16 games to play and a time control of 30 days plus 1 day per move, players seem to be getting through the opening phase quickly, to get as much extra time on their clock in all their games as possible.
Thibault de Vassal (2017-10-01 13:40:40)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Herbert: Yes it was, now it should be less the case (about ratings). Let's see in a few months.
Garvin: About CUP final, yes looks like reasonable to play the opening as fast as possible (just like in WCH)... 16 games is really tough to manage in the middle game, that's why I was more favourable to a longer time control for this cycle, but obviously many players are faster than me :)
Garvin Gray (2017-12-14 11:47:49)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish
Even more I read about this result, the more I am inclined to put this result in the 'nice story' but the devil is in the detail.
The time control was 1 minute per move, no tablebases and limited hardware for Stockfish.
This is a major limiting factor for any of the major programs and not how they are designed to work.
Also reading the chessbase article, as I suspected, AlphaZero was able to play many, many games against the Stockfish program, but Stockfish had no such opportunity against AlphaZero.
And so with each game, AlphaZero and the programmers had the opportunity to learn about Stockfish's strengths and weaknesses. Stockfish had no such opportunity.
The only way to see if AlphaZero and its MonteCarlo system is any good is for it to enter the next Computer World Championship and play under equal equipment against all the best chess programs.
Same time control, same processing power , opening books tailored for each engine and tablebases available for each engine.
That is the only way to find out how good the next version of AlphaZero really is.
Ilmars Cirulis (2017-12-14 12:09:18)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish
Conspiracy theories and not understanding of Deepmind motivation.
They tested if the concept works. It was success. They are satisfied and start working on other interesting/useful stuff, as they mostly don't care about chess.
The only training of AlphaZero happened when it played against itself. Stockfish was just an opponent to play against - to check how strong has AlphaZero became.
AlphaZero too had no opening book or endgame tablebases, so that's not relevant. Etc. etc., basically too much conspiracy theories and too much caring about which is the most strongest engine (at least in comparison to Deepmind, as they are totally chill about it, imho :D). :)
Thibault de Vassal (2017-12-22 23:28:18)
Monte Carlo Analysis
Oh wow, it looks like I have no more idea of what Fritz Gui looks like nowadays... Is there a "Monte Carlo" engine or is it a Fritz option? Or is it the old option allowing engines to play each other in tournaments on various openings & positions?
Actually, I don't see the interest of a 'pure' Monte Carlo method in chess as it just looks like a non-optimized search. But it seems to me that it's a long time that engines use algorithms that look like it when it may be useful (particularly in calm positions & endgames). So, it's just a "plus" if you have some processing time to do it (like AlphaZero, having a much more powerful hardware), otherwise...
Right now, I must say I still have no accurate idea of how AlphaZero plays chess.
Daniel Parmet (2017-12-24 18:51:20)
Monte Carlo Analysis
I thought the whole idea of IDEA was a human thought merge of computer analysis through MCA?
I had the thought about using MCA with chess engines as the brain nearly 5 years ago at work. My boss loved the idea and tasked me with it. However, I have no coding skills so my ability was limited to what was available which was extremely limited at the time.
The best way to think of MCA is to accept that we don't know what move is best (hence why Alphazero didn't have or want an opening book or games database). From here now, it's like trying to predict what's best and what will come from flipping a coin 5 million times. You know in a coin scenario that it is 50%. But what about the stock market? A lottery ticket? A game of black jack? Or Chess? Each individual decision could yield 50.1% in favor and by MCA you will find it. It will create a tree that shows a RANGE of your worst possibilities to best on a probalistic manner. The most common use is for wealth management investing.
As for how to change off the Fritz engine, I don't know. I could never figure that out (though I only have the Fritz 13 gui). I guess I was hoping this feature would be improved over time. Perhaps now due to Alphazero, it will be.
Christoph Schroeder (2018-01-11 00:29:15)
1st King Supertournament
A King's gambit thematic would be great, but as a no engine version? No.
It is fun to search for truth in ancient openings like the King's Gambit, but that obviously requires the use of books, databases and engines.
Moreover, experience on other servers shows that in the so-called "no-engine tournaments" the majority of the players use engines, anyway.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-03-14 23:12:38)
A few questions to Nelson Bernal Varela
Nelson Bernal Varela is an early FICGS correspondence chess player, now rated 2277 but also rated 2359 at ICCF (Correspondence Chess Master - CCM).
Last but not least, and as all poker holdem players here probably noticed, he is also our ranked #1 for years, who just reached an outstanding poker rating of 2382, while number two is now rated "only" 2212. A good occasion to ask him a few questions, that he kindly accepted to answer.
-----------------------
- Hello Nelson! You are the 2nd most active player at FICGS for years now. Everyone here probably noticed your incredible results in poker tournaments. "Correspondence poker holdem" was probably a strange idea as it is very unusual and very different from "Internet poker". What's your opinion on this and on the presence of a card game (played without money) at FICGS?
NBV: There are more important things than money and one of those is HONOR; It is honorable to be a chess master, international master, grandmaster, world chess champion at ICCF and at FICGS and to be number one in the ranking. It is honorable to be a FICGS world champion at Go and to be first in the ranking, it is honorable to be poker world champion at FICGS poker and in my case, it is an honor to be number one at poker here at FICGS during the last years, understanding that our general level of play has improved remarkably. None of these activities produces money, but to achieve any of the mentioned titles, it is necessary to have extraordinary abilities.
When I was about 18 years old, I had the opportunity to meet a person with immense material wealth, we spent whole evenings playing chess and then I told him my perceptions about each movement of the game. He thanked me for my chess explanations and paid me with good money. That wealthy man in his turn told me about life and recommended that I should always be proud of the gifts I had, since he knew, with all the money he had and being able to hire the best grandmasters in the world, that it could hardly come at the level of chess master. That person told me that the intellect can be turned into money whenever you want.
Now, by playing poker without money at FICGS, I understood that it was my extraordinary and wonderful opportunity to study-learn-perfect and test my poker theories without costing me a single dollar. In FICGS there is no money, but thanks to the knowledge I gained playing poker in FICGS, today I can go after the money in online poker rooms and probably in OTB poker tournaments. I am studying the possibility of becoming a professional poker player.
- The understanding of your opponent's behaviour is usually quite important at Poker. Do you manage to establish some profiles while playing so many simultaneous hands & games? Did you build any method?
NBV: Today I am sure that the most important thing to raise, and keep raising my level in poker, has been to build a psychological profile of mine, to get to know Nelson Bernal Varela in depth and above all to understand me, accept me, love me and be work every day eliminating my technical errors, strategic, psychological that make me play badly. I am aware that in poker I can play perfectly and still lose, what I can not forgive me is playing badly, which is why I work hard correcting my wrong decisions.
Of course, there is a space in my brain where I have built a psychological profile of each contender, that profile I have been able to elaborate with all the information that is provided to me in each hand we play. The way each of us plays, gives reliable information about our personality.
About my method I can write the following: A few years ago, I created a table in excel, where I had all the games with each contender, I identified them with the FICGS numeration and each movement in each hand (preflop, flop, turn, river ) it I was writing and studying; I started to add technical-psychological variables that seemed important to me, resulting in 20 variables that I had to qualify in each movement. With the passage of time and my effort, I no longer needed the excel table and I did not use it again (it was exhausting and time consuming) because I was assimilating things faster and with greater depth. Today I can say that I evaluate these 20 variables in a natural way, as if I was breathing and that when I am at a poker table, online or real, after a few minutes I get the psychological profile of the table and each of my opponents. In the pocket of my shirt I keep a small paper with the list of variables, periodically reread it and I wonder if I should modify, remove or add something.
- You won 1007 poker games, and lost only 380, with a ratio usually going from 57% to 80% according to your best opponents. Undoubtly you know the mathematics hidden behind poker but that may not explain everything. How did you learn to play?
NBV: Mathematics is an ingredient in poker, in the same way that my psychological aspects and of my opponents (I recommend reading-studying about four times the book “The Poker mindset†of Ian Taylor and Matthew Hilger), it is vital to understand the Law of Large Numbers. Next I make a list of topics that I consider important to raise the level of poker; compete with EV+ cards, you have to know the small ball theory of Negreanu (but not apply it, hahaha) you have to always look at the texture of the board, you have to evaluate your reality and your future, also that of your opponents (act and power), the position to talk is important, the stack, the personality of the table, know who has the panic button on. All these and other variables must be evaluated in the few seconds they have to make a move and the only important thing is to make the right decision according to the circumstances. There is a good list of poker books to read... it is mandatory to have read about 15 poker books.
- As for me, I may be wrong but I can't imagine that you reached such a rating without special techniques & maybe by optimizing it in some ways... Of course, "rating management" is not a problem, and it is only one thing with a limited impact, but maybe you have some other secrets? What about this "+1" technique that I noticed in many of our games, if this is not a secret? :)
NBV: In these years I have used different techniques that I had to read, study, learn, repeat, modify, invent and sometimes eliminate. Poker is a sport that seems easy, with time one manages to understand that it has an amazing complexity, today I consider poker to be as complex as chess and I study them in a "similar" way. As an example, I have tried to create "openings in poker"; based only on probabilities I invented something that I called mirror theory and another "opening" that I called opposite outs. I am fascinated by mathematics and from the mathematical perspective they are perfect "theories-openings", but I have lost tournaments and a lot of money for applying such theories in mistaken emotional moments. In poker it is important to never lose sight of the Law of Large Numbers and be aware that this LAW likes to make fun of each one of us... I am working on giving an emotional nuance to my theories "mirror" and "opposite outs". There are moments when perfect mathematics becomes an unforgivable psychological error...
For the last few months I have modified my way of playing and my results have improved; Today it must be much more difficult to win a game me, thanks to small and imperceptible adjustments that of course only I know, because I have followed my mistakes-successes-evolution in the game over several years.
- Isn't it too frustrating for you to play heads up only (here at least) ? Of course it is a way to improve this important technical case but we know that many complexities come with 3 to 8 players on the table, which is the most common case in professional poker tournaments.
NBV: Currently I spend little time every day playing heads-up in FICGS, thanks to the fact that I have the profile of each contender. The 4-5 hours that I study poker daily, include practice in micro limits in cash tables of 6 players and tournaments in tables of 8-9 players. I think I'm covering the whole range of possibilities, experiencing game situations between 1 and 8 contenders.
- What do you think about computer analysis in poker? Do you think it could make a difference here just like the way we play advanced chess?
NBV: I think the algorithms are ready to be written in machine language and the question is where are those algorithms? Well, in the brains of the best players in the world and in their games compiled in huge databases. But programming language can be accelerated with artificial intelligence brains, making A.I. studying databases of the best professionals, playing with itself millions of games and building an invincible TACTIC-STRATEGIC SYSTEM, similar to chess software and GO... I think preflop and flop play would be very similar between humans and artificial intelligence, but on the turn and on the river artificial intelligence would take considerable advantage, but in the short time the level of human poker would rise because artificial intelligence would teach us to play poker, this event that would diminish the profits of the professionals. It will always be said in favor of poker that because it is an incomplete game of information, to make computer algorithms are quite complicated, but despite that, I am sure that artificial intelligence will far surpass the best human poker player. It is possible that an artificial intelligence that plays a perfect poker already exists, but unlike GO and chess, poker does produce a lot of money. Due to the money factor, in today's world, it is very difficult that there is a Prometheus willing to steal fire from the gods and give it to mankind...
- How would you describe your relation to games in general?
NBV: I can summarize it in one of the first chess books I had the fortune to read, by the great Danish master Bent Larsen, "I play to win"
- When did you start to play chess & poker? Do you play other games?
NBV: My first contact with chess was at the age of nine, it was love at first sight and until death separates us; I must confess that for some years we have been separated, due to my stupidity and my erroneous decisions. I have always been self-taught in any subject, my method is to buy about 10 to 15 books of the subject that interests me and I read them thoroughly, sometimes 3 or 4 times; already with that information in my head and thanks to the constant practice, I build MY SYSTEM (Nimzowitch) according to my personality, my dreams, my desires, my anguish, my fears... I was youth champion of Bogotá, for 4 years , my OTB level was strong, but I had to abandon chess because I had to work and survive; Being an athlete in Colombia is an absolutely difficult thing, but being a chess player is extremely complicated since there is no support or respect from society and you can not live by chess, because it does not produce money.
I met poker in 2009 in FICGS, at that time I was in a terrible emotional situation, trying to get away from a relationship with a woman that I should never approach and where I wasted valuable time and energy. In that context, looking for my thoughts to be occupied, I ended up playing the FICGS C-24 poker tournament and tied the first place with three more players; I kept playing, without understanding what was happening with the cards and obviously, losing, until in 2010 I won the FICGS D-21 tournament with perfect score, 6 out of 6. I had already bought-read my first beginner book: Poker for Dummies of Harroch and Krieger, but my poker was coarse, wild, street, intuitive, amateur, without dedication or study. In the background of this paragraph, the affection and gratitude that I have for FICGS is condensed, a place where I have been able to build-practice-study-test MY SYSTEM in poker.
I play Backgammon, I do not care that it may sound pretentious-petulant, but I have a very strong level and I have not read my first book yet. Hahaha. Any year I register as a participant in the world championship and I will cause disgust to more than one professional. Hahaha. Unlike chess and poker, backgammon does not cause me stress, on the contrary, I feel a lot of joy and pleasure when I play backgammon. I feel something similar with math, reading and music. It's true and I'm proud, I've always been a NERD.
- We all know how difficult it is to reach a number 1 rank but it is even more difficult to keep it during a long time. What is your motivation? Do you have more goals to achieve (chess & other games included) ?
NBV: My motivation in any activity I undertake in my life is to do it with absolute passion (passion is everything you would do to get a breath of air, in the second before dying by drowning or suffocation).
I have several goals to accomplish before December 2021; In the ICCF correspondence chess I must reach the 2400 elo and get the titles of International Master, SIM and Grand Master, also perform outstanding performances in world championships. In FICGS Chess I must complete my Master and International Master titles and overcome the 2450 elo, also snatch the title from our eternal champion Eros Riccio. You're warned Eros, hahaha. On the LSS site where I also play, www.chess-server.net I want to be a world champion.
In POKER I find myself playing micro limits bets in several online sites; in June 2018 I hope I have built some bankroll. In July of 2018 I must be evaluating my poker to know if my immediate goal is to become a professional poker player, that would completely change my chess goals and I would have to dedicate myself to OTB poker. At the moment I study and practice poker every day, about 4-5 hours a day. At this moment my poker is full of errors that I am eliminating one by one. MY SYSTEM needs to win and raise money in the micro limits, so that it can succeed in professional poker.
In chess OTB I should become a great master, but that topic should be left as a goal for after 2021. I could achieve the record of being the oldest human in getting the title of Grand Master OTB. Hahaha.
In backgammon I would like to play some important tournaments in USA and Europe and maybe to be OTB world champion, but at the moment I do not have clarity on how to do it. I must mature that idea.
I hope they invent immortality before I die and that I have enough money to buy it, because time is what I need to realize all these and other dreams...
- Finally, playing so many games on several websites (obviously with serious ambitions in each game & place) may look quite inhuman and exhausting, does your body or brain say "stop" sometimes? Do you train by melting sports and brain games just like Kasparov did in the past?
NBV: It's true, it takes willpower and a lot of resistance to sustain the pace that I carry. To take care of my body, I am doing daily exercise for 60 to 90 minutes, including routines of strength, elasticity, speed and endurance. I also practice table tennis to preserve the agility of my body. I'm also divorced and I do not have a girlfriend... Hahaha
- By curiosity, do you consider playing Go in the future, even after... 2021? (which would surely be an enormous charge more, but the game is really interesting)
I have a kind of commitment with the best Colombian GO player, exchange of classes, he makes me a competitive player of GO and I turn him into a competitive player of backgammon. But the truth is that I do not have time... it could be after 2021...
- Do you confirm that you are not (entirely or partly) AlphaZero or any kind of A.I. (yet) ? :-)
NBV: Hahaha, of course I would like to be a real centaur, human with machine power, I do not care what physical form I should adopt. I offer myself publicly as a guinea pig in projects of technological singularity. Hahaha
- Many thanks for your detailed and instructive (impressive as well) answers! My best wishes of luck in all your games and future tournaments.
Peter W. Anderson (2018-06-02 09:21:07)
Komodo 12 with AlphaZero techniques
My gut feeling is that Monte Carlo is most applicable to the opening, but I am not sure that is better than alpha-beta even there.
By the way, in my judgement Leela is already very strong in the opening. If I was still playing correspondence I would be using Leela to help prepare openings.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-06-30 20:22:16)
Interview with 15th chess WCH finalist
For once, as Eros & I couldn't find much more to say after all his consecutive wins, I asked Ramil Germanes these few questions around his match & correspondence chess (with what may look like a quite surprising conclusion).
_______________________
- Hello Ramil, many thanks for answering those few questions! This is a first time with the WCH finalist, as the winner (Eros again) agreeded this could be an interesting experiment for a change, so we'll probably have a quite different point of view this time! You just finished your games to score 6-6 (12 draws), Eros retaining the title again. I guess this was the first time you played such a correspondence chess match, what are your impressions on this knockout format?
Yes this is the first time I've played a world championship match although I played before in earlier editions of this world championship but not reaching the challenger level. My impression? Its great playing for the world championship but I know its nearly impossible to beat the world champion.
- Let's rewind a few months backward, would you make other choices, in openings or anything?
I don't know. Tbh, I'm not very good on chess theory and not very updated as well. So I'm just playing basic moves hoping for opportunities to come up.
- So, is Eros beatable in this final match according to you? (please give us some hope) ^^
With how quickly you can search information and the strength of chess engines nowadays, its almost impossible to beat him unless you have access to alpha zero (haha). Though maybe Herbert Kruse can pull it off.
- What can you tell us about yourself and your relation to chess & correspondence chess?
I'm just an ordinary guy from the Philipines who happens to love playing chess. But my love of computers is what brought me to correspondence chess and to ficgs.
- Do you play other games, e.g. Go, Shogi, cards games?
No I don't know how to play those games.
- Could you tell us how these 12 games went from your own point of view?
For me, the games went through their normal course. Both of us didn't made any major mistakes so all games were drawn. That's just how it went. Though there were new moves on some the games it doesn't really changes result of the older games played before.
- Would you share a few tips to play good correspondence chess in 2018, or at least to beat the best chess engines? :)
Sorry but i dont know. I will be the new world champion by now if i know, hehehe.
- You told me that your computer configuration was basically a quad-core i5 3570 / 4gb on Fritz GUI (about 10,500 kn/s) / Windows 10, and we know that many of us (Eros included) still use such configs or even dual-core, would an octa-core have brought a significant advantage to you to win this match according to you?
Oh I don't know they still have those configurations. But I've already encountered opponents in Infinity Chess with 18-22 cores configs. Anyways, an octa-core or faster cpu would definitely be going to speed up my analysis and will let me analyze more lines and variations which may improves my overall play.
Honestly, I don't have that much time these days for correspondence chess. In my match against Eros, I had only about 1 hour of analysis time before work and about another 1 hour after work. Since I already have a family and 2 kids, they have to be my priority first. And I think somebody also can relate to this. So a faster cpu would be very helpful in the match and maybe will give a better chance than a slower cpu.
- As far as I know, you love to build computers, did you use or think about using several ones at the same time for analysis?
No. I only used one computer in my match against Eros. I have 2 other computers but both are slower.
- How much time you've been playing correspondence chess & how do you feel the way the game changed over the years?
I've been playing correspondence chess since 2010 and I have observed that its easier to win games in the past when chess engines were still weaker. Because you notice some players depend only on engine moves and engines still commit mistakes and you can exploit those mistakes if you "investigate" further.
Unlike now, engines are very strong that even players who rely solely on engines moves will be very hard to beat. It lessens the gap of players that know how to "use" the engines and the ones who do not.
- Finally, what makes you love correspondence chess in 2018?
I will always love chess and correspondence chess but what makes it exciting now is the rise of the new kind of engines.
Engines like Leela chess zero that has a different approach in playing chess. Maybe more of these kind of chess engines will be seen in the future. Because of its use of monte carlo analysis and neural networks, we are starting to see moves that we have never seen before. Very aggressive attacks and moves defying opening principles can now be seen. Correspondence chess is getting exciting again!
Thibault de Vassal (2018-09-24 00:15:43)
Some questions to H. Kruse, WCH finalist
After that the last FICGS chess WCH final match finished, the choice was made again to ask a few questions to Eros Riccio's challenger: Herbert Kruse, for the 2nd time. He kindly accepted to answer it so let's learn a bit more on our top-ranked correspondence chess player.
______________________________
Hello Herbert, you're not really a player to introduce as you're very active here and at several chess websites for years, with outstanding ratings in each one (as far as I know), you're the 1st FICGS CUP winner & several times FICGS WCH challenger, each time facing "the wall" Eros Riccio, what could you tell us about yourself particularly as a chess & correspondence chess player?
- i began late with 16 to play my first tournament game, but with 18 i already was kicked out of a night club in company with tony miles ;) (dresscode) had vlastimil hort as trainer for a short time and played in teams with gutman, michalchisin, klovans, gipslis and some other GMs. corr chess i began, because i love to find the truth and because of freestyle, where i began to build very strong computers
What kind of computers do you build? Is it all dedicated to chess?
- i have several dual xeon e5 computers with 64gb ddr3 and 16 to 20 real cores and they all play chess ;)
Once again, GM Eros Riccio managed to draw the 12 games of the match. What are your feelings on these games? How did you estimate your chances to destabilize your opponent in the openings and to create complications enough with White (or Black)?
- this time my feelings were neutral. 1% chances to win, but i hoped he would lose his concentration if i began more games with him (we played 6 other games at the same time)
Doesn't "1% chances to win (the match)" mean about 0.17% to win only one game with White, even when losing one with Black? Isn't it a bit pessimistic after all, or is it the new so called Riccio-effect? :)
- if the strongest players face each other there is no win possible, except some has a mouse slep or forgot something during human interfacing
When did you start playing correspondence chess and what changed since that time? What attracted you most in the game?
- 2004 and evaluation of the position is the key point of improvement since then. attractive was to be better than actual world class players :)
Could you tell us anything on the way you work chess and play your correspondence games? Any tip or secret? (nothing to lose to ask :))
- with black i play for fastest way to 0.00 and with white i try every promising way to make a game for a longer time complicated
Do you use several ones at the same time when analyzing a game? (still grabbing some tips)
- i only use the newest stockfish versions of brainfish and corchess because the other engines are not so good. because i have many games i decide which one gets the most cores and time and let them run in infinity mode until i am happy that can be after 1 week or more sometimes.
You're not far to rank 2nd as a poker player at FICGS, you obviously started to take on Big Chess as well. What other games do you play? Did you consider to play Go already?
- i played go against the german champion and lost so i quit :)) played backgammon money game and internet (in fibs with kit woolsey i played over 100 matches) in bridge i was best bidder in germany 1994 to 1995, but dont play much nowadays
Do you have specific goals to achieve as a player?
- 2 goals, since a long time: be ficgs world champion and win one german bridge championship
How do you imagine correspondence chess evolution within a decade? What kind of engines/computers do you expect to use and what will look like centaur chess according to you? (in other words, what part will remain to the human player in the decision?)
- i think the engines today are already unbeatable, so in 20 years the would still not lose and chess is dead since about 4 years
What did you think about Google Deepmind's Alpha Zero performance vs. Stockfish?
- it was a joke because they let a bad version of stockfish play. i would not have lost one game against az0 and maybe won 2 til 5 out of 100
Conditions of this AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match were very specific (opening books, unbalanced hardware...) What weaknesses did you detect in AlphaZero play?
- it was the lack of precision, what would let it lose against stockfish in its tuned newest version but i look from a view of a player who is used to play with deep 60 :)
It seems that computers did not completely take on Bridge yet, what do you expect within a decade?
- i have not seen bridge programms, but the game is so easy that it must be already mastered by computers
Zack Stephen (2018-10-30 13:14:19)
World Championship Tie-breaks
agree with William, eros can draw these matches with his eyes closed at this point, he can easily be champion for the foreseeable future unless a format change is made.
Some other ideas for consideration: Force specific opening thematics in the final (ie each has to play black/white of a kings gambit, or other speculative openings
Don't provide the +1 day for each move. Make the games a set amount of time say 45 days for 60 moves
Make each side play BIG, random, or other variants as tie breaker until a winner is determined
Paul Larwinski (2018-11-14 21:44:07)
World Championship Tie-breaks
no , there should be nothing changed , the ficgs.com chess Champion must be beaten to by new champion.
when you look at last match , they have played mostly same openings, not even taking openings chances is it
Paul Larwinski (2018-11-17 00:09:46)
World Championship Tie-breaks
there are different ways
possible to play 6 different own openings whith white and with black
longer time control would be better for thinking
Paul Larwinski (2018-11-17 19:28:43)
Carlsen Caruana wch match
i meant the exciting chess games between Kasparov and Karpov in wch matches, they have both played other openings and mostly main famous lines.
everyone can see Kasparov-Karpov games in chess database
first game of Carlsen - Caruana wch match was exciting too , winning chances
Thibault de Vassal (2018-11-18 01:32:48)
Carlsen Caruana wch match
At least the openings are interesting... games 5 & 6 are good examples. This Petroff line could be a thematic tournament soon here.
Fred de la Foret (2019-02-22 18:27:31)
Best Opening Move?
In your opinion, which is best for chess engine players, 1. d4 or 1. e4 . CCGM Hans Berliner argued that 1. d4 was the better.
Thibault de Vassal (2019-02-22 21:18:32)
Best Opening Move?
Still hard to say. In my opinion, only databases & statistics can "answer" this question.
Ilmars Cirulis (2019-02-22 22:02:19)
Best Opening Move?
1.c4
Fred de la Foret (2019-02-23 20:12:55)
Best Opening Move?
The English ( 1. c4 ) is considered less popular as best opening move to 1. Nf3, though the English is played by many OTB Masters.
Nelson Bernal Varela (2019-03-01 04:52:25)
Best Opening Move?
1.e4
Thibault de Vassal (2019-03-01 20:08:18)
Best Opening Move?
It seems that AlphaZero prefers 1.d4 or 1.c4 ... I guess he has good reasons :)
Fred de la Foret (2019-03-02 17:40:51)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?
Is the King's Gambit a bad opening to play for correspondence chess engine players ? It seems to be only a futile opening in failure against strong chess engines.
Thibault de Vassal (2019-03-02 19:34:23)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?
I can't say if it is "bad", but in my opinion it is quite hard to play against experienced players. So yes, I agree on this one. But it remains a great opening to try OTB or without engines!
Miroslav Gazi (2019-04-26 22:48:11)
Chess DB
What do you think about using special DB e.g.
https://chesswind.eu/
Could it be interesting for creating opening books?
Charles Bovary (2020-02-19 17:20:02)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
But you can't go wrong in the opening:-)Heaven is wide open.
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.
Ilmars Cirulis (2020-05-08 01:01:32)
Thematic Suggestion: Traxler
When I was younger I was embarrassingly enthusiastic about refuting this opening. :D
Remembering youth, still believing that white wins (with Bxf7) and having 11.16 epoints, I challenge those who disagree to the Silver thematic game. :)
Thibault de Vassal (2020-06-04 13:04:11)
chess archives in pgn
Hello Roberto,
Thanks for detailing your question here.
Yes, the "Go" function below the menu is very general and does not help much for what you would like to do.
The "Search games" option in the menu (below "Waiting lists" and "Tournaments") brings more specific ways:
Years ago, I considered that the complete PGN database was enough to build easily specific databases (player or any criteria, combinations of it, etc.) by using a database software.
Then I added a few search options, per player & per game (chess or Go), per opening, per rating (black or white) and per material for endgames... Of course, this will not replace a serious database like Chessbase.
I hope I was clear too... Does this help?
Thibault de Vassal (2020-11-19 12:15:31)
Thematic tournaments?
Let's go for the Bishop's opening...
Scott Ligon (2022-11-22 15:22:57)
I did not win a game since 3 years
Here's another idea. We start with two pools of starting positions. One pool where white has an advantage that may or may not be winning. Another pool where black has the advantage. First player picks a position from either pool. Let's say the first player picks from the white advantage pool (on the border between winning advantage for white and draw). Second player gets to choose which side of that position they want to play. They can either play white but then they have to win, or black but then all they need to do is draw. So no matter the outcome, each match will be decisive. We'd just have to populate the pool of opening positions first.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-22 16:00:33)
I did not win a game since 3 years
Even the idea of having preset pools of starting positions isn't necessary. Going off my previous post, the first player selects any starting position they like (has to be a position that can be reached in an actual game of chess, so let's say the first player gives a sequence of opening moves that results in the position). First player wants to pick a position right on the border between win and draw, but they don't even need to stipulate which side is playing for the win, because a chess engine can run a quick search and determine that automatically. So the first player submits an opening sequence of moves, the FICGS server runs a quick evaluation with Stockfish or whatever just to decide which side has advantage, and the second player chooses between playing the advantaged side for a win or the disadvantaged side for a draw.
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.
A. T. S. Broekhuizen (2022-11-25 16:48:19)
I did not win a game since 3 years
In case of the openings I mentioned earlier, I think there is a possibility for white to hold on to an advantage. The problem is that with the superhuman playing strength of engines nowadays, one will have to study harder than before to keep up with the engine. But now, after I studied these variations in detail, it has become clear. In practice one nowadays will have to have the right approach before the game to the played opening, otherwise I think it is not doable anymore to find the way to any white advantage during the game. This can be frustrating, but also in OTB chess more and more engine designed defences are played, so it is prudent to study these "unbeatable" defences.
Thibault de Vassal (2022-11-30 00:59:29)
I did not win a game since 3 years
Did anyone "calculate" what opening leads to the lowest rate of draws in engines tournaments? (or Stockfish vs. Stockfish)
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.
There are 108 results for opening in wikichess.
Francisco Pessoa (2528)
e4
King's Pawn Game refers to any chess opening where White opens with 1.e4, the most popular of the twenty possible opening moves. Since nearly all of these openings have names of their own, the term "King's Pawn Game", unlike Queen's Pawn Game is rarely used to describe the opening of the game.
King's Pawn Games are further classified by whether Black responds with 1...e5 or not.
Openings beginning with 1.e4 e5 are called Double King's Pawn Games (or Openings), Symmetrical King's Pawn Games (or Openings), or Open Games—these terms are equivalent. Openings where Black responds to 1.e4 with a move other than 1...e5 are called Asymmetrical King's Pawn Games (or Openings) or Semi-open Games.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Mark Noble, Francisco Pessoa
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
d4
Queen's Pawn Game refer to any chess opening which starts with 1.d4, the second most popular opening move, but is now usually used to describe openings where White opens with 1.d4 but does not follow through with an early pawn advance to c4. Some of these openings have individual names as well.
In the 1800s and early 1900s, 1.e4 was by far the most common opening move by White, while the different openings starting with 1.d4 were considered somewhat unusual and therefore classed together as "Queen's Pawn Game".
As the merits of 1.d4 started to be explored it was the Queen's Gambit which was played most often; more popular than all other 1.d4 openings combined. The term "Queen's Pawn Game" was then narrowed down to any opening with 1.d4 which was not a Queen's Gambit. Eventually, through the efforts of the hypermodernists, the various Indian Defences, such as the King's Indian, Nimzo-Indian and Queen's Indian, became more popular, and as these openings were named, the term "Queen's Pawn Game" narrowed further.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
e4 c5
The Sicilian Defence is a chess opening which begins with 1.e4 c5
This is the most popular response to 1.e4 at the master level. Black immediately fights for the centre, but by attacking from the c-file (instead of mirroring White's move) he creates an asymmetrical position that leads to complicated situations. Typically, White has the initiative on the kingside while Black obtains counterplay on the queenside, particularly on the c-file after the exchange of Black's c-pawn for White's d-pawn.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
Nf3
The Réti Opening (also called the King's Knight Opening) is a chess opening characterized by the opening move 1.Nf3
It is named after Richard Réti, a Czechoslovakian chess player who used it to defeat the world champion José Raúl Capablanca in 1924.
According to ChessBase, out of the twenty possible opening moves, 1.Nf3 ranks third in popularity. It develops the knight to a good square and prepares for a quick castling. White maintains flexibility by not committing to a particular central pawn structure, while waiting to see what Black will do. The slight drawback to the move is that it blocks the f-pawn. This is not a problem if White does not intend to move it in the near future, but it rules out the possibility of playing systems with f3 and Nge2, which is a fairly popular setup against the King's Indian.
Usually 1.Nf3 will transpose into an opening with 1.d4, such as the King's Indian or the Queen's Gambit. If White follows up with an early c4 a transposition to the English Opening may be reached. Even the Sicilian Defense may be reached if the game opens 1.Nf3 c5 2.e4.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5
The open game is a fight for center squares : d4 and d5 are already under control, and the probable next moves 2.Nf3 or 2.Nc3, then 2. ... Nc6 or 2. ... Nf6 will take control of e4 and e5 squares as well.
Games are often more tactical than in Sicilian opening (1.e4 c5), and requires more calculation than deep strategy. Furthermore, black chances to win are lower than in Sicilian, so I avoid to play it against computers or at correspondence chess.
According to Chessbase and correspondence chess statistics, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 Nc3
Closed sicilian is a strategical opening that often leads to a slow white kingside attack. Black usually fights for counterplay on the queenside. Much less played than the main line 2.Nf3, this opening is a good alternative against sicilian experts.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 53%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3
King's knight opening is prefered at 90% cases.
The knight simply attacks black's e5 pawn, that is not protected yet and controls d4 and e5 squares.
By far the most played continuation is the King's Pawn Game 2...Nc6, and it is sub-divided into many familiar opening names like Ruy Lopez. Petrov's Defense, 2...Nf6, and the Philidor Defense, 2...d6, are also familiar opening names.
Some less familiar continuations of the King's Knight Opening include:
- Gunderam Defense 2...Qe7
- Greco Defense 2...Qf6
- Damiano Defense 2...f6 ?
- Elephant Gambit 2...d5
- Latvian Gambit 2...f5
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Bc4
The Bishop's Opening is one of the oldest openings to be analyzed; it was studied by Lucena and Ruy Lopez. Later it was played by Philidor. Larsen was one of the few grandmasters to play it often, after first using it at the 1964 Interzonal Tournament. Although the Bishop's Opening is uncommon today, it has been used occasionally as a surprise by players such as Kasparov and Nunn.
White attacks Black's f7-square and prevents Black from advancing his d-pawn to d5. By ignoring the beginner's rule, "develop knights before bishops", White leaves his f-pawn unblocked allowing the possibility of playing f4. This gives the Bishop's Opening an affinity to the King's Gambit and the Vienna Game, two openings that share this characteristic. In fact, the Bishop's Opening can transpose into the King's Gambit or the Vienna Game, and transpositions into Giuoco Piano and Two Knights Defense and other openings are also possible. In particular, White should remain alert for any chance to transpose into a favorable variation of the King's Gambit, but with careful play Black can avoid this danger.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4
King's gambit was the most popular opening in the 19th century. White offers a pawn to divert Black's e-pawn and build a full center with d2-d4. In order to hold the extra pawn, Black will have to spend time weakening his kingside with moves like g7-g5. It is now rarely seen at the master level, it being generally thought that Black can obtain a reasonable position either by giving back the gambitted pawn at a later time or holding on to it and consolidating defensively.
Black must decide whether or not to accept the gambit. Since White cannot easily regain the pawn if Black accepts, the King's Gambit Accepted is the most common.
According to Chessbase and correspondence chess statistics, white chances are about 54%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6
Petrov's Defence (sometimes spelled Petroff's) has a long history, it was first popularized by Alexander Petrov — a Russian chess player of the mid-19th century. In recognition of the early investigations by the Russian masters Petrov and Carl Jaenisch, this opening is called the Russian Game in some countries.
The Petrov has a reputation of being dull and uninspired. However, it offers attacking opportunities for both sides, and many lines are quite sharp. Often a trade occurs, and black after gaining a tempo (or unit of time) gains a well placed knight. Pillsbury's game in 1896 against Emmanuel Lasker testifies to this. The Black counterattack in the center also avoids the Ruy Lopez and Giuoco Piano.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 41%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5
The Ruy Lopez, generally called the Spanish Game outside of English speaking countries, is named after the 16th century Spanish priest Rúy López de Segura. He made a systematic study of this and other openings in the 150-page book on chess Libro del Ajedrez written in 1561 (which also included some more esoteric and what some would consider unfair suggestions, such as setting up the board so the sun shines in one's opponent's eyes).
However, although it is named after him, this particular opening was known earlier; it is included in the Göttingen manuscript, which dates from 1490. Popular use of the Ruy Lopez opening did not develop, however, until the mid-1800s when Jaenisch, a Russian theoretician, "rediscovered" its potential.
The opening is still in active use as the double king's pawn opening most commonly used in master play; it has been adopted by almost all players at some point in their careers and many play it from both the white and black sides.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6
Indian defences are characterized by the opening moves 1. d4 Nf6, although they can be reached by other move orders. These defences have a vast body of theory and have been employed by nearly all masters since the early twentieth century. They are all to varying degrees hypermodern defences, where Black invites White to establish an imposing presence in the centre with the plan of drawing it out, undermining it, and destroying it.
The Indian defences are considered more ambitious and double-edged than the symmetrical reply 1 ... d5. In the Queen's Gambit Declined, Black accepts a cramped, passive position with the plan of gradually equalizing and obtaining counterplay. In contrast, breaking symmetry on move one leads to rapid combat in the centre, where Black can obtain counterplay without necessarily equalizing first.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 d5
Queen's pawn opening is the symmetrical response to 1.d4, leading to a more passive play than 1. ... Nf6, particularly after second white move 2.c4 named as Queen's gambit.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 42%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 d5 c4
The Queen's Gambit is one of the oldest known chess openings, as Lucena wrote about it in 1497 and it is mentioned in an earlier manuscript in Göttingen. During the early period of modern chess queen pawn openings were not in fashion, and the Queen's Gambit did not become common until the 1873 tournament in Vienna.
As Steinitz and Tarrasch developed chess theory and increased the appreciation of positional play, the Queen's Gambit grew more popular. It reached its peak popularity in the 1920s and 1930s, and was played in 32 out of 34 games in the 1934 World Chess Championship.
Since then Black has increasingly moved away from symmetrical openings, tending to use the Indian defences to combat queen pawn openings. The Queen's Gambit is still frequently played, however, and it remains an important part of many grandmasters' opening repertoires.
With 2.c4, White threatens to exchange a wing pawn (the c-pawn) for a center pawn (Black's d-pawn) and dominate the center with e2-e4. This is not a true gambit since if Black accepts the pawn he cannot expect to keep it.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Sebastien Marez (2377)
d4 d5 c4 c6
The Slav is one of the primary defenses to the Queen's Gambit. Although it was analyzed as early as 1590, it wasn't until the 1920s that it started to be explored extensively. Many masters of Slavic descent helped develop the theory of this opening, including Alapin, Alekhine, Bogoljubov, and Vidmar.
The Slav received an exhaustive test during the two Alekhine–Euwe World Championship matches in 1935 and 1937. Played by 11 of the first 13 world champions, this defense was particularly favored by Euwe, Botvinnik, and Smyslov. More recently the Slav has been adopted by Anand, Ivanchuk, Lautier, Short, and other top grandmasters. Today the theory of the Slav is very extensive and well developed.
Black faces three major problems in many variations of the Queen's Gambit Declined (QGD).
- Development of the Black queen bishop is difficult, as it is often blocked by ...e6.
- The pawn structure offers White targets, especially the possibility of a minority attack on the queenside in the Exchange variation of the QGD.
- White often plays Bg5 to pin the black king knight on f6 against the black queen, and unpinning it is awkward for Black.
The Slav addresses all of these problems. Black's queen bishop is unblocked, the pawn structure remains balanced, and the move Bg5 is not yet threatening as the unmoved black pawn on e7 prevents the pin. Also, if Black later takes the gambit pawn with ...dxc4, the support provided by the pawn on c6 allows ...b5 which may threaten to keep the gambit pawn or to drive away a white piece that has captured it, gaining Black a tempo for queenside expansion.
On the other side, Black usually won't be able to develop the queen bishop without first giving up the center with ...dxc4, and moving this bishop may leave the Black queenside weak. White will try to dominate the center with e2-e4.
According to Chessbase, Black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Sebastien Marez
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6
This is the second most played line in Sicilian. Reached commonly after 2. ... Nc6, logically the best move. The play is probably easier for Black than in 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 variation, but it is much harder to win against a same level player who plays Sicilian Sveshnikov. In my opinion, one should use this opening only to obtain a draw against a stronger player, and to save energy.
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange, Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
e4 e6
The French defence has a reputation for solidity and resilience, though it can result in a somewhat cramped game for Black in the early stages. Black often gains counterattacking possibilities on the queenside while White tends to concentrate on the kingside.
The defence is named after a match played by correspondence between the cities of London and Paris in 1834 (although earlier examples of games with the opening do exist). In the early 20th century, Géza Maróczy was perhaps the first world-class player to make it his primary weapon against 1.e4. It is currently Black's third most popular reply to 1.e4, behind only 1...c5 and 1...e5. Players including Viktor Korchnoi, Mikhail Botvinnik, Wolfgang Uhlmann and Nigel Short have been particularly fond of it. More recently, the defence has featured strongly in the opening repertoires of Evgeny Bareev, Alexander Khalifman, Alexander Morozevich, and Teimour Radjabov.
According to chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Toncho Tenev
Sebastien Marez (2377)
e4 c6
The Caro-Kann, like the Sicilian Defense and French Defense, is classified as a "semi-open game", but it is thought to be more passive and drawish than either of those openings.
The opening is named after the German players Horatio Caro and Marcus Kann who analyzed the opening in 1886.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Sebastien Marez
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
c4
The English Opening is the fourth most popular opening move in chess. White begins the fight for the center by staking a claim to the d5 square. Common responses are 1...e5 (which can lead to positions similar to the Sicilian Defence but with opposite colors), 1...c5 (the Symmetrical Variation), and 1...Nf6. Also perfectly playable are 1...e6 (often leading to a Queen's Gambit Declined after 2.d4 d5) and 1...c6 (often leading to a Slav Defence after 2.d4 d5, a Caro-Kann Defence after 2.e4 d5, or a Reti Opening after 2.Nf3 d5 3.b3).
The English is a very flexible opening. Although many lines of the English have a distinct character, it often transposes into other openings. If White plays an early d4, the game will usually transpose into either the Queen's Gambit or an Indian defence.
The English derives its name from the English (unofficial) world champion, Howard Staunton, who played it during his 1843 match with Amant. It fell out of favor (the opening was notably disdained by Morphy), but is now recognized as a solid opening that may be used to reach both classical and hypermodern positions. Botvinnik, Karpov, and Kasparov all employed it during their world championship matches. Bobby Fischer created a stir when he switched to it from the King's Pawn against Boris Spassky in 1972.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
f4
Bird's Opening is named after the 19th century English master, Henry Bird.
According to ChessBase, in master level chess, out of the twenty possible opening moves, 1.f4 ranks seventh in popularity. It is much less popular than 1.c4 (the English Opening) mainly because 1.f4 weakens the king's position slightly.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
f4 e5
This opening is called From's Gambit. White can then transpose into the King's Gambit with 2.e4. If White wants to stay in the Bird's Opening play can continue 2.fxe5 d6 (2...Nc6 is also possible) 3.exd6 Bxd6. Now White must play 4.Nf3 (and if 4...g5, either 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 or 5.d4 g4 6.Ne5) or 4.g3, avoiding 4.Nc3?? Qh4+ 5.g3 Qxg3+ 5.hxg3 Bxg3 checkmate.
This gambit can give Black an overwhelming attack if White goes wrong, but even if White plays accurately Black still has some attacking chances. From's Gambit is named after the Danish chess player Severin From (1828–1895).
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 Nf6
Alekhine's Defence is named after Alexander Alekhine who first used it in two games in the 1921 Budapest tournament: one against Andre Steiner (which he won) and the other against Fritz Sämisch (which he drew). Another early exponent of the defence was Ernst Grünfeld. The opening is considered hypermodern because Black provokes White to attack Black's knight and occupy the centre with his pawns, hoping to prove that White's imposing mass of pawns in the centre (which often includes pawns on c4, d4, e5, and f4) is in fact weak.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 39%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nc3
The Vienna Game. White's second move is in contrast to the more usual 2.Nf3, which can lead to the Ruy Lopez, Giuoco Piano, Scotch Game and other openings. The original idea behind 2.Nc3 was to play a kind of delayed King's Gambit with an eventual f4, but in modern play White often takes much quieter paths.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 56%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4
The Nimzo-Indian Defence is a hypermodern opening, developed by Grandmaster Aaron Nimzowitsch who introduced it to master-level chess in the early 20th century. Unlike most Indian openings the Nimzo-Indian does not involve an immediate fianchetto, although Black often follows up with ...b6 and ...Bb7. By pinning White's knight Black prevents the threatened 4.e4 and seeks to inflict doubled pawns on White. White will attempt to create a pawn centre and develop his pieces to prepare for an assault on the Black position.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6
Since White's third move 3.Nf3, a move commonly played to avoid the Nimzo-Indian Defence, does not threaten to occupy the centre with 4.e4, Black has the option of playing 3...b6, called Queen's Indian Defense.
The play in the Queen's Indian is similar to that of the Nimzo-Indian. The opening is considered a hypermodern one, since Black does not strive to occupy the centre with his pawns immediately. Instead he intends to fianchetto his queen's bishop and put pressure on the e4-square in order to prevent White from occupying that square. With the White centre restrained Black intends to attack it. As in most other hypermodern openings, White will attempt to solidify his centre, prove that it is strong, not weak, and use his advantage in space to crush Black.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 d5
This move transposes in queen's gambit lines. Not much more to say about it. See the queen's gambit openings.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6
The King's Indian Defence is a chess opening that begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 followed by ...Bg7 and ...d6. The King's Indian is a "hypermodern" opening, where Black lets White take the center with the view to later ruining White's "wonderful" position, often by an attack on White's king. It is a risky opening, which has been a favourite of players such as former world champions Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer and Tigran Petrosian. Prominent grandmasters John Nunn, Svetozar Gligoric, Wolfgang Uhlmann, and Larry Christiansen have also played this opening frequently.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 42%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4
The Italian Game is a chess opening, or more accurately a family of chess openings, characterized by this move.
The openings arising from the Italian Game are among the oldest recorded openings and the sequence of moves is known as the Épine Dorsale. The Giuoco Piano (Italian: "quiet game") was played by the Portuguese Damiano at the beginning of the 15th century, and the Italian Greco at the beginning of the 16th century. The Italian Game received its name because of Greco's work, while Damiano has the misfortune to have his name attached to the Damiano Defense, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6?, a line he rightly condemned. The Two Knights Defense was analyzed by Giulio Cesare Polerio (c.1550–c.1610) in 1580.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 52%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
g3
The King's Indian Attack (KIA) can be reached by different routes (usually by 1.e4, 1.Nf3 or 1.g3). Often the KIA is reached via 1.e4 followed by d3, Nd2, Ngf3, g3, Bg2, and 0-0, an example being 1.e4 e6 2.d3 (this is possible against almost any opening move -- 1...c6, 1...c5, etc.) d5 3.Nd2 followed by Ngf3, etc.
Since the KIA is a closed, strategic opening choice, many 1.e4 players prefer to play sharper, more open variations. When played after 1.e4, the KIA is most often used against the semi-open defences where Black responds asymmetrically to e4, such as the French Defence, Sicilian Defence, Caro-Kann Defence, etc. The KIA is less often played against 1.e4 e5, where most White players prefer to play more aggressive lines such as the Ruy Lopez.
The King's Indian attack is considered to be one of the most solid opening choices for White, but not very aggressive. It is similar to the King's Indian Defense with colors reversed. White's plan is usually to either push the d and e pawns up a rank as the game progresses in order to bind the opponent. If Black castles king-side, White often follows up with h4 and a king-side pawn storm, placing his king at h1 if needed. If Black castles queen-side, White can move his knight to c4 and attack on the queen-side.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5
The Giuoco Piano (Italian: "quiet game"), is the oldest recorded opening. The Portuguese Damiano played it at the beginning of the 15th century and the Italian Greco played it at the beginning of the 16th century. Because of Greco's work on the opening, it is sometimes called the Italian Game, although that term is also used more generally to describe the position after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4. The Giuoco Piano was popular through the 19th century, but modern refinements in defensive play have led most chess masters towards openings like the Ruy Lopez that offer White greater chances for long term initiative.
White's "Italian bishop" at c4 prevents Black from advancing in the center with ...d5 and attacks the vulnerable f7 square. White plans to dominate the center with d2-d4 and to attack the Black king. Black aims to free his game by exchanging pieces and playing the pawn break ...d5, or to hold his center pawn at e5.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 46%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 b4
The gambit is named after Captain William Davies Evans, the first player known to have employed it. The first game with the opening is considered to be Evans - McDonnell, London 1827, although in that game a slightly different move order was tried (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O d6 and only now 5. b4). The gambit became very popular shortly after that, being employed a number of times in the series of games between McDonnell and Louis de la Bourdonnais in 1834. Players such as Adolf Anderssen, Paul Morphy and Mikhail Chigorin subsequently took it up. It was out of favour for much of the 20th century, although John Nunn and Jan Timman played some games with it in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and in the 1990s Garry Kasparov used it in a few of his games (notably a famous 25-move win against Viswanathan Anand in Riga, 1995), which prompted a brief revival of interest in it.
The Evans Gambit is basically an aggressive variant of the Giuoco Piano, which normally continues with the positional moves 4. c3 or 4. d3. The idea behind the move 4. b4 is to give up a pawn in order to secure a strong centre and bear down on Black's weak-point, f7. Ideas based on Ba3, preventing black from castling, are also often in the air. The most obvious and most usual way for Black to meet the gambit is to accept it with 4... Bxb4, after which White plays 5. c3 and Black usually follows up with 5... Ba5 (5... Be7 and, less often 5... Bc5 and 5... Bd6 are also played). White usually follows up with 6. d4.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3
King's Knight Gambit. The main variation of King's gambit, played in 2 games out of 3. The knight prevents the black queen from checking in h4, although many King's gambit variants are interesting for white with the king at the center, probably making King's gambit the most illogical and critical opening.
Black still can prevent white from castling by playing the Cunningham defense 3. ... Be7
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 49%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5
Kieseritsky Gambit is a relatively positional opening. This is the most played variation after 2.Nc3
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7
The Cunningham Defense is black's most aggressive option; it can permanently prevent white from castling after 4.Bc4 Bh4+ 5.Kf1 (else the wild Bertin Gambit, or Three Pawns' Gambit 5.g3 fxg3 6.0-0 gxh2+ 7.Kh1.) However, nowadays it is more common for black to simply play 4. ..Nf6 5.e5 Ng4, the Modern Cunningham.
The first "best game" (Game 156 : Hrubaru [1400] - Berthelot [1420]) voted by FICGS players, followed this opening, not played anymore at a master level.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 d6
The extremely popular Fischer Defense (planning h6 and g5 but only rarely Bg4, a natural-looking but often weak move that beginners play too early) is complicated and subtle. After Bobby Fischer lost a 1959 game at Mar del Plata to Boris Spassky, in which the Kieseritsky Gambit was played, he left in tears and promptly went to work at devising a new King's Gambit defense. In a 1962 article titled "A Bust to the King's Gambit" he put forth this idea and claimed that it refuted the King's Gambit, which was clearly not the case. The article concluded with the famously arrogant line, "Of course white can always play differently in which case he merely loses differently." Nonetheless, the article was possibly the most influential ever written about an opening, and ever since the King's Gambit has been rare in Grandmaster play, though a few players such as Joseph Gallagher still use it.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Gino Figlio (2454)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6
The definition of the Najdorf from other Sicilians, a good move taking control of the b5 square, and preparing b5, this opening named after the Argentinian GM Miguel Najdorf who poularized the opening, but he did not create it as is often the case with so many modern openings. A6 is also designed to play e5 without white being able to reply with Bb5+
============
Contributors : Steven Hanly, Andrew Stephenson, Gino Figlio
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3
The Morra Gambit is an interesting opening against the Sicilian Defence. It is not common in Grandmaster games or correspondence chess, but at club level chess it is an excellent weapon.
White sacrifices a pawn to develop quickly and create attacking chances. In exchange for the gambit pawn, White has a piece developed and a pawn in the center, while Black has nothing but an empty space on c7.
If black wants to refuse the gambit, he can do so with 3... d5 or 3... Nf6, both of which transpose to the Alapin variation of the Sicilian (usually introduced by the move order 1.e4 c5 2.c3). Alternatively, 3... d6 is the Smith-Morra declined proper, and leads to unique lines.
Some interesting games played on FICGS by David Angeli : Game 563, Game 565 (accepted gambit) or Game 555 (declined, with 3. ... d5).
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
Nf3 d5
Now White can choose to transpose to a Queen's pawn game or to play hypermodern (not to fight for the center in the opening).
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
Nf3 Nf6
Réti opening.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5
The Grünfeld Defence is named after Ernst Grünfeld, the player who first employed the defence in the 1920s. The defence was later adopted by a number of prominent players, including Vasily Smyslov, Viktor Korchnoi and Bobby Fischer. Garry Kasparov has often used the defence, including in his World Championship matches against Anatoly Karpov in 1986, 1987 and 1990, and Vladimir Kramnik in 2000. In more recent years it has been regularly employed by Loek Van Wely, Peter Svidler and Luke McShane among others.
The opening relies on one of the main principles of the hypermodern school, which was coming to the fore in the 1920s - that a large pawn centre could be a liability rather than an asset. This idea is seen most clearly in the Exchange Variation of the defence: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4. Now White has an imposing looking centre - and the main continuation 5...Nxc3 bxc3 strengthens it still further. Black generally attack's White's centre with ...c5 and ...Bg7, often followed by moves like ...cxd4, ...Bg4, and ...Nc6. White often uses his big centre to launch an attack against Black's king, which generally ends up on g8 after Black castles king-side.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7
The King's Indian defense is a "hypermodern" opening, where Black lets White take the center with the view to later ruining White's "wonderful" position, often by an attack on White's king. It is a risky opening, which has been a favourite of players such as former world champions Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer and Tigran Petrosian. Prominent grandmasters John Nunn, Svetozar Gligoric, Wolfgang Uhlmann, and Larry Christiansen have also played this opening frequently.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
David Grosdemange (1912)
Nf3 c5
this move allows white to enter in a sicilian game with 1)e4 , or in an english opening with 2)c4 .
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 b4
Wing Gambit is the name given to the branches of several openings in which one player gambits a wing pawn, usually the b pawn).
Most common is the Wing Gambit in the Sicilian Defence. After Black takes with 2...cxb4, the usual continuation is 3.a3 bxa3 (3...d5 is also possible). It is also possible to decline (or at least delay acceptance of) the gambit with 2...d5.
For his pawn, White gets quicker development and a central advantage, but it is not generally considered one of White's better choices against the Sicilian, and is virtually never seen at the professional level (amongst amateurs it is more common, though still not so popular as other systems).
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 Bg5
The Trompowski attack is named after the one-time Brazilian champion Octavio Siqueiro F. Trompowski (1897–1984) who played it in the 1930s and 1940s.
With the second move, White is intending to exchange his bishop for Black's knight inflicting doubled pawns upon Black in the process. This is not a lethal threat, Black can choose to fall in with White's plan.
After 1.d4 Nf6, the Trompowski is a popular alternative to the more common 2.c4 and 2.Nf3 lines. By playing 2.Bg5, White avoids the immense opening theory of various Indian Defences like the Queen's Indian and the King's Indian. Some of the grandmasters who often play the Trompowski are Julian Hodgson and Antoaneta Stefanova.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 56%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5
Richter-Rauzer opening, caracterized by last move 6.Bg5, was introduced by the German Master, Kurt Richter. The idea was to force an immediate 6....e6 or risk doubled king-pawns. At this point, Vsevolod Rauzer contributed the move, 7.Qd2. Here, White has an advantage in space and development is nearly complete while Black has a better pawn structure.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Adrian Tan (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6
The Ruy Lopez exchange, White gives up the advantage of the bishop pair, but gains compensation by damaging black's pawn structure.
White has a long range plan of creating an endgame where he is able to profit from a king side majority while Black is unable to due to the doubled pawn on the Queen's side.
Traditionally, this opening has not being very popular at the top level, but Fischer had some success with it in the 60s.
Note: White doesn't actually win the e pawn with this move because dxc6 Nxe5 Qd4 recovers the pawn.
============
Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, Adrian Tan
Sandor Porkolab (2269)
e4 d5
One of the oldest recorded openings, first recorded as being played between Francesco di Castellvi and Narciso Vinyoles in Valencia in 1475, and being mentioned by Lucena in 1497. It and the French Defense are the oldest asymmetric defenses to 1.e4.
It is a playable, underrated defence that can lead to equality for black. White almost always takes the pawn. Other alternatives are 2. Nc3!?, leading to the Dunst opening, 2. d4!?, leading to the Blackmar-Deimer gambit, and 2. e5?!, leading to unique positions where black can easily equalise. After 2. exd5, there are two very different ways of playing the defence, 2...Nf6 and 2...Qxd5.
1.e4 d5 2.e5!? is also an option - going to French/CaroCann Lines - preventing the skandinawian...
============
Contributors : Adam Domurad, Sandor Porkolab
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 d6
The Pirc Defence, sometimes known as the Ufimtsev Defence.
Amir agheri : When it comes to chess openings, I prefer to play less popular, less traveled lines. For almost two decades, I have mostly played the Queen pawn Opening, the Dutch Defense, and the French Defense, which are all well known, solid openings sane opening choices. However, I must confess I have a passion for opening study and experimenting. Recently I have been experimenting with the Balogh Counter Gambit against 1.e4.
Did he say the Balogh Counter Gambit?? What is that?
Well, play starts out like a Pirc Defense, 1.e4 d6 2.d4 and now instead of 2…Nf6, Black plays the shocking 2…f5!?
============
Contributors : Amir Bagheri, Thibault de Vassal
Amir Bagheri (2513)
e4 d6 d4 f5
The move has great surprise value! One has to hunt hard in opening books to even find the Balogh Counter Gambit (BCG) mentioned. With a little investigating you will find the BCG is covered under the Dutch Defense, The move order there is 1.d4 f5 2.e4, the Staunton Gambit, then 2…d6 transposes to the BCG.
I first saw the BCG mentioned in Richard Wincor’s book “Baroque Chess Openings”. A whimsical book on less traveled opening lines with the idea of engaging battle on one’s own terms. The book does make an interesting point. One can play less forceful openings that offer soundness and surprise value in return for more frequently getting known lines/positions.
If you are lucky enough to find a BCG referenced in an opening book the analysis line usually runs 1.d4 f5 2.e4 d6 3.exf5 Bxf5 4.Qf3 Qc8 5.Bd3 Bxd3 (5…Bg4 is better) 6.Qxd3 with a clear plus for White.
============
Contributors : Amir Bagheri
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5
The Latvian Gambit is an aggressive but dubious chess opening, which often leads to wild complications. This opening is almost never seen at the top levels, but some correspondence chess players are devoted to it.
It was formerly known as the Greco Counter Gambit. The name is a tribute to the Latvian players, notably Karlis Betins, who analyzed it in the early part of the 20th century.
It looks like a King's Gambit with the colours reversed.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Thibault de Vassal
Gregory Kohut (1783)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5
The beginning of the end ! Black has no moveoptions and the Qf6-Move is a MUST and not a can.
The following comment is by me (Benjamin Aldag):
The Kings Gambit was good to play in the early 80s. But with comming of good and fast computers, the Kings Gambit is researched move for move in all lines. If both players play the best moves, all white can reach is a draw. But the point is, white has the chance, to do more wrong in the opening, than black. Ok, there are some kiddy-tricks by white, but if black want an equal game, he will get it. Now letz take a look to the latvian,- the Kings Gambit with a tempo down. If the Kings Gambit is bad, why should the Latvian Gambit good for black with a tempo down ? The only way for black is to hope, that the white player isn't prepared for this gambit. There are many traps, but the basics of these traps are easy to see. Black is from beginning on under big pressure and has no dynamic play. In nearly all lines of the Latvian Gambit, black has only forced moves. From now on, i will give to all moves in all lines my commentary. Ok.... i'am not a GM, IM, or FM, but i think i know the Latvian Gambit really good.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Gregory Kohut
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6
This poor looking defense is know as damiano defense. It is far from being refuted, if played correctly, hoverer, this defense is very sharp and lack attacking chance, black doesn't have very good compensation for a pawn.
If played to perfection, it is know as draw, but player avoids it as it is very sharp, one mistake for black and it is over.
2 F6 as many disvatage, is open the a2-68 diagonal, it breaks black short castle. It takes ways the f6 square for the knight and the queen. It also open the very dengerous h5-e8 diagonal, all this to protect a pawn, this is a very dangerous opening. It should called Damiano Gambit. Should be a draw, even if your opponent take the e5 pawn, as 2... f6 isn't an instant protection.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Sophie Leclerc
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 Nc6
The Nimzowitsch or Fischer Defense.
This is a somewhat unusual chess opening and an example of hypermodern chess where Black invites White to occupy the centre of the board at an early stage with pawns. Black's intent is to block or otherwise restrain White's central pawns and, if allowed to do so by inaccurate play by White, eventually undermine the White pawn center by well-timed pawn advances of his own or by attacking the White pieces defending the centre.
============
Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Thibault de Vassal
Peter Marriott (1816)
g4
Grob's Attack named after Swiss IM Henri Grob (1904-74).
White intends to put pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal while also threatening to launch a Kingside pawn storm.
The opening is considered inferior for White (-0.32 at this stage of analysis 29/06/2008), but it avoids endless theoretical discussions and cannot be avoided by Black. The positions are often highly tactical and natural play by Black may lead him into several traps.
Evaluation notes from Kjetil Prestesaeter:
I have added all known named lines plus other lines favored by Rybka (Rybka 2.3 mp 32-bit, 17ply). Many of the named lines seem to be more romantic than strong. Please extend the analysis if you have spare time and computer power.
Notes by Peter Marriott:
I used to use the Grob in many blitz games I have played against humans. I actually had good success, not because it is a good move, but because it confused many players. On a chess server, I actually achieved a rating from 16-1700 by playing it. Many, many players simply responded by ...d5 and after I played Bg2, they took the g4 pawn, which led me to win a whole bunch of games by playing 3.c4, with an eye on b7. Maybe the right way to play this for black is simply to play 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 then c6. Then white wonders what he's gonna do (At least I did!)
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Gary Gruwé, Kjetil Prestesaeter, Peter Marriott
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3
The ponziani opening.
Aims to grasp d4 early on, but is this possibly a premature aim?
============
Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Kieran Child
Normajean Yates (1946)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3
The Catalan opening.
According to MCO-14 (p. 509, second paragraph), the organisers of the 1929 Barcelona Tournament asked Tartakower to invent a variation and name it after that region.
If this is true, it is most interesting chess history: an opening - like a dish - invented on request!
============
Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Normajean Yates
Mark Carroll (1700)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6
This is an easy opening trap for black to fall into.
============
Contributors : Mark Carroll
Paul Brand Lyard (1400)
b4
Sokolsky opening.
It was named as 'Orangutan opening' by Tartakover.
============
Contributors : Gary Gruw, Ilmars Cirulis,
Paul-E Brand-Lyard.
Benjamin Aldag (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 Nxe4 d5 Ng5
How can i describe the past moves of this game with one word ? Hmmm....it's GAMING ! White is playing with his opponent like a cat with a mice. Just count the queenmoves of black, and you will understand me. Let us remember some opening rules:
1. Don't move to early the queen.
2. Don't move with the same figure in the opening twice or more times.
3. Don't open the pawnshield of your king (f-pawn etc.).
4. Develope your figures fast and with one move.
Now......we can see,- Black did in the opening all wrong, what a chessplayer can do wrong in the opening. In the Latvian Gambit, White will kill Black with a headshot !
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag
Benjamin Aldag (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 d3 exd3 Bxd3 d5 O-O Bd6 Re1 Ne7 Nc4 dxc4 Bxc4 Bxh2+ Kxh2 Qxc4 Re4 Qc5 Be3 Qf5 Qd6
After Qd6, black is totally lost. Is this the way, you want to go in the opening with black ? I believe not ! All white figures are activ and not far away, to crush the black king. If you think the position of black is O.K., than chess is not your game and you should change your hobby (maybe its better for you to play checkers or backgammon)
;-)
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag
Dirk Ghysens (2187)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5
The main continuation, and the only one which gives Black opening problems.
============
Contributors : Dirk Ghysens
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
h4
Terry Godat :
As bad as this move is, it does not appear to be any worse than 1.g4. The latter,however, has a following and some literature to its dubious credit. 1.h4 has never been popular.,
Yugi Inving :
This move doesn't really look good. it is an irregular opening so it has to be answer with an irregular opening. It is not an error, just the fact that the white are skipping a turn and begin an attack on G7.
============
Contributors : Terry Godat, Yugi Inving
Paul Brand Lyard (1400)
b4 g6
Sokolsky opening.
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis, Paul Brand-Lyard
Tim Hansell (0932)
h4 e5 Rh3 d5 Re3 Nc6 d4 e4
============
Contributors : Terry Godat
Now the position is a sort of Reverse Advance French with a rook instead of a pawn on e3. Already this opening has received a bit more attention than it deserves.
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
b3
The Larsen-Opening
============
Contributors : Ulrich Imbeck, Gregory Kohut, Carlos Oliveira
Ingo Schwarz (1824)
e4 c5 Bc4
An idea, which I have tested in some tournament games. I often played Bc4 in other Sicilian systems, so I asked me, why not play it as soon as possible.
This move works against d5 and sometimes a Bxf7+ combination is possible like in other openings with sharp play.
============
Contributors : Ingo Schwarz
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
e4 e6 d4 f5
The 'Kingston Defence' is characterised by the opening moves:
1.e4 e6
2.d4 f5
It can also be reached after the transposition of moves 1.d4 f5 2.e4 e6 — a form of Staunton Gambit Declined.
The first record of the defence being played is Schiffers-Chigorin, 1880. The first record of a win by Black is the 1892 victory of Elson over Emanuel Lasker. It remains obscure, but has considerable surprise value.
The Kingston Defence shares a weakness with the French Defence — in the form of the constrained queen's bishop -- and a strength with the Dutch Defence — namely the early thrust of the f-pawn, which often supports a knight on e4. (These French and Dutch similarities led to the first, uncomfortable name for the defence: Frutch.) White's decision at move three tends to define the nature of the game that follows.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4
Zucketort gambit accepted.
Black's usual reply to an unorthodox opening. It is sound, but only if black recognises he shouldn't try and hold on to the pawn forever.
Chessbase considers this 54% win for white
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 Nf6 Nc3
Reti - Van Geet
A hypermodern move and one that refuses to confirm central pawn structure. However, after blocking the f pawn, this block of the c pawn can be considered weak and restrictive. If black plays d5 and c5, he can often get a good game.
ChessBase considers this a 49% win for white - lower than the average opening.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 d4
Norwald variation - Electric eel attack
Possibly the least played opening to still have a name. On bigbase9, only 4 games played d4 in response to the Norwald and thus it is hard to analyse. Black doesn't have any immediete wins though, and after the pawn takes on d or e, white will play e5 and Nf3 for an OK game.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Terry Godat (2137)
h4 e5 Rh3 d5 Re3 Nc6 d4 e4 c4
More attention than it deserves? pah!
With c4, white continues to attack the centre by attempting to undermine the defence of e4. This is a tactic typical in grob openings.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Terry Godat
Thanks for your compliment to my invention, but it really is quite silly.
Lazaro Munoz (1785)
h4 d5
Kadas opening.
Black prevents the rook from developing. White's only plan has been destroyed. The type of player who would play h4 is the same player who would follow up with h5, trying to develop the rook again to h4 this time.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Lazaro Munoz
Kieran Child (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 f6
The most common move, and yet another blunder. Often played by those who were confused by white's opening, and think they can hog the pawn advantage.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Toon Pepermans (1992)
d4 e5
Englund gambit (/Charlick gambit)
Black's aim is to avoid closed systems and castle early, though nowadays this move is rarely seen without the follow up trap. In case the multiple follow up traps appeal to anyone reading this, remember that this opening is never seen at grandmaster level, emphasising its hideous unsoundness.
-K.Child
===========
1. d4 e5
{The Seccond best first move gambit in Chess. The authority is GM Stefan Bücker, who wrote one of the bibles of unorthodox openings, with his book "Englund Gambit" (1988). He has touched upon the opening in later collumns both at chesscafe.com and in his magazine; Kaissiber. The conclusion seems to be that White is better with acurate play, but OTB White usually avoids those main lines.}
2. dxe5 Nc6
(2... d6 "Hartlaub-Gambit")
3. Nf3 Qe7
(3... f6 "Soller Gambit")
(3... Nge7 "Zilbermints Gambit")
{Now White can chose between several playable lines:}
A) 4. Bf4 {Grob Variation}
B) 4. Qd5 {Stockholm Variation}
C) 4. Nc3
D) 4. e4
-P.Valle, 5th Nov 2010
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Paul Valle, Toon Pepermans
Paul Brand Lyard (1777)
f3
This is known as the Barne's or Gedult's opening. I don't even think there is even think there is anything achieved in this opening except for the fact that the g1 knight will either have to come out on h3 or e2, which gives white a cramped position.
============
Contributors : Lucien Boissier, Malik Mohandoussaid, Benjamin Block, Peter Marriott, PaulSandra Brand-Lyard.
Thibault de Vassal (2514)
Na3 d5 g4 Bxg4
Now the question : Did Black win the game already ? :) .. Such strange openings have at least the merit to create real challenges IMO.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Roberto Migliorini (2058)
c4 b5
Jaenisch gamnbit
Never been an especially popular opening, the Jaenisch gambit is a theoretically unsound attempt at getting an interesting game out of the English. Black aims to quickly develop the bishop to b7 and gain central control, though he is not without some tactical traps on the queenside. White can easily fight for a solid centre, and start some counterplay while black is trying to regain the pawn.
Chessbase considers this a 34% win for black, 32% if white accepts the pawn.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Roberto Migliorini
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 Nf6 b4 e5
I'll call this idea the "Rebaudo variation" because, in all my time playing this opening, he's the first person to play it against me, and I actually think it looks quite good. Black threatens to stop any hope white had of queenside space by capturing the pawn on b4. This move is also more forceful than the common e6 as b5 now falls foul to e4 and black has the advantage.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 c6 Ne5 Nf6 Nc3 O-O Bd3 d6 Nf3 Na6 a3 Nc7 O-O d5 Ne5 c5 dxc5
Opening up the position shouldn't harm White.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 c6 Ne5 Nf6 Nc3 O-O Bd3 d6 Nf3 Na6 a3 Nc7 O-O d5 Ne5 c5 dxc5 Bxc5 cxd5
Further opening up.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Thibault de Vassal (2514)
h4 e5 a4
Hypermodern.. crab opening :)
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5
White should avoid exchanging Queens (i.e. by Qe2), because the White Queen tends to be more powerful in this opening than the Black Queen!
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+
Fritz prefers ..d6 to this, but I like this simple move's adherence to basic opening principles.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5
White has decided this is not going to be a highly tactical opening, so Black needs to decide what formation he will settle for, and where his minor pieces will go.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nh3
Slightly mysterious, but does create the option of putting the knight on f4, which might put useful pressure on g6 if the White queen comes out to h5+.
One reason why we are advised not to develop knights onto rook-3 is in case they are captured by an enemy bishop and you have to re-capture with the pawn. But in this opening, there are currently three of the opponent's own pawns preventing this capture.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Yugi Inving (0980)
h4 g6
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
g6 doesn't fight agaisn't h4, it just make H4 the best opening possible and open the diagonal a1-h8. the bishop will open to attack
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 O-O Ng6 Re1 Qc7 Nf4 Bc5 Nxg6
White may think he is scuppering Black's plans to castle kingside, but really he's just opening the h-file for the black rook against the white king. Black's kingside attack will play itself now.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Mike Hoogland (1764)
d3
I have seen this move twince. it is a very good move for people that want to play whit black but dont have them.
I play this opening a lot when I want to get an initial passive game.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving, Jose Fernández Bueno, Mike Hoogland
Mike Hoogland (1760)
d4 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 g6
Black opts for the Leningrad variation. A sharp opening in which black counterattacks the centre with his pieces.
============
Contributors : Mike Hoogland
Mike Hoogland (1760)
d4 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 g6 c3
White, having not played c4 as in a typical Dutch opening, choses to put the pawn on c3. This has two advantages:
-It reinforces the d4 pawn, so that Bg7 is not putting real pressure on the d4 pawn. Subsequently, the chance of a succesful counterattack by black in the centre has become significantly lower.
-It opens the d1-a4 diagonal for the queen. From b3 the queen can attack the b7 pawn, together with the bishop on g2. Also, because f5 has weakened the black's king position, the queen can give a check on b3 or make castling for black more difficult.
============
Contributors : Mike Hoogland
Telmo Escobar (2055)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 Nf3
{after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5} Now it's an English opening {another move order to reach this position is 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4}.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3
Benko Gambit Declinded
If white isn't happy about accepting the gambit he can always decline it and hope to capture the pawn under better cicumstances. (Yasser Seirawan: Winning Chess Openings p.161)
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Terry Godat (2088)
e4 f5
This is Inving gambit. this gambit is the most dengerous weapon to use for black, as it can turn on the face because of Qh5+ the inving Gambit accepted have only four variant possible, After Fxe5. 2... g6, 2... h5 2... Nf6 and 2.. Kf7
the gambit can also be refused with , Nc3, Nf3, d3, f3, g3... or white can play the Advence Inving Gambit Variant (AIGV).
This gambit is not a bad move tough it's is -0.37 for Rybka. ( This opening has no name, i just name it like that for fun) it can also be an inversed From gambit.
============
This gambit, the Fred, is completely unjustified, except as a joke.
Contributors : Yugi Inving, Terry Godat
Julien Coll (1672)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Bb4
A popular move, and not only an inversed Sicilian Rossolimo. Because of the reversed colours and the tempo up for White, it leads to particular and typical positions of the English Opening, some of its most important tabyias.
To permit Bxc3 or not to permit Bxc3, that is the big question for White here.
============
Contributors : Julien Coll
Telmo Escobar (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f3 Qb6
Achtung! This move is recommended in one of the editions of the Yugoslav Enciclopedia of Chess Openings, even evaluating this position as favouring Black (!). The idea is, apparently, that White is deprived of the natural reply 7.Be3, so Black has (apparently!) the initiative. Let us see why this is wrong.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Riani Kiiari (1800)
e4 h5
foolish, but dangerous if not stopped, h5 is an amateurs opening.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Block, Riani Kiiari
Benjamin Block (1397)
f3 e5 g4 Qh4+
Grob's Opening, Fool's first Mate variation - the finish.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Paul Brand Lyard (1777)
Nh3
1/Played by French amateur chess player Charles Amar in the 1930s, this opening is also known as the Drunken Knight Opening, or the Ammonia Opening (NH3 is the chemical formula of the ammonia).
There is no particular interest in choosing to play NH3, and it is therefore considered as an irregular opening. It prepares for kingside castling, but so would NF3...
2/Here is the "Sodium Attack", an very rarely opening played in profssional tournaments,the interest of this
Non-orthodoxe opening,is to control cells g5
and f4 in One also move... to prépare the attack on column f, with bishop on c1 at thé 3th.move, and to prépare the casting, so of course!
Paul,Emma& Sandra Brand-Lyard. 2021/07/24th.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Block, Normajean Yates, Florian Cafiero, PaulSandra Brand-Lyard
aka "The Sandra Lyard13061975-03081997 Inventor
Chess variants Annapurna' séries.
Terry Godat (2088)
e4 f5 exf5 Kf7
The real inving gambit or the Inving gambit of the king, can also be called the drunked king opening, Kf7 does somewhat something to prevent White plan
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving, Terry Godat
This has been dubbed (allegedly by some Russian players) the Mao Zedong Attack, as it sacrifices pawns for no reason. Black is already completely lost.
Paul Brand Lyard (1400)
a4
============
Contributors : Benjamin Block, Ruddy Franco, Kostis Megalios, Paul Brand Lyard
This opening is the Ware" opening A4
Mr. Ware, US champion in his time, had
won very much games in tournaments with his
rarely,amazing opening....
What do you play after one a opening a4?
Best move isn' t it to play pawn e5 for blacks?
Blacks to play.
Nota bene
Mr.Paul-emmanuel Brand FRA, Aka
"The Sandra LyardVers13061975",
Inventor Annapurna' chess séries variants said
about this Non- orthodoxe, rarely uses in tournaments by players,afer a long time to try and studied this,that was a precious opening because she can create an big surprise attack on column A,for the oponnent after only twelve moves....
Thé " Meadow Hay" Ware opening' is most strongest than WE believe...2021 July 20th.
Paul,Emma&Sandra Brand-Lyard.
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7
This move is simple too. Ne7 take control of both d5 and f5 sqaure, it also control g6 square which just save from a little Qh5+
As for, Qh5+ g6, The queen is attacked, and you lose the knight
Refuting this is not an easy task. And blakc does have well hidden compensation for the pawn. this opening is gived the rating as the halloween gambit.
Black can not come up with many plans, depending where the knight woulg go, Nf3 just mean you have lost a tempo, Nd3 prevent d4, and Nc4 will cause black to play d5 right away, since they don't want a knight on e3.
the f6 pawn can serve later, in attack, with the moves, g5, -h5 g4- h4.
Black has a little initiative, he must not lose to win the game.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Normajean Yates (1975)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 Nd5
Rybka 3 opening book line. According to the author Jeroen Noomen:
"In 2007 the Poisoned Pawn variation of the Sicilian Najdorf was experiencing a crisis. White players found out that after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 the old move 10.e5!? was not so easy for black and they scored a few impressive victories. The Poisoned Pawn finally refuted? Not really! After 10.e5!? h6 11.Bh4 dxe5 12.fxe5 black has a move that gives him full equality: 12... Nd5!
"
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Sophie Leclerc (1525)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 O-O Qd2 Nc6 Bc4 Bd7 O-O-O Rc8 Bb3 Ne5 Kb1 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g4 b5 b3 b4
We should keep going with this move now, that we are on it.
The dragon is an opening so violent that we must not be scared of sacrifices.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1573)
f4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3
This opening can be call the phantom system, as it can not virtually die and if black is not carefull, white will be tired and can build faster then you can think a big pawn center.
No joke, the pawn center must not happen.
If white continue in a hyper-modern style, he will want to fianchetto his bishops.
From Yugi_inving.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4
Curions opening, a curious gambit, in which white attack black's centre,
Black has no reason to accept it, but he can just take b4 and not on a3.
This^ opening should called the AudreySophie gambit. Or by my name, if your prefer to be not imaginative...
For now, black does not seem to have any way to bust it. And white trie for a big play everyside of the board.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Mark Styler (1800)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bf4
Mark's Opening
(see FICGS encyclopaedia); also see www.Marksopening.blogspot.com
============
Contributors : Mark Styler
William Taylor (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 c3 Nxe4 d4
The only try for an opening advantage.
============
Contributors : William Taylor
Paul Brand Lyard (1777)
c4 c5 Nc3 d6 Nf3 Bd7 d4 a6 dxc5 Nc6
============
Contributors : Piotr Wiaderek, Paul Brand Lyard
Play knight on c6 is it really the best move to play here,
or to capture the white pawn c5 with the black pawn d6 now is the better and stongest attack,
to get the control of cells b4 and d4, ans qu'on the advantage opening position?
FICGS : opening , Wikipedia : opening , Dmoz : opening , Google : opening , Yahoo : opening
When I asked Fischer why he had not played a certain move in our game, he replied: 'Well, you laughed when I wrote it down !' (Mikhail Tal)
By this measure (on the gap between Fischer & his contemporaries), I consider him the greatest world champion. (Garry Kasparov)
When you don't know what to play, wait for an idea to come into your opponent's mind. You may be sure that idea will be wrong. (Siegbert Tarrasch)
Back to FICGS , Wikichess