ron



FICGS - Search results for ron





There are 1087 results for ron in the forum.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-08 13:37:17)
Class tournaments overlap

Hello Hannes. Thank you for support :)

The overlap offers the possibility for players to register to several class tournaments, at least to choose. I think it won't be used a lot, but it could be something more for the stronger players who will choose to register to "under-class" tournament as well as other players who may play sometimes with stronger players.

Feel free to tell me what you think.

Thibault


Hannes Rada    (2006-04-09 00:43:50)
Travel destinations

>In this modern world, not even > travelling abroad will stop you from > being able to play: you will > probably find an internet cafe near > Or you may have internet access in > your hotel room, or if you visit > business colleagues, they will > probably give you access to a PC. > Too bad if you're TOO dependent on > Fritz, of course, but.... Normally I spend my holiday far away from the so called civiliations. Destinations like Papua New Guinea, Micronesia or Ethiopia are my favorite places. So there is no chance for communications and also no interest for playing chess. In 2 weeks I am heading to Vanuatu .....


Per Lea    (2006-04-09 11:41:46)
Rating improvement...

2141? Now you mention it... I had simply forgotten the latest list! (Hooray! I am 5 points stronger than I thought! Everyone in A_000001 beware!)


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 :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-11 18:33:13)
Bug fixed...

Many improvements in the send move process... It should not be possible anymore to make a wrong move. Stalemate detection is implemented. In checkmate case, nothing else should be possible than resigning. Thanks for your feedback.


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-04-12 07:24:22)
TITLES

I think the answer is obvious. FICGS titles should be named FICGS EM, FICGS IM etc, so that it's clear from where the titles are got from. By putting the organization's name in front of the title this way, I don't see any problems. I think the majority are bound to agree, and there won't be any sorta arguments with other organizations. After all, the world is a very big place.... there's enough room for everybody! I find FICGS a very friendly place. Also, organizations like IECG, ICCF, LIAPE etc. are very hardworking, dedicated organizations too, and I enjoy playing in them too. My thanks to you all.


Hannes Rada    (2006-04-12 19:16:51)
Titles

Sorry I opened erroneously a new thread ...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-14 13:19:38)
Registrations, best of :)

Among players who tried to register with a false name, some of them have a great imagination. I'll post their most funny "contributions" here. If they finally succeed to skirt the filter (me), I'll just say "ok, you won... great. now, what about a game ? :)"


Fischer, Bobby (2900)
Holycron, Kieron


Paul-Iosif Guralivu    (2006-04-18 00:25:05)
Explaining

I put that quesion more like a joke... Put on the other hadn I asked it, because you didn't let Holycron to join....


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-04-18 00:39:05)
Sorry, Paul-Iosif

But I don't understand.. (must be tired :)) Is there a play on words in your american name ? Kieron Holycron (Quieron holy crown) is ok but...


Glen D. Shields    (2006-04-18 21:39:57)
A Suggestion

Thibault my e-mail notification will be turned off :)

I'd encourage you to re-consider your 60 day ruling. I can foresee individuals getting late in a game and accumulating hundreds of reflection days. Not many, but a few players could go 59 days per move 2 or 3 times in a row just to irritate their opponent. Not everyone is a "good sport" unfortunately :(

IECG does it right by limiting time to 30 days max per move. You violate the limit once, game is over no questions asked. ICCF does it half right and half wrong. They set the limit at 40 days, but then make the person waiting beg the TD to do something. If the TD refuses to enforce the rule, the violating player can stall as long as he wants :(

This is your chance to pick and chose from the best things done in other organizations. Either set a limit on the number of accumulated days so it doesn't go into the hundreds or set a reasonable limit on the number of days per move. Just don't let both become large. Also don't be wishy washy on the limit. Set a limit and enforce it, no questions asked. No hard reasonable limit and too many accumulated days is an infrequent, but irritating problem in the making. There won't be many, but sadly there will be those few "bad losers" who think it's "cute" to string their opponents along. Don't let that happen at FICGS!

Just my two cents :)


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-04-18 23:15:46)
30 d max

I agree with Glen, 'resign' is the hardest word, and some prefer the server (or the time control rules) _gradually_ pronounce it.. 30 days max, with time doubled at move 10th + optional leave of 30 days would be more than reasonable to me.


Graham Cridland    (2006-04-25 17:22:16)
Hmm.

Well, I see your point (I have an opponent like that) but what you're really objecting to is their failure to use their time, not conditional moves (or even fritz). And I can't imagine that forcing people to use their time will be popular. Just have to NOT send the move back right away, sit down at the board, and figure out where Fritz goes wrong. Our German friend isn't all knowing (especially at the 14-16 ply people only give him much of the time). So you should generally win those games.


Stefano Ghisi    (2006-05-09 15:24:48)
wrong move

I made a wrong move in game 49. Now I can't make the right move (to me) that is c2-c3 How can I make?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-09 15:59:09)
... old bug

Hello Stefano. The 'wrong move' was caused by the update that fixed the ambiguous moves bug... I corrected your move that was 6.Ncb5

Sorry again.


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2006-05-14 00:47:20)
Swiss

Hello Thibault these are the "rules" (see at http://www.chessfriend.com/ and then Tournaments-CFC World-Championship-CFC Championship 2003)
Modus: 3 rounds Swiss à 10 games each. ... Every player is allowed to participate in all 3 rounds. Pairings of the 1st round are based on rating. We will build equal groups where possible. In the second round we will do the pairings so that be build at first 3 groups depending on score and rating. Among this three groups we will build new tournaments which should be of about equal rating.. Third round will be paired in the same way with the exception that the first group will be the strongest (score and rating). Normally two players should play during a championship cycle only one game. If it will be necessary in a following round that two players play a second game, this game should be played with revised colours.
I will send you more information.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-15 08:33:32)
Team Championship

In brief : The idea of a team championship is very good, but of course it's too early... Such a championship could be a 2 stages round-robin tournament with teams of 6 or 7 players.


Bonjour Sébastien. Pourquoi discorde ? :) Au contraire...

Pour le moment j'envisageais des matchs par équipe occasionnels (FICGS vs. fédération ou autre serveur de jeu).

Le problème d'un championnat est qu'il soit représentatif, il serait donc souhaitable (dans le cas par pays) de pouvoir monter des équipes complètes (6 ou 7 joueurs) et que les plus forts joueurs trouvent un "intérêt" à défendre leurs couleurs (dépend de la popularité du serveur). L'idée est de toutes manières des plus intéressantes, mais le serveur doit gagner en confiance et en expérience sur la durée, il est encore tôt. Par contre je me demande comment se déroulerait un tel championnat... Un tournoi toutes ronde (round-robin) entre 5 à 9 pays, divisés par groupes, puis une phase finale ?!


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-01 03:06:05)
Website url

Hello Wayne.

No problem, but take care with your website url while posting, you just sent a wrong link to both forums here & on http://www.talkchess.com ;)

I corrected the Url in your post.


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-06-01 07:32:45)
other chess websites

okey dokey. Thank you. dunno what I did wrong but I check. by the way, it is not my chess site, I only play there for over 10 years.Thanks Wayne


Lionel Vidal    (2006-06-01 22:17:30)
Go rules

I don't quite understand what kind of problems with draws remains with FICGS (sic!) rules: as passing is not allowed, if you add the non repetition of the same whole board position and a non integer komi, I do not see how a draw is still possible.

BUT... this solution does actually not solve anything as I don't think you can forbid passing (as a matter of fact, I checked the official japanese, chinese, new-zealand, AGA (USA) and SST rules: pass is allowed and needed)
The main reason is, IMO, that you need a legal way to end the game (double pass). And yes there are situations where the best move for BOTH players is NOT to move at all in the area: the simplest case I can think of is thousand-year kos, which in the case of japanese rule usually end in seki.
Note that a single pass (that is the game goes on after it) can change the difference in scores in area mode: the AGA rule introduces the concept of pass stone to compensate and insists on white making the last move (if necessary with an additional pass and pass stone) to ensure that the total number of stones played by the two players are equal!
(BTW this is one of the reasons, admitedly far behind familiarity, why I prefer the japanese rule in face to face go)

To sum things up (!!), while I agree that FICGS could develop its own set of rules, I feel that the subject is too complex and error-prone, and has been long, and still is, disputed by highly competent authorities : why not use the result of their work?
I would add that the point of all this is rather moot if you consider that situation like triple ko and alii are indeed rather rare: why not stricly stick to, say, the official chinese rule, and replay the game by referee decision in the rare cases where neither playing side will yield?

oh, but I could also check what they do in the kiseido server ?!?
oh, and do take what I say with great caution: I don't feel and I am certainly not competent enough on the subject! Any other advice over there? :-)


Lionel Vidal    (2006-06-01 22:21:52)
Bug?

It seems that the postings are sometimes not in chronological order ? (see the last two posts)



Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-13 18:02:00)
Chess tournament

FICGS CHESS CLASS M 000005 just started. Another strong tournament I'll follow with interest :)

http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_M__000005.html


David Grosdemange    (2006-06-13 21:24:48)
....

ça ne fait que retarder le problème ! ceux qui font le premier tour , quand ils seront qualifiés pour le second , ils feront le second , mais pendant ce temps la , que feront ceux qui ont déjà fait le second tour ????


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-15 16:36:17)
Criteria

Hello Dorel and Daniel.

As you noticed, rating is quite important in FICGS world championship cycle (particularly established ratings, obtained from IECG / ICCF or after 9 games finished in FICGS) !

I think these rules are really the best choice in order to designate a world champion. It's more logical IMO to favour players who obtained previously the best results in FICGS and recognized organizations, and consequently a high rating. It takes time, of course. Even very strong players starting with a 1700 rating won't achieve a 2300 established rating before months !

Criterias in FICGS wch are (from most important to least) :

1) Winner of the previous cycle (qualify for the final match)
2) The eight best established ratings (play the KO tournament)
3) Points obtained in the wch tournaments
4) The tournament entry rating (TER)


Of course, there are some provisional ratings that will increase a lot, but it is not possible to grant a 2300 rating to any player saying so. It's already a lot of time gained that ratings from FIDE, ICCF, IECG be recognized.

Finally it is the same in IECG / ICCF : it's very hard to achieve a high rating, it's very hard to directly qualify for a 2nd stage too, it takes months, probably years in email chess...

Now, please consider this, if we start 1st wch at stage 1 : It won't change anything for your play, as the 1st stage of the 2nd wch is exactly the same... 2300+ players won't play before months... and if the rule is changed about 2300 mark and everyone playing 1st stage, probably all games for 2300+ players won't be rated with a 100% result... and at last it will be harder for you to qualify for 2nd stage...

It is a hard work to write rules as fair, balanced and interesting as possible. Rules can't satisfy everyone, sorry about that.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-16 19:24:41)
Retard et explications

Bonjour Pablo.

La règle de la qualification au 2ème tour des joueurs 2300+ ne date pas d'hier, et j'avais annoncé une mise à jour des règles. Les discussions n'arrivant souvent également qu'au dernier moment, je dirais seulement : Mieux vaut tard que jamais :)

.. mieux vaut changer des règles non-optimisées avant le début des tournois qu'entre deux cycles... Je le répète, les règles changeront tant qu'elles pourront être améliorées significativement (comme partout ailleurs). Il me faut un peu de temps pour adapter et trouver de nouvelles dénominations pour les tournois (notamment celui qui permettra aux joueurs classés 2300+ de jouer avant l'heure).

Le plus important reste que le championnat attire les joueurs ayant un classement élevé comme moins élevé. Dans les règles originales, de nombreux joueurs n'auraient pas pu jouer tout de suite. Un retard reste un retard, certes... Désolé pour cela, mais je pense que ça en vaut la peine.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-17 12:39:45)
Correspondence chess

Hello Wayne.

Correspondence chess is definitely a game of patience...

Note : When you register, you can enter your rating ! The rules state a rating not from FIDE / IECG / ICCF gives at most a 1700 rating... So you could have started with a 1700 rating ! Anyway in july (after the next rating calculation) you can play stronger tournaments... and so on..


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


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-22 17:56:59)
King's gambit and statistics...

Wayne, where did you find such (wrong) statistics ??

Gambit (the real thing) is IMO first a psychological attack, most useful against a weaker player... "The best way to refute is to accept it", one said... but queen's gambit is NOT a real gambit and for sure 2. ... dxc4 is not the best move... King's gambit is, but a perfect play most probably also leads to a draw.

Queen's gambit accepted statistics : 33% (1-0), 48% (1/2-1/2), 17% (0-1)

King's gambit statistics : 35% (1-0), 27% (1/2-1/2), 36% (0-1)

... in classical time controls.


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-06-22 21:11:43)
interesting question for the Gambit's a

Sir let me explain, the stats are taken from A database of 1600 GM's. the statistic is taken prior to blacks response but assuming pxp. Of course the percentages varies as you go thru the book lines. Where did your statistics come from (e-mail me, dont want to continue with troll)? Kings gambit with perfect play as you say leads to a draw. That does not impress me much. I agree the best defence against a gambit is accept, I usually do. Yes your right the thread is a troll, I apoligize for contributing but I found my self not being able to agree with where the last few topics were heading. I do not accept this mind games thing excet against a very weak player playing a much stronger player. In this case I agree. I end the troll with this...Wayne


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-23 12:25:36)
Blindfolded Chess

THE chess-world (for there is a "world" in chess as in other matters) has lately been startled by a very extraordinary performance at one of the "divans" of the metropolis. A young American has played ten games at once, against an equal number of players, without, on his part, obtaining a single glimpse at any one of the chess-boards. The feat is not new; but never before was it performed so triumphantly as in the present day. The writers who have ferreted out the early history of this beautiful game have found the name of one Tchelebi, who, nearly nine centuries ago, was able to play at chess without seeing the board. Many persons in the East acquired the art of playing by feeling instead of seeing pieces; but that is a very different affair, since in such a case the sense of touch comes in aid of the memory. In 1266, a Saragen, named Buzecca, came to Florence and at the Palazzo del Popolo played three games at once, looking at one board, but not at the other two. He won two of the games, and made a drawn or abandoned game of the other. As all his competitors were skilful players, his achievement caused irrepressible astonishment. At various times, in later centuries, this mode of play was exhibited by different persons--Ruy Lopez, the author of one of the earliest treatises on chess; Mangiolini of Florence, Zerone, Medrano, Leonardo da Cutri, Paolo Boi, Salvio, and others, many of whom were Spaniards. Boi is reputed to have played three games at once without seeing the board. Damiano, an Italian, who wrote a treatise on chess more than three centuries and a half ago, gave what he called the "Rules" for learning to play without seeing the board; but his rules are worth very little, amounting chiefly to a recommendation to cultivate the memory. Keysler, in his Account of Turin (1749), says: "The late Father Sacchieri, Lecturer on Mathematics at Pavia, was a remarkable instance of the strength of the human understanding, particularly that faculty of the soul we term memory. He could play at chess with three different persons at the same time, even without seeing any one of the three chess-boards. He required no more than that his substitute should tell him what piece his antagonist had moved, and Sacchieri could direct what step was to be taken on his side, holding, at the same time, conversation with the company present. If any dispute arose about the place where any piece should be, he could tell every move that had been made, not only by himself, but by his antagonist, from the beginning of the game, and in this manner incontestably decided the proper place of the piece. This uncommon dexterity at the game of chess appears to me almost the greatest instance that can be produced of a surprising memory." The most celebrated player of the last century, however, in this peculiar achievement, was the Frenchman Andre Danican, who then, and afterwards, was generally known by the name of Philidor. In 1743, when Philidor was about eighteen years old, M. de Legalle asked him whether he had ever tried to play from memory, without seeing the board. The youth replied, that as had calculated moves, and even whole games, at night in bed, he thought he could do it. He immediately played a game with the Abbe Chenard, which he won without seeing the board. After that, a little practice enabled him to play nearly as well in this as in the ordinary fashion--sometimes two games at once. The French Cyclopedie told of a particular game in which a false move was purposely made by his antagonist; Philidor discovered it after many moves, and replaced the pieces in their proper position. Forty years afterwards, he was residing in England, where he astonished English players by his blindfold achievements at a chess-club in St. James' Street. He played three games at once, with Count Bruhl, Mr. Bowdler, and Mr. Maseres, the first two of whom were reputed the best players at that time in England. Philidor won two of the games, and drew the third, all within two hours. On another occasion, in the same year (1788), he played three games at once, blindfold as before, and giving the odds of pawn and move to one of his antagonists; again did he win two of the games, and draw the third. His demeanor during these labors surprised his visitors as much as his skill, for he kept up a lively conversation during his games. Many eminent chess-players, including M'Donnell, La Bourdonnaye, Staunton, etc., have achieved these blindfold wonders, in greater or less degree, since the days of Philidor. M'Donnell, a famous player about thirty years ago, played his moves even more rapidly without than with the board; he did not object to any amount of conversation in the room during his play, but disliked whispers. La Bourdonnaye could play within a shade of his full strength without seeing the board; he won against good players, on some occasions two at a time; but when trying the threefold labor, his brain nearly gave way, and he wisely abandoned all such modes of playing his favorite game. Mr. Staunton, the leading English player at present (but who has almost ceased to play since he undertook the editing of an edition of Shakespeare), some years ago played many blindfold games with Harrwitz and Kieseritzky, foreign players of note.


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-01 17:44:41)
Format For Championship

Hello John.

After all, if it wasn't unusual, the interest would be lower for sure... :)

So you noticed, the 8 players with the highest established correspondence chess ratings play a pure knockout tournament.

I thought about this format a long time ago (and a long time). Combining a knockout tournament (more "spectacular") and a round-robin cycle (everyone can play, no more than 5 cycles) gather together the advantages of both. It is one of the reasons I made FICGS... I think pure knockout or pure round-robin wch cycle is not efficient enough for chess championships.

The other thing you'll notice in the rules : "The special rule is that in case of equality (4-4), the winner is the player with the strongest tournament entry rating if all games are draw, the player with the lowest tournament entry rating if not all games are draw. The winner is qualified for the next stage."

This rule (in case of equality in the round-robin tournaments, the player with the strongest TER is qualified too) is another way to avoid short draws... It may sound strange at a first sight, but I really think it's fair enough and a good way to find most probably the really strongest players in the last stages. Anyway, it's amazing for sure :)


The FICGS chess wch rules :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#tournament


Peter Konig    (2006-07-02 10:50:19)
rules & ratings

Hi, the rules on registration were different, and stating personal rating seemed just to be of informative value, no checking of numbers or anything. Now, it seems that I have a disadvantage by stating that, I feel treated second class (I wholeheartedly ackowledge that there are much stronger players around) and my motivation dropped considerably. it is like in real live. There are people earning more or less money, but they should be equal before the law (rules). That's in the spirit of 1789! Je t'embrasse, Peter Konig


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-07-02 14:51:28)
Re: France vs Brazil soccer match

I watched the match. France deserved it's 1:0 victory over Brazil, as France were clearly the better team on the day. Zinedine Zidane was at his very best, and he easily outshone the Ronaldos, Ronaldinhos etc.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-02 19:26:07)
qualification for 2nd round

Bonjour David !

Maybe it wasn't clear enough yet. The winner and only the winner of each tournament will be qualified for the next stage. As there can't be several, only 1 player per group will be qualified.

"Round-robin tournaments are groups of 7, 9, 11 or 13 players. The winner of each group is qualified for the next stage. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage."

Consequently, there will be at least 17 players from the groups ("at least" : if new groups are created) + players rated >2300 from the high rated groups (but winners).

I expect about 40 to 50 players in stage 2 round-robin tournaments. If the numbers don't fit, there will be an invitation to players 2300+ until it solve the problem.


John Knudsen    (2006-07-04 05:31:49)
Symmetrical games

This format (8 games against the same player at once) is really strange and not normal at all, IMHO. Don't get me wrong - I am enjoying my games. I would not recommend this format for future versions of the quarter-final. Most strong players that I know would not even consider playing in this kind of format for one minute. Better to have a RR, with X number of players advancing from that. If you wish to make the championship attractive to stronger players, you won't want to repeat this format in the future. John


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.


Gino Figlio    (2006-07-04 21:19:14)
statistics

Dear Thibault, I don't have the answer, I suspect there is no solution for this problem. If you apply statistics to extreme situations, there will always be some outliers that will prove your prediction wrong. One good example is ICC(internet chess club) and their self-proclaimed perfect method to detect online cheaters. I can tell you some OTB 2100-2300 players can perform sometimes close to 2600 strength, and sometimes more than 95% of their moves coincide with one of the chess engines...statistically you can call this a cheater, but reality is not respectful of normal distributions


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 21:40:51)
statistics and cheating

Gino, this is one thing sure : symmetrical games played on FICGS will be detected... No statistics here in question.

Anyway, symmetrical games (cheating) consequences won't be the same in correspondence chess and on ICC, that's obvious. A computer is much stronger than any human in rapid chess, and computers are easily available on ICC. In correspondence chess, very strong players are not so easy to reach ;)

Actually that's not so comparable. Note it is mentioned in the rules "any kind of help is authorized", so a player could be helped by a computer, or even by other players...


Glen D. Shields    (2006-07-08 21:05:41)
Thibault You Have a Golden Opportunity

Thibault - one of the reasons that FICGS has grown so quickly is that you've welcomed input and implented the things the players have asked for. John is right on this issue. I urge you to listen to him. Take this opportunity and make FICGS the chess server that leads the way in establishing logical time rules.

Here are some suggestions for regular tournaments. You and others can build on these:
- 30 days start +2 days added per move
- 100 days maximum accumulated time
- 30 days maximum limit for one move
- 4 weeks (28 days) annual leave
- no time lost or added during leaves
- no moves made during leaves
- all time calculated by a running clock in hours and minutes

My recommendation for rapid tournaments are:
- 14 days start +1 day added per move
- 30 days maximum accumulated time
- 10 days maximum limit for one move
- 2 weeks (14 days) annual leave
- no time added or lost during leaves
- no moves made during leaves
- all time calculated by a running clock in hours and minutes

I recommend you let the server automatically handle time limit oversteps and make no exceptions. The only exception I would offer is if someone is ill or injured and needs to take an extended medical leave (these things happen). Let there be an option for that player to file an approved leave with you.

Thibault love your server and the hard work you put into it. You and others feel free to critique my suggestions. I strongly urge you to use this opportunity to lead the world in logical time rules. You don't have federations or tempermental world champions to appease. You are the boss. Do it RIGHT. Good luck.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-20 14:39:21)
Google pagerank

Hi Dinesh.

Ironic ? ;)

Google is definitely the best search engine for several years. Maybe his statistical concept will be outdated soon (or already), but it's the most powerful one (speed, capacity, accuracy...) and most : it still represents 85 % of visitors from search engines (for all websites). Yahoo represents 9% .. the others nothing. About 30 % (only) of FICGS visitors come from search engines, but it will undoublty increase and over 90 % as time passes.

Pagerank is decided on the value (Pagerank) of the links towards a website.. Actually this is a complex formula based on many parameters, but first of all the Pagerank of the websites referrers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagerank


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-23 16:00:42)
Wikichess : Modifiability

Hello Dirk Jan.

It's not possible to modify a comment made by a stronger player (> +100 points ELO) in order to maintain a kind of "trust level"...

Anyway, chess game is still large enough for everyone ;)


Dirk Jan Van Dijl    (2006-07-23 20:46:29)
Error?

What is wrong with 4 ... Nf6 after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4? Regards, D.J. van Dijl


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-07-26 00:32:35)
I'm feeling guilty

I just read The touching story of Glen and frankly I feel guilty. I complained here of basically, having to play a 1400 player. Reason obvious he has a 2800 rated program, but so do I. Glen earned his stature. the old fashon way, brain power, intuition, chess knowledge and a strong memory, putting all these tools to work for many, many years. My CC rating elsewhere is 2200+, sorry to admit my programs got me there. In the fairness vain, I didnt earn such a rating. I sorta like to kid my self that all the players I play use comps too. So I tell my self I earned this rating. I earned it playing on servers against people, just like me doing the same as I, getting help/advise from a program. I do not believe this is right, it is not fair for a player such as Glen. I do not have an answer. I am all in favour of Artificial intelligence and hardware advances applied to chess. I am a EE so it is natural for me to be deeply involved.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-01 22:32:16)
United Kingdom = 1 code, 1 flag

Hello to all.

Sorry, I definitely made a mistake offering both United Kingdom and England-Scotland-Wales-Northern Ireland flags... The four are not official countries... I had the same problem with Québec/Canada & Puerto Rico/USA.

Everyone will have GBR code (and flag), but feel free to ask another country flag if it doesn't fit to you.

Thibault


"Hello Thibault, Thanks for trying. I did think it would get to be a bit confusing. The United Kingdom and Great Britain issue is a difficult one to explain. (...) we can get "heated" when our seperate nationhood and identity are not recognised. But this is chess and the International Correspondence Chess Federation has the motto, "we are all friends" and FIDE has "we are one people" as its motto. So avoiding the mire of nationalism let's just get on with the game without frontiers. You can't please everyone. This is still a good place to play chess."

Thanks ! :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-11 17:14:15)
Unrated miniatures

Hello Jaimie.

Absolutely... This is clearly a 'statistical' choice...

A chess server need rules like this one to avoid most human decisions. I think this is a good one so far. About this unfair case (at first sight), if you resign in less than 10 moves (it happens not so often in CC above elo 1600, except forfeits), your opponent is obviously much stronger than you, so chances for him to already have a rating superior to yours + 350 points are very high... so the game wouldn't be rated anyway !


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-24 20:01:31)
we will see....

Sorry for my slow commentating-speed, but i have over 60 corr-games here at the same time and must analyse. Tonight (german-time) i will commentate the rest of your moves. Maybe i think wrong, but i still do not believe in the Latvian-Gambit. There is no good line for black in this Gambit. Just a few traps. Chess is not a game of hoping for a stupid opponent. Chess is a game of good moves by black and white and i would never play a line, by hoping for a bad move of my opponent. Maybe in Blitz or Bullet.....but never in Corr-Games.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-03 16:45:33)
Re: First mover loses

Hello Joachim.

"why nobody seems to enter these tournaments" : first because they are not open yet :)

As I said, this is only an example. New categories will be created, with formulas as simple and fair as possible, and other ones that could allow to low-rated players to meet strong titled players...

Anyway, all suggestions are welcome.


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-09-04 10:51:45)
To Charlie on cheaters ...

Hi Charlie

I completely agree with the first sentences of your post, but I cannot accept the second part of it.
I use computers, and books, and databases and lots of prepared personal analyses for my games here.
I do not accept to be called a cheater : this is explicitly allowed by the rules here, and it is even one of the main reasons for which I joined this association.
There are lots of other sites where computer use is forbidden : you can for sure play there and complain when you will guess that your opponent is making use of electronic assistance, but not here.
Moreover for me it is pure shortness of sight if you are not able to imagine that playing with computer help can be both creative and even fascinating.
Take any of your games and do a quick analysis with several chess programs : you will see that for a large majority of positions they completely disagree on which is the best move to play. The human touch is critically decisive when playing with computer help.
And resulting games are far more complicated and interesting in my eyes.
Another point is that for myself I prefer that my opponents do not spoil an interesting game for which I have spent hours and hours of analysis along weeks of play through a stupid human blunder that ends it all suddenly.
I do pretty well understand that you prefer to play on your own. But what is the problem if you have a computer-assisted opponent? Either you will loose and will maybe learn something either you will win and it will be a pretty good achievement. And surely it will be a better game. The only problem I can see is the possible frustration not to be able to win many games.
Then I repeat : go on another site where computer assistance is forbidden. But I have to say that having played on such sites for years you will find _many_ cheaters... Pure human play cannot be enforced ...

But please stop saying that players like myself are cheaters and poor ignorants.
It is sure we play a different game but why should you be entitled to say that mine is worse than yours?


Regards

Marc


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 13:21:27)
Time to display all informations

Actually, it's only due to recursive call s to other files...

I firstly thought this slowness was caused by browsers because of all the pictures to display. I was wrong... Now the program is less "beautiful", but it works much faster, don't you think ? ;)




Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 15:43:12)
FIDE WCH : Kramnik vs. Topalov

Do you believe it ? .. now it's most probably almost sure :-)

We'll have a new FIDE-Classical world champion in a few weeks !

A reminder : This will be a 12-games match, taking place from September 21 to October 13 in the capital of Kalmykia (whose president is FIDE president : Kirsan Ilyumzhinov himself), Elista. In case of equality, four rapid games will be played, if equality again two blitz games will be played and finally a sudden death blitz game. The prize fund of one million US dollars will be equally divided between Vladimir Kramnik and Veselin Topalov, whatever the result. The looser won't play the next world championship tournament (quite strange).

Anyway, that's a great thing for chess, even if I'm not very optimistic for the next FIDE world championship cycles, particularly if the world champion has to play a knockout tournament, instead of a classical 12 or 24 games match...

My favourite in this match is still Kramnik because of his style, but Topalov is really getting stronger IMO... It will be a hard match !

Any predictions about the result & games ? .. Will Vladimir Kramnik play his Berlin defense in the Ruy Lopez again...


Ron Keyston    (2006-09-07 18:30:32)
More options for Wikichess moves

Hi Thibault, I have a suggestion for Wikichess. It would be nice to have the ability to mark a move with ?! (dubious) and !? (interesting) in addition to the existing ! and ?. What do you think? Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (2006-09-07 18:41:14)
Wikichess Bug

Hi Thibault, I just put the Lasker Trap of the Albin Countergambit into Wikichess and every move after fxg1=N+ now starts with fxg1=...not sure what the problem is. Thanks, Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (2006-09-07 18:43:41)
Oops

Sorry, forgot to give the moves to find the line: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.e3 Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3 6.Bxb4 exf2+ 7.Ke2 fxg1=N+


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-07 18:52:06)
Wikichess Bug

Hi Ron.

I just forgot this way to write promotion.. fxg1N+ or fxg1=N+

I corrected the moves, the bug will be fixed soon.

Thanks for feedback !


Ron Keyston    (2006-09-07 18:57:36)
Thanks

Wow, thanks for the quick response Thibault. I was just coming back to say that I guess it fixed itself, but now I see that it was you! Thanks, Ron Keyston


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-07 18:59:40)
More options for Wikichess moves

Hi Ron !

Of course it makes sense, but too much marks could add more confusion than accuracy... As it's "open" & everyone can write, wikichess should stay easy to read and simple. It's better IMO to explain why a move is dubious or interesting than giving a lot of marks...


Ron Keyston    (2006-09-07 19:24:50)
More options for Wikichess moves

Good point...thanks for the input Thibault. Ron Keyston


Lionel Vidal    (2006-09-09 23:08:00)
Tavli

Is tavli the greek version of backgammon? I am not sure of the specific rules of that variant and I do not think Jellyfish could play it but I may be wrong.
BTW I find real time backgammon (by server or not) a great fun to play!


Ron Keyston    (2006-09-12 00:01:50)
Thematic Suggestion: Traxler

I think a Thematic Tournament based on the Traxler Counterattack would be interesting: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5


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... :)


Miguel Pires    (2006-09-12 15:08:51)
Match FICGS vs. GameKnot

I wana say they have a lot of strong player signing to play. I hoppe we can create a very strong team


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


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-09-15 19:59:46)
two moves from the start

Interesting idea, Thibault, for having a winner in just one-game match. (I mean of course giving clear advantage to White from the start in a must-win game (any other result would be failure).

In this same line of thought, I would suggest to give White two consecutive starting moves (no captures allowed), W player chooses which are those two moves ( 0.e4 1.d4 or 0.e4 1.Nf3 or 0.e4 1.Bc4 or why not 0.e4 1.Qh5!? or whatever )

However, in all cases where White is giving a significant advantage at start, I believe, White has a 2/3 (66%) chance to win, and 1/3 (34%) to draw, so that in a match a strong player with White should go the next round. (assuming he has played the best two consecutive moves and then mantained the advantage all the way --although with the current wonderful defending capabilities of the engines it could add some serendipity to the game ;)


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-09-16 10:54:22)
2-games matches

The test ground could be 2-games matches between weak v weak, weak v strong, and strong v strong players(*in the ELO sense) : in the first game, the player has odds of two moves, in the second, he must defend the side with two moves down..

This could shed more light into this scheme..


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-17 00:29:58)
Heeeelp :-)

We definitely need more strong players :)

About 10 players are interested to play right now.


James Stripes    (2006-09-18 15:56:13)
27 years ago

When I first played correspondence chess, books were encouraged and the few chess engines in existence were garbage. Good quality engines and comprehensive databases have changed the nature of correspondence play. Nearly everyone permits databases (electronic books), although endgame tablebases are less clear. Engines are permitted some places, while banned others. This site is my first foray into CC where engine use is permitted, but I've played at dozens of sites where I can use databases. (I don't believe I've ever reached a position in which tablebases would be useful, except a few elementary positions that any average player could win against Kramnik.) These inter-site matches, it seems to me, nurture connections across the broad community of correspondence players--a rapidly expanding coterie of chess aficionados thanks to the likes of GameKnot and similar sites.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-19 15:03:13)
Computer use on GameKnot......

I just read GameKnot forum about the FICGS vs. GameKnot match :

http://gameknot.com/fmsg/chess3/3860.shtml

It seems to me this question of computer use on GameKnot is quite out of topic (and on the wrong forum)... I proposed to GameKnot rep (Thomas) to prohibite any computer assistance (engines + databases) for the match or to simply authorize it, as I think more players from FICGS would play, and surely players from GameKnot too... Then everyone is free to play, accepting the rules and the risk of cheating (quite small IMO), but it's up to I & Thomas to deal with that. This debate shouldn't happen here IMHO.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-20 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.


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-09-29 13:14:25)
Kramnik's team says...........

Kramnik threatens to stop playing the match......

29.09.2006 Statement from the team of Vladimir Kramnik, rejecting the decision of the Appeals Committee of FIDE : "The protests of the Topalov team and the suspicions in the press release of Mr. Topalov are utterly disgraceful and are touching Mr. Kramnik’s privacy."

Elista, 29 September 2006

Open Letter to FIDE President H.E. Kirsan Iljumshinov

Copied to Executive Committee of Kalmykia Mr. Valery Bovaev, Chief Arbiter Mr. Geurt Gijssen, Russian Chess Federation

Dear Mr. President,

The Appeals Committee of the World Championship Match between Veselin Topalov and Vladimir Kramnik made the following decision on the protest of the Topalov Team:

“to close both the toilets in the players rest rooms and to open another toilet that will be available only to the two players”

The Kramnik team received the mentioned decision a few hours before the start of game 5 and was officially informed about the protest of Mr. Topalov only yesterday evening, 10 p.m., 28 September 2006. With such a decision the WCC Committee is clearly violating both the rules and regulations of the WCC match and the rights of Mr. Kramnik.

The relevant clause in contract of Mr. Kramnik expels: “FIDE shall provide a rest room and toilette for the players during the WCC match in the playing hall and close to the stage (if possible backstage) to be equipped with a live monitor furnished with coffee and tea as well as with light refreshments.”

The reasons that Mr. Kramnik is entering his own bathroom often is simple: The restroom is small and Mr. Kramnik likes to walk and therefore uses the space of the bathroom as well. The Appeals Committee has been informed about the issue before they decided. It should also be mentioned that Mr. Kramnik has to drink a lot of water during the games.

On the request of Mr. Topalov the agreed live monitors have been removed as well as the shower cabines in the bath rooms. The moves are provided on demonstration boards only. The substance of Mr. Topalov protests (dated 22, 24 and 28 September 2006) were basically always met by the approval of the Appeals Committee. Everything has been done here to satisfy Mr. Topalov’s requests.

On a regulary basis the restrooms and toiletts are heavily checked by specialists, obviously local police forces. This goes together with the arrival of the players. The arbiters are observing all the measures. One representative of each team has the right of being present in order to observe the activities. The playing area is banned from signals and the glas wall protects from any kind of view contact and/or body language. There is not a single reason or evidence to believe that a player would have any kind of cheating possibilities.

It is and was no problem for the organization to assure all necessary measures in order to avoid any kind of cheating. By starting the match both participants agreed all the playing conditions de facto and de jure and the conditions are therefore legally binding. Any change of the playing conditions without a good reason would in our understanding request the approval of both players which is not the case here.

Mr. Kramnik believes that the latest decision should increasingly concern the world of chess as it shows very clearly and once again the biased stand of the Appeals Committee members involved. In person: Mr. Makropolous, Mr. Azmaiparashivili (well known as a close friend to Mr. Danailov), Mr. Gelfer (now replaced by Mr. Vega). Therefore Mr. Kramnik requests to exchange the mentioned persons immediately. Enough is enough.

We would like to add that the recent decision not only insults Mr. Kramnik but is clearly critizing both the excellent work of the local organisation at Elista and the nominated arbiters. Yesterday evening the chief arbiter and the head of the excutive committee once again confirmed that the indirect accusations of cheating are nonsense.

The protests of the Topalov team into the direction of Mr. Kramnik and the suspicions in the press release of Mr. Topalov are utterly disgraceful and are touching Mr. Kramnik’s privacy. We do not think that the Topalov team has any right of getting access to the recordings. This shall be job of the nominated arbiters only.

The Topalov team includes a parapsychologist and more people which are obviously having no other tasks as to distract and to insult Mr. Kramnik especially since their team is realizing that Mr. Topalov finds himself in a difficult situation. This is what we call an utterly unfair behaviour which is not in accordance with the FIDE Code of Ethics. The decision taken by the Appeals Committee can only be seen as another attempt to disturb Mr. Kramniks concentration since it is difficult to understand what kind of improvement it shall be to have one toilet instead of two.

Our team does not trust the objectivity of the Appeals Committee anymore. Therefore it makes no sense for us to bring a protest to this table and Mr. Kramnik strongly insists once again that the members of the Appeals Committee will be changed immediately and that the heads of the Organizing Committee are taking their responsibilities.

In the meanwhile Mr. Kramnik will stop playing this match as long as FIDE is not ready to respect Mr. Kramnik’s rights, in this case to use the toilet of his own restroom whenever he wishes to do so.

Further and more detailed legal investigations are already in process.

On behalf of Vladimir Kramnik
Yours sincerely,
Carsten Hensel
(Manager to Vladimir Kramnik, Classical World Chess Champion)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-30 03:39:05)
Vladimir Kramnik - Open letter

Open Letter To
FIDE President
Kirsan Iljumshinov
Russian Chess Federation

Elista, 29. September 2006

Requests of Vladimir Kramnik

• To proceed with GAME 5

Clause 3.17.1., Schedule 2 of the contract: “All protests must be submitted in writing to the Appeals Committee not more than 2 hours after the relevant playing session.”

The protest made by the Topalov Team were not made within this window after game 4 (27 September 2006) but only hit the FIDE Office and the Appeals Committee on the rest day (28 September 2006). Therefore the protests are not even relevant and should have been rejected by the Appeals Committee immediately.

Clause 3.18.3., Schedule 2 of the contract: “After the World Chess Championship Committee agrees with the Organizers on the arrangements in respect of the tournament hall, facilities etc. etc. etc……., no objections from the participants shall be acceptable as long as the conditions are in accordance with the rights of the players granted in their agreements.”

This clause clearly underlines the statement made in today’s Open letter: “By starting the match both participants agreed all the playing conditions de facto and de jure and the conditions are therefore legally binding. Any change of the playing conditions without a good reason would in our understanding request the approval of both players which is not the case here.”

Therefore it is clear that the Appeals Committee took a completely wrong decision and was obviously not even aware of the Rules and Regulations. The decision of Chief Arbiter Mr. Gijssen to forfeit game 5 was clearly based on a wrong decision of the Appeals Committee and shall be nullified.

Mr. Kramnik is ready to continue the match and to play the 5th game (with a leading score of 3:1) on the conditions that were accepted prior to the start of the match.

• Toilet issue The toilets connected to the restrooms shall be opened again. This request is in accordance with clauses 3.17.1. and 3.18.3 (see above) and in the general understanding that by starting of the match both participants agreed to all the playing conditions. Any change of the playing conditions without a good reason would require the approval of both players which is not the case here.

Mr. Kramnik is ready to accept even stricter controls by sealing the toilets before and after inspections. Inspections shall be done before and after each game.

• Exchange of members of the Appeals Committee
We repeat that the Kramnik team does not trust the objectivity of the Appeals Committee anymore. It is evident from this letter and our first Open Letter today that the existing Appeals Committee is biased and incompetent. Mr. Kramnik strongly insists once again that the members of the Appeals Committee will be exchanged immediately.

• Access to Recordings As Mr. Kramnik in the press conference stated he did not sign a contract for acting in a reality show. The recordings shall be observed by the arbiters. Neither Team Topalov nor Team Kramnik shall have access to the recordings. Investigations shall be in the sole responsibility of the Arbiters.

• Requested Apology Last but not least Mr. Kramnik believes that Mr. Danailov should apologize to Mr. Kramnik in writing. Remarks such as:

“If the match were to continue, the World Champion will refrain from shaking hands with Mr. Kramnik before the games and will not take part in joint press conferences with him.” and “Veselin Topalov is disturbed by the suspicious behavior of his opponent Mr. Vladimir Kramnik who takes his most significant decisions in the bathroom.” are clearly insulting.

On behalf of Vladimir Kramnik
Yours sincerely,
Carsten Hensel
(Manager to Vladimir Kramnik, Classical World Chess Champion)


Nigel Davies    (2006-09-30 09:07:48)
Legitimacy

This is (or should have been) the real point of these championships from FIDE's point of view. Rather than being seen as a banana republic with a paper champion their aim should have been to establish legitimacy for their cycle and organisation. FIDE established itself by taking over the World Chess Championships with the death of Alekhine. If it can no longer do that, a large part of its raison d'etre disappears, in my view. I'm not sure they realise it yet, but if Topalov 'wins' from his 1-3 position with some trumped up accusation of cheating, their legitimacy is not enhanced. Quite the opposite in fact. Kramnik goes home with a very strong claim to being the REAL World Champion (he beat Kasparov in a match) and having allowed FIDE to demonstrate its true colours. I think that the odds of him establishing his own cycle will have improved dramatically, he just needs a sponsor. Nigel


Nigel Davies    (2006-09-30 13:50:51)
Re: Legitimacy

Hi Rodrigo, I haven't played Kramnik but I met him once; my impression is that he's a proud and rather honourable person. I don't see him organising his own cycle, but there are plenty of people opposed to FIDE who could. This might be just the opportunity they need. Kramnik couldn't really have refused a 'reunification' match before this, it would have looked like he didn't want to play. But now he's got a strong case that FIDE cannot provide a suitable aegis. Nigel


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-09-30 23:42:57)
i'm thinking too much...

It's true. :( Now, after some analyses, I think that 6.e4 is one of the stronger moves. Maybe I must keep silence few days. :|


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


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2006-10-02 15:17:48)
Argh!

"Question to Topalov: Veselin, with what feeling will you come to play tomorrow?

With great enthusiasm. I am tired of rest!"

On the other front: "unfortunately, Vladimir could not appear here – he is not feeling well"

Disgusting! It's a good thing they opened the toilets, because I need one to puke right now! So they give in on everything, except on the 3:2 score, just to get Kramnik less advantage and to wear him out. Argh!


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2006-10-02 18:44:08)
Well...

I'm just a patzer, but since there are all levels of players here...

My computer is low-end for today's standards, and I use only freeware engines for cost restrains. I used about 4 different engines for analysis during my WC and Class G games, but it proved to do less difference than I expected. I was the weak link at all times in the chain, and only in the games I was able to understand why my engine showed certain moves should be made I was able to win.

But I guess you can't always blame on the patzer. I had quite a few instances that it became obvious why I couldn't understand the moves: the engine was wrong. Best way to test this is to let it run a position where it gives a slight advantage to you for 15 minutes. After that, make the moves and check if you have the same score or better. Of course it might be just my below-average computer, but the shareware version of Fruit got me into some really bad spots. The best solution I had up until now was Toga II, as it proved to be pretty solid on that aspect.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-10-02 20:40:30)
Hi again, Thibault!

What do you think about WC article 2689? I think - it is possible refutation of Traxler counterattack. White has slow, but sure win - piece again two pawns. Refute me if I am wrong, please! (: Cirulis


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-03 13:54:48)
Traxler is not dead.... :D

Ok, sorry about 2988... but, you play for Black now ? :)

Anyway, it only means White played a wrong move before...

Good try against 7. ...Qe7, but there's 8. ...Qg5+ 9.Kxe4 Qf4+ (d5+)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-03 14:32:52)
SmartGo, Many faces of Go...

Computer Go seems to be very far from computer chess yet... (more than I thought)

Do you think a playing Go program could beat the best player in future ?
(following discussions I had with several players here :))

I've read the strongest programs could play around 8 kyu level (SmartGo, Many faces of Go). Not so bad, but I suppose it's at a blitz level, what about correspondence Go...

I train myself against gnuGO and I've been told about Kombilo, a free Go program (database), but I did not really enter it. SmartGo and Many faces of Go seem to be really good programs to learn the basics of the game.. but then ? .. Should we learn life and death structures, other things or only practice ?


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.


James Stripes    (2006-10-03 16:13:13)
curious

I have approximately 64 chess engines, including the beta version of Rybka 1 (the free version). In engine tournaments on my box, it has prevailed against my strongest commercial engines. However, the centaur play that is the norm here presents Rybka with an entirely different sort of playing environment than those in which it has demonstrated its superiority. As I am new to this type of play, I don't yet know how Rybka measures up to the likes of Junior, Shredder, and Hiarcs.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-03 19:18:18)
Open letter

Another letter of support to Vladimir Kramnik, written by famous chess grandmasters... (source www.chessbase.com)


Monday 2nd of October 2006

Dear Vladimir,

Through absolutely no fault of your own, you have suffered the consequences of an unprecedented combination of unethical behaviour from your opponent and glaring incompetence, for lack of a stronger word, on the part of the Appeals Committee.

In spite of evidently unfair treatment, which has not only resulted in your being forfeited one game, but also being subjected to petty attacks and ridiculous accusations from the opposing camp, you have agreed to continue the match for the sake of reunifying the chess world. This is a very impressive decision. It testifies to your remarkable sense of honour and is worthy of your true status of World Champion.

Regardless of the final result of this match you have earned the deepest respect of your fellow Grandmasters and colleagues as well as countless chess fans around the world. Thank you for being a model sportsman in a time and place where so many circumstances turned against you. You deserve to win.

With unfailing support,


GM Joel Lautier
IM Almira Skripchenko
GM Viktor Korchnoi
GM Laurent Fressinet
GM Nigel Short
GM Alexandra Kosteniuk
GM Pavel Tregubov
GM Pentala Harikrishna
GM Yannick Pelletier
WGM Sophie Milliet
GM Lev Alburt
WIM Anna Hahn
GM Rustam Dautov
GM Yasser Seirawan
GM Emanuel Berg
GM Helmut Pfleger
WIM Olena Boytsun
GM Vladimir Barksij
GM Bartlomiej Macieja
IM Maxim Notkin
GM Alexander Baburin
GM Tony Kosten
GM Alexander Khalifman


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-10-04 18:55:32)
Rybka and others

I use rybka 1.1 and quite a few other ones :-)
I am pretty sure that rybka is stronger than all other engines but this does not in any way say that rybka's play is perfect.
A problem with the practical use of rybka is the fact that it has something like a different scaling of his assessments than most others.
+0.10 is a large advantage for rybka! and often he gives almost the same score to several candidate moves whereas other engines more clearly differentiate the value of different potential continuations.
Rybka often misses evidently promising tactical continuations if you do not give him a much longer thinking time than requested by some competitors


So I think Rybka is a powerful tool but not the only one to have for computer help

Marc


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-09 11:19:53)
UCI / Winboard engine

Hello Yannick.

Maybe you could try a free chess engine like Crafty (quite strong already, also running on Chessbase / Fritz interface), GNUchess, Arasan, Ghost or any engine running on Winboard / Arena free interfaces...

See a list of chess engines here :
http://www.ficgs.com/wiki_en-chess_engines.html

A well-known french speaking website about computer chess :
http://perso.orange.fr/lefouduroi/computerchess.htm


Actually it's probably very hard not to be influenced by chess engines suggestions, but the point is to understand, then find better moves...

All depends on the level you want the engine to play. There are hundred of engines to download...


Thomas Gilbreath    (2006-10-11 07:04:35)
Pairings:

cyrano (still waitimg on name) vs. Glen D.Shields*****cairo (ottesen_soren) vs. Miguel Pires*****ccmcacollister (collister_craig) vs. Benjamin Aldag*****thumper (jacobs_doug) vs. James Stripes*****tugger (edwards_matthew) vs. Trond Michalsen*****yanm (maret_yannick) vs. Peter Willoughby*****taikaviitta (koivuniemi_raimo) vs. Richard Grady*****tag1153 (gilbreath_thomas) vs. Regis Ducreux*****eqj2 (johnson_eddie) vs. Martin Selby*****dewillget8 (bingham_anthony) vs. Ilmars Cirulis*****mozz (price_richard) vs. Julien Baudement*****lofix (mankowski_peter) vs. Phil Cook.***********************************************************That's a 12 vs. 12 match. 24 points possible. First team to 12.5 wins. Are we in agreement? - Thomas


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-12 18:56:37)
80 -> 50 -> 20

Actually, my estimation was probably right a few months ago, but not anymore... When the server started, the elo average was really strong, most players coming from well-known correspondence chess places (TCCMB, IECG...), but more and more beginners sign up, so the proportion of centaurs (human + engine) already is or will be nearer 20%, slowly but continuously decreasing (Google effect)...


Graham Wyborn    (2006-10-17 12:24:05)
Top of Rating List

How can Atalik, Suat be top of the rating list, when this player has never played a game on this site? Or have I got these facts wrong!


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-17 12:43:42)
GM Suat Atalik

GM Suat Atalik is about OTB #100 ranked player in the world (GM FIDE), and one of the first players who registered at FICGS. Ratings & titles are also displayed in an informative way, some other strong players will probably register when it will be possible to play unrated simultaneous games for money, but they'll keep a provisional rating. I still have to separate the rating lists, but provisional ratings aren't displayed the same way already.


Scott Prestwood    (2006-10-21 03:15:11)
Full Disclosure

Perhaps tournaments should be labled as permiting engines and not permiting engines. Coorespondence chess has tradionally had only the rules of chess and the time control limiting it. And the early masters that used and believed in coorespondence chess as a method to improve ones game did not have access to computers, nice to know I could get killed in the tourney I am in just because I'm playing 6 computers. The initial allowance of databases and books to aid ones choice of moves as well as playing the game through allowed improvement of ones chess abilities. Computers will have a greater tendency to be the one playing the game because they only prescribe one line of action from a position. That line is very strong and likewise tends to be the operators choice of the next move. If the allowance of computers is posted for the games it will allow for the players to chose which type of game they prefer.


Scott Prestwood    (2006-10-21 03:44:11)
Double Disclosure

I am confused as to why it double posts. what am I doing wrong?

[moderator : corrected]


Pekka I. Turakainen    (2006-10-26 18:04:25)
Reveal your software

Engines against engines....please, at least tell what chess engine you're using, so that your opponent knows which engine defeated his engine....like Shredder 10 vs. Shredder 10 1-0. Better advise: If you want to know which engine is strongest, please don't play here, visit some site that has ratings for chessengines.


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-31 10:54:18)
Go : pro game videos on Youtube

An incredible mistake in a Go game by a professional 9p player. Pressure is high too :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj58O_qHBAU

"The player of the Black stones was Nakano Hironari 9p and the White stones were played by Ishida Yoshio 9p of joseki dictionary fame. This is part of a broadcast of a game from a TV tournament in Japan. The announcer who comes on in the middle says that there isn't time in the program to show the whole game so they are skipping to the end."

From GoDiscussions forum :
http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=732


Henri-Louis Muller    (2006-11-04 08:55:34)
temps de réflexion

Hello Thibaut, de toute manière, merçi pour ta réponse !.....même si elle n'arrange rien !! ( ceci dit en toute amitié) Il y aura tjs deux camps qui s'opposeront. Dans la famille (sic !) nous sommes assez rapides, d'où une certaine incompréhension du système. Blague à part, je connais (au moins TROIS) des joueurs qui ne jouent plus à cause de ce temps de réflexion "incompréhensible" pour eux ! Moi non plus, je ne comprends pas qu'un certaine joueur dispose encore de 2 jours de réflexion, puis soudain, il en a à nouveau une bonne vingtaine. Je ne cherche pas à comprendre, mais c'est un fait. Il y a des cas où il faudra attendre 60 jours ou plus, pour gagner la partie, car l'adversaire ne répond plus !!! Logique ?? Normal ?? Sportif ?? Le débat est loin d'être clos et acquis ! Amicalement - hlm


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-05 12:45:06)
Fischer : "Now chess is completely dead"

A new interview from the former world chess champion Bobby Fischer...

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3468

No surprise : Fischer’s problems with the Union Bank of Switzerland, United states founded and being run by extremists, Capablanca brillancy, but also : "I don’t like chess any more" (what about chess 960 ?), "Now chess is completely dead. It is all just memorisation and prearrangement. It’s a terrible game now. Very uncreative"...

I just wonder.. How can we find so much pleasure in correspondence chess ? .. Was his pleasure only to destroy weak players or in real challenges against strong[er] players (ie. Karpov).. I can understand why a grandmaster stop to play competitive chess because it's too hard & it takes too much time, but I can't explain myself such a champion finding "limits" to chess & getting no more pleasure...

"Play Go !" :)


Sebastian Palozzi    (2006-11-05 14:29:19)
A Moment of Clarity

I find it interesting that no matter how bizzare his life and his thoughts might be I can usually find a moment of perfect clarity and thought; his description of Capablanca's style and ability coincide very nicely with the latest computer analysis of World Champion strength and style as posted on Chessbase. It seems to me that putting aside all questions of strength or playing ability Fischer has a profound knowledge and love of chess. If he is wrong about anything he is wrong about his own feelings about the game.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-11 16:48:20)
temps de réflexion

Je comprends que la règle de 60 jours max. par coup puisse paraitre plus que nécessaire, mais je maintiens que cette souplesse pour les joueurs a sa raison d'être, notamment en tenant compte du fait que contrairement à l'IECG (par l'intermédiaire des directeurs de tournois) le "facteur humain" est quasi nul sur FICGS, toute partie perdue au temps l'est irrémédiablement et sans recours... Dans de nombreux cas, 30 jours peuvent passer très vite (voyage, hospitalisation, vacances en oubliant de prendre des jours sur le site)...

D'autre part, les joueurs qui veulent énerver leurs adversaires en prenant leur temps joueront 1 coup tous les 30 jours au lieu d'un coup tous les 60 après avoir accumulé du temps, la durée de la partie restera la même (dans le cas d'un forfait, il suffit d'attendre un peu plus pour le gain)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-12 15:00:01)
Chess problem

Interesting chess problem...

The first move seems quite easy to find, knowing only one move wins & considering bishop and knight, but proving it is not obvious... maybe I'm wrong (my first idea was h5)... Anyway, chess engines are lost here, it seems Hiarcs is the only one finding h5.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-11-12 15:21:39)
Chess problem

Hello Thibault, I think you are wrong! This position is one of my last finished games on ICCF and one of my best - at least from this position to the end. It seems to be very important to find first the better way for Black instead of his last move. Greetings, Wolfgang


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-11-12 20:33:06)
Nice endgame

In complex positions it is always hard to show all lines I investigated during the game in depth (!!!) and then to be confronted with an other line suddenly, independent of its value. I don't think, that 61...Rh5 (instead of 61...Rg1) will be a fundamental better move, but for evidence I have to do a lot of work!


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-14 13:49:08)
Story Of Life and Chess

Yes, a story of life and chess ! ..

In my ICCF database, the oldest archived correspondence chess games have been played (at first sight, I may be wrong) in 1989, did you kept your first correspondence chess games ? It would be great to see some from this period... In which organizations did you play before ? Thanks for your answers :)


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-11-17 17:51:23)
Need one more player

Class A 000009. We have 6 strong players. Need one more. rating 2000-2200 welcome Wayne


Marius Zubac    (2006-11-19 19:21:59)
A penalty system is needed

Hello Thibault. I think that time has come for you to add new rules to FICGS and a penalty system (using penalty points) to discourage players from retire-comeback behavior. Loosing some games on time unless provoked by some unforeseen event should be also penalized although less severe. Upon reaching a certain number of penalty points the player should be prevented to register for new FICGS tournaments (let's say a half a year) and on resuming the penalized player should be only allowed to play a limited number of games until the lesson is learned. If you would compare FICGS list with the server-based IECG list you should notice that FICGS is less populated in the strong players section (2200+) than IECG and this has an impact on the quality of high-end tournaments, norms and titles and of course ratings. If we want to improve FICGS some action in this regard must be taken. I sympathize with Mr. Oltean and wish he reconsiders his decision. Marius


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-19 21:40:49)
Re: A penalty system is needed

Hello Marius, thanks for suggestions.

My problem is : How to deal with ie. a player who can't play (personal or any good reasons) during a while and looses only one or two games on time in a tournament ? .. How to prove a 'retirement' ? .. Above all, we have to avoid cases that could be undecided by the rules.

Of course, IECG server is more populated in the strong player section ! .. But there is no link with this in my opinion, IECG - International Email Chess Group - exists for more than 10 years, it's a long way. I regularly read IECG forum but I did not try IECG server yet.

I only know that IECG & FICGS servers started about the same time (FICGS started one or two weeks before IECG server), as Ortwin gave me some advices about the server before it started...


Marius Zubac    (2006-11-20 00:25:05)
The penalty system - a proposal

A player that for a (good) reason is not able to continue his games should have two choices: A) Let some games get lost on time and then he would be treated under the penalty system. B) Ask for a retirement and in this case no penalties should be applied. Once a player asks for retirement the following actions should be taken: 1. His status in the rating list should be flagged to retired; perhaps a retired player should not be able to register a new tournament; 2. A retired player could get re-instated by applying directly to the FICGS adjudication commission; 3. All the retired player’s running games should then be frozen and dealt with on a by tournament basis: 3a) if in a tournament the retired player has finished games that are not lost the remaining games should be adjudicated by FICGS for rating purposes. However all the retired player’s games should not be counted for qualification purposes (if the tournament provides qualification to a next stage); how the games are to be considered for norms is a matter to be discussed. 3b) if in a tournament the retired player has finished games that are all lost the tournament director can act as in 3a) or has the option of canceling all the retired player’s games. This proposal is far from perfect but shows that we are not helpless and some action can be taken. The reason I mentioned IECG is because probably on the server the population is roughly equivalent with the FICGS’s one but in IECG’s case the distributed is more favorable in the upper section. This is the reason why there is enough active population at any given time for new tournaments and severe rules are not needed as much as in FICGS’s case in order to maintain a meaningful activity. My belief is that the centaur mode will prove in time to generate stronger games, stronger chess and FICGS will have chances to become in time the most relevant correspondence chess server. The technical conditions are already met. Marius


Lionel Vidal    (2006-11-20 21:29:31)
You seems in advance :-)

Well, considering the results of last year pro games (almost a perfect 50-50 result, according to my rather large but admittedly incomplete database) I am not sure a komi change from 6.5 will occur soon, at least in the japanese pro scene... And the number of recent games in gobase that ends in 1 or 1/2 points difference is astonishing :-) (not really significant, I know, as pros have the capacity to keep a tiny edge till the end, reducing it to simplify the game... but still :-))
Anyway, for us, simple and humble go mortals, that does not change much :-)

(but even at my low level I tend to be more aggressive in my fuseki while playing with an opponent of my level or stronger when the komi is 7.5 instead of say 5.5... so considering the increase/decrease (black/white) of aggressive attitude, maybe it is important for most of us because the feeling of a game might eventually change)


Lionel Vidal    (2006-11-20 21:57:03)
Go handicap and rating

Is handicap Go really nonsensical in rated tournaments?
While it seems so in a world championship, where the aim is to determine the stronger player in an absolute sense, why should it be so in a tournament, where the aim is to determine the best player in a relative sense... hum, not a very clean or clear sentence, but I hope you got the idea :-)

In face to face Go, in most amateur tournaments, it is not a problem, and you can win or loose a tournament, win or loose points, playing with an handicap (some tournaments set a limit lower than 9 in the number of handicap stones). I do not know the formulae used to compute the knew ratings, but in practice it works well. (and the same thing works also in Shogi tournaments)

Before WWII, even pros played with handicap (one or two stones at most, more commonly with a fixed color and no komi) and that *for money*!! Nowadays this is not the case anymore: maybe the increase of pro-tournament prizes change the noble way to be the best of two players fighting *their best* at their *respective* level!

Anyway, I think such an idea may be interresting to motivate players: when weaker, I will fight my best because I have a chance to win, and when stronger, I *have* to fight well :-)

We could think of a rating system where you play your first, say, 20 games without handicap to get a starting rating, and then to receive or give handicaps automatically in tournaments. We could then consider a rating as fixed after a bunch of 20 more games...
Or any other system that will always generate tense and dangerous games! That will be, at least for me, a great motivation to play more :-)
(but then I do not care much for my rating :-))


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-21 11:32:39)
Go: Komi

Stones handicap or Komi handicap is handicap anyway... I'm not sure it makes sense to change the Komi (Lionel would agree, I think).

As I just said in another thread, if we add a handicap system which gives chances enough to weak players against strong players, I'm afraid results & ratings / ranks don't mean anything anymore then, at least more aleatory. This is another game... (and such 'strange' rules might frighten beginners).

I think it could be ok (as another challenge) in an unrated tournaments category.


Lionel Vidal    (2006-11-21 13:47:55)
Komi vs handicap

IMO, Thibault is quite right: it would make no sense to increase Komi instead of playing with handicap stones.
To give points or to give stones is not the same: the very nature of handicap stones is pedagogic, that is to help *both* players to improve. Go strategy is complex, but can often been seen as a delicate balance between power (thickness) and territory (points). Handicap stones are put on Hoshi on purpose: to help the weaker player to build and use thickness, the most difficult concept to master compare to territory, where a beginner can actually count concrete points (or so he believes at first :-)
Playing at 9 handicap stones, or giving, say, 100 points komi is not the same and never will be: the weaker player has no chance with such a komi, because he will have no anchor to help his stones live and will probably be completely destroyed... but much worse, he cannot improve his play easily because he'll never be in a position where he could *try* to think strategically.
IMO, true go is not non-handicap go, but a fair game where the tactical and strategic true nature of the game is preserved. How could we say that, for instance, Dosaku 'Go Saint' games are not true go, when he was at least one stone stronger than all his fellow pro players, giving them Black (no komi at that time) or one,two stones?
The beauty of handicap go is that IMO it *is* still true go :-) You can compare to chess where giving a piece, say a N as Lasker used to do, change the strategic nature of the game through a controlled exchange policy.


Don Groves    (2006-11-21 20:49:23)
Go: komi

Hello Lionel (and Thibault), I think you misunderstand what I wrote. I am suggesting "reducing" komi in certain games, not "increasing" komi as a way to handicap games. I agree the games should not be handicapped. I do not agree that a much higher rated player playing white should receive 7.5 komi against a much weaker player. The much stronger player already has a great advantage and does not need to be compensated for the weaker player making the first move.


Graham Wyborn    (2006-11-22 09:00:54)
Go Software

Which is the stronger program. Many Faces of Go version 11 or the new SmartGo 2.3


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-22 13:54:26)
Go engines...

SmartGo is really nice, but I've read Many Faces of Go is a bit stronger (it would play around 8 kyu). I've tried both programs, and I feel they would be weaker at correspondence Go, as reflexion time couldn't improve much their play.

But they are a great way to improve by solving problems and watching pro games.


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-11-24 06:44:37)
Kramnik vs. Deep Fritz, 2006

My two cents. I have little interest in this match. It is no longer any doubt wheather the programs are stronger than the Human. The playing field for this match is not even,. Kramnik has secured far too much of an advantage based on the rules of the match. He will play just well enough to secure a draw, or even perhaps push to a 31/2-21/2 win. After all gotta keep up the suspense for the next big payday cow. Anyways Fritz is not the strongest Engine I believe Human-Program matches should be played without handicap for the program. Then we know who is champs. so now in my view I already know. Wayne


Don Groves    (2006-11-25 20:42:20)
"Next" request

I would like to see the "Next" function changed to move through a player's games by going to the next game in the list instead of going to the front of the list each time. The reason for this is: if I have skipped over a game because I don't want to move in that game until I have given it more thought, I can't use "Next" to step through my games but must instead use "My Messages" to keep skipping that game. With a long game list, this gets tiresome.


Charlie Neil    (2006-11-29 23:13:37)
Krammik vs Deep Fritz, 2006

After the blunder in game two Krammik plays on and IMHO pulls game three out of the fire I thought. after getting into trouble he saved a half point with style and fight. But I could be wrong.


Jaimie Wilson    (2006-11-30 15:14:36)
Game 3

I could be wrong, but I suspect fritz thought he had a clear advantage when the draw was agreed. My fritz 9 said something like -1 although even I would have fancied my drawing chances in the final position (maybe overoptimistically against a 2800 rated comp :) ).


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-12-02 13:56:38)
Deep Joke

You have to agree that it's hard to be serious when a new program is more like a joke, a Deep Joke that is :p

OTOH I expect CB to get serious and release a really strong version of the program.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-12-06 18:18:54)
David Bronstein

David Bronstein (February 19, 1924, Bila Tserkva, Ukraine - December 5, 2006, Minsk, Belarus) was not only one of the fathers of anti-computer play, he also drew a challenge match for the title of world champion by a score of 12-12 with Mikhail Botvinnik, the reigning champion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bronstein

He played (and beat) all the first well known chess programs : Rebel, Fritz, Zarkov, Chess player, Deep Thought, Socrates, Saitek Sparc, MChess, Genius, Dark Thought, Deep Blue Jr., XXXX ...

Some of his games - http://www.angelfire.com/on/anticomputer/bronst.html


Lionel Vidal    (2006-12-09 21:24:05)
scrabble+

Your idea for scrabble is interesting but the luck seems still there (not that luck is a problem per se IMO): even if the letters are shown, their very order is luck dependend ; and the only thing that really changes is that you can forsee the letters of your opponent and play accordingly... and so the game is actually more simple (!) IMO, more calculating prone and less strategic because you remove some possibilities, all as likely, in your move tree.
To be more concrete, suppose you can play a scrabble for, say, 75 points, and open the grid for the opponent, or play a nice glue-word for, say 40 points, but let the grid closed enough. In your proposed game, I just have to look at my opponent possibilities, as I know his letters... I calculate one, two or more moves ahead and say, ok, I can open the grid and still win by 10 points. In the normal game, I have to estimate, if the openess of the grid is worth the 35 points difference and that means calculating the rough propabilities to score points on the letters I open, considering what my opponent already played, if he seems waiting for some specific letters, or maybe he is bluffing, but then by experience I know that the double 'e' I let is not very valuable, considering that only four expensive letters remain...and so on: the game seems much more strategic and interesting for me.
Of course, I can loose because my letters are really bad... but that is quite uncommon on a whole game for good players, and almost meaningless on a match with, say, five set or more. (remember that the goal is not to make words, but to score points, or to prevent your opponent doing so on the grid, something a good player can almost always do whatever his letters).

For the chess engine, I did try some, and frankly my level in blitz play is so terrible that gnuchess is enough for me for a quick match:-). Now I tried Fruit and Hiarcs on some of my correspondence games and even on my modest scale, I was not very happy with the result: they did suggest others moves than mine, but that were moves I would never have played (maybe (surely?) I am wrong, but I am not sure)... so what would be the point to waste computer time? Even if they may suggest a good move I missed, I would still feel uneasy to play something 'outside' my own mind... old fashion maybe, but that is how I have fun in chess :-) I still like the waiting of the reply, while wondering if I made an oversight! (that being said, I used and will still use the tablebases reading engine when needed: very useful at some points :-)
But then maybe my biais against engines made me use them badly :-) Never mind, I am not going to apologize for that to a silicon piece of junk :-) And if the beast feels somehow insulted and asks for a real time match, let's just play Go!


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-12-26 14:15:24)
Ok, 14.Qg1 still the best.

After 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 Qe5 16.d3 (16.Nc3?) exd3 17.Qf2 Nd4 18.Nc3 Nxb3 19.cxb3 c6. Unclear.

I must find something stronger for white. And before 14th move. :)


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


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-12-29 14:48:31)
To be continued

It has been discussed already, my conclusion was vacation had to be hard to use enough, in order to reduce influence on time controls, ie. a player shouldn't be able to take days to think more time when having difficulties in some games and cancel his 'holidays' after finding a solution... So it has to be discussed. Anyway, I'll add a message specifying vacation can't be canceled when taking days leave.

Reminder :


http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#playing

11. 4. Time rules

Any move in any game shall be played in a maximum period of 60 days, otherwise the game will be adjudicated on time. Time accumulated in a game can't exceed 100 days. Please don't call referee since you see your opponent's clock 'Out of time', you just have to wait a few hours a robot automatically adjuges the game.

Please be aware that it's possible sometimes your internet provider or a point between the server and you may block the connection between the server and you. Even it's a rare thing, it's strongly recommended to always have several days left at your clock. No result will be reconsidered or time added due to such a technical problem. No time will be added due to any problem during a period less than 1 day long.

It is possible to take a maximum of 30 days leave per year, called vacation. During this time, clocks are frozen and it is no more possible to play, in order to reduce the effects on time controls.

Please note the time limit per move clock still runs during vacation. Take your days carefully, as it's not possible to take back or displace your leave dates. However you can add days leave.


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-12-31 22:59:37)
Strong players needed

Class A 000012 Tournament needs two more strong player near 2200 to complete the field. Will be nice strong tournament to start 07 Thank you Wayne


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-12-31 23:02:26)
Strong players needed

The tourney is open to 2400 rated. cmon lets have some strong chess starting 07 (did not mean to exclude up to 2400 rated in my last post, sorry Wayne


Wayne Lowrance    (2007-01-01 05:06:43)
strong players needed

welcome aboard our tournament Miguel, with you in it's going to be very good. Wayne


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-01-02 20:43:37)
Blitz correspondence chess

Programming problems you mean?

In a 1-game match I would gladly play Black all the time :) -provided that if draw Black "wins" of course-

It's tricky to make a fair 1-game match; the old proposal of giving odds to White (first two consecutive moves in a MUST WIN -other result loses- situation) would give White -I reckon- 60-to-70% chance to win, which is about the same odds as playing Black for a draw. But it's something new, which could be tested. Here I could play Black just to try to prove me wrong, lol.




Ron Keyston    (2007-01-02 21:19:58)
Me too

Not necessarily just you Wayne, I've never noticed the envelope either. I don't believe that I've ever missed a draw offer, but there have been a couple times where I didn't notice it until I was just about to hit the move button.


Ron Keyston    (2007-01-02 21:23:50)
IMO

In My Opinion


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-01-13 11:23:38)
WikiEndings?

..is it feasible? (I'm sure it is, it's just a rhetorical question ;)

I believe endgame theory (and players) would benefit from a endgame section in Wikichess contributed by members taken from their practice, especially if general "rules of thumb" and guidelines are outlined together with analysis. Specially interesting I think would be many-pawn endings and other practical endings which are given poor coverage in the books and are less investigated (and, as it seems, there are always holes in the analysis even from very strong players, there would be a lot of room for improvement of the articles until a general consensus is reached)

Subsections could be created in the lines of the ECO classification for endgames, it would then be easy to find/correct/contribute in a given position.

Any thoughts?


Wayne Lowrance    (2007-01-18 01:19:11)
Chess engines rating

Very nice information. A great big word of caution. We play coorespondence games here. Those engine-engine tournaments do not indicate directly which program is best suited for correspondence deep analysis, I do not have enough experience with the engines except earlier versions of Fritz, shredder, Hiarc, Junior and of course Dr Robert Hyatts Various versions of Crafty and Rybka. Rybka is top rated eng-eng program for fast time controls. But not sure that it is best for deep analysis. My guess is that Latest Fritz is at least as well suited for deep analysis and perhaps better. Then their is Shredder another top eng-eng program that is very very good at deep analysis. From what I read and for what it is worth those are the best engines. But if you want the strongest program for 40/120 time control down to bullet chess,then the clear winner is Rybka by Vas. Hope this is of interest. Wayne


Wayne Lowrance    (2007-01-18 17:39:24)
draw offers

gad !, I am terribly sorry. I have two reactions: 1) I am very glad that the program draw logic is sound without a crack. 2) I am terribly embarrased, I just cannot remember asking. As I said tho the draw was very appropriate, And I thank my opponent who is a stronger player than I for accepting. My best to both you and He. Wayne


Nigel Davies    (2007-01-20 07:42:54)
Correspondence Chess

Hi Thibault, I picked up your message and I would agree in terms that an OTB player should not try to play 'perfectly'. The point of my article was that correspondence chess can help cure OTB players of becoming 'too practical' at the expense of good moves. A lot of OTB players will develop defective (but dangerous) methods to score heavily against weaker players but get cut to ribbons when they use the same methods against a stronger player. This is particularly noticeable on the ICC, where some players will just try to win on the clock regardless of the objective strength of their moves, and most of the time it works. But their 'chess habits' suffer mightily as a result. Best wishes, Nigel


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-01-21 13:48:44)
Go and chess, IGN Goama newsletter

From IGN Goama newsletter by Alexander Dinerchtein - http://www.gogame.info


Go and Chess ­ Two Games, Shared Experiences

Chess and go show are similar in many ways, yet it's always strange to see how the masters of each game try to "invent the wheel", instead of benefiting from the knowledge of their colleagues.

Let's consider sharing experiences!

These ideas can be useful even for strong Asian Go professionals:

1. Currently, only a few pros use Go databases and programs for studying. It is easy to find commentaries, written by 9-dan masters, which state that a move is new and has never been played before. Yet if one checks such moves in Go databases, one can sometimes find up to 100 examples from professional games. How can they cheat the readers who study these commentaries?

Once in Korea, I showed the Bigo Assistant program (similar to GoGod, MoyoGo and SmartGo) to Lee Sedol's brother Lee Sanghun, 5-dan, who is the director of a large children's Go school. He was surprised and said that the program looked very useful, and he added that he had never met this kind of program before. He even suggested deleting all amateur games and games played on Go servers, because of their low quality. I promised to order the programs and to install them on the school's computers if he liked this idea, but he did not follow up. Lee Sanghun, 5-dan was not able to break the traditions of his forefathers …

2. Even such top chess players as Kasparov, Kramnik and Topalov enlist the support of trainers during important tournaments and matches. During the Communist era, almost every Russian grandmaster worked on behalf of world championship candidates. Our government forced them to help, to show them new moves and ideas. Those who refused to help were punished severely: for example, sometimes a player would be prohibited from playing in tournaments abroad and would be refused foreign visas.

We do not see this in Go. Everyone thinks only about his or her own self. Do you know who is currently assisting Lee Changho? I don't know, either!

3. I would like to say a few words about playing technique. Chess players often used to write the move on paper first and then make it on the board. This helps to avoid impulsive moves and to prevent blunders. Go masters record the game afterwards, and so one can often find terrible mistakes, such as overlooking ataris and recapturing ko without playing a ko threat first. As an example you may see Black's move number 271 from this game: http://www.go4go.net/v2/modules/collection/sgfview.php?id=10828 I am sure that if a player looked at their move at least twice ­ before they write it on paper and after ­ they would not make such mistakes.

4. Even top Go tournaments are usually run by the knock-out system so we often see sensational results. Mightn’t it be reasonable to think about increasing the number of games in each round? If rounds were best-of-three (in case of time constraints, it would be possible to use blitz time controls for the third game), it would help to minimize sensations.

How about organising a definitive World Go Championship? Chess players have contested one for more than 100 years, and competitions for this World Championship have revealed the very best players of each generation. In Go it's harder to tell which player is true champion. In 2006, for instance, one international tournament was won by Lee Changho and another one by Lee Sedol, while Cho U won the largest amount of prize money. Whom can we call the World Champion? Who can say which tournament is the most important : LG, Samsung, Fujitsu, Chunlan or another? We don't even have a unified rating system …

If we determined a single World Go Champion, he might earn the same degree of popularity as Garry Kasparov achieved in chess, and this could have a very positive influence on Go popularity around the world!


Dan Rotaru    (2007-01-24 16:42:19)
Suggestion for rating period

I would suggest that the rating period to be monthly instead of every 2 months. I understand the reason for longer periods between calculation being to avoid big differences but 2 months seems a little bit too long for me. I have noticed that some players with high provisional ratings or who started with high provisional ratings still have a much higher rate after they lost all or almost all their games, and players which started with, let’s say, standard 1400 still have lower ratings even they won all the games. And there is no such a difference between the Elo average of the opponents. My point is that a monthly period will increase the dynamic of the ratings and eventually will lead to a much realistic overall ratings and why not to a more challenging environment.. Of course the number of games played will have the biggest impact on re-adjusting the ratings based on results, but a month period will help for example a player to obtain a higher TER sooner and eventually play on a higher ELO bracket tournament. The other reason is that I believe many players will want to see how their rating evolves and a month seems more reasonable. As I said it is just a suggestion, others may not agree with me. Thanks, Dan


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-01-25 11:54:20)
Rating period

2 months is definitely a good rating period IMO.

The dynamic of the ratings is quite high already, higher than ie. at IECG. "More challenging environment", quite true but it would lead to more lasting games for sure... About your last points, you're right but I'm convinced it would have some bad consequences too.

World championship tournaments also help to find quicker your rating.

Anyway, waiting for other feedback about this point.

Correspondence chess is definitely a game of patience :)


Miguel Pires    (2007-01-27 00:09:54)
thank's

and i hoppe some strong players came to play to.


Ron Keyston    (2007-01-29 15:54:26)
German Translation?

Can I get a german speaking member to translate a couple of lines of text for me? Hattest Du seine mail mit der Datenbank bekommen? Viele Grüße and Nein, ich habe keine Datenbank von ihm. Thank you for your help, Ron


Ron Keyston    (2007-01-29 17:16:55)
Thanks

Close enough for my purposes. Thanks Benjamin, Ron


Ron Keyston    (2007-01-29 17:27:38)
"Major" Deep Fritz 10 Bug

I've confirmed this problem on two different computers with completely different hardware and different operating systems. I've also sent the problem off to Chessbase, but have not yet gotten much of a response. If anyone else has Deep Fritz 10, would you mind giving this a try and reporting back with your results? Also, if anyone has the non-Deep version of Fritz 10, I'd be interested in knowing if it is also affected by this problem.

Input a game into Deep Fritz 10 and get to a point in the game where it is possible for black to castle long. Now save the game into a database, close the game and then open it back up from the database. If you either turn on infinite analysis, or just try to make the move, black is not able to castle long...Fritz assumes that it is an illegal move.

Furthermore, if you castle long BEFORE saving the game into the database, then save it and re-open it, then go to the position after black has castled queenside and turn on infinite analysis, the analysis is "messed up." Either the analysis text is invisible, or it reports impossible lines, or the evaluation score is very obviously wrong. This should be enough info for anyone to give the test a try, but if you want some specific examples, please let me know.

Ron


Miguel Pires    (2007-01-29 17:42:25)
Ron

Can you give some examples? And another thing, waht Hash yable you use? And what is the maximum HT you can load? Best Regard's Miguel Pires


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 00:09:34)
Rybka secret

An interesting (even if totally wrong) article about Rybka's strength and particularly his results against Deep Fritz on Rybka forum.net .. A computer gate, is Rybka cheating ? :)

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=90


Rybka forum - http://www.rybkaforum.net


Charlie Neil    (2007-02-02 11:45:33)
Without Computer

Marcus if you can please read the old forum postings, "Why do you play corr-chess." I made a similar comment about computers being used as the main player. Believe me I was wrong! As much as in correspondence chess you can use notes, books and databases for reference. Here at FICGS, (A great site!) players use their computers as a reference. It does not benefit anyone to just relay their computer moves without understanding them. Those players won't prosper nor will develop a passion we chessplayers have for the game. I believe that now to be the case. Personally I don't have a Juinor8, Fritz 10 or Deep Joe 90 or whatever to use as a reference point. I do have a pile of books that serve to confuse me in my games. As I continue to seek understanding in this game. People should use computers as long as the computers don't use them! How boring can it be just to imput moves? The computer isn't compulsory. And I am saving a fortune on stamps playing here! It is fun after all. It is only a game. Even if it is a terrible one.


Marcus Miranda    (2007-02-02 15:37:22)
Without computer

Thanks Charlie for directing me to the old forum, I thought that a computer engine is unbeatable if you give it enough time, and if this was the case there would be no human touch in the moves you play, I guess I am wrong.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-05 12:34:53)
Correspondence chess / OTB chess

Quote : "Players with a FIDE ELO 2200 and higher will have here a rating over 2600 and they will not only play computermoves."

Benny, this is just wrong ;) .. There are many examples, here and everywhere... Best correspondence chess players are not best chess players with computer assistance, they are 'only' the best correspondence chess players.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-07 00:52:58)
Rybka 2.3

An interesting thread about Rybka 2.3 (should be available on february 12) and his new features, described by Vasik Rajlich. In a few words : stronger, new chess knowledge, better search algorithm, better positional play, bug fixes and an interesting feature called "randomizer" :

Quote : "You can put Rybka into a mode where she will play against herself over and over from the same position without repeating variations - she will systematically explore the space of possibilities in the variation, branching from the previous games at later and later points. It's an effective way to get a Monte-Carlo-based evaluation of a position."

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=180


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.


Dinesh De Silva    (2007-02-10 08:36:07)
Re:

Do you think Illya Nyzhnyk's feelings would be hurt if chess officials ban him from carrying a teddy bear in future tournaments?! Or will they scan/ monitor or even interrogate the teddy bear?! Will Illya lodge a complaint citing cruelty to kids & teddies?! Will this divide the chess world in two?! Lastly, will there be a sizeable increase in sales for similar teddy bears by chess players who might think that these teddies might make them very strong players?!?


Wayne Lowrance    (2007-02-15 23:05:38)
more chess engine talk.

Thibault, you miss the boat on Hydra futre expectations in my opinion. Its advantage over pc engines was dedicated hardware (no necessarily speed) and ease of making program modifications. However you perhaps neglect to consider the tremendous improvement in PC performance multiple cores, processors and et all. My thought is that the pc programs already are superior to Hydra. Correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall that Rybka has finished ahead of it in tournament play. As far as other programs, you did not mention Zap. You best keep an eye on this one. It is very very strong and improving. Right now it is the only engine that has a chance of catching Rybka in eng-eng matches. I think it will be number two on the computer rankings. I will try to look further into Zap for a top CC engine. we see. again, my thoughts Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-16 02:09:40)
Established rating list

Of course it's a good idea, and it can be discussed. So far, three main reasons for not doing this change :

1) One rating list is much clearer and easier to reach than two.

2) Provisional and established ratings are easy to distinguish already. (grey or not)

3) There could be more strong players in future who will play unrated games -only- at standard time control (2 hours / 40 moves, soon available) and in my opinion, the rating list is first a way to show who is playing there.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-16 02:11:07)
Rybka 2.3

More info about Rybka 2.3

www.rybkachess.com/index.php?auswahl=Rybka+2.3+readme

The new engine should be a bit stronger than the previous version, Vasik Rajlich ran a blitz match (1' + 1") between Rybka 2.3 and Rybka 2.2n2 and got a result of: +245 =607 -193 (52.5%, +17 Elo).


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-17 12:26:13)
Les échecs en France

Here is the agreement just signed by the ministry of education and the french chess federation - fédération française des échecs (F.F.E.)

This should help to promote chess in France.



CONVENTION-CADRE

Établie entre les soussignés :

L'État - Ministère de l'Education nationale, de l'Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche représenté par Monsieur Gilles de Robien, ministre, ci-dessous dénommé " le Ministère "

et

La Fédération française des échecs représenté par Monsieur Jean-Claude Moingt, président, ci-dessous dénommé " la Fédération "

Rappelant

Que le jeu d'échecs, activité à la fois ludique et sportive, constitue aussi et surtout une activité intellectuelle qui permet de développer des compétences diverses chez ceux qui le pratiquent, et notamment chez les jeunes auprès de qui il constitue un réel vecteur de formation ;

Que la pratique des échecs encourage notamment le développement des capacités intellectuelles telles que la mémoire, le raisonnement logique, la capacité d'abstraction, l'analyse de problème et la mise en oeuvre de stratégies de résolution ;

Que la pratique des échecs contribue également à la construction de la personnalité en encourageant l'attention, l'imagination, l'anticipation, le jugement et la confiance en soi ;

Que le jeu d'échecs, école de concentration et de maîtrise de la pensée, est enfin une école de maîtrise de soi qui favorise l'apprentissage des règles et le respect d'autrui, et à ce titre participe de l'apprentissage de la citoyenneté ;

Considérant

Que, pour toutes ces raisons, le jeu d'échecs constitue un complément légitime et pertinent des activités éducatives proposées par l'Ecole ;

Que de nombreuses expériences menées en académies ont permis de mettre en oeuvre des projets de qualité associant des établissements scolaires et des clubs d'échecs dans un cadre réfléchi et concerté entre les parties concernées ;

Que ces initiatives ont permis de développer des pratiques et des outils permettant une exploitation du jeu d'échecs dans un cadre scolaire et/ou périscolaire ;

Il a été convenu ce qui suit :

Article 1 - Objectifs

Par la présente convention le Ministère et la Fédération affirment leur volonté commune de favoriser le développement de la pratique du jeu d'échecs dans les écoles, les collèges et les lycées. Ils se donnent comme objectifs la mise en oeuvre de deux axes de travail privilégiés :

- le jeu d'échecs au service de l'égalité des chances, l'expérience montrant que la pratique des échecs peut constituer pour des élèves en difficulté scolaire une occasion privilégiée de se remotiver et de se remettre sur la voie de la réussite scolaire ;

- la dimension éducative du jeu d'échecs auprès du plus grand nombre, en favorisant la transférabilité des acquis entre les pratiques ludiques et les situations d'apprentissage.

Article 2 - Egalité des chances

Le Ministère et la Fédération conviennent de développer l'accès de la pratique des échecs auprès des publics scolaires qui en sont les plus éloignés pour des raisons sociales ou géographiques. Le partenariat portera en particulier sur des actions impliquant :

- les collèges " ambition réussite ", qui visent à offrir un cadre d'excellence à des publics scolaires confrontés aux plus grandes difficultés socio-économiques. La contribution de la Fédération consistera notamment en mise à disposition de matériel (ludique et/ou pédagogique), en actions de sensibilisation ou de formation organisées dans le cadre des établissements concernés, en appariements des collèges avec des clubs de proximité ou encore en parrainage de certains collèges par des joueurs de haut niveau recommandés par la Fédération.

- l'opération " Ecole ouverte ", qui accueille les jeunes dans les EPLE pendant les vacances scolaires pour leur proposer des activités de loisirs à visée éducative. Parce qu'il conjugue les dimensions ludique et formatrice, le jeu d'échecs correspond bien à l'esprit de ce dispositif qui contribue à modifier l'image de l'école auprès des jeunes.

- les dispositifs relais (classes et ateliers), qui accueillent temporairement des élèves en voie de décrochage ou de désocialisation. La pratique des échecs peut permettre à ces jeunes de reprendre goût à l'activité intellectuelle, tout en leur inculquant le respect des règles et de l'autre.

Article 3 - Action éducative

De façon plus générale, le Ministère et la Fédération conviennent d'encourager la connaissance et la pratique des échecs auprès du plus grand nombre. A ce titre, ils pourront notamment :

- développer la pratique des échecs dans le cadre des activités péri-scolaires au sein des internats scolaires, des clubs et des foyers socio-éducatifs, en partenariat avec les clubs locaux.

- mettre en place des actions de sensibilisation et/ou de formation dans les écoles et les établissements volontaires, en rapprochant les équipes éducatives et les clubs selon des modalités à préciser entre les partenaires concernés : enseignement et pratique dans le temps scolaire ou périscolaire, projets thématiques fédérateurs s'appuyant sur les dispositifs transversaux, opérations d'information et d'animation, tournois scolaires à l'échelle d'une ville ou d'un bassin, etc.

- développer des ressources en co-édition, en lien avec le réseau des CRDP et des CDDP (sites Internet de jeu pour les écoles, dépliants de présentation, outils pédagogiques, etc.).

Article 4 - Contribution des partenaires

La Fédération française des échecs s'engage à apporter aux écoles, collèges et lycées qui en font la demande une aide en matériel ou en ressources diverses (publications, outils pédagogiques etc.). Dans le cas d'actions spécifiques conduites au sein des établissements dans les temps scolaire ou périscolaire, les cadres qualifiés de la Fédération ou de ses organes déconcentrés devront avoir reçu un accord préalable du Ministère et/ou de ses services déconcentrés ; ils pourront apporter des aides techniques ponctuelles auprès des enseignants qui en feront la demande après avoir pris l'avis des corps d'inspection.

De son côté, le Ministère s'engage à diffuser, par le biais de son réseau de communication et de diffusion ainsi que par l'intermédiaire de ses services déconcentrés, l'information nécessaire à la mise en oeuvre de ce partenariat.

Article 5 - Communication

L'application du présent accord-cadre peut donner lieu à des déclarations et communications aux médias par chacun des partenaires, lesquels conviennent de se concerter préalablement.

Article 6 - Mise en oeuvre et suivi

Les partenaires conviennent de se réunir au moins une fois par an pour examiner les conditions de mise en œuvre de l'accord-cadre et dresser un état des lieux des actions entreprises sur la période de l'année écoulée.

Article 7 - Durée

La présente convention est signée pour une durée de trois ans à compter de la date de la signature. A l'issue de ces trois années un bilan global permettra de faire le point sur l'évolution des pratiques à l'école, au collège et au lycée et d'étudier sur cette base les termes du renouvellement de la convention. Elle peut être résiliée par l'une ou l'autre des parties, à l'expiration d'un délai de trois mois suivant l'envoi d'une lettre recommandée avec accusé de réception valant mise en demeure.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-18 00:05:00)
Morelia Linares 2007

Super-GM tournament of Morelia-Linares starts... with Topalov, Ivanchuk, Leko, Morozevich, Svidler, Carlsen, Anand and Aronian.

Will Topalov be affected by rumors ?

Let's see who will make the best predictions ? :)


My final standings :

1. Aronian, 2. Topalov, 3. Leko, 4. Anand, 5. Svidler, 6. Morozevich, 7. Ivanchuk, 8. Carlsen


Catalin Ionescu    (2007-02-18 23:58:41)
Topalov or Leko ?

1. Topalov 2. Leko 3. Svidler 4. Aronian 5. Carlsen 6. Anand 7. Ivanchuk 8. Morozevich

(right now the round 2 is playing)

I think Carlsen will be the surprise of this tournament :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-20 17:44:50)
Rybka 2.2 stronger than Rybka 2.3

Rybka 2.3 weaker than Rybka 2.2 ??

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=340#fp


CEGT computer chess rating lists :

http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_4_Ratinglist/40_4_AllVersion/rangliste.html


Waiting for HIARCS 12 :)


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-02-21 18:51:49)
standing suggestion

the thing i try to explain is the follow:

if you are the last player that enter in a tournament, your name in the standing is the last, also if you win or for example arrive third.

Now the question is:

is possible to see the tournament standing with the leader in the first position of the standing, the player who arrived second in the second place of the standing, etc etc?

for example, if you see FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_C__000001, the winner is in the last position of the standing.

Is possible to see this standing with this order?:

Unger 5.5/6
Muller 4.5/6
Holes 4/6
Ghisi 3/6
Baron 2/6
Guralivu 1/6
Rattay 1/6

sorry for my bad english and thanks thibault for your time :-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-22 12:01:22)
Standings - Round 4

Hmm... Morelia's round 4 was quite interesting. Anand beats Morozevich, Carlsen beats Ivanchuk !

Now Anand leads by 3/4 followed by Carlsen 2,5 .. then Svidler, Aronian, Ivanchuk, Leko 2/4

Everything still can happen... :)


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-02-23 09:13:39)
Magnus Carlsen is now at the top

After round 5 Carlsen lead with 3.5/5, winning against Topalov, while Anand lose against Aronian.
This is a great tournament, with leaders that can lose a game also against the last player. Really interesting :-D


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-23 11:54:47)
Kasparov

I wonder how Garry Kasparov would do in this tournament without any more preparation :)

This round 5 was full of surprises... I think Topalov will have a better 2nd part again, like Aronian. But Carlsen could make my predictions false :/


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-02-23 20:45:40)
The best chess player of history

Who is the best player of history?

From 1500 to 2007, who is for you the strongest?


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 ...


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-02-25 11:30:19)
Round 6

All game drawn, Carlsen still lead

This is the standings after six rounds:

Carlsen 4
Aronian 3.5
Anand 3.5
Leko 3
Svidler 3
Ivanchuk 3
Topalov 2
Morozevich 2

Next round:

Peter Leko - Vishy Anand
Vassily Ivanchuk - Levon Aronian
Veselin Topalov - Alex. Morozevich
Peter Svidler - Magnus Carlsen



Dinesh De Silva    (2007-02-26 17:49:46)
Re:

Thibault, here's the wager/bet: If your prediction is wrong, you can give me 1000 Euros. If your prediction is right, I can be given 1000 Euros by you.


Ovidiu Baron    (2007-03-01 16:12:17)
Big chess. An idea!

Interesting game, but I think the Big chess has a small(?) problem, the 16 squares on the vertical. It takes too much time to bring the pawns into the game, and the risk is that they will not participate at the "battle" at all. Wouldn't be more efficient to reduce the vertical lines a little bit, maybe not to 8 squares, because of the central knights positioning, but to 10 or 12?


Kim Peters    (2007-03-02 01:21:37)
greatest chess players

here is a great article i found on chessbase. everyone is free to draw their own conclusions but the authors make a strong argument. http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3455


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-03 17:12:57)
Rybka 2.3.1

Rybka 2.3.1 beta is available, Rybka 2.3.2 is announced, quite hard to follow Vasik Rajlich's work day after day :) .. Rybka forum is very active and it seems Rybka 2.3.1 is the strongest Rybka and the strongest chess engine today !

I hope Fritz, Junior, Shredder and Hiarcs authors are working hard...

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=472#fp


Samy Ould Ahmed    (2007-03-04 12:45:47)
My im impressions in french :)

Après deux jours de combat et 5 rondes voila mon parcours : Ronde 1 : avec les blancs je prends un pérpétuel assez rapidement après un sacrifice spéculatif. Ronde 2 : avec les noirs je vérouille la position pour arracher une nulle dificile. Ronde 3 : avec les blancs je massacre mon adversaire en 30 coups face à une sicilienne roques opposés. Ronde 4 : je joue la française avec les noirs pour avoir une position fermée, et je fait l'érreur de l'ouvrir, je me fait tout simplement massacrer, superbe partie. Ronde 5 : je joue encore les noirs, le cauchemar continue, je joue e5 sur e4 et une grande variante théorique, mon adversaire prends l'avantage petit à petit, et je me fait nettement dominer sans que je comprene comment à la fin...dur dur de jouer les noir en "advanced chess"


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-04 12:57:00)
Round 9

Great game Topalov vs. Ivanchuk... Morozevich beats Leko. Carlsen & Anand still lead. It seems my predictions will be quite wrong :) .. To be continued.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-05 10:19:11)
Playchess Freestyle Tournament

Thanks for info, Samy...

What a crosstable, no less than 17 players finishing with 5,5 / 8

Petr, I understand your frustration, anyway that's why I play correspondence chess only over the internet. Losing a game thanks to a connection lost or strange rules is not interesting much :/


Several remarks while looking at the final crosstable :

The winner uses Rybka 2.3 mp, the others too :) .. Rybka's author (Rajlich) scores 5 out of 8 (pos. 18)

With Rybka getting stronger and stronger at fast time controls, Advanced Chess will probably become Computer Chess and finally Rybka Chess very soon. 1 hour + 15 sec is no more interesting.

I recognize some famous 'names' used on the defunct KasparovChess.com, King Crusher (5 / 8), Deep Thunder (3,5 / 8)... Correspondence Chess GM Mikhail Umansky scores 2,5 / 8... and last but not least, french forums superstar Olivier Evan scores 2,5 / 7 :)


Samy Ould Ahmed    (2007-03-05 21:05:00)
Mon parcour, suite...

Ronde 6 : je joue 2.d3 contre la Caro-Kann pour éviter les variantes théorique annulante, j'ai bien fait car mon adversaire suit betement sa machine et je me retrouve avec une position complétement gagnante...que je gache en jouant betement un coup que Fritz 9 m'a suggéré, je suis obligé de faire nulle. Ronde 7 : je joue contre Umansky avec les noirs, une partie fantastique, une catalane ou j'obtiens 3 pions contre l'initiative à mon adversaire et mon roi au centre, je choisi les variantes les plus compliquées et je gagne au temps dans une position probablement perdante, j'au eu chaud :-) Ronde 8 : je fait une nulle de salon avec les blancs puisque je suis sur de ne pas me qualifier. Finalement j'ai 4/8 et suis assez satisfait de mon parcours, du fait que j'ai joué seul et avec une machine relativement lente (un P4 2,93 GHZ)


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-03-06 20:24:54)
round 11

Carlsen beats Ivanchuk, now the standing is:

Anand 7
Carlsen 6.5
Svidler, Aronian, Ivanchuk 5.5
Topalov 5
Morozevich, Leko 4.5


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-10 22:40:51)
Final standings

Morozevich beats Topalov in a dead draw ending at round 13, Morozevich beats Svidler with Black in the next & last round... In the final standings, after a horrible start, Morozevich is second with Carlsen ! (who lost to Peter Leko in the last round). Topalov is last with Leko. Really incredible tournament, very hard to predict all long.

Vishy Anand wins the tournament by one full point !


Final standings :

1/ Anand : 8,5
2/ Morozevich : 7,5
3/ Carlsen : 7,5
4/ Aronian : 7
5/ Svidler : 7
6/ Ivanchuk : 6,5
7/ Topalov : 6
8/ Leko : 6


... even harder that lottery :)))


Phil Cook    (2007-03-11 06:36:09)
Quote "Go"

To resign in a game of GO,then find your estimate was wrong!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-12 15:31:09)
Major update : SSL encryption forms

Hello to all.

This is the last major update before money tournaments can start...


Now you can login through SSL encryption forms, meaning the best security to prevent hacking.

You should use SSL encryption forms only to browse the whole site with HTTPS, particularly if you wish to enter money tournaments later... It is also strongly recommended to change your password regularly (at least 8 characters, numbers & letters is best).

Thus you should always see HTTPS:// before the url after you login.


Feel free to follow this link for more advices about security & phishing :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#security


FICGS now uses SSL data encryption, hash functions and a bunch of other security features...

4 login forms is a lot but thus anyone can connect, even with browsers that doesn't support HTTPS and Javascript.

Also a few minor bug fixes and improvements, komi updated in .SGF files, reinforced hash functions, last connection date displayed in profile and so on...

All feedbacks are welcome :)


Dagh Nielsen    (2007-03-12 03:20:43)
5th Freestyle tournament

Just a short comment on the use of computers in these Freestyle tournaments:

There are two groups of participants:

1) Pure engines (with a book).

2) A somewhat larger group of "centaurs" who play the moves themselves, and use computers to analyse the moves actively.

Please note first, that the engine names behind some of the nicks in the crosstable do not necessarily mean that that participant played as pure engine (it's just an irrelevant effect of the server software somehow, decided by whether the participant had an engine uploaded during registration).

In fact, only two of those 10 who made it to the final (after the playoffs Saturday) are playing as pure engines. All the rest played as centaurs, including Cato the Younger.

This was also the case in the 4th Freestyle tournament: Only two pure engines made it to the final.

However, the pure engines surely made up more than 20% of the starting fields. What is more, these engines are usually operated by engine-chess freaks who have very strong hardware (Hercules01, who made it to the final after the play-offs, is allegedly running a 16-core system).

So my conclusion is: Centaurs perform significantly better than pure engines still. Even at this relatively short time control.

In other words: The human aspect is very much alive and kicking in this kind of chess :-)

I can only recommend interested people to try it out next time. It really is quite a bit of fun!

PS. I was lucky to qualify for the final, playing with nick "Flying Saucers". Also in the final is Corr. GM Arno Nickel (=Ciron) and FIDE GM Yuri Solodovnichenko (2585) (=Engineer). Several finalists have not yet revealed their identities :-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-13 20:53:51)
Correspondence Go rules

I read a post at GoDiscussions.com by a player who wondered how to tell his opponent he's lost... That's quite true some correspondence Go games may last (sometimes more than 50 moves) whereas the result is obvious, ie. when a very strong player beats a beginner who even doesn't really know why he's lost.

I was thinking about a rule to solve this problem but I couldn't find one good enough :/

Is it correct to ask his opponent to resign (according to a rule) or simply he's 'most probably' lost ?!

All ideas are welcome.. Thanks in advance !


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-15 13:59:35)
Lightning chess games

Hello to all.

A new update, you may have seen a new category in money tournaments :

Lightning (correspondence) chess games, time control 30 minutes + 1 minute / move


I think it's a quite interesting time control for chess, it should attract more advanced chess players (or simply strong computers).. Really faster than "blitz correspondence chess".

I updated the server so that it is really easier to play fastly in these games. When you send your move, a new option will appear next to (Flip) and (Next). The link (Wait) will redirect you to the viewer page that will be auto-refreshed every 10 seconds. When your opponent play his move, you'll be automatically redirected to the "move" page to play your move and a pop-up window will appear to warn you (if Javascript is activated)...

Read more about in Time rules - http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#time


Money tournaments will start on April, 2


Lionel Vidal    (2007-03-23 18:59:07)
Not too up-to-date article...

Computers are much better in chess now than in 1998 ( :-) or :-( ... hum maybe :-( for me...). I am not sure that a player, even J. Edwards (very good player and a good chess writer too!) could be sure anymore to CC-outplay an engine running 24h/day on a modern hardware platform. He might win, yes, but might only IMHO.

Nowadays, many CC players (most?) consider that using an engine is *not* cheating, and I am so sure that *most* sites, as said in the article, do prohibit such a use. At least it could be noted that the strongest players seem to play in ICCF (or maybe iecg ... and in FICGS of course :-)) where engines are allowed. (and this is good IMO, not per se but, as it is often recalled, because their ban could not be correctly enforced)

Anyway I am looking forward to reading the next article to use more effenciently chessbase :-)


Don Groves    (2007-03-25 03:10:20)
A new computer Go era?

Eventually computers will be able to play Go on a 19x19 board as well as they can now play on a 9x9 board. It's just a matter of spending the time and money to build a powerful enough computer. But, there's no reason why the Go board cannot grow larger. A larger board, say 23x23, wouldn't change the game much for humans but would astronomically increase the time required for expert computer play. But again, if someone wants to spend the time and money, computers will eventually have the power to be the best Go players, just as in Chess.


Lionel Vidal    (2007-03-25 11:24:50)
Computer Go

While I agree that programming Go is much more a problem of algorithm than a hardware one, I think you underestimate the theorical difficulties.

First, a word on the alluded new approach (BTW the french edition of 'Pour la Science' has an article on this algorithm this month, but not very involved): it seems promising only because that program regularly beats other program using what we can call a traditional approach: tree exploration combined with pattern recognition and some clever splitted evaluation function. That is fine, but does not mean much for human, considering the poor level of all these programs.
AFAIY the very best program is said to be at low pro-dan level on a 9x9 (without any concrete real test match, that is with money at stakes... but let's suppose it is true). The problem to play on 19x19 is that the nature of the game dramatically changes: in short the tactics is more complicated and the once very basic strategy of 9x9 becomes overwhelming! There is still no known algorithm to tackle that problem. Such algorithm could exist of course, but don't hold your breath :-)
Now I am quite eager to read the tests and pubications on these researches :-)

The neural network approach is interresting but is more or less stalling (again AFAIY) in recent programs mainly because of a fundamental flaw: the tuning of the gap functions. In Backgammon, where this approach works very well, these functions are tuned by simulation: basically, the program plays many, many games against himself and in a way learns (that is tunes its network) depending on the results. As you may guess, this can not work in Go because of the complexity of the branch tree. So the problem is how to tune the network (and 'by hand' cannot be a soution, believe me, considering the number of nodes and the type of the functions being commonly used!)

Of course I simplified a lot and the maths behind these kind of algorithm are involved enough (and very interresting :-)) that someone may find new ideas that will revive one path or another. But my feeling is that the pros of go have nothing to fear for a long time...
You have to consider that the very best programs are not beaten, but crushed, by multi-dans amateurs, you know, the kind of player a top pro will beat at 5 stones while blitzing and at 9 stones if some money is at stakes :-)

Now I may be wrong, and I remember in the 80s many people saying the same thing for chess, and betting on the fact that a program could never beat a good player in at least 50 years :-)... but at that time, I did not agree :-)) mainly because the algorithms were more or less basically known already... the 80s hardware was a problem, but a technical and not theorical one...

Sorry for that too long reply... I can't believe I typed so much... that must be my new keyboard, and the fond memories of some past jobs ... :-)


Don Groves    (2007-03-27 02:55:47)
Chess and politics

It probably isn't known much outside the US but Bush is merely a figurehead, not the brains behind what is going on. Cheney and his gang of neoconservative fascists are the real power behind the throne. But, you are right in the sense that they have done so much damage to US democracy in just six years :-(


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-28 04:11:59)
Class GM : 2500+ players needed

Hello to all.

Even if the number of very strong players should increase significantly during next months, it may be interesting to reduce the limitation for GM class tournaments from 2600 to 2500... It could return to 2600+ later if there are players enough of this level to fill such a waiting list.

Until this moment, players rated 2500+ are welcome for a bloody tournament :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-28 04:33:21)
Chess and politics

Obviously nobody else want to play with Bush anymore :)

China is too strong already and others play without any oil stakes or prefer to play other games. Poor boy...


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-03-28 19:32:07)
You change the rules or I leave :-)

A few comments in french (sorry : easyer for me)

Deux situations distinctes se produisent :

1. Quelqu'un a mal évalué et s'est engagé dans trop de parties, ou bien a un problème de santé, ou un changement de ses possibilités de loisirs. Il décide d'abandonner un tournoi, abandonne toutes ses parties, donne une petite explication à ses adversaires et bien sûr ne se réinscrit à rien dans l'immédiat. Désagréable mais bien sûr tout à fait admissible. La moindre des choses est qu'on lui interdise de s'inscrire à quoi que ce soit tant que ce qui reste de parties n'est pas terminé (ou abandonné) et que la prochaine réinscription se limite au départ à un seul tournoi qui devra être complètement terminé avant de pouvoir à nouveau cumuler plusieurs inscriptions simultanées.

2. Quelqu'un s'inscrit à de multiples tournois et s'arrête de jouer dans ceux où il est mal parti. Il ne prévient rien ni personne et laisse son temps s'écouler. Entretemps il s'inscrit à d'autres tournois et procède de même. De temps en temps il termine un tournoi si celui-ci parait mieux engagé. Ce joueur(?)-ci est simplement un parasite, un gâcheur de plaisir et un fausseur de résultats pour ceux qui le rencontrent. Mon opinion est sans appel : exclusion pure et simple de celui qui laisse s'éteindre des parties sans aucun commentaire tout en s'inscrivant à de nouveaux tournois. Je ne vois aucune justification possible à une telle attitude.

Je comprends que certains ne partagent pas cette opinion radicale

Quoiqu'il en soit, j'estime que le minimum exigible en faveur de ceux qui ont déjà été confronté à des "droppers" est de leur offrir un moyen de ne pas se trouver à nouveau confrontés aux mêmes parasites dans un autre tournoi.

Je m'explique : actuellement si je m'inscris dans un nouveau tournoi je n'ai aucune assurance quant à l'identité de ceux qui viendront s'inscrire après moi, et je risque à donc à nouveau d'être confronté à quelques-uns de ces personnages que je suis fermement décidé à ne plus rencontrer.

Je n'accepte pas cette perspective

Dès lors, tant qu'il n'y aura pas une modification de règlement qui me permettra d'éviter qu'un "dropper" connu s'inscrive dans un tournoi où je prendrai part, je ne jouerai plus sur FICGS.

Marc

PS Pour ma part, m'étant déjà engagé dans ce tournoi qui a complètement avorté et dans un tournoi master class ICCF, j'ai renoncé à ma qualification dans le championnat FICGS pour éviter de me trouver dans l'obligation éventuelle de renoncer à certaines parties. Le moins qu'on puisse dire est que l'attitude de certains ne me récompense pas vraiment de ma prudence ...


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 ? :)


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-03-29 23:44:48)
Fast double RR at five players

"Finally I think the idea of double round-robin tournaments with 5 players could be a good one for a new category, with a different time control (maybe longer ?!) .. What do you think ?"

Or why not testing it with faster time controls (5 days initial + 1 day per move, maximum accumulated time 20 days) for example.

Sure I would immediately enroll for a 2200+ tournament on this basis.

:-)

Strongly limiting maximum accumulated time is also a project I would support wholeheartedly !

Anyone for a test ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-30 23:18:03)
100 games per player

:o) ... quite ironic or not... anyway this rule also prevents too many forfeits.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-01 19:00:23)
Internet Go vs. Masters

From Goama newsletter - http://gogame.info


How strong are Tygem ( http://tygem.com/ ) stars?

Korean Tygem Go server announced a tournament between top 3 Tygem players and Korean Dream team: Cho Hunnyun, Lee Changho and Yoo Changhyuk.

The results are:


First game: Cho Hunhyun, 9-dan lost by resignation to "spiderman1"

Second game: Lee Changho, 9-dan lost his game by resignation to "GoldHammer"

Third game: Yoo Changhyuk, 9-dan lost by 6.5 points to "gurenarukl"


It's hard to believe it, but they played without any handicap! Each game gathered more than 5000 observers. It seems, that Tygem has lot of other good players, considering that these 3 masters are not undefeatable. Their scores: Spiderman1 , 9-dan on Tygem, W113-L51 GoldHammer, 9-dan on Tygem, W275-L60 gurenarukl, 9-dan on Tygem, W893-L360

Maybe the online Go is far from the offline Go, or do we need a special experience for playing Go on servers? How strong are Tygem star players? Do we know them in real life? There are so many questions.

Chess players will also ask about the possibilities of computer help. Unfortunately they don't have English client available.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-02 21:52:55)
Anand number 1 !

Here is the FIDE elo, 2007 april list.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3771

1 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2786
2 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2772
3 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772
4 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2762
5 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2759
6 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2757
7 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2747
8 Leko, Peter g HUN 2738
9 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2736
10 Adams, Michael g ENG 2734
11 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2733
12 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2729
13 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2727
14 Navara, David g CZE 2720
15 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2717
16 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2717
17 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2709
18 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2708
19 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2705
20 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2699
21 Akopian, Vladimir g ARM 2698
22 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2693
23 Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter g ROM 2693
24 Short, Nigel D g ENG 2691
25 Sasikiran, Krishnan g IND 2690


Nice to see a player like Morozevich at this level...


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-06 04:50:07)
Rating calculation (algorithm update)

A small (but necessary) improvement in rating calculation algorithm for chess & Go : "In case of a loss or draw against a player rated more than 350 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Current Rating - 350"

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating

In example, if a player rated 2000 loses to a player - most probably a new player helped by a strong engine - rated 1400, the rating considered in calculation will be 1650. It should help to keep ratings more coherent.

All chess results since March 1st will be affected by this change. Next rating calculation will occur on May 1st.

You can see your future chess rating (calculated on the basis of your results since last rating calculation) by clicking on the magnifying glass in "Preferences", then "ELO".


Jason Repa    (2007-04-07 05:57:23)
Double RR tournaments

I disagree. I think that it has a very significant influence on the result. If you get Whites against the stronger players and Blacks against the weaker ones, you are getting a big advantage over someone who is not. IMO, it greatly adds to the luck factor. I have the most fun from fair competitions where things are balanced.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-07 06:11:03)
Double RR tournaments

The point is there shouldn't have stronger (I mean really) players in class tournaments... Anyway, several players already asked not to change current formula & single round-robin tournaments.

But I'll organize more special events and / or I'll create a new category using double round-robin.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-16 16:45:13)
Fortunately...

... chess programs are not strong enough to generate good correspondence chess opening trees :)


Jason Repa    (2007-04-21 10:35:27)
WCH Rules

Achim Mueller wrote: "In case of having 2 or more players with the same points at the top the player with the highest rating will qualify." This is completely logical. The higher rated player will tend to be the stronger of the group, especially if he isn't outscored by the lower rated player, so it's obvious that if you have to choose between two that are equal in points, you take the one that is more likely to be stronger. Can you think of a better and more fair way to choose between the two? Also, I disagree with your comments about how someone "can easily play on draw". This is completely wrong. Even with the Black pieces, games can be and are won all the time, even at the very highest level of chess. Top GM's constantly are winning with black, and what is arguably considered the top computer in the world "Hydra" was defeated more than once by a garden-variety GM who had the black pieces. Regardless of color and regardless of rating, chess is a game of skill and if you need a win against a certain opponent, the onus is on you to draw on all of your resources, including choosing the type of oppening that will not lend itself to an easy draw. A weak player who doesn't understand these concepts will have no chance in subsequent rounds in a tournament anyway and shouldn't worry about advancing. My experience is proof also. I had the black pieces against a significantly higher rated opponent in my WCH group and I beat him to secure my advancement.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-21 19:46:04)
Rules

Why FIDE didn't use such rules... Interesting question : IMO because OTB (over the board) chess is simply so different ! .. It is quite logical to use SB in open tournaments because it helps the player who is probably best "at this particular moment", meaning the best player of the event. In correspondence chess, it is quite different, I think using SB makes less sense here.

About draws, I think there's a real trap :) .. A player who thinks 'I must draw' will have difficulties against a good CC player IMO. And you probably noticed the players ratings in 7-players groups.. Even if all players fight, in most groups only 2 or 3 players probably really hope to win the tournament, the others have (at least) an opportunity to play stronger players and win some points... And you may be right (Don), 11 players groups may be more interesting. Maybe the next one...


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


Mikhail Ruzin    (2007-04-22 19:39:29)
WCH Rules

If you stronger simply win the game. Or increase you rating and get advantage. =) Sorry, my english wery bad.


Jason Repa    (2007-04-23 10:04:00)
Cheating Accusations

My advice is to take the accusations with a grain of salt. I'm a very good blitz/bullet player and years ago before I found out about ICC and Playchess.com I used to play at the crappy free sites such as yahoo and pogo. I would often be the strongest and highest rated player in the room and would get constantly accused of being a "prog". I would say take it as a compliment but these people are too stupid to understand what a good move or good technique is. They make the accusation based on successful results only.
As for your game with Anand. I think it's ridiculous to accuse you of program assistance. For starters, the game isn't very important. It's just an unrated simul game with no prize whatsoever. It seems to me you should have received some sort of award, not necessarily cash, but something chess related and of value. I understand it's for charity, but I can't see who in their right mind would pay money to play in a simul when there is no incentive to win. You might as well just write a check to send directly to the handicapped children of India.
When Chapters bookstore hired me to do a chess simul it was a fundraiser for our chess club. I didn't lose any games, but the sole person to merely draw me (28-0-1) in the 29 games I played received a free tournament entry ($30 value) to one of our local monthly events. I thought this was a great idea and had the benefit of bringing a new player into our club.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-30 14:05:46)
The meaning of Go for modern Russia

An interesting (as usual) article from IGN "Goama" newsletter - http://gogame.info


Alexander Rodin, the member of Go Federation
"The meaning of Go for modern Russia"

I'll try to state my thoughts about the meaning of the Go for modern Russia.

To begin with I suggested that we extrapolate Go models on the political and economical maps. These maps are very important as the spheres of social life, because the questions that are discussed at political and economical levels touch upon our lives, the lives of ordinary Russian citizens. In these spheres they continue the fierce struggle for life and death; in these spheres rivalry is especially keen and the made decisions define the vectors of our country development.

Let's imagine a situation if somebody inadequate came to power and set the totalitarian regime! Then all social "dissident" institution would start dying and so would do the Go Federation as a phenomenon which unifies people with independent thinking. Then it would be inevitable to start "hiding in basements" to keep the organization and set the secret addresses. Under conditions of modern Russia such kind of reasoning seems to be mostly fantastic than real. But if we look behind into our history we’ll remember that we have already had this phase of social development and know everything about it.

I am for that only "adequate" people, patriots, must hold power (I mean all its levels: federal, regional, local and busyness elite as well). These people must think independently and it would be just perfect if they were the people who both understand the very notion of strategy and use in their activity all the arsenal of strategic instruments and among them principles, stratagems and Go philosophy.

Someone can argue: "What are the patriots who set Japan draughts?" the heart of the problem is not in the fact that somebody sets draughts and even the Japan ones. The matter of fact is that there is a "pacific" model the centre of which is the idea of balance and peaceful division of the territory and influence. If someone of us can offer something better, so let him rule. In my opinion, it's the same as to rewrite the Bible or "The Treatise of Military Art" Soun Tsi.

The Go essence manifests in the state scale in the following aspects:

The first one is historical and cultural. The game has a great history and longstanding traditions. Go is no less than a civil game with the development of which hand by hand goes statehood making in many countries. Besides, it's followed by strengthening of spirituality and moral principles of society.

The second aspect is social. Go unifies people, sets friendly relationships between them. Through Go a man manifests quickly, through it s/he can see his/her reflection. Owing to "open spiritual fight" your adversary is likely to become your best friend without saying a word during a game.

The third aspect is pedagogical. Through Go they bring up the grown generations and form their active civil position. Like chess, Go forms and consolidates dynamical stereotypes showing in following behavioral models of people. Penetrating and consolidation happen imperceptibly when sleeping, during the junction of conscious and unconscious.

The fourth aspect is economical. Why are business people interested in Go? Because through the game model a man learns how to manage material and non-material resources. Via the game s/he realizes economical and management notions: market (territory), economical integration, SWOT-analysis (the analysis of weak and strong aspects) etc. Managers start realizing the importance of interconnection and interaction of structural subdivisions ensuring. These subdivisions shouldn't be isolated from each other. They should work time in time like a well-tuned tuning fork.

The fifth aspect is political. The idea of community in politics is as relevant as the idea of group of stones. When a group is weak there is always a possibility of dividing it and this is a sign for the whole group. When our country, being a federal union of equitable subjects, was going through its stage of making a number of subjects had a wish to use the weakness of this chain. So, in 1992 ­ 1994 for the first time after the collapsing of the USSR there appeared first separatist tendencies. E.Rossel, the governor of Sverdlovskaya region, A. Philipenko, the governor of HMAO, claimed about the possibility of Ural republic creation. The emissary of Chechen separatists Gokhar Dudaev proclaimed the independence of Chechen-Ingush republic. The detachment didn't happen but the country paid with blood for it. Nowadays we can see demonstration of political integration and isolation on the modern political world map. Take a strong unity of the European Union and states-outsiders: Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Iran.

In terms of remaining of the USA's striving for establishment of world hegemony (from V.V.Putin's speech at the recent Munich conference), Russia needs the processes of integration and consolidation with other countries aimed at its strengthening. The unified countries have a lot of dame. Now we can observe the stronger split in the CIS as a consequence of energetic and territorial policy of Russia that uses economical instruments of pressure upon "unfriendly and opposing" countries. Is it good or not? It's more likely that it‘s bad. But there are some positive tendencies: the role of the EurAsEC as a community which's built not on the basis of "strange brotherhood" and the role of Russia in it are increasing. Go is an ideological and spiritual base making us related to the countries of Asia-Pacific region. Go teaches how to see and distinguish creative and destroying processes.

The sixth aspect is psychological. The game develops thinking, in particular such processes as analysis and synthesis. It develops the ability of seeing the whole board and its details, the ability of seeing processes proceeding at global and local levels.

The seventh aspect is verbal and lexical or even philosophical. Through studying of the game theory we realize such categories as life and death, territory and influence, reliability, stability, the whole and the parts etc.

So, what is the Go meaning on the country scale? I assume that Go, as philosophy (an ideological and spiritual base), is a very important instrument of upbringing of strategic leaders, those who make decisions at high economical and political levels that influence the country's fate. Because in Go the idea of peaceful co-existence shows the way to harmony. The most pleasant is the fact the "Go way" doesn't have an end and there sky's the limit.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-30 22:34:37)
WCH rules

Thanks Sandor & Wolfgang for sharing your views.

As you said, there's no perfect rule for everyone, particularly in a correspondence chess championship, where time is a predominant factor. As for me, I like much FICGS rules so far because of these major points :

1) The best players have the best chances.
2) A new cycle can start every 6 months.
3) There's no external influence in a knockout tournament.

I think the lowest rated player has to prove he's stronger than the highest rated player or champion, so it's coherent in round-robin and knockout tournaments. I particularly like the special rule in the knockout tournament (stage 1, 2 & 3). I'm now playing an exciting quarter final against Wolfgang, that I'm to lose because of this rule - the winner is the player with the strongest TER is all games are draw, the player with the lowest TER if not all games are draw - even if it finishes with a 4-4 score. Simply because I'll lose most probably at least one game. I think it's fair ! .. I knew the rule (of course, I made it :)), I knew I had to draw all games or to win by one point at least. Rules are the game ! .. It's not more unfair than to draw a game with one or two pawns more ;)

However I agree that WCH round-robin tournaments should be 9, 11 or 13 players groups to give more place to chess. I'll take care of this in the next cycle.

Finally, not only rules are to be taken in consideration... To attract players, there must be a real challenge ! .. To take the title to the champion will be really hard for sure :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-05-01 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 :)


Wolfgang Utesch    (2007-05-01 08:28:28)
Rules

@Achim: It is just your failure to start in a tournament without knowing the rules! @Thibault: I think, in our match we need not the use of the special rule. :-) A problem in corresponding game is, that rating is showing the right strongness seldom. By the way, you should put the rules on the home page!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-05-07 14:32:34)
science,art and bluff

The environment is different but there's a lot of bluff in correspondence chess IMO, even if the number of draws is higher at 2400+ level. It is no more based on obvious mistakes but on apparent "weak" moves that actually can win ie. a long endgame, particularly moves that are completely missed by the best chess engines such as Rybka. This kind of moves happens often yet, fortunately.


Don Burden    (2007-05-11 02:32:13)
Chinese thoughts

Confucius could give answer to that, unfortunately Confucius not here at moment.

Kindness in heart better than gold in bank.

Truth like football, receive many kicks before reaching goal.

Politeness golden key that open many doors.

Any powder that kills flea is good powder.

Knowledge only gained through curiousity.

Man without relatives is man without trouble.

Sleep only escape from yesterday.

Do not challenge supernatural unless armed with sword of truth.

To destroy false prophet must first unmask him before eyes of believers.

When fear attack brain, tongue wave distress signal.

Drop of plain water on thirsty tongue more precious than gold in purse.

Thought at present like dog chasing own tail, getting noplace.

When money talk, few are deaf.

Humility only defense against rightful blame.

Luck happy combination of foolish accidents.

Alibi have habit of disappearing like hole in water.

Good fisherman, like clever merchant, know lure of bright colors.

Man without enemies like dog without fleas.

Front seldom tell truth, to know occupant of house always look in backyard.

One small wind can raise much dust.

Caution sometimes mother of suspicion. Suspicion often father of truth.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2007-05-15 20:46:59)
Tablebases 5-pieces

Thibault: Not about, but accurate mate in 37! What is wrong with your installation - I'm not longer wondering, why you can't win against me! ;)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-05-21 22:23:21)
Oops..

I chose wrong heading for my last reply. I'm sorry.


Catalin Ionescu    (2007-05-27 13:52:21)
Candidates Matches 2007

The matches started today. You can see them live at: http://globalchess.eu/games.php.

The top match of round 1 is Carlsen against Aronian.

Who do you think will qualify for the WC?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-05-27 19:13:09)
Candidates Matches 2007

I just read the Chessbase news :

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3886

I was first surprised to learn that Etienne Bacrot (after Grischuk) turned to poker also...

Levon Aronian (ARM) - Magnus Carlsen (NOR)
Alexei Shirov (ESP) - Michael Adams (GBR)
Ruslan Ponomariov (UKR) - Sergei Rublevsky (RUS)
Alexander Grischuk (RUS) - Vladimir Malakhov (RUS)
Peter Leko (HUN) - Mikhail Gurevich (TUR)
Judith Polgar (HUN) - Evgeny Bareev (RUS)
Boris Gelfand (ISR) - Rustam Kasimjanov (UZB)
Etienne Bacrot (FRA) - Gata Kamsky (USA)


In this round my favourites are : Carlsen, Shirov, Ponomariov, Grischuk, Leko, Polgar, Kasimjanov, Kamsky.

Hard to say who will win this knockout tournament...


Graham Cridland    (2007-05-29 18:21:09)
M-Tel

Weird tournament. Topalov failed to impress against a weak field, when you would have expected a really strong performance. He needs to study a bit I think. Very surprised by Adams' result, that's just not acceptable to him I'm sure...


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-05-29 21:30:18)
Round 3

Another loss for Etienne Bacrot, score is now 0,5 - 2,5 against Gata Kamsky.. Kamsky was my favourite in this match but not with such a score.

Great game from Carlsen who equalizes against Aronian !

GM Carlsen (2693) - GM Aronian (2759)

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 b6 3.g3 c5 4.Bg2 Bb7 5.0-0 e6 6.Nc3 Be7 7.Re1 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.d4 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Be4 11.Ne5 Bxg2 12.Kxg2 0-0 13.e4 Qc8 14.Qg4 Bf6 15.Nf3 Kh8 16.h4 Nc6 17.Bg5 cxd4 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.cxd4 e5 20.Qxc8 Raxc8 21.d5 Na5 22.h5 Nc4 23.Nh4 Nd6 24.h6 Rc3 25.Rac1 Rfc8 26.Rxc3 Rxc3 27.Nf5 Nxf5 28.exf5 Kg8 29.Re4 Kf8 30.Rg4 Rc7 31.Rg7 b5 32.Rxh7 Kg8 33.Rg7+ Kh8 34.d6 Rd7 35.Kf3 b4 36.Ke4 Rxd6 37.Rxf7 Ra6 38.g4 Kg8 39.h7+ Kh8 40.g5 fxg5 41.f6 1-0

To be continued.


Svante Carl von Erichsen    (2007-06-01 12:26:32)
Go championship

I think that the current rules are quite good. For the current user base, 9 players round robin is enough.

If the user base gets bigger and stronger, you could introduce preliminary stages. Example: sort all players who entered the waiting list by rating, then the final league consists of the 5 strongest players plus 4 players who placed first in the preliminary (which might be a knockout, or another league).

One thing I would change in the current system: the usual custom for multi-game matches between two players is to determine colours randomly for the first game, then alternate. If an uneven number of games is played, then in the last game, colours are chosen randomly again.

As I interpret the rules in that way that all five final games are played simultaneously, I would propose that one of those games is played with random colours.


Garvin Gray    (2007-06-04 11:41:42)
Wch 3 in rating order


KAZ Balabaev, Farit 2580

FRA de Vassal, Thibault 2512

USA Ingersol, Harry 2502

NZL Noble, Mark 2497

DEU Schuster, Peter 2480

POL Ostrowski, Leszek 2458

ARG Brunsteins, Daniel 2452

CAN Zubac, Marius 2415

ROU Mathe, Iosif 2414

UKR Khokhlov, Igor 2370

MLT Sammut, Ronald 2362

ROU Helmer, Janos 2343

PRT Pires, Miguel 2270

LKA De Silva, Dinesh 2235

POL Sanner, Zdzislaw 2219

RUS Dyakov, Alexander 2217

DEU Schiller, Wilfried 2217

DEU Koslowski, Volker 2204

DZA Ould Ahmed, Samy 2195

FRA Appendino, Jérome 2192

GBR Taylor, William 2182

GRC Bleker, Frits 2171

DNK Jorgensen, Poulerik 2168

DEU Kesselheim, Peter 2149

CAN Repa, Jason 2144

PRT Louro, Eugénio 2123

USA Kotlyansky, Edward 2114

DEU Markus, Roland 2103

FRA Czekaj, Christophe 2098

AUT Dudulec, Konstantin 2084

CAN Plante, Marc-Eric 2079

LVA Borisovs, Leonids 2078

AUT Mueller, Robert 2069

DEU Unger, Peter 2065

AUT Riha, Josef 2019

POL Skwarczylo, Marek 2018

MUS Stephenson, Andrew 2000

CZE Stanislav, Musil 1990

SCG Vidanovic, Djordje 1966

USA Burden, Don 1959

DEU Haluschka, Rainer 1950

CAN Rotaru, Dan 1937

GBR Wyborn, Graham 1890

GBR Burrows, Nick 1884

POL Broniek, Mariusz Maciej 1879

BIH Dautovic, Dzenan 1875

AUS Gray, Garvin 1863

USA Minkin, Alexander 1850

GBR Josse, Mark 1806

ARM Khachaturov, Vadim 1803

USA Kotlyanskiy, Ilya 1800

DEU Krueger, Karsten 1800

PRT Vasquez, Fernando 1775

DZA Toutaoui, Khaled 1763

DEU Wosch, Arkadiusz 1746

TUR Yuvarlak, Ugur 1732

ROU Hrubaru, Mircea 1726

ARG Carrizo, José 1724

USA Phillip, Lennox 1700

ROU Kondort, Mihai 1700

ROU Ioan, Bucsa 1700

BRA Miranda, Marcus 1691

VEN Flores, Luis 1680

RUS Ruzin, Mikhail 1639

DEU Faust, Dieter 1627

MYS Behrmann, Klaus 1617

FRA Bellanger, Michel 1606

POL Bester, Kazimierz 1600

DEU Nent, Alexander 1593

PRT Oliveira, Carlos 1586

HUN Nagy, Attila 1549

ROU Ionescu, Catalin 1535

HUN Kis-Kos, Laszlo 1512

ITA Lupinacci, Nicola 1492

BEL De Groof, Pieter 1465

DEU Odendahl, Marcel 1462

USA Hendricks, Richard 1459

BRA Queiroz, Florencio 1444

CZE Pech, Jaroslav 1433

USA Goodwin, Adam 1415

HUN Csoma, Robert 1400

USA Gillz, Nicolas 1400

BGR Toktas, Ibrahim Ugras 1400

IND Veeraiah, Karuppaiah 1400

MEX Ortiz Durán, Esteban 1400

TUR Ilhan, Alper 1400

CHE Margot, Alain 1400

TUR Erdonho, Erdinç 1400

USA Lipsits, Sasha 1400

BRA B. Lima, Edmilson 1400

DEU von Buttlar, Paul 1386

HUN Fenyves, Adam 1330

BGR Stoianov, Stoian 1316

GRC Serd, Than 1300

TUR Ak, Murat 1300

GBR Willoughby, Peter 1294

ARG Orden, Jorge 1264

GBR Neil, Charlie 1212

NLD Oldenhof, Dwight 1203

USA Greer, Stephen 1200

BRA Barradas, Anderson 1194

IND Malvankar, Vikrant 1188

BEL Tuteleers, Bruno 1145

DEU Bothe, Matthias 1143

BGR Stoyanov, Zdravko 1136



Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-04 17:15:54)
Candidates Finals

Only 4 of my favourites qualified : Kamsky, Leko, Bareev, Grischuk, Shirov, Gelfang, Rublevsky & Aronian won their matches...

New pairings for the Candidates Finals are :

Aronian - Shirov
Leko - Bareev
Rublevsky - Grischuk
Gelfand - Kamsky

Any ideas for the next round ? :)


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-06-04 19:05:48)
Any ideas for the next round ? :)

Aronian (not clear)
Bareev !
Rublevsky
Gelfand

Hehe !

Marc


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    (2007-06-06 19:12:00)
Rybka: $100,000 challenge to FIDE

The author of Rybka - undoubtly the strongest chess engine (Rybka 2.3.1), Vasik Rajlich challenges FIDE for a $100,000 match between Rybka and the winner of the "Ultimate Computer Chess Challenge 2007" between Deep Junior and Deep Fritz, that just started (first game drawn) :

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=1126


Also the match offer to grandmasters is more and more interesting :

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=794;pg=1


I doubt Chessbase or FIDE would accept to organize & play such a match, even if Fritz 11 or 12 can beat the next Rybka... The war of engines is not on the chessboard nowadays but that's quite interesting to follow anyway :)


Graham Cridland    (2007-06-06 21:22:22)
Next Round Winners

Aronian Leko Gelfand Grischuk You heard it here first. Aronian, Leko, and Grischuk just outclass their opponents, and Gelfand is currently much better prepared than Kamsky.


Michael Aigner    (2007-06-10 03:10:07)
Different PCs - Marketing rules!

Maybe Chessbase thinks they already sold enough copies of Fritz and the market is already satisfied. Now it is time to promote another engine as the "strongest" - the plan is to to sell a lot of Junior copys - how many people own Junior yet, not a lot compared to Fritz - right?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-14 02:43:48)
Go with handicap

Well, it is possible to organize casual matches or simultaneous games with a strong player (any volunteer ? :)) .. but it looks quite hard to organize such tournaments automatically.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-14 18:14:03)
Rybka 2.3.2

Just after President's cup "Ultimate computer challenge" finished, Vasik Rajlich threw a new Rybka 2.3.2 in the chess engines arena... (partly explains the $100,000 challenge to Ilyumzhinov a few weeks ago)

Once more, Rybka 2.3.2 seems stronger than her predecessors with indcredible results (blitz time control) against Hiarcs 11.1, Zap chess Zanzibar, Shredder and so on... Maybe +35 elo points compared to Rybka 2.3.1 !

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=1264#fp

http://www.rybkachess.com


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-14 18:20:51)
Rybka 2.3.2 improvements

An interesting thread (readme file) on improvements since Rybka 2.3.1

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=1240#fp


Rybka is undoubtly the strongest chess engine, but is it now the best partner to analyze correspondence chess games and the best anti-human engine !? .. Any opinions ?


Wolfgang Utesch    (2007-06-14 22:45:22)
Figlio - Schuster

Have a look into the WCH tournament rules: "The knockout tournament is played into 8 games matches. The special rule (avoiding short draws) is that in case of equality (4-4), the winner is the player with the strongest tournament entry rating if all games are draw, the player with the lowest tournament entry rating if not all games are draw. The winner is qualified for the next stage." Any questions?


Michael Aigner    (2007-06-15 12:53:31)
It depends

Hello Thibault In my opinion is Rybka very strong in the middle game as long as you got a position where a kingside attack is not possible - otherwise you should use some other engine. My experiance is that Rybka nedds some more plys to see the danger (or opportunity to attack), than other engines do. In Endgames it is also good but check always with Fritz or Shredder if you want to avoid ending in a dead drawn ending with an Rybka evaluation of +1 Best regards Michael


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


Mircea Hrubaru    (2007-06-16 14:12:43)
More on Strelka

Hello all, Well, it seems that all the fuss on wether Strelka is a clone has ended. Strela by Yuri Ostripov (St. Petersburg, Russia) is his original work and this was strongly tested by trustful persons in computerchess. Yet its status (a very materialistic engine, with very few endgame knowledge) makes this engine a very goo future hope. Yuri is currently improving Strelka so we must expect spectacular progress very soon (at least I hope that). Regards, Mircea


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-16 15:45:46)
FICGS 3.0 , novelties & advanced chess

Dear chessfriends, the new FICGS version is installed :) ... Improvements :


- New random design (see preferences) after each login, great IMO :)

- Correspondence chess established, preliminary & complete rating lists (user mode)

- Big chess rating list
- http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_big_chess
- Rated big chess tournaments (no more unrated)

- Advanced ches rating list
- http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_advanced_chess
- Rated advanced chess tournaments (money blitz & lightning games)

- New advanced chess games category : CHESS MONEY BRONZE (entry fee 0,2 E-Point)

Advanced chess games are chess games played at Lightning (30 minutes + 1 minute / move) or Blitz (2 hours + 2 hours / 40 moves) time control. Computer assistance is encouraged. See rating rules for advanced chess, everyone gets a rating (first estimated from your correspondence chess rating) after you played your first game.

Every member now has 2 free E-Points to play 10 free CHESS MONEY BRONZE (advanced chess) games. Consequently the FICGS advanced chess server is not free of charge after this free trial.


This is a major improvement, so there will be some adjustments during the next days, particularly to reorganize money tournaments.

Feel free if you have any comment or suggestion...


Have good games :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-16 22:00:18)
FICGS vs. IGAME.RU

Hello to all.

I'm glad to announce a new match between chess servers, that should start in about 10 days to 2 weeks. The previous match was FICGS vs. GAMEKNOT (we lost :))

The opponent is the russian server - http://www.igame.ru , an opportunity to meet new chessfriends from eastern countries :)

Here is the agreement :


1. Teams should consist of 25 players maximum (an exact number should be agreed later);
2. Number of games on each board equals 2 (one for White and one for Black);
3. Time control is 30 days + 3 days/move;
4. Leaves are provided, 30 days/year;
5. The match is played on www.ficgs.com;
6. Start date of the match should be agreed by both sides after squads are completed;
7. ICCF rules of play are applied.


In this match chess engines are allowed, it goes without saying we need a strong correspondence chess team, but anyone who wish to play may email me (or use the 'message to webmaster' form in "My account"), or just respond to this post.

Best wishes.


Wayne Lowrance    (2007-06-18 03:53:01)
World Computer Chess Championship (wccc)

Thibault, I dont care for your notion here. It is WCCC and should not be downgraded because ChessBase and program authors of Hiarcs, junior & fritz did not enter. Those programs have the big rep';s, but in actuality you should check out all of the rating sites. Zappa ranks Higher that those three programs for example. There is a thing called GridChess, which is very strong, beat shreddar. Oh I dunno, I could go on. Mostly I object to chesbase direct or indirect control of the chess engine tournaments. And to make things worse you and others posts nonsense as this. My two cents my friend. Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-18 05:32:40)
WCCC

Hi Wayne.

I mean, WCCC is a tournament like any other (no federations or whatever...), it is a big event and program authors come to play, that's great. But the format with so few interesting games can't provide accurate results :/

I agree that Deep Fritz & Junior are not the strongest chess engines today, but they are a good test for other ones and a way to improve the results of a tournament. IMO a World Computer Chess Champion should be ie. the SSDF 1st ranked program, which is continuous tournament with many games played, or maybe the games played at SSDF should be organized like a continuous swiss tournament.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-18 06:26:11)
WCCC

Computerchess rating lists are very different from human's ones. Fritz & Junior are not so weak (ok, maybe Junior is :)) .. At least they can beat Loop and Naum. Anyway I meant that more strong programs should play at the WCCC, the results can't be significant this year because too few interesting games will be played (and there was a bug in some Rybka game). At last I agree about CCRL, it is more trustable than SSDF rating list.


Alexander Shalamanov    (2007-06-18 17:02:08)
FICGS vs. IGAME.RU

Hello Thibauld, You can surely count on me, in case you might need a guy rated -2300 in your team. Anyways, good luck to you in the upcoming match. I know a lot of the igame team players; it's true that they are pretty strong, but they are as much arrogant and highbrow about their chess skills. It might stand them in bad stead in the long run. Lol!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-18 21:48:26)
Lightning and Blitz Time Controls

Well, as these tournaments are not popular yet, you'll have to wait for an opponent, but you may use the chat bar to announce you entered the waiting list or to find an opponent before to enter it. The game starts as soon as another player signs up.

The point is you can retire from the waiting list when you want, just by clicking on the arrow next to your name in the waiting list (you can try it by entering a Lightning bronze game).

It will take time but it will work :)


Also I'm to organize some "freestyle" advanced chess tournaments at lightning time controls, that should happen from time to time on saturday & sunday.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-19 07:29:28)
Chatter robot

The robot works... You may try it by entering a CHESS LIGHTNING BRONZE tournament (1 game match). It should be a bit easier to find an opponent now...


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-20 15:03:22)
Rybka vs. Deep Junior

We'll have to wait & see :) .. I would be surprised if Junior beats Rybka in a 6-games match or so. In my opinion Junior is the old generation already, playing psychology while Rybka simply plays good chess. But let's wait the next versions, Junior most probably has an excellent software basis to make a very strong engine.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-20 15:46:39)
Players for FICGS team (by rating)

Here is the complete list of players who registered for the FICGS vs IGAME.RU match. Unfortunately, a few players couldn't play :( .. I think our team is strong enough, as rating rules are quite hard at FICGS and some ratings are still provisional.

I don't know how players will be distributed on "tables", if it's freestyle I think Wolfgang should play at table 1.

I am also surprised to see players coming from IGAME.RU or russian forums who entered FICGS team !? .. Anyway, I'm sure there are no spies :)


Thibault de Vassal (2512)
Mark Noble (2496)
Wolfgang Utesch (2466)
Albert Popov (2463)
Michael Aigner (2354)
Janos Helmer (2343)
Miguel Pires (2270)
Leszek Tymcio (2270)
Alexander Shalamanov (2252)
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2246)
Silviu Nenciulescu (2194)
William Taylor (2182)
Poulerik Jorgensen (2168)
Wayne Lowrance (2124)
Edward Kotlyansky (2114)
Christophe Czekaj (2098)
Konstantin Dudulec (2084)
Polina Romanova (2000)
Dan Rotaru (1937)
Nick Burrows (1884)
Garvin Gray (1863)
Vadim Khachaturov (1803)
Janusz Kepinski (1599)
Alexander Nent (1593)
Graham Cridland (1406)
Edmilson B. Lima (1400)
Sasha Lipsits (1400)
Ilmars Cirulis (1305 ~ >2100)
Than Serd (1300)
Charlie Neil (1212)
Phil Cook (1132)


Alexander Shalamanov    (2007-06-20 16:34:00)
Hello Thibault and all!

First of all, thanx for letting me defend the colours of FICGS Team. Oh, no, no spies on the parts the Russian players in our team. We will play fair and at our strongest. And I want to warn you that the IGAME team is really pretty strong and made of tough titled Russian players: GM, IM or GM, although they didn't feel like exposing their correct data or rating. You know, they feel they can win that match, on the one hand, and want to obtain some advantage in case we underestimate their chess strength, on the other hand. After all, honesty is not their best feature, alas. So be on guard, folks! The foe is at our gateway! Lol! Anyways, I want this match to be a fair play one and run with the ICCF motto: Amici sumus! (We are friends!). Good luck to anyone and interesting and exciting games to you! Remember, this match is a good point to win new friends over the globe behind the game of correspondence chess! Play at your strongest but bear in mind your match opponents are likely your partners in chess masterpieces than bitterest enemies. Be happy and have a fine day!


Alexander Shalamanov    (2007-06-20 16:44:27)
Junior my love!

He reminds me in style of the wonderful chess game knights of the past: Bronstein, Tal, Kasparov and the present: Shirov, Morozevich. Are brilliance of tactics and sacrificial chess more precious than cool and pitiless tecnique skills? Wait and see!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-20 17:02:02)
Amici Sumus

Hello Alexander :)

It goes without saying ! .. And I meant our team should be strong enough for a tough battle. We'll see. First of all that's a nice opportunity to meet friends from another part of the globe :)

Best of luck to all.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-20 22:54:33)
Internet chess

Well, the discussion with Tryfon Gavriel continues at TCCMB. As I had to explain the way I make FICGS, I copy my responses here :

http://ancients.correspondencechess.com/index.php?topic=109.15


Hello again Tryfon !

That's a very interesting discussion...

Actually I have to explain FICGS in its whole to respond :) .. To be continued for sure..

While registering a new member wrote to me a few months ago "Thanks for creating this ultimate chess challenge" or so... That's exactly what I try to do, mostly with the FICGS championship knockout & round-robin rules... Players just want challenge, that's the only assumption I start with, so I try to create interesting challenges. About the intellectual part, you're right but I'm quite sure that top level correspondence chess players still consider their game as an intellectual challenge, much more than a brute force or computer skills one. That's not the case for Advanced chess with fast time controls.

Let's take a look at the bicycle races again... The "Tour de France" is dying IMO.. because everyone understood we "don't know" if the champion is ok.. If doping was allowed (it would be a scandal for health of course), I'm sure the interest would raise again ! I think it is the same for chess & for everything else... The "Tour de France" syndrom happened in Elista with the match Kramnik vs. Topalov... It will have consequences. We need champions and we want true champions, every means are ok for this ! .. So the "engines allowed" rule is the only one possible or reasonable in my opinion.

Of course, chess & correspondence chess are changing, because these "walls" are nearer & nearer... maybe chess will die, maybe not.. The main problem is that in 1997, a super computer became World Champion... this year a "simple" computer Deep Fritz became world champion, soon Rybka on a cellular phone... :) Who is really interested to be a champion in "human category" ? FIDE world chess championship will continue to progressively lose its interest IMO...

Correspondence chess is just starting to grow in popularity and is told to be dying already. Surely correspondence chess will ask more & more time at a high level to win a few points, but it is possible to create more challenge by ie. changing the rating rules (the "design" of Elo rating system will become a problem).. Then, if it is not enough, we'll look for other challenges... It's told for years that Go (Weiqi) will replace chess in western countries... why not Big chess as the "brain only" game if there can't be doping in it.. just trying, as there's no other solution :)

A word about Poker of course, as it's probably the fastest growing game in popularity : IMO this game is at a stade like chess in year 1900, but the same problem will happen, even quicker. At a high level the game will be just more and more boring (if you wish to win real money) or chancy (in a wch tournament), or you'll have to always find weak players (well, not very challenging).

About the simultaneous exhibition against Alekhine or Capablanca, I'm not sure at all they would crush everyone at our chess servers, they are undoubtly more talented than all of us, but I feel it wouldn't be enough in all cases to win against correspondence chess style of play & knowledge accumulated for 50 years... A few players rated OTB 2000-2200 could draw against them IMO...

At last, yes I'm a fan of Sun Tzu's "The art of war" :) .. I strongly believe that correspondence chess will not die in the next few years because players will follow its principles more and more, as the only way to win ! .. Big chess follows the same principles... and Go is the most challenging game because of it too !

Tryfon, I'm not sure that we're opposite in our vision of chess ! .. Our servers have obviousy different goals, nothing more.. I do enjoy playing mad blitz games without chess engines... I just believe that the future of internet chess is "serious (engines allowed, rated) correspondence chess" on one hand and "human chess for fun (no engines, unrated)" on the other hand... The other ways look like nonsense to me.

I hope it responds.


Best wishes, Thibault


Alexander Shalamanov    (2007-06-21 08:31:01)
Salut, Thibault!

Je crois que les memebres de notre equippes doit ordonnees par les ratings. De cette facons nous pourrons tenir le principe de bonne guerre. Salutations amicales, Sacha


Wolfgang Utesch    (2007-06-21 12:48:19)
FICGS vs. IGAME.RU

Nice, Peter would be making our team much more stronger!


Denis Stork    (2007-06-21 22:11:39)
from Russia with love

Greetings to all! So here we are, fresh new Russian players, to participate in FICGS vs. IGAME match. I'd like to give a short explanation of our "disguising identities". The thing is that mostly our names really won't say anything to you. iGame is just an amateurs' site and with the upcoming match we have a good chance to find out which material we really made of. :) So show us maser-class. And let the strongest win! :) Good night and good luck ! :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-22 01:51:23)
Lightning and Blitz Time Controls

That's an idea, but I'm making some changes to help to find opponents more easily. I hope it will help...

First, experience shows that rating rules are still too hard IMO : A player winning or drawing against another one rated 350 points more most often means the lower rated player should be rated higher, not the contrary... A few games only are concerned, but with provisional ratings such results are still not fair, and many players rated 2100 to 2300 fear to lose points in the chess WCH, even if they win their groups. This rule should allow strong players not to fear (too much :)) to play against anyone in rated tournaments without rating restrictions, like blitz & lightning ones.

Consequently, the rule "In case of a loss or draw against a player rated more than 350 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Elo - 350" will be changed to "In case of a loss or draw against a player rated more than 200 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Elo - 200" in a few hours.

The entry fees & prizes (E-Points) will change also, most important is to attract more players to start more advanced chess games.


Alexander Shalamanov    (2007-06-22 16:46:10)
Garvin, I side with you

Thibault, I think there is some logics in his comment. That's true that good traditions should be kept; hence, regular members should be given the priority to play vs. the Russians. Of course, you will make the final decision and'll have to balance between the strongest team players' list and respect for traditions, but I'm with Garvin about the issue. Hell, what a puzzle you're now having to guess.:)


Denis Stork    (2007-06-22 19:34:13)
Russians in FICGS team

As far as I know, the complectation of iGame team has been completed. Everyone who wished joined it. The rest applying for FICGS team are volunteers and they didn't intent to play for iGame initially. Well, I may be wrong, let Sergey (our captain) speaks.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2007-06-23 10:21:35)
Nicknames

It's up to you - I think different! Preparation is an inportant thing in high-level chess (correspondence same as OTB) if you want to win or just to hold a draw against a very strong player.


Michael Aigner    (2007-06-23 12:55:32)
Rybka 2.3.2a would!

Hi! Rybka follws the mentioned game Motley -Anand but finds an improvement at move 24. 24. Bh5 Qf5 26. Bxg7 with an unclear (IMO, according to Rybka equal position. it could follow Nc5 (Kxg7 26.Rf1) 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27.Kd6 Kd3+ 28.cxd Qa5+ 29.Ke2 Kxg7 still unclear, but in an otb game i would shourly prefer to play white. I can imagine when you look deeper in the position after Bh5 you might find a win for white - or lets say a variation in which it is almost not possible for black to defend in an otb game even when the objective evaluation says the position is equal. This could be the reason why Re8 is prefered by strong human GMs.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-23 16:04:55)
Unsolved

You're looking at the wrong place, Wolfgang :)


Well, 5 russian names have just been changed. Sorry to Sergey for adding some work to organize Igame.ru team


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-23 18:35:15)
Rating rules update

Hello to all.

As I said in another thread, experience shows that rating rules were still too hard IMO : A player winning or drawing against another one rated 350 points more most often means the lower rated player should be rated higher, not the contrary... A few games only are concerned, but with provisional ratings such results are still not fair, and many players rated 2100 to 2300 fear to lose points in the chess WCH, even if they win their groups. The new rule should allow strong players not to fear (too much :)) to play against anyone in rated tournaments without rating restrictions, like wch, blitz & lightning ones.

Consequently, the rule "In case of a loss or draw against a player rated more than 350 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Elo - 350" has been changed to "In case of a loss or draw against a player rated more than 200 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Elo - 200"

All correspondence chess results of these last 2 months & in the future will be affected, as well as future advanced chess & big chess results.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-24 14:39:20)
suggestion

Thanks for suggestion Garvin. A problem is the swiss tournament will occur on a particular day and will take about 6 hours.

I think it will take some time before players be interested to play fast time controls anyway, and I'll probably have to improve some things yet.


Reminder : Everyone starts with 2 E-Points and can play 20 bronze lightning games for free.


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2007-06-25 03:18:38)
Second division.

If there is a second division, I will be in, I am not a strong player so I cannot participate now.


Sergey Pligin    (2007-06-25 10:13:05)
to Wolfgang Utesch

Wolfgang, it is a pity such a strong player as you are resigns playing this match for the reason you are giving up this opportunity is insignificant, IMO. Several players of our team use nicknames, but not all of them. You may play vs me. I am expected to play on 3rd or 4th board. My games are available on ICCF web server. I hope you will change your mind and play FICGS team. Best regards, Sergey


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-25 15:25:58)
Ficgs vs Igame.ru

Undoubtly the most replied in this forum :)

I think that's not so important matter. A few IGAME.RU players registered with other names and were honest by admitting it. Of course a few players here used nicknames before that, that's not a big deal and that's internet chess. The only way to be sure (actually that's wrong, I saw some cases a long time ago in team championships) of your opponent's identity is to play over the board.

Finally, if some players in IGAME.RU team use nicknames, let's say that's a small advantage we give to them :) .. On the other hand, we play at home !

Not a big deal... really.


Amici sumus !


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-26 01:35:03)
A guide to Endgames Tablebases

Endgames tablebases fully explained, a great page :

http://horizonchess.com/FAQ/Winboard/egtb.html


* [A.1] What is a endgame tablebase? How do they work? How much stronger will it make my chess program play?
* [A.2] What are the different endgame tablebases formats out there? What are the differences?
* [A.3] Where can I learn more about the endgame table formats?
* [A.4] What are the Chess programs that support endgame tables? Which format do they support?
* [A.5] Where can I get endgame tablebase?
* [A.6] Where can I buy tablebases?
* [A.7] Where can I download tablebases?
* [A.8] How do I generate tablebases on my computer?
* [A.9] How large are the tablebase files? Can I put then all into one directory? Do I have to use a complete set of 5 men tablebases?
* [A.10] Questions about 6 men endgame tablebases. Which are the most useful?
* [A.11] How do I find out which tablebase is corrupted? How do I know the endgame tablebases are working?
* [A.12] What is datacomp.exe? Where can I get it?
* [A.13] How do I get Crafty to work with Endgame tablebases?
* [A.14] How can I get Fritz to use Endgame tablebases?
* [A.15] What is the difference between tablebases download from Dr Hyatt's ftp site and those on the Chessbase endgame turbo CD? Can they be used together?
* [A.16] What are the files ending with .tbs? What about those with nbb and nbw? Do i need both?
* [A.17] Help, the endgame tablebases are not working properly!
* [A.18] Can I use tablebase files in zipped form?
* [A.19] Where can I get a useful graphical browser to view endgame tablebases? What about an online searchable database?
* [A.20] Misc questions


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-27 06:19:40)
Bullet games & prizes

Hello to all.

A few new changes and one more time control in lightning tournaments category :


- Bullet games (available for chess & Go), 10 minutes + 20 seconds / move.
- Bronze bullet Go games are available... Everyone can test it for free.
- Bullet & lightning Go games are now rated (same rating list).


Dinesh De Silva    (2007-06-27 07:26:44)
Re:

It seems someone is trying to force issues by always trying to be confrontational. Any player who tries to be high & mighty & aggressive is surely unstable. What people like I & Miguel Pires were doing is just making a suggestion & making friendly debate. Maybe there should be a poll to determine if the vacation period should be increased or not. It's all upto Thibault, of course. Whichever way he decides, we as players would accept it in a friendly, calm, peaceful manner, unlike a very few who try to impose their will on matters by thinking they are ALWAYS correct..


Miguel Pires    (2007-06-27 10:44:20)
Wolfgang Utesch and rules

Rules against "unreasonableness" is what we need. Rules against pp how atack others and try to create some sort of confrontations only because pp have different idias. That type of persones shuld see their capacity of post in the forum cancel. But that is my opinion. About this pool everyone is free to give their opinion about this thing. For me what thibault decide or the majority of the members is ok. I don't admit is a person that i don't now and i never see more "fat" (Portuguese expression) try to have some sort of confrontation with me about the whay i see or make my decisions on this site. Best Regard's Miguel Pires


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-27 14:50:19)
+1

I must say that Glen's argument is very pertinent. The more vacation, the more games, the more difficulties... Quite logical, and I don't say that for you Miguel as it's probably a mechanical effect. Anyway I agree with you that a few more days would give a welcome breath, but as Wolfgang said, time is a part of the game, that's life. Sorry if you felt a bit of irony or cynicism in our posts, I suppose it was difficult to avoid it to justify our opinion...

Best, Thibault


Miguel Pires    (2007-06-27 20:58:00)
Thibault de Vassal and others

Men, like i sayd before i only ask a question, if we can have more days, nothing more. The ironie and cynisme, if in a polite whey is ok, not in the other whay. For me what the comunity decide is ok, no problem, like i said i only ask a question, and yes the argument's from some of the persones against the change are very valid. For finish if someone fill offended from what i sayd i appoligies. Best Regard's Miguel PIres


Charlie Neil    (2007-06-30 09:26:19)
Cheering on Ficgs!

Hi, go to Tournaments, then Special Tournaments, then Ficgs Special Events and there is the Ficgs vs IGame match. There is one King's Gambit already! This is brave play in a strong match or not? Who needs sites covering matches and tournaments elsewhere when we can stay here and cheer on our own players against this strong team. "C'mon Ficgs! Check every move twice and again before sending. Take your time. Good luck!" Unfortunately we cannot pass comment of any kind on any of the games in progress. Rules forbid it...There must be somehow home advantage can count.


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-07-02 18:22:50)
Too fast

10+20 is a timing where a strong engine playing alone with a good book is unbeatable.
No time left for creative human added value ...
That's the reason why Freestyle tournaments on Playchess recently evolved from an initial 45 min + 5 sec/move to a slower timing (60 min + 15 sec/move)

I am pretty convinced that at 10 min + 20 sec increment the one with the most powerful computer will win for sure...

Marc

PS for a mean 60 moves game, 10+20 is equivalent to 30 seconds per move.
Freestyle tempo (60+15) gives a mean 75 seconds per move.


Dinesh De Silva    (2007-07-04 12:40:35)
Re:

Utesch is correct......there's no trace of any "Montviel" playing at IECG or ICCF. I have a strong feeling that either Utesch or I have already guessed Thibault's real name somewhere in this thread


Jason Repa    (2007-07-15 20:45:57)
Hillarious!

This is your "argument"? You copy and paste some drivel where they seem to substitute the word "skill" with "intelligence", or perhaps you did that.
You don't provide any sources or qualifications of the author whatsoever.
This is too entertaining and unbelievable to make up!!



in a statement signed by 52 psychologists, published in the December 13, 1994 Wall Street Journal

"1. Intelligence exists as a very general mental capability involving ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. The brain processes involved are little understood.
2. Intelligence can be measured, and IQ tests measure it well. Nonverbal tests can be used where language skills are weak.
3. IQ tests are not culturally biased.
4. IQ is more strongly related than any other measurable human trait to educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes. Whatever it is that IQ tests measure, it is very important.
5. Genetics plays a bigger role than environment in intelligence, but environment has a strong effect.
6. Individuals are not born with an unchangeable IQ, but it gradually stabilizes during childhood and changes little thereafter."

I think 52 psychologists might be a bit more qualified than the random blog where you copied and pasted from.


Jason Repa    (2007-07-15 21:12:20)
My Opinion

I certainly do have an opinion. My opinion is that you have a very low IQ burrows, and don't have a clue how to do research. You like to make things up as you go along and change the subject when you're cornered and proven wrong. Very poor form!

It seems I have to talk to you as I would a very young child. It should go without saying that the opinion of 52 professionals in a given area should have some value when they're commenting in the area they have expertise in. If 52 mechanics told you that your car needs a new alternator would you argue and tell people to have their own opinion on the matter? This is what you're doing here.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-07-16 04:47:17)
Who knows...

Maybe it is because of my wrong terminology. Then, how I must call other things that traditional IQ test don't measure? Does emphaty (for example) don't earn honour to be included into intelligence?

Can you enlighten me, Jason?


Mladen Jankovic    (2007-08-01 15:47:10)
Yes

That was an ultra-weak solution. Now we have a strong solution.


Polina Stefanova    (2007-08-02 16:13:21)
Threatened to kill the person

...in Moskow.

Unfortunately I inform, that --- [moderator : name deleted] from Ukraine promised to employ killers and to kill in Moscow the strongest chess player Igame - Sex God (2 place in rating Igame).

Sex God should play for command Igame against ficgs on the third board.

Sex God was against participation --- [moderator : name deleted] in match Igame – ficgs, because he supports addicts and played for a command which captain is the sick person and addict R2.

In Russia against a narcotism, including this illness a harm, however the command headed by addict R2, exists on Igame till now :(

As a result captain Igame, being afraid for a life and health Sex God has been compelled to exclude Sex God from a command.

Best wishes, Polina Stefanova (the leader of rating Igame)


Ivan Pljusnin    (2007-08-03 14:06:28)
My offer

I offer to play some interesting chess matches between strong igame player Sex_God and his enemies.

1. Sex_God - --- [moderator : name deleted], his would-be killer.

2. Sex_God - Sergey Pligin, who did not let him play in the igame team because of the conflict with --- [moderator : name deleted].

3. It is also interesting to see the match Sex_God - some strong player from ficgs. If Sex_God had stayed in the igame team, this match would have already started.

Best wishes, Mobutu (on igame) aka Ivan Pljusnin (here)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-08-03 17:21:40)
Strong solution

What do you mean ?


Ivan Pljusnin    (2007-08-03 21:35:57)
:-)

Thibault, but you are agree that murders of strong correspondence chessplayers bring some excitement into their boring life, aren't you? :-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-08-05 13:12:04)
Unrated

Cause many strong players from Igame started with a 1600 rating... (it would have been unfair to play rated 2 games matches IMO)


Ivan Pljusnin    (2007-08-09 01:49:06)
Igame ratings

In order to make this topic more exiting I give the igame ratings of the opponents:

Sex_God: 2463 (+111, =63, -3)
RODINKA (aka ---): 2369 (+69, =29, -3)

Polina is our rating-leader (2536; +173, =1, -1), but most of igame players consider her rating unfair because she have played many games with weak opponents. Some people also say that she is another nickname of Sex_God but I don't believe it.

There was a conflict between Sex_God and RODINKA (aka ---). They have abused each other, and our cap decided to expel Sex_God from the team in spite of his higher rating. Unfortunately, this strong igame chessplayer does not take part in our great match.


Ivan Pljusnin    (2007-08-10 01:06:34)
2 Dinesh De Silva

As an IGAME player I express my opinion. Everything is not so simple!

1. Some strong chessplayers like Morozevich on ICC would not like to show their real names. Should they all be driven away from all chess cites? I am not sure. :-)

2. Your rating-leader is Viktor Savinov, he have not played a single game here. Our rating-leader is Polina. Are you sure that they should be the captains of our teams?

3,4. Legendary chessplayers like Viktor Kortchnoj or Bobby Fischer are sometimes abusive. But I am not sure that they should be driven away.

5. There is no any titles on IGAME. We are anonymous Russian amateours.

In general, I think that chess cites of all kinds are necessary and useful. And a chessplayer must have a choice: FICGS, IGAME, ICCF, GAMEKNOT, PLAYCHESS.DE, CHESSHERE and so on. Each cite has its own customs and traditions.

By the way, it makes matches between them more interesting. I believe in IGAME anonymous fighters. :-)

Best wishes, Mobutu (my IGAME nickname)


Ivan Pljusnin    (2007-08-10 16:21:13)
IGAME ratings

Polina is not published in IGAME rating-list because she has finished her last game more than three months ago. Here is her last game:
http://www.igame.ru/chess/gm.htm?gid=350240

Full IGAME rating-list looks as follows:

1. Polina (2536)
2. curator (2513)
3. GipsyFlame (2495, plays as Sergey Pligin)
4. Mobutu (2476, = Pljusnin Ivan)
5. Many (2475)
6. Sex_God (2463)
7. abc0123 (2461)
8. owl (2461, plays as Dojnikov)
9. klio (2457)
10. Vovanchiki (2455, plays as Kim Vladimir)
...

I do not think that IGAME ratings show real chess strength. For example, Polina and Many haven't played any games with serious opponents. curator, abc0123 and some other players have high ratings because they have finished many hundreds games. And some really strong players have comparatively low ratings. For example, our first board in the team, Vladimir_Lenin (=GM Andrey Sumets) has IGAME rating 2403, #35 in the full rating-list.


Ivan Pljusnin    (2007-08-12 03:39:21)
2 Andrew Stephenson

I think, curator on IGAME and curator on chess-mail is the same person. Here is his IGAME info:
country - israel
city - natania
bitth date - 13.03.1963

As far as I know, he was invited in IGAME team but refused to play. However, I am not sure that he is stronger than some of our team players. For example, look at this:
http://www.igame.ru/chess/gm.htm?gid=219934
or at this:
http://www.igame.ru/chess/gm.htm?gid=195761
GipsyFlame (=Pligin) and Red (aka Orlov) play in the IGAME team.


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-08-13 11:53:27)
(Unfair) partial withdrawal


A few weeks ago IM Andrey Vovk had a discussion in the forum with Thibault regarding the fact that he did not wish to play in the new WCH although he had formerly enrolled on the waiting list.

As Thibault confirmed that he had to play in tournament FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_M_01__000003, IM Vovk announced that he would forfeit all his games in this tournament.

That's what he seemed to do for more or less 30 days as he let his clock run and so lost five games on time.
Then he seemed to change his mind and began to play in his three remaining games where his flag had not yet fallen.

Although I admit that anybody may decide to play or to resign whenever he wishes, this seems a bit problematic in a qualification tournament : five players got a full point whereas three have to fight one more opponent (and presumably a very strong one)...

For what regards myself I am very happy to play a game against IM Volk but I feel that three of us have not the same chances anymore as the five other ones for qualification ...

I think this situation calls for establishing new rules for qualification tournaments : if a player clearly forfeits a given number of games, then all his games in this tournament should be withdrawn.


Your opinion ?

Marc



Thibault de Vassal    (2007-08-13 17:16:34)
2 Ivan & Sergey

"pig" doesn't look like much "pig-headed fan" IMO... but of course I may be wrong :)

Anyway, playing with the rules is a tough game where nobody wins, ever.. quite obvious.


Wayne Lowrance    (2007-08-13 23:40:48)
Obvious blunder

I always feel bad for a player who has done this. In my many years of playing CC I have done this on rare occasion. I remember a game in particuliar. I was playing this very excellent player (2300+) but very very arrogant. I had an easy but complicated clearly won end game. I copied the wrong move and resigned immediately. My Arrogant opponent as it turns out offered a take back, which was within the sites rules. But I declined telling him to me it is the same thing as "touch Move" in OTB chess. So my friend I know your feeling, I think we have all touched this base somewhere along the line. Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-08-14 03:22:05)
General comments

Hi Don.

I fully agree with this... The same problem may happen in OTB swiss tournaments when a few strong players agree results in advance to share the money prizes. That's probably very hard to avoid it, that's why I prefer knockout tournaments. And after all, according to the current rules, nothing prevents to ban systematic abusive players, which is probably enough...


Dan Rotaru    (2007-08-16 12:49:51)
Quote 7

If something goes wrong and somebody smiles you can be sure that he already thought who to blame for it.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-08-18 02:46:19)
Yes

Hello Ulrich, see 'Lightning tournaments' it is possible to play ie. chess blitz bronze (2 hours + 2 hours / 40 moves), lightning bronze (30 minutes + 1 minute / move) or bullet bronze (10 minutes + 20 seconds / move) games.

You just have to find an opponent... (you may try the chat bar)


Philip Roe    (2007-08-23 17:31:35)
draws and wins

Those statistics might have some curiosity value but perhaps not much deep meaning. Especially in the lower sections, all of the games defaulted in ten moves or fewer give a false impression of decisive play. Even if they are excluded, I feel sure that the proportion of draws is much higher for stronger players, so I dont know what an average percentage would tell us.


Than Serd    (2007-08-30 10:05:34)
Greece

Kotronias Vasilios (2602)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-01 00:38:30)
My favourite quote...

... from FICGS chat :)


devassal thibault : Ilmars discovered sleep :) .. Good night !

cirulis ilmars : I was in very interesting chat with girlfriend...

devassal thibault : Oops.. I was wrong... :>

devassal thibault : lol !!


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-02 14:21:35)
China, chess and Go champion ?

The match between chinese and russian chess teams just ended in Nizhniy Novgorod. Both russian men and women teams lost to chinese by, respectively, a 24.5-25.5 and 23-27 score. Finally, China beat Russia by 52.5-47.5 points.

More details - http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4084


Chess seems to be much less played than Xiangqi in China, the chinese are probably able to take the crown in every board game, soon a chinese world champion for chess ? Practice, practice and practice... Their only secret ? :)

... or was the russian team simply not strong enough ?


Still waiting for more chinese friends here at FICGS, but internet seems to have its own limits too :/


Christophe Czekaj    (2007-09-03 12:53:52)
no chess engines

Hello Thibault, I play here without chess engine. Anyway, recently I tried to play "hippopotamus defence", (with no good result yet, I have to admit) so a computer is no use, it doesn't understand anything, but perhaps it's hippopotamus which is wrong, not the computer ;-D. Anyway a difficult defence in correspondence play). I began on this site with 2000, and so my elo was too high to play against human only ? I don't see how it's possible a sofware detect computer use ? Ok we see strange, computer-like moves sometimes, but... Perhaps two players, at the beginning of the game can agree to not use computer. Again about chess engine, I use a computer to record the moves (chessbase),to gain time, and replay fast the moves to get to the actual position, but my chess engines (an old fritz (5) and chess tiger (14) all that on a old PC) would certainly suffer a lot use against more recent chess engines ;-D Like Philip, I like to play on ficgs and it would be nice to plmay against more human opponent. I play one tournament on itsyourturn since last year, and I saw a lot more human mistakes than on ficgs. So, how explain it, I sometimes feel more comfortable on itsyourturn, but still I do like the spirit of ficgs, match against RU, the tournaments, forum, nice people to meet on the board, and so on


Philip Roe    (2007-09-03 18:59:27)
CC without engines

Thibault, Christophe, All I did was to pass on that ICC CLAIMS to be able detect computer use. They dont say how they do it. Maybe they are just bluffing, or maybe they have an algorithm that kind of works and they dont want people to work around it by knowing how it works. The reason I dont use engines is because I want to take full credit for any wins I get. I can imagine using an engine and telling myself that I will just use it to prevent oversights. But I cant control what the engine will tell me. It might recommend a move that tells me that I am planning to attack the wrong target. If I then switch plans and win, what is left for me to feel proud of? But I can understand that others may feel differently, and there is much to be said for a site where everything is allowed because it gets around the issue of making a rule that is certainly very hard to enforce. But just because that rule does not exist on FICGS, it seems to me that if somebody on FICGS says that they are not using an engine, then you can probably believe them. The problem with other sites is that if a player with an umimpressive rating fires back a series of accurate moves very quickly in a difficult situation then you suspect that he is using an engine (although he promised not to) and there is not much you can do about it. If the same thing happens on FICGS you are pretty sure that he is using an engine, but you have already agreed that he can, so it doesnt irritate you. For that reason, I think that a computers-barred tournament might actually make sense on FICGS because those who want to use engines can legitimately do so. But for me, it would need to be chess that means something, with at least rating points at stake. Interestingly, Christophe and I are drawn in the same tournament, so we can declare at least that one game computer-free!


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-05 05:04:29)
Adjudication

Thibault I understand that to some players it might be unacceptable to have the game suddenly declared lost or drawn in a Q v Q+P ending or R+P v N+p ending. In my view these players should opt for the non computer tournaments you are going to set up. To cover the point raised: yes there can remain a need for a referee which should be human. Linking to table bases does not affect the beauty of an endgame Thibault its just a small range at the moment of 6 piece endings. There is no aesthetic value in following the moves advised by the tablebase the value is in getting there. Every strong player is consulting the tablebases when analysing positions leading to 6 piece situations so automating table base adjudications in say A M and WCC tournaments seems completely logical. Yes strong tournaments are played only for the sporting result Thibault I dont think anyone would choose an inferior move for the beauty they might try it to take a risk to win by complicating the game. I have seen 30+ moves games of yours of absolute poisened pawn Najdorf theory leading to a dead draw ..... I guess what I am trying to avoid is opponents dragging out games which are table base won. In the case of reasonable strong opponents 2100+ in my view this is because they just dont want to resign. by the way how do you call for the referee?


Garvin Gray    (2007-09-06 07:36:52)
engine use


Jason- Thibault already spelled it out for you in pretty simple terms that he doesn't believe in human-only correspondence chess. I guess if there are enough people who don't want to deal with reality whining about it he'll cave in.

Hello Jason,

I think the better response is if someone wants to play 'human only' correspondence chess, there are plenty of other sites 'out there' to satisfy.
Rather than 'cave in' I am most likely am wrong as Thibault is of course not keen to lose members, but I can see more bitching if human only chess is specifically catered for as players will 'bitch' about other players who they suspect of using engine assistance.

I enjoy the freestyle component of play is what I enjoy here and the good nature of the site. I think a main part of this is that there are no misconceptions about what the rules are regarding engine use.



Jason Repa    (2007-09-06 08:15:18)
engine use

[moderator : partly deleted]

I explained quite clearly in my previous post that.... "you'll never be able to tell for certain if someone is consulting a program or not in corr. chess, so why fret about it?"

The truth is, there are no corr. sites that can satisfy a desire to play non computer-assisted chess because corr. chess doesn't work that way anymore. Anyone can simply say they aren't consulting a program but unless they are right in front of you as they are making the moves you'll never know for sure. (...) Just accept reality for what it is. Are you going to try to have a footrace with someone on a scooter? Of course not. So why complain about computer use on corr. chess? Re-read my previous post in this thread a few times until you understand.

There is something to be said for human only chess. It is my favourite form of the game. Really, the only form. All else is just study and analysis. You can call it "playing" if you want, but unless you're making the moves strictly on your own brainpower, it's not playing chess.

I play rated OTB tournaments at time controls ranging from 5 minutes to 6 hours. I also play hundreds of bullet games a week online where I am certain that there is no computer involvement. To me this makes allot more sense than whining and crying about the advent of Fritz (and other programs). It's called accepting realilty.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-06 23:29:46)
Rybka

In my opinion, the whole correspondence chess level has improved with Rybka. So it is probably a new step towards the 100% draws also (at the highest level)... Fortunately the last step will never happen ;)

Anyway that's why some strong players are bored with correspondence chess.


Christophe Czekaj    (2007-09-07 12:44:20)
To Jason

Hello Jason ! It’s just a question to have the possibility to play correspondence chess (for fun, not neccesarily studying or analysis, just the pleasure of finding moves, ideas (you know, what Bronstein called imagination) not rating, not to be classified as expert, or I don’t know what…) with people without computer. If they lie and use computer ; OK, we can’t be sure, but I’m certain you could accept that some players can trust other players when they say they don’t use computers. For example, I trust Philip when he said this, it’s just a question of being a gentleman. If there are cheaters ok, so what… Rybka will win And I don’t undestand your topic about class of players : I hope I‘ve the right of posting some commentaries on this forum, despite the fact being largely behind you in term of rating… I think we can still play chess without computer, and with rating or not, it’s the same game for me. Philip and I just think it could be kind to play with other players with a kind of gentleman’s agreement. Sorry if it bother you


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-14 02:33:32)
FIDE World Championship 2007

The FIDE World Championship 2007 just started in Mexico. A double round-robin tournament with 8 players and a US $1.3 million prize fund. Players are Vladimir Kramnik, Peter Svidler, Alexander Morozevich, Levon Aronian, Viswanathan Anand, Boris Gelfand, Alexander Grischuk and Peter Leko.

Round 1, all games drawn... Any favourite ?


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.


Jason Repa    (2007-09-08 12:26:56)
"No engines" Tournaments

I suspect you'll get a whole new breed of forum posts where accusations will be disguised as compliments such as: "Johnny So and So really played an excellent game! He was accurate like a machine against me", etc.
You'll also hear allot of twisted soapbox rants about how "morally superior" the allegedly non engine consulting players are.
This is what the forums on second rate sits such as RedHotPawn, ChessHere, etc are filled with, in addition to absurd claims of so-called "engine detection technology", which is obviously impossible. On RHP in particular, the site admin are software developers with extremely modest uscf ratings in the C-class range, yet somehow they deem themselves qualified to make such difficult judgment calls, which are at best a probability guess, even for a strong chess player.

I thought it was precisely this kind of nonsense you were trying to avoid when you decided to make it an up front policy of "freestyle" chess at will at FICGS.


Mladen Jankovic    (2007-09-10 01:54:09)
Confessions of a Magic 8 Ball ;)

Well, first off I started with the provisional rating of 1200, then I signed up for a bunch of tournaments and started playing 60+ games. Next, add irregular Internet access with no conditions to perform any reasonable analysis of games in progress and the pressing requirement to answer 40 moves in one go, only to go trough the same at the next soonest opportunity.

I "solved" the problem by not playing and forgetting about the server for about a month (needed that). For that reason I lost more than 250 points (254 to be exact).

Needless to say, the recovery of my rating to any decent level is slow, as, in the meantime I have gone trough periods when I played little chess here, or even none, with games in progress.

Your speculated reasons for my supposed intrusion here (it might be argued that your first post here is the real intrusion) are just plain wrong.

I also don't find ELO ratings to be a valid measure of a man. The real reason I "intrude" in the matter is that I like the general atmosphere here. I am also quiet aware that I am probably the lowest rated poster here, but, before few minutes ago, I was not aware of your rating (good job, while we're on the subject) or Garvin's, for that matter.


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2007-09-11 07:25:33)
Tolerance

Also the only moderator we have is Thibault. Unfortunately he is human, so he sleeps and has other activities ... FICGS sans frontieres


Jason Repa    (2007-09-10 22:20:52)
chess engines

Couldn't you have waited until our game is over before buying Rybka? lol! Fruit 2.3 is the strongest free UCI engine that I know of.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-10 22:42:32)
chess engines

First of all, every chess engines is a choice, ie. about selectivity, and has consequences & weaknesses in particular positions. Fruit/Toga algorithm is really good but it has probably still much less chess knowledge than Rybka. I think Rybka's algorithm is really better also, Vasik Rajlich added some "human features" while other programs still think about chess like mathematics.

Rybka changed correspondence chess because Fritz or Junior (very strong chess machines) added to a good chess player makes a good centaur while Rybka is "almost" a centaur itself... Consequently a weak chess player can reach quite easily a 2100/2200 rating. That's the main reason...

Of course Rybka will always make some bad moves, but it/she builds an advantage move after move against other engines in most cases in 'calm' positions. HIARCS, that was told during a long time to think most like a human, was not a strong 'chess machine'. I don't know much about Hiarcs 11/12, but Rybka is a major improvement in this way IMO.


Jason Repa    (2007-09-10 22:48:06)
chess engines

I don't think it's a coincidence that the strongest commercial program was designed by a strong IM chess player.

It's always amazed me that the majority of chess engine programmers know very little about the game of chess itself, such as Stefan Meyer-Kahlen's Shredder. I think there comes a point in the decision making process where your human chess knowledge because an important factor.


Jason Repa    (2007-09-10 23:25:57)
Chat Rules

It sounds good, just as long as you're not going to make a policy of rewarding weasels and cowards who like to needle and insult with indirect and surreptitious means. An honest and direct person should not be chastised for possessing good qualities and being upfront. Being offensive is being offensive. Taking liberties with someone and trying to condescend is just as, or more offensive than calling someone a name, especially if that name that you call them is true.

In the end, it will of course be up to your judgement.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-10 23:56:42)
Shredder 10

Shredder is really not strong enough in this case IMO. Shredder is best in calm positions where there's a good move to find many moves in advance...


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-12 07:36:30)
chess engines endgame play

Right Thibault! I am becoming more impressed with Rybka's endgame knowledge. It seems to have the extra pawn on just one side situations well understood. Is there any engine that is recognised as being the strongest at endgames? This is certainly an area where cc has helped me enormously as it has forced me to get some endgame books (and actually study them!)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-12 07:36:52)
chess engines endgame play

" It seems to have the extra pawn on just one side situations well understood." .. It is undoubtly one of the keys of its success.

As far as I know, Shredder has always been said to be the strongest engine in the endgames.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-09-12 14:15:41)
2 Jason

Yes, I see my mistake. 'are' is wrong word. Maybe 'is'. :)


Philip Roe    (2007-09-13 00:37:23)
Andrew Stephenson

You post makes a lot of sense, and I can absolutely agree that being a centaur can be fun and educational (Centaurs in Greek mythology, by the way, were a highly respected race, and usually described as happy) However, I am puzzled by something which maybe you or someone else can explain.

You and others assert that playing the engines first choice every time will drop points against an intelligent centaur. Does it not follow that a centaur should have a higher rating than its engine? But in fact the ratings quoted for the top engines are substantially higher than the ratings of anyone on FICGS, which seems a paradox.

Does the explanation lie in unsynchronized rating systems, or am I just missing something? This question has nothing to do with value judgements, merely with satisfying a curiosity.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-13 00:41:26)
Chess engines ratings

"unsynchronized rating systems" : undoubtly :)


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.


Philip Roe    (2007-09-14 17:53:56)
Andrew Stephenson

Thanks for your explanations. They were helpful. Let me try to say what I meant by unsynchronised rating systems (maybe I could have found a better word)

The difference between your rating and mine is a measure of how likely you are to beat me, and that relationship between rating difference and percentage score is similar for any system I have come across.

However, the absolute numbers mean little if anything. There was a widespead belief for some time that US players were overrated, even though the system worked fine internally. My understanding is that from time to time organisations check to see if they have drifted too far from FIDE standards.

This sort of calibration works fine for human OTB games, but for anything else it is not easy to see how to "set the zero", and that possible mismatch is what I called "unsynchronised".

I think that standard CC practice is to try to give each player a rating similar to their OTB rating. I do not know how the engine ratings quoted were tied down, and I imagine that centaur ratings are very difficult to calibrate.




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    (2007-09-17 16:18:47)
Schuster-Figlio

I have... Definitely I don't like the "speed up" formula, that happened ie. in the Kramnik vs. Topalov match, it changes the nature of the match and adds some more 'random' factors, up to sudden death - White must win - which is no more chess. In our case this wouldn't be correspondence chess anymore (added to potential difficulties to play blitz games).

Anyway no rule can break the tie "properly", at least this rule allows the strongest player by rating (in case of 8 draws) to move to the next stage, which is quite logical IMO.


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2007-09-18 06:20:30)
Hmm...

Wouldn't it be better to ask Peter what he thinks about this? I know some people that would actually be offended if the opponent withdrew, even if they took the upper hand because of that. This is an issue that should be discussed between Peter and Gino only, IMHO.

And for the next championship (and I'm just one guy rambling here, with hardly any chance of getting there), perhaps it could be arranged that the opponents just played 8-game matches until one of them is won. It'll take more time, but it it seems the only way it won't look fishy for one side or the other. (And sorry if fishy is a strong word.)


Albert H. Alberts    (2007-09-18 17:04:14)
110 best chess moves ever

All: Dutch GM Tim Krabbe has compiled "110 best chess moves ever".I computerevaluated them.Most of them are spotted by machines and if not: they are refuted. Notably nr. Topalov-Shirov and a classic 1960 Spasski-Bronstein.www.howtofoolfritz.com. Albert Alberts Amsterdam.


Don Groves    (2007-09-20 08:23:56)
One more thing...

I just noticed there is no longer a "back" button. With no "back" button, I am afraid of sending a wrong move! Can we have the "back" button back ;-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-20 20:39:56)
chessfriend

As far as I can remember, this way to break the tie was used in most Chessfriend round-robin money tournaments. I have no doubt that some players would have sacrificed their ratings for more chances to win cash prizes... Highest rated players were attracted anyway because they were invited.

About my match, I was simply glad to get these 4 draws easily with the black pieces, it gave me more time to try to win with White (I was in time trouble at this moment). GM Farit Balabaev is a strong correspondence chess player, even if I lose the match, I have no regret about it. Surely I won't play my FICGS WCH games less seriously than my IECG WCH ones :) .. By the way I still hope to play the first candidates final against Gino or Peter :p


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-20 21:30:15)
Chess Friend

I did not think there was ever any money paid out in chess friend but I never played in any round robins so I can't comment on the tie break being used in them. As for repeating the same 15 moves in 4 games because you had too many other games it just seesm farcical to me. Everyone is a strong player at that stage but still .... My point about IECG is just that perhaps (understandably) you take that more seriously and would not agree to 4 short meaningless draws because the others are strong and you have a lot of other games going on. The point i was making is that these 4 draws resulted from your tie break system having a higher TER as your opponent attempted to draw his way to victory and you went along with it. You have set up a system that encourages this sort of approach which is anti chess and , arguably, devalues the concept of a "World Championship" What is your objection to 2 game tie breaks involving accelerated cc rates that I suggested?


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    (2007-09-21 20:34:37)
Tie Breaks

Thansk for the reply Thibault. on the delay front I think it would be less than 6 months maybe 1 or 2 months. First the effect of this delay would impact on only very few top players in completing the final stages. Overall the quantity of chess games and opportunities would be unaffected as new championships start every 6 months so the amount of playing is the same. Second "If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account." Ok this will be rare but you cannot really be saying that a match would be decided perhaps 1 or 2 months after completion when the next rating is done? Third "The special rule, at least, force one player to avoid it." yes but it didn't did it? You took the 4 draws in 15 moves because you had too many games and your opponent was a strong player! My point is not about the unfairness of the rule Thibault its the effect of it - in this case 4 identical 15 move draws is not a good advert for the site, the World Championship FICGS or the players.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2007-09-26 15:25:11)
4,5 - 2,5

Thibault, this result of a small nuumber of games has no statistical significance. But Zappa seems to be a very strong engine!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-26 18:45:47)
Chess, love... ego

In a discussion where Susan Polgar (in her new forum, see link below) encourages members to ask questions to strong OTB GM & IM, I suggested to ask them :

"...how the venue of Rybka and other engines crushing them OTB (ie. Hydra-Adams) in classical games affected their love of the game ! .. More than learning us & them humility, obviously noone can feel the same than Bobby Fischer in front of the chessboard anymore (and probably before him also). How can a human player love the game like he did, nowadays ? .. What is the place of the ego in this strange relationship ? Finally... do they play other games more and more as time passes ?"

An interesting point, undoubtly to be discussed, is the place of ego in the love of the game IMO. Go players may have an interesting point in this discussion ;)


http://www.chessdiscussion.com

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=196


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-28 02:56:48)
E-Points

A summary about E-Points has been added to the terms and conditions :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#epoints

"E-Points : To summarize previous Entry fees and Prize money sections, you can buy E-Points (1 E-Point is worth 1 Euro, see My account after you connect to the server) then play money tournaments with entry fees and prizes (bronze, silver, gold) with low rakes in E-Points, finally ask for money prizes instead of E-Points for the tournaments you choose : According to the prize won, you'll be paid 0,75 Euro per E-Point remaining in your account. Consequently the more tournaments you play before to ask for a money prize, the lower is the cost per game (prizes in E-Points reach up to 99 % of the entry fees, 100 % for the chess freestyle cup)."


Feel free to tell me if it is not clear enough... I've also updated the Help section about how to enter the freestyle cup & E-Points.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-28 03:01:14)
Invitation to FIDE, FICGS, ICCF GM & IM

Just added to the FICGS chess freestyle cup rules :

"FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the waiting list for free until one week before the start of the tournament ! .. Please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register. You may be asked to send a copy of your passport or ID card."


Strong titled players may be interested in winning the title & prize, other players may be interested in playing them...


Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman    (2007-09-28 08:09:33)
Question about e-points

A quote from the rules: "When you buy tickets, a virtual account in E-Points is created (or modified) with a limited lifetime of 2 years, meaning the account will be emptied at the end of this period. Member's account lifetime will be reconducted each time tickets are bought by the member. The number of E-Points added to the account is the amount in Euros paid to FICGS. Tickets are not paid back." This means i lost the E-Points after 2 years? So what i do with E-Points if: "Tickets for tournaments (E-Points) can't be sold to other members, exchanged with cash money or paid back" In the summary that you wrote you said: "... then play money tournaments with entry fees and prizes (bronze, silver, gold) with low rakes in E-Points, finally ask for money prizes instead of E-Points for the tournaments you choose" This is not clear. For example, I join a gold tournament i must choose before hand if i want E-Points or a money prize. Also why i want to play more tournaments before redeeming a money prize if i could do nothing with my remaing E-Points (see above) Any help in my queries will be appreciated.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-29 13:37:42)
2-player match?

Hello,

It is possible, but limited... With the 2 free E-Points, you may play 20 bullet (10 min+ 20 s.) or lightning (30 min+ 30 s.) bronze games.

There are no 2-player match without entry fee & prize at standard & rapid time controls.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-02 19:33:41)
CC / OTB ratings

Since strong engines appeared, there's no more a clear relation between OTB and CC ratings IMO. A few months ago, GM Nigel Davies explained that he gave up correspondence chess because it simply asks too much energy and time.


Hannes Rada    (2007-10-02 21:16:11)
GMs + engine vs amateur + engine

However it would be interesting to know if Kasparov or any other strong OTB GM + strong engine would play significant better chess than an amateur + strong engine at cc time control.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-09 14:49:05)
Cracking Go less than a decade away ?

I just read this astonishing article in the last American Go E-Journal :

“I believe that a world-champion-level Go machine can be built within 10 years, based on the same method of intensive analysis—brute force, basically—that Deep Blue employed for chess,” wrote Feng - Hsiung Hsu (r) in “Cracking Go,” a provocative article in the October issue of IEEE Spectrum, published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). (...) "with some optimization a machine that can search a trillion positions per second would be enough to play Go at the very highest level."


Looks serious... Any opinion ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-11 12:43:33)
pinot noir, knowledge & 9x9

I agree with that :)

Don, I mean 9x9 should be compared to checkers, it is "chess" at a size where brute force is enough, so a 'particular case' only. But just like Rybka/Hiarcs playing at master level even thinking a few seconds per move by imitating (knowledge + algorithm) an international master's way of thinking more than calculating trillions of positions, why not a Go engine built the same way, much more complex though. Actually Go engines do not calculate much, they try to 'see' already but sure these programs will be improved significantly soon and it could play about the same level (without joseki databases) on different goban sizes. I feel a Go engine could reach a 1 dan / 2 dan level on our small computers, whatever the size of the goban... But it should be incredibly harder to beat stronger players, which is great for Go :)


Don Groves    (2007-10-11 23:33:36)
knowledge and 9x9, etc...

My 0.02€: Chess has rules which make it easier to program than Go. Just one example, when the King is in check, the search tree of possible moves is pruned enormously. Go has no analog to this. Until the endgame, even when several pieces are in atari there still may be a better move than saving them. As for "playing like a master...," Chess is far more local than is Go. In Go, the whole board must be nearly always in focus, not so in Chess where losing a local battle can spell almost certain defeat. Another factor in making Go so difficult to analyze is the evaluation function which the program uses to decide on the best move. This is far easier to do for Chess than for Go. Maybe I'll start working on a Go program, just to prove myself wrong ;-)


Garvin Gray    (2007-10-15 17:49:02)
slippery slope


Sorry to say, but I am against this re-instatement. Main reason is the slippery slope effect.

Also what happens if in another game a player claims that they moved the wrong knight and the opponent says too bad or your responsible for moving correctly?

The recriminations and ill feeling could result.

Sorry but Peter is responsible for the moves he makes and his actions towards those moves.

It should be a double win to igame.



Adkham Yunusov    (2007-10-15 21:57:52)
Sergey Pligin

I support your decision. It is the a friendly match and I see nothing wrong here.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-21 01:07:45)
Go freestyle tournament

What do you think about a Go freestyle tournament, just like FICGS chess freestyle cup ?

A problem is to define the best time control and number of rounds... With about 100 to 120 moves per game & per player, time control 30+10 means 2 hours per round. As there's no draw at Go, 5 or 6 rounds played in a single day could be ok to find a winner. Any opinion ?

Another question is : Are there players interested to play it ? .. Entry fee would be 10 E-Points / 10 Euros, prize 100% entry fees in E-Points (or 75% for a money prize). It may attract some strong players for interesting games :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-21 13:52:04)
Is a one day limit mandatory?

No it isn't, but unlike "real" tournaments, I assume that players prefer to spend 1 day hard in front of their computer than a whole week end or more for a tourney... But I may be wrong ;)


James Stripes    (2007-10-26 17:29:58)
RE Stolen elections

I can report that since 1972, in August of the election year I have offered my prediction for every Presidential race in the US. I have been wrong only in 2000, and that one went to the US Supreme Court over the counting of Florida's votes.


Wayne Lowrance    (2007-10-31 19:35:51)
yea

But they avoid tournament confrontation. suggests they are not ready for other strong engines yet. My opinion at this point....Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-02 20:55:37)
Videogames & the future of Board Games

Quite funny to see the same discussion on GoDiscussions.com and ChessDiscussion.com forums :

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=457
http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4644

<<

Apparently, two years ago there was a major exhibition sponsored by the Asia Society in American museums called "Asian Games: The Art of Contest." I have been fortunate enough to get a copy of the exhibition book. I found a quote there that I would like you to comment on:

“We hope that this exhibition, in addition to persuading visitors of the historical importance of games, will also stimulate an interest in playing board games. As computer gamers sit in solitary oblivion frantically pressing buttons to manipulate images on screens, it is worth considering how such games could have succeeded, to a large extent, in eclipsing real board games. The answer may be that they have appropriated much of the best of traditional board games. But it is also worth pointing out that the appeal of most electronic games is ephemeral. Ask a teenager if he still plays the same game he played two years ago, and the answer will inevitably be no. We can predict with confidence that twenty years from now, of the electronic games currently in fashion, it is only those versions of classic board games—chess, weiqi/go and perhaps backgammon—that will still enjoy widespread popularity. Does the future of chess, weiqi and backgammon, then, lie solely in electronic media? We hope not. However convenient it may be to play chess or weiqi on the internet, nothing can replace the face-to-face social interaction of real games playing—and indeed the attraction of such games as spectacle. It is no coincidence that there is a trend now among jaded electronic games players to return to board games. This renewed interest undoubtedly reflects the need to compete with a real (as opposed to real-time) person. But there may be another reason for this development. The physical satisfaction of holding a well-crafted gaming piece or die, or of hearing the sonorous click of the pieces as they are placed on the board, does not exist in an electronic universe. No culture better understood the aesthetics of games than the Japanese, whose go, sugoroku, and shogi boards were not only objects of exquisite beauty, but were also designed to enhance the sound of piece struck against board. If, in addition to stimulating more research on Asian games, this exhibition prompts some of its visitors to take up chess, xiangqi, or weiqi—or even better, to work out the rules of liubo—then we will be entirely satisfied.”

Colin Mackenzie and Irving Finkel, “Preface”, Asian Games: The Art of Contest (Asia Society), p. 17

>>


Interesting !


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-09 01:05:28)
Chess sponsorship

An interesting discussion about chess sponsorship started on ChessDiscussions.com (Susan Polgar forums)

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=504

Several issues : "How to bring chess to the masses ?", "How to make chess a show ?", "What kind of sponsorship is possible ?"

Susan obviously thinks that OTB chess still has a great potential and that organizations could do much better to promote it... Here's my last response in the thread (reminds some old threads here) :

<<<

In other words, you say that chess has a show-potential like any other sport that could be used and that isn't...

For sure traditional marketing methods could help to promote OTB chess, and chess organizations could do much better... but is chess "bankable", just like an actor ? .. I just saw one more comparison between chess & poker in the thread "How to bring chess to the masses", but there's a major problem in chess that doesn't exist in poker or soccer : "everything can't happen", at least at a first sight, actually the way people can see it...

FIDE tried to change some things, ie. time controls, wch cycle but that's not enough, obviously. Anyone can win a lost hand at texas hold'em against any professional player, like any 2nd division soccer team can beat the Real Madrid once... Of course long-time statistics will be always favourable to the best players, but it takes a much longer time... Everything can happen in any event in these games (poker wch, soccer world cup). The probability for a real surprise that makes buzz is much lower at chess, the same best players invariably play the best tournaments, won statistically (ie.) 20% by Anand, 19% by Topalov, 18% by Kramnik and so on... quite boring.

The only interesting chess events follow the same scheme : David vs. Goliath, the buzz-genius 12 boy vs. Kramnik, mystery-Deep Blue vs. Kasparov, Anna Kournikova vs. Fischer & so on... nowadays the man vs. machine match is no more interesting since any home computer is stronger than HAL 9000 or Kramnik and there's no clear world champion (too many FIDE wch, different cycles..)

Chess needs real events and I'm curious to see the ones "that could bring chess to the masses" in the future... Maybe I'm a bit pessimistic, at least for OTB chess, but I'm very interested to see how good marketing methods will be able to transform our chess world... Just wait, hope & see :)

Best regards, Thibault

>>>


I'm now working again on SEO (Search Engines Optimization) for FICGS, more and more players find us via Google... Of course one next step is to sponsor the FICGS WCH & freestyle tournaments but it is a hard task for sure... All comment and suggestions on this issue are welcome :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-11 17:53:24)
2nd FICGS chess freestyle

The 2nd FICGS chess freestyle cup waiting list is open. This 6 rounds swiss tournament will start on november 24, 15:00 server time. Time control is 1 hour + 15 seconds / move. Entry fee is 10 E-Points (10 Euro). Prize is 100% of the entry fees in E-Points.

FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the waiting list for free, please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register (you may be asked to send a copy of your passport or ID card).

Definitely we need strong players to rivalize with SIM Eros Riccio :)


Dan Rotaru    (2007-11-12 01:14:40)
Number of games limitation

I think that limiting the number of games is a good idea, and I have a feeling reading the posts that the issue is not if to do it but the number of games. 40 seems to be a reasonable number. FICGS is still free for corr chess and people are tempted to play too many games at once which not only dilute the quality of the games but leads to too many forfeits. I was horrified some time ago when one of my opponent confessed that he had about 230 games in progress on various sites including FICGS. I believe that even for very strong players too many games will reduce the quality of some games and I am not talking about chess knowledge but about the possibility to do a mistake as the good move in the wrong game.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-19 01:52:29)
how to start a Go game

Hello Xuan.

This server is mainly a correspondence chess & Go server, then a real time chess & Go server.

You may enter a tournament in "Waiting lists", Go tournaments are below chess tournaments. "Advanced tournaments" are real time tournaments, but most are tournaments with entry fee & prizes, you can play 20 "bronze" games free with your 2 E-Points.

Feel free to enter a Dan, Kyu III, Kyu II, Kyu I tournament, according to your provisional rating.


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-11-23 21:00:02)
Any strong player for Rapid class M 00 ?


... Three players are awaited for completing rapid class M tournament 009.

There are already four players enrolled (2147-2215 Elo)

I (2373) would be pleased to join if two 2300+ do come with me for completing the table.

Anyone interested ?

... We need more strong tournaments.

Marc



Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-24 16:33:54)
SC. von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion !

Svante Carl von Erichsen 4d is the first FICGS Go world champion, congratulations :)

According to the rules : "In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage."

As Svante Carl now leads the tournament by 7/7, even if he loses his last game and another player also finishes with 7/8, the TER decides. And as there's no previous winner to defend his title...

After the second championship (the level should increase), we may have the first 5 games match between two very strong players :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-11-26 22:40:10)
Hi, Graham!

We can play bronze lightning.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-26 23:36:46)
Wilkes-Barre Furor

The next thematic tournament is a very interesting line of the Sicilian poisoned pawn variation : 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 10.e5

See in Waiting list >> Special chess tournaments

If you want to play a "one-game" match with Ilmars, you may try in Advanced chess tournaments >> Bronze lightning .. and play Traxler, if you don't care about your blitz chess rating :) .. or Thematic lightning but with entry fee & prize (10 E-Points) & White must win rule.


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!"


Mladen Jankovic    (2007-12-06 13:07:17)
re: Where is the PM-Tool?

Try the bottom of the front page, above the list of online people.


Garvin Gray    (2007-12-25 05:47:53)
Chess 960 possible problem


Nice Xmas present for you Thibault- a possible server problem :P

Not sure if I am doing something wrong or it is the server.

When I download a Chess 960 game and attempt to start engine analysis through fritz interface, I have only just realised that the downloaded game does not recognise 'Chess 960' or even the traditional version castling.

Only when I set the position up and select the four castling options will the game start analysing castling options.



Mladen Jankovic    (2008-01-06 15:46:08)
re:

There seems to be an high amount of bullet bronze games started and lost in the firs turn.


Michael Aigner    (2008-01-07 14:03:08)
Possible to stop the clock?

I do not know if Viktor did not know his clock will keep running during his vacation - but if so and this would be the reason he is ging to loose his games,i would prefer to stop his clock and keep him playing the tournament. Nobody has anything to win when he is loosing on time because he did not know this (slightly unlogical) rule - but to loose a chance to play a very strong player and an interesting tournament. Would this be possible - OK with all other players of the tournament - OK with Thibbault - OK with Viktor ????


Mladen Jankovic    (2008-01-11 09:18:06)
re:

Lack of sincronisation with the width of the screen is an anoying feature for me. You might want to fix that sometime.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-01-14 16:19:56)
challenges

Hi Andrew, yes players are ordered by login time (then roll so looks like random) while they most probably should be ordered by rating. Maybe soon... If a player challenges you, a line with an "accept" option appears below the box. If you challenge a player, a line that you can remove by clicking the double arrows appears below the box and your opponent is warned. But I have to make new improvements to increase the interest of these bullet/blitz bronze games - maybe it should be free after all :) .. Now, the empty games (without any moves) will be deleted by new ones...


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-01-15 05:13:17)
"No games to display"

Did anyone notice a strange bug, ie. "Sorry, there's no game to display" (when actually that's wrong) in My games, while other pages, ie. the forum, work correctly.. this bug looks like to happen after a long time without loading a new page.. (so only the message box automatically refreshes regularly)

I'm not sure where's the problem yet... Thanks for feedback.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-01-15 20:47:51)
Re

But I have to make new improvements to increase the interest of these
> bullet/blitz bronze games <
- maybe it should be free after all


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-01-16 04:03:45)
bronze / silver / gold

Hi Garvin.. Of course bronze / silver / gold games will remain. Prizes may change for bronze games, nothing more. But I'll probably find other ways anyway :)


Robert Mueller    (2008-01-17 18:43:01)
FWIW

I am sorry for Peter that he was not qualified for the third round. Yes, he did win our game, but due to a blunder on my side when I lost a piece on move 4 because I read his move wrong. I am sorry for Peter, but the rules are quite clear about the TER qualifier.


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 ;)


Ivan Pljusnin    (2008-01-27 16:43:11)
Team complectation

FICGS team could be much stronger, I think. Some of your players have lost their games by time. Imagine, you replace them with winners of FICGS World Championship and other strong tournaments of FICGS. FICGS result would be much better...

In fact I do not believe neither in official correspondence chess titles nor in ratings. They do not show real strength very often. On IGAME the best part of our team is anonymous players, I think. Their achievements in this match are just fantastic. 9 members of IGAME team who play under imaginary names have now 14.5 of 17! Owl (here he is "Dojnikov") is going to win his last game. Probably he is our best fighter.

P.S. If I was allowed to play as Mobutu, I'd play stronger!:-)


Nicola Lupinacci    (2008-01-30 21:40:50)
Something strange inside...

I have played 2 CHESS BULLET BRONZE at 21.00 today (unfortunatly I win both without moving).

The first game appear as "Game 12143", and the second as "Game 18538".

Something strange inside... :D


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-02-07 02:59:03)
Tie break rules

Yes knock out winner likely to have higher rating. However the round robin winner might have increased rating in getting to the candidate final. For example in 000002 Harry Ingersol could draw all his games in the knockout final and drop from his rating of TER 2555 and go through to candidate final (his future rating at the moment predicted at 2493)The other contestant Wolfgang has a predicted rating at 2489. Whereas Daniel Brunsteins could put in a strong showing winning the round robin final and improve his TER of 2476 (future rating estimated at 2487)Its quite possible that he could go into a candidates match with the higher TER and lose where all the games are drawn under the present rule. Why not just keep to the higher TER winner for an even result with draws and the lower TER tie break winning in a tie where the ganes were not all drawn


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-02-14 13:40:04)
ratings

Hi thibault some time ago I think you suggested that you were going to start people at a higher rating? Maybe 1800? At present you have some players starting at very low ratings who are obviously going to be strong cc players. One outstanding example is Zack Stephen at 1300. He won the PAL/CSS frestyle advanced chess tournament in 2005 and as ZackS has remained at the top getting high places each year Just a thought .....


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-02-15 01:03:12)
ratings

Well, it should be really exceptional, actually I don't understand why so strong players did not ask for this provisional rating change before starting to play (volunteer ? ;)) .. Anyway, as no rated result has been recorded in this case, a standard 1800 provisional rating seems ok.


Philip Roe    (2008-02-15 18:48:06)
Current WC

Sorry, Iouri, but you are wrong.

But even if you were correct, your comment would be wrong (IMO of course)


Wayne Lowrance    (2008-02-15 18:57:08)
ratings

Thibault you say you don't understand why a strong player would not ask for a provisional rating change when coming aboard.... Easy to answer Thibault, most people feel like rules are rules, and won't challenge them. At least that is why I didnt ask for a rating upgrade when I first came aboard. As I said earlier that when I came aboard my rating was 2300+ on another CC site I played on for humpteen years. Anyway I was confident in my CC chess ability and figured it would not take long to get to a decent rating, I wanted to more or less prove my self here. I guess that is basic to what you have answered. Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-02-15 21:31:39)
ratings

Hi Wayne. About provisional ratings, you started with the default rating at that time (1400, max. provisional rating was 1700 though), as every player do in any organization, now why a strong player delete the default rating (1800) when registering ? .. I understand this as "no rating, beginner", this is most probably what happened with Zack's rating.


Vjacheslav Perevozchikov    (2008-03-27 11:14:31)
Ratings

I have played more than 40 games. 30 wins & only 1 loss (misclick :)), and don't understand one simple thing: why my rating is so small - 1867 points. I saw other members with much worse performance & much more rating? What's wrong here? Thanx


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-03-29 21:36:49)
time

Hi Thibault whats the cut off point for the warning? Does it just show up if the vacation exceeds the time left or within 1 day? Can the vacation time leave you with 1 minute or 1 hour for your move? I am wrong about the My games time - it does show the time to move time - sorry!


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-03-30 07:25:30)
Freestyle cup : Rules & start

There was a small conflict in the rules, now corrected : The first game will start at 13:00 server time, not 15:00

Current rules :

FICGS advanced chess "freestyle" cup is a 6 rounds swiss tournament with entry fee and prize, played in a single day. Entry fees are E-Points that you can buy in 'My account'. Read carefully terms and conditions, particularly Entry fees & Prize money sections before to play tournaments with entry fees.

All games are played in 30 minutes + 15 seconds / move. Norms are not possible.

The first round will start at the date and hour (13:00 server time) indicated as "deadline". Next rounds will start at 15:00, 17:00, 19:00, 21:00 and 23:00 server time. Please register carefully as it is not possible to retire from the waiting list. It is strongly recommended to display the chat bar to communicate with the tournament director.

If several players obtain the best score and the best Sonnenborn-Berger, they will share the prize. It is possible to forfeit all next games (that will be unrated for the advanced chess rating list) during the tournament.

FIDE GM & IM, FICGS / ICCF GM, SM & IM are invited to enter the waiting list for free.. Please just send a message to webmaster through My account page to register. You may be asked to send a copy of your passport or ID card. The tournament might be cancelled if less than 7 players registered before the deadline, in this case entry fees will be given back to the players.

An extra fee, usually 30% of the entry fee, will be added to the entry fee 2 days before the start of the tournament.


Don Burden    (2008-04-02 12:05:34)
April Fools!

That was the wrong link. Here's the right one. Thought I checked that when I posted.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4543


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-04-06 18:06:20)
time control

Once more, you are probably right about time controls.. just tried, but anyway, no formula will fit to everyone :( .. IMO the main points are the site has to improve yet and we need more players, then things should follow. Of course, feel free to make suggestions...

Two points :

- I just wonder if an 'open' waiting list is ok for such a tournament : Maybe players shouldn't be able to see the players who already entered the waiting list (cause of course everyone may wait to see who registered before to register...)

- Following some improvements, bronze games may become free soon. More players could familiarize with short time controls.

What do you think ?


Garvin Gray    (2008-04-07 12:47:43)
freestyle


- I just wonder if an 'open' waiting list is ok for such a tournament : Maybe players shouldn't be able to see the players who already entered the waiting list (cause of course everyone may wait to see who registered before to register...)

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I would not recommend denying access to the waiting list. The reason is two fold:

1) Players will be regularly asking, who is playing and how many entrants so far? If these questions are not answered, then it either looks like there is something to hide or that the tournament is not going well.

2) It will just increase your work load of answering more questions.

- Following some improvements, bronze games may become free soon. More players could familiarize with short time controls.

It might be an idea to try the next freestyle tournament as a free entry tournament with the one game per day/long time control idea.

As for the bronze games being free, a trial period has already been offered and success has been limited. This gave everyone a chance to familiarise themselves with how the timed games operated. I do not think many players took this up.

As for paying for competitions, the payment options must become a lot more simple and obvious.
A simple paypal option would probably be best.
From my otb organisational experience, even offering a bank deposit option is beyond some players. And this is in competitions where the players know the organiser in person.



Thibault de Vassal    (2008-04-23 22:11:45)
Free bullet & lightning bronze games

Hi Benjamin, I don't think so 'cause chess bullet & lightning bronze waiting lists may be closed soon. A better way is to use the challenges option in "My games" as there are much less chances to start a game while the opponent is offline (and no more messages in the chat).


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


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-03 06:22:50)
Arena

I have loaded Rybka into Arena and it seems to be performing at a superchetged rate - unfortunately I cannot make sense of its analysis out put. I am used to a Fritz environment where you can select how many different moves it displays and it ranks them and assisgnsa value + 1.1 etc. it does the same for other uci engines. In arena hoe do I get this kind of output??


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-03 09:28:38)
From??

Completely lost for black imo its madness to throw away a pawn like this at cc - I suppose there might be some way to grovel for a draw after 4..Nf6 black will probably get his pawn back unless white plays e3 and d4 when he has the hole on e4 has a kind of compensation. After 4..g5 can put up more of a fight with 5...Nc6 at least white doesnt get quite such a massive a massive centre All black has are some tactical tricks and a temporary lead in development once white avoids these and gets his pieces out of the box its dire for black. The last GM to play this as black (Kotronias) got a completely lost position although he won the game! On the other hand 1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white .... if everyone would reply with the From I would play nothing else but f4!!!


Jason Repa    (2008-05-04 07:45:33)
From??

I agree with most of what you said, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to conclude that all variations of the From's Gambit are busted. We might end up finding out that some variations of it are fine for Black.

I also disagree with your statement that "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white". Assuming I'm willing to hypothetically go along with the argument that there's supposedly something "wrong" with 1.f4, even though it's at worst a Dutch Defense a move up......you're not taking into consideration the fact that some people actually do more than "play" correspondence chess and want to practice lines they play in live tournaments. 1.f4 has been played by many of the world's greatest players, and in serious competitive tournaments. Fischer, Kasparov, Lasker, and many others have played 1.f4 occasionally, and there are many current IM's and even a GM (Henrik Danielsen) who have played it quite frequently.

Perhaps your idea of "playing chess" is to simply plug a position into various chess engines and mindlessly relay the moves your program suggests, but as for myself, I use the data I acquire from my cc games to prepare for my real chess (chess between human mind vs human mind). Anything other than that is just analysis or group study at best.


Benjamin Block    (2008-05-04 15:41:43)
How fast is my computer.

My computer is a AMD Sempron(tm)1.80 GHz.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-05-05 11:09:26)
AMD Sempron

Mine is even slower :/


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.


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.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-06 18:04:40)
From RIP

"would like to know how you refute the line which begin with 10..Bf5 instead of your opponent's move 10..Qe7. It usually continues with 10..Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 and now what?" The answer is 13 Be3 and after Be6 14 Bf2 f5 15 Nd2 GM Kotronius tried 15..Qf7 16 0-0-0 Bxa2 when 17 e5 looks winning. Instead 16..fxe4! 17 Bxe4 Bxa2 and maybe black can hold with Na5 to come. Obviously 14 e5 is critical after 14 ..Bxe5 15 Bxc6 Rxh2 16 Rxh2 Bxg3+ 17 Rf2 black gets 2 pawns for a piece and an exposed king but white still has some winning chances. That leaves 13 ..Bd7 but the bishop is more passive and will probably end up going to e6 after f5 etc White has 14 Bf2 or 14 Kd1! intending Kc2 and Nd2 both look good. The problem for black is that his long term comp is the h file pressure which doesnt balance whites extra centre pawn. IMO


Pablo Schmid    (2008-05-06 20:13:21)
To Andrew

I would play 13..Bd7 to leave the e-file open. If 14.Bf2 then I play 14..f5 and I see nothing wrong for Black for the moment. 14.Kd1, I didn't look at that move, it seems interesting but really, Iam not that afraid. RIP? Easy to say...


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.


Pablo Schmid    (2008-05-07 00:34:11)
...

"Actually you're wrong once again Pablo. I know that you're only a 1912 rated player on this site" Yeah, on this site... I began here as a 1700 (the first rating here) and I lost many games on time or because I was very busy and in a hurry to play a move without checking seriously to not lose on time. And corr rating does not mean everything. I play OTB too. Do you? I would be happy to play with you, even if you seems a bit arrogant when I see the way you speak in general. And still, when I read that: "FYI, 5...Nc6 doesn't "put up more of a fight". It loses immediately to 6.Bxg5. I rarely have anyone play that badly against me in an online bullet game, let alone a cc game. and in the line with 4...Nf6 (called the Mestel Variation), there is no clear way for Black to win his pawn back. " There is not discussion about material, you seems to judge the position on the fact that Black could not regain the pawn, so they are worse...


Jason Repa    (2008-05-06 23:41:40)
Pablo

"I realize that Pablo, probably a lot better than you do. 'What? How do you know? You know nothing about me and you say that...'" Actually you're wrong once again Pablo. I know that you're only a 1912 rated player on this site. And I also know that you have difficulty understanding the difference between a discussion of dynamic compensation for material, and one of simply whether or not material can be recovered. Only in your mind is there the implication that "chess is all about material". Material is one parameter, and that is the parameter that was being discussed. You need to learn to understand that. Nobody was saying that was the only parameter to consider, or that it was the most important parameter to consider.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-07 01:09:36)
Step up, or shut up!

"I know that you're only a 1912 rated player on this site" Yeah, on this site... I began here as a 1700 (the first rating here)"

Join the club. I started as a 1700 player also. You've lost over 25% of your games. And to weak opponents at that. So I'm quite justified in assuming that I'm a better chess player than you, and by a very wide margin also. The fact that you couldn't figure out on your own why 10...Bf5 is no improvement over 10...Qe7 is just icing on the cake.

But anyway, I've had enough of you whining about your low rating and making excuses for your poor performance in chess. Excuses are for losers.

And there was nothing "arrogant" in any of my statements. The problem here is your stupidity and incapability at understanding what has been said to you. I've already explained to you TWICE that you were wrong in assuming that there was an implication that "material is everything" when I was discussing the recovery of material. That was not said nor implied. What part of this isn't sinking into your skull? How many more times does it need to be repeated for you to be able to understand???

I don't normally give free chess lessons to insolent patzers like you, but I'd be willing to have you a few bullet games on a secure server like playchess.com where in bullet time controls you won't be able to use your chess program to do the thinking for you like you do here. I've already had this type of thing go down with another motormouth on this site. I beat him 100% of the games and posted a link to them. At least he was man enough to step up to the plate and play me. You made the challenge so don't back down with any excuses, like the excuses you used to explain your paltry 1912 rating. And obviously if we're going to play real-time chess with the assumption is that its going to be human mind vs human mind chess, it's going to have to be fast bullet games. Not standard blitz where you have time to see what rybka running on your other computer suggests. Let me know what your playchess.com account name is and when you're able to play.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-07 05:15:58)
f4 or not f4

1.0 Pablo here is a link you should read: http://www.avlerchess.com/chess-analysis/A_BRAND_NEW_Chessbase_9_for_sale_on_eBay_92649.html 2.0 Mr Repa here is a comment about the Dutch defense: "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 3.0 Mr Repa's chess federation of canada rating is listed as 2010 with an active rating of 1737. If he reaches am expected rating here of, by his account, 2370+ then everyone will be impressed particularly as Mr Repa says "I think I'm a bit out gunned here.I'm running BATTLE CHESS on a Commodore 64. I believe its running at 1.023 MHz." 4.0 It might be battle chess that accounted for the following cc (!) game as black he played against Torsten Opas 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 Nf6 4.exd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Be7 7.Ne5 Bd7 8.O-O O-O 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bh4 a6 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Re1 Re8 13.Qf3 Qd6 14.Re3 Qb4 15.Rae1 Bd8 16.Qf5 Qxd4 (oops)17.Bxf6 Bxf6 and the game is already lost 5.0 Together with his loss with 1f4 that he forgot about here is another example of the correct treatment of f4 by black against Mr Repa 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 O-O 6.Be2 b6 7.O-O Bb7 8.d3 c5 9.Ne5 Nfd7 10.d4 e6 11.Nd2 Nc6 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 completely dead for white no prospects and duly drawn. Like I said 1 f4 is a waste at cc. I doubt we shall see Mr Repa use it again against a good opponent on this site. 6.0 All the games I referred to were white victories OTB with 1. f4 "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 - thats the whole point. At cc Sengupta's play would not be impressive but otb it was effective. Incidentally the game was played in 2004 in India 8.0 1 g4 is like 1 b4? Well that is clearly wrong. There have been no GM - GM encounters with 1 g4 there have been several with 1 b4 including Topalov v Malakhatsov. Over 50 IM's and a dozen GM's have played 1 b4 very few have ever played g4. 1 f4 has been championed by GM Jakubiec who is the only GM who has played it regularly. 9.0 "What is weird is that the conversation began with quite civil exchanges before tiny criticisms quickly escalated to nuclear mode despite my genuine and exhaustive efforts at diffusion and removal of misinterpretation" Can anyone guess who is being written about here on another chess site?


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!


Pablo Schmid    (2008-05-07 08:29:01)
My last message to you

Too much insults. My OTB rating is stronger than yours, but I don't wanna tell you my life. But even the level is not the problem. Every GM that played against me always respected me, so they can be better and sympathic. Before a chessplayer, I am an human and I hope in real life you don't speak like that to the people. No need to insult, I never did to you and I won't even if you did. Now I won't speak with you anymore and if I play with you one day by the server, I will try my best to beat your machines. Thibaut De Vassal, j'espère que tu vas réagir face à un tel comportement, car je pense que tu es d'accord avec moi que c'est intolérable, un tel manque de respect.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-07 12:45:03)
Pablo BACKS DOWN!

Your OTB rating is NOT stronger than mine, liar. If it were you'd step up to the plate and play me, instead of backing down as you're doing. You're probably a 1500-1700 elo OTB player. Considering your rather beginnerish question about the Lasker From, I might be giving you too much credit at that. You know as well as I do that you'd be lucky to get a single draw in ten games against me. I'd probably just win all ten.

Do you always run around challenging people to a chess match on the internet, then retreat like a frightened animal, with your tail between your legs, when they accept your challenge? How pathetic is that? I was looking forward to playing some human mind vs human mind chess with you, but the idea of actually having to THINK and use your own mind to come up with the moves was too much for you to deal with, so you BACKED DOWN like a little girl!


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2008-05-07 13:01:32)
From's Gambit ...

Hi, is there a valid way to decline the From's Gambit without falling onto the Kings Gambit? Even if the Froms Gambit may not be sound, I do not like to be defending, especially against players stronger than myself.


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.

-------------


Don Groves    (2008-05-09 07:02:53)
Go categories

Hi, Thibault -- I think the Go categories need to be looked at. We don't have enough players in the 5 Kyu to 10 Kyu range to fill the Kyu II groups, making it difficult to continue to improve after reaching 10 Kyu. Maybe combining Kyu II and Kyu III would help? One can only continue to improve by playing against stronger players.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-12 10:14:41)
Rating changes

1) There was never a "rule" stating that a player has carte blanche to drop as many rating points as they want and still enter a tournament for which they do not meet the rating criterion.

2) Thibault has already manually removed players from rating lists for this reason. Nobody is being "penalized" except the players who are legitimately qualified to play in that category and who must play with the lower category player. The rating average is being erroneously brought down. The player who's rating was lowered is free to enter the correct waiting list for which his rating qualifies.

3) Your "C" class rating category is hardly comparable to the "M" class category where this has been an issue, so your opinion, even if it did have a shred of merit, which I proved it doesn't, is moot anyway.


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.


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.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-13 15:08:20)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that a <1500 otb player, such as yourself Mr. Stephenson, wouldn't be able to figure out something that any normal 6 year old child would have no difficulty with. But then again, during our chess game in which I crushed you, I had the feeling I wasn't dealing with a mental heavyweight, to put it mildly. I'll hold your hand and explain it to you since there is probably no 6 year old child where you live to help you:

The Elo rating system is a method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in two-player games such as chess, GO, backgammon, etc."Elo" is often written in capital letters (ELO), but it is not an acronym. It is the family name of the system's creator, Arpad Elo (1903–1992, born as Él&#337; Árpád), a Hungarian-born American physics professor. The Elo rating system has been adopted by many different organizations, including the USCF, CFC, FIDE, and others, as well as various online gaming servers.

My national elo rating is indeed over 2000, Stephenson. And yours is under 1500, as you've already confirmed.

I already beat you very easily in chess Stephenson. You're the little guy with something to prove here, not me.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-14 00:35:54)
Re: Hannes query

I'm not "afraid" of playing anyone, and the FICGS rating points are only a means with which to play the stronger players. As I stated earlier, and in other threads, my primary interest in correspondence chess is to do research for my otb chess. Having said that I'm interested in playing the strongest players possible.

It's simple common sense that if a rating category says 2200-2600, then it should have players who are rated 2200-2600. Lower rated players are free to sign up for the category that they qualify for.

Do you play otb chess Hannes? You don't seem to have any otb rating as far as I can tell.


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.


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.


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


Jason Repa    (2008-05-16 00:23:32)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0

Geez Stephenson, I thought you were done stalking and harassing me and had found something else to amuse your little mind with. Something shiny and metallic perhaps? But here you are continuing your trollish ways.

Actually, what this thread is REALLY about, is a pathetic little character who doesn't handle losing at chess very well. As was stated before, it's pretty sad that you don't have any chess games of your own worthy of publication or discussion, so you post one of mine and continue to rant, and rant, and rant about nonsense. I already BEAT YOU in chess. Quite easily, in fact. Could there be anything more ridiculous than a guy who loses at chess criticizing the play of the victor?

Normally when someone obsesses over me like this it's a female doing the obsessing. But hey, each to their own.

And yeah, it's pretty obvious you're someone with a lot of time on your hands. Nice of you to share that with us. But you only speak for yourself in that regard. Even with all your free time I was still able to beat you easily when we played chess.

Just look at this latest drivel you're posting. You go on and on and on about why I shouldn't have lost a chess game I played a year ago like this is some life and death event for you. It's really not a big deal to me. So why is MY game such a big deal to you? If you're trying to make an argument that I'm such a terrible correspondence chess player based on this game, why did I beat you so easily when you and I played? I'm also higher rated than you as well. If you're going to harass me with one of my losing games, at least have enough intelligence and imagination to vary the game once in awhile. You have 5 more to choose from.

Sorry but I've never met anyone clued out enough to put DOWN LOAD and DATA BASE before. This isn’t a minor spelling mistake or typo. This is a surprising lack of education. What’s next, “COMP -UTER”? A chess player should especially be familiar with the word DATABASE. But as I said earlier, some people mindlessly trust machines, and don't have the capacity to think for themselves. People like that like to brag about their meticulous spelling, because even a chromosome-deficient inebriate can figure out how to use spelling software. Most of us couldn't be bothered, because we realize that spelling is not important when making casual internet forum posts.

And no, Stephenson, the "point" about ELO is not dead. It's your ability to learn and understand simple concepts that appears quite dead here. This has nothing to do with me not "agreeing" with you. This has to do with objective fact. An ELO rating could be talking about GO, Backgammon, or other games, that FIDE has absolutely nothing to do with, in addition to national rating organizations. You were wrong. End of story. Continuing to defend your ignorance of the meaning of ELO is just making it all the more obvious what it is you are to everyone reading this. Again, Stephenson, LOOK IT UP.


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    (2008-05-18 21:45:48)
Quotes

I just read these famous ones :)

"Whenever people agree with me, I always feel I must be wrong." , "Experience is the name we all give to our mistakes." (Oscar Wilde)

"An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field." (Niels Bohr)


Marc Lacrosse    (2008-05-19 11:00:52)
Feature suggestion

A little suggestion :
When going on a tournament page it would be nice to have a list of the most recently finished games ordered by inverse chronological order so that it would be easyer to see at aglance what happened recently.
In the present state it's difficult to guess what happened since last visit.

Marc


Arnab Sengupta    (2008-05-21 14:01:58)
Help!

Does anybody has some better moves for black in the game between Kramnik-Aronian, Wijk aan Zee 2008, after Kramnik's 25. Nc3 dxc3 26.Qxc3+? somebody help me plz


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-05-21 17:08:01)
game

Kramnik,V (2799) - Aronian,L (2739) [D43] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bh4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8.Bg3 b5 9.Be2 Bb7 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.Ne5 Bg7 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.Bd6 a6 14.a4 e5 15.Bg4 exd4 16.e5 c5 17.Re1 Nxe5 18.Bxe5 0-0 19.Bxg7 Kxg7 20.Ne2 f5 21.Bh5 f4 22.b4 cxb3 23.Qxb3 Qd5 24.Qh3 Bc8 25.Nc3 dxc3 26.Qxc3+ Qd4 27.Qf3 Ra7 28.axb5 Qf6 29.Qa3 Qb6 30.Qc3+ Kg8 31.Re5 Qf6 32.Qxc5 Rd7 33.h4 gxh4 34.Bg4 Rdd8 35.Bxc8 Rxc8 36.Qd5+ Qf7 37.bxa6 Qxd5 38.Rxd5 Rf7 39.a7 Ra8 40.Rda5 Kh7 41.R1a3 h3 42.gxh3 f3 43.Kh2 Rg7 44.h4 Rg2+ 45.Kh3 Rg7 46.Ra6 Rf7 47.R3a5 Rg7 48.h5 Rf7 49.Kg4 Rg8+ 50.Kh3 Ra8 51.Kg4 Rg8+ 52.Rg6 Ra8 53.Raa6 Raxa7 54.Rxh6+ Kg8 55.Rag6+ Rg7 56.Kxf3 Rxg6 57.Rxg6+ Kf7 58.Rg4 Ra1 59.Kg3 Rh1 60.Rh4 Ra1 61.Rb4 Kg7 62.Rb6 Rg1+ 63.Kf4 Rh1 64.Kg5 Rg1+ 65.Kf5 Rh1 66.h6+ Kh7 67.Ra6 Rf1 68.f4 Rb1 69.Re6 Ra1 70.Rf6 Re1 71.Kg4 Ra1 72.f5 Rg1+ 73.Kf4 Rf1+ 74.Ke5 Re1+ 75.Kd6 Rf1 76.Ke7 Rf2 77.Rf8 Re2+ 78.Kf7 Ra2 79.Rd8 Ra7+ 80.Kf6 Ra1 81.Rd2 Rb1 82.Ra2 Rb3 83.Rh2 Rb1 84.Rh4 Rb8 85.Kg5 Rg8+ 86.Kf4 Ra8 87.Kg5 Rg8+ 88.Kf6 Ra8 89.Re4 Ra1 90.Re8 Ra2 91.Re1 Ra3 92.Rh1 Ra2 93.Kg5 Rg2+ 94.Kf4 Rf2+ 95.Ke4 Re2+ 96.Kf3 Ra2 97.Ke4 Re2+ 98.Kd4 Rd2+ 99.Ke3 Ra2 100.f6 Ra7 101.Rf1 Kg6 102.Ke4 Ra4+ 103.Kd5 Kf7 104.Rh1 Ra5+ 105.Kc4 Ra4+ 106.Kb5 Ra8 107.h7 Rh8 108.Rh6 Rb8+ 109.Kc6 Rc8+ 110.Kd6 1-0


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-05-24 16:36:19)
Tournament winner in WCH

This is true in WCH round-robin tournaments only !

I explained why I've chosen this rule in previous threads, ie. :

>>

As you noticed, rating is quite important in FICGS world championship cycle (particularly established ratings, obtained from IECG / ICCF or after 9 games finished in FICGS) !

I think these rules are really the best choice in order to designate a world champion. It's more logical IMO to favour players who obtained previously the best results at FICGS and recognized organizations, and consequently a high rating. It takes time, of course. Even very strong players starting with a 1700 rating won't achieve a 2300 established rating before months !

Criterias in FICGS wch are (from most important to least) :

1) Winner of the previous cycle (qualify for the final match)
2) The eight best established ratings (play the KO tournament)
3) Points obtained in the wch tournaments
4) The tournament entry rating (TER)

<<


Wayne Lowrance    (2008-05-26 05:14:25)
Rybka vs Rybka

Thibalt your wrong !. If enough games are played to get rid of the noise and is statistical relevent then it will be a draw, period Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-05-27 17:18:27)
Provisional rating

Not so big IMO. Ratings move fast, it doesn't take a long time to move to a higher category at this level (for a strong player / centaur).


Mik Kris    (2008-05-29 06:37:00)
so thing you might not know about go

go is not about making a better move its about keeping the game equal you cant win in go unless youre oponent had a misstake that you fix or a simple misstake you didnt evean have to fix most players take too long to realy understand this hell i know this i stil dont understand it but its true ask any strong player or pro its evean more true in our kyu games where we make a wrong move every few also i took some time lookin at some games on this site it seems that most players here dont use the extra time they have to read or make shape any way in fact many games are lost becouse of misstakes in reading what seems to me becuse the lack of faster games where you have to read perfactly fast


Don Burden    (2008-05-31 13:28:03)
Scientology

I remember hearing Isaac Asimov on a radio talk show once. He told the story about the time L. Ron Hubbard, Robert Heinlein, and himself were sitting around a table talking. There was a bet made at that time between Heinlein and Hubbard that Hubbard couldn't create his own religion.


Paul-Iosif Guralivu    (2008-06-01 15:26:35)
Problem....Problem

There is a problem.... In 1986 L. Ron Hubbard disappear. At that time there were questions concerning this. What really happend with him.


Jason Repa    (2008-06-02 09:13:06)
Go game (weiqi) in films

An excellent movie called "Pi" that was written and directed by Darren Aronofsky features scenes in which a mathematical prodigy visits his former professor to discuss math and play Go.


Jason Repa    (2008-06-04 09:11:18)
Poker

As usual, Groves, you're returning to your trolling ways once again. You're the one who started with the personal attack here, not me. I simply stated that that there is more to poker than mere bluffing and money management, as you contended. You seriously don't know anything at all about the game of poker. That's not an attack, that's a fact. I was studying the value of inflection points and stack to pot ratios when you were struggling to learn the difference between a straight and a flush.

Just as you're a 1600 chess player, so you're showing your mediocrity where poker is concerned by grossly oversimplifying what the game is about. Saying that poker is more a game of psychology than math is hardly saying that all there is to poker is bluffing, as you repeatedly and mindlessly keep stating. For starters, bluffing is just one tool in a strong poker player's toolbox, and it is both a psychological, as well as a scientific/mathematical tool at that. In no limit poker, for example, sometimes a player will spend hours trying to create a certain image just to set up one single play in order to win a large pot. There are all kinds of relevant intangibles that are so far beyond your comprehension it's not funny.

And I really couldn't care less what you agree or disagree with. I know what I'm talking about. You don't. I have a proven track record over the last two decades as a winning player. I'd be surprised if you're not in the hole overall. And FYI, everything I've said is consistent with what guys like Greenstein, Skansky, Harrington, etc have been saying for years.

Do yourself a favour, Groves.....go read a poker book and learn some basics. Then perhaps you'll be able to make a contribution to a discussion about poker.


Jason Repa    (2008-06-08 20:37:40)
Rapid chess entry rating

No, Lowrance, you're the one missing the point here. And you're using engine assistance as much as anyone here, so don't pretend like you're somehow at a disadvantage. I've played you, and you're 100% program. Perhaps that's the problem.

Thibault mentioned once that a weak player running Rybka can get to around 2100 or so. To get beyond that requires some chess knowledge. While he may not be precisely accurate about the number....perhaps it's 2200 instead......nonetheless, the point is accurate. Everyone who's above 2000 on this site is consulting chess engines, but in corr. chess simply running a program alone is not the strongest way to play. You make it sound as though Rybka plays the perfect chess game. If that were the case everyone on this site would be rated about the same. It should be quite obvious to you that to go from 2300 to 2400 is much more difficult than going from 2200-2300. As a higher rated player, you get less points for winning or drawing, and lose more when you lose. As for your chances against 2400 players being the same as against 2100 players, that's pure nonsense. You'd be lucky to get the occasional draw against a 2400 player, (one who's really earned their rating and not just started with an artificially high rating as is the case with more than a few on this site) whilst you will lost most of those games. A higher rated player is higher rated for a reason. They win more games.

The correct spelling of my name should also be obvious to you, as it's on the same page that you're entering text into.


Jason Repa    (2008-06-09 00:22:32)
Rapid chess entry rating

If you're not bright enough to figure out how to look up someone's rating, you better stick to "engine-assisted" chess. I'd probably beat you blindfolded in chess where you have to come up with the moves using your own mind. You're not even intelligent enough to figure out how to spell someone's name, when the spelling of it is right in front of you.

And for someone who doesn't want to engage in insults, you sure are doing a good job of insulting. Nice of you to "claim" I wouldn't accept your "challenge" of playing match games, before you even make the challenge. Obviously it's YOU who's backing down from match games with me, under the pretense of not having any time to play. What sheer nonsense. You seem to have a lot of free time on your hands....enough to blabber away with numerous forum posts where you whine about not being able to make it to 2300.

I'm challenging YOU to some human mind vs human mind chess on the playchess server right now. You can get a free trial account there (if you don't already have an account) in about 2 minutes. For a guy who's incessantly bickering about Rybka hurting your performance, you should love having the opportunity to prove to everyone reading this that you're not the spineless hypocrite coward I'm claiming you are and step up to the plate to play me some fast (so rybka or other engines cannot be consulted) online games.

Nice of you to tell us you have problems, but it was already obvious.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-07-04 22:50:54)
Closing of old topics

Hi Garvin,

Well, some problems may appear if topics can be reopened whenever.. Mainly, it helps to maintain a chronological order of threads (that will appear below the post preview). Posting links to old topics should be ok IMO, and it is not possible to totally avoid topic repetitions anyway. Maybe I can set the delay to 6 months though, what do you think ?


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-07-09 22:18:10)
Derrida

Strongly advise against reading anything by the chap although I did enjoy his defense to being caught with a big bag of dope in prague - it was planted on him when he visited Franz Kafka's grave - hmmm yeah ok.


Normajean Yates    (2008-07-14 04:29:14)
thanks thibault, it was adblock problem

the adblock-filter-updater i was using was too strong :)

As a courtesy, as long as I am a free memner I have allowed all ads that appear that appear on this site :)


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-07-14 21:41:51)
hmmm

I remember you previously posted about this game having, after many hours, found a problem like win. It sesm that this was wrong! I guess that 89 ...Be7 followed by g5 holds the draw and white just got the order of moves mixed up and played g5 first. It happens.... On the other hand 25 ..Bd3 seems unecessarily risky while 25 ...Ra5 looks fine for black. Still you kept up the pressure and often you make your own luck :))


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-07-17 04:40:24)
Quotes added from House M.D.

The quotes file grow :) .. a few nice ones from Gregory House (House M.D.), ie:

- You can think I'm wrong, but that's no reason to quit thinking.

- I take risks, sometimes patients die, but not taking risks causes more patients to die - so I guess my biggest problem is I've been cursed with the ability to do the math.

Applies also to chess & Go :)

BTW this TV series is an enormous - deserved - success in France (too).


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    (2008-07-18 14:24:09)
Chessbase Deep Rybka 3

Chessbase, who distributes the best chess engines (Fritz, Shredder, Junior, Hiarcs, Zappa...) now also distributes the little fish : Rybka 3 and Deep Rybka 3 are available.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4772

Rybka 3 (by Vasik Rajlich) is the reigning computer world champion and should be at least 80 points stronger than the previous version Rybka 2.3.2

Did anyone test it already ? What about the improvements (particularly Monte Carlo Analysis in endgames) ?

Rybka 3 book with 3,387,966 positions (260 MB) is also available.


Normajean Yates    (2008-07-21 19:15:38)
thibault you really need more women here

US sites like fics are so sexist [AND racist --- anti-Arab] that for 3 years i was ranting and raving there ...

So chess.com is an exception i think.

I would have liked the first exception to be NOT from the USa, but .. fait accompli it is ... And woman are vocal at chess.com - i've not been the target of any sexist remark [or seen any anti-arab or otherwise racist remark] there so far though i am perhaps the most vocal woman there .. And lots of women DO play corrspondence chess there ... 'lydiablonde' is both vocal and a strong, heavy player.
Anyony I am here for computer-assisted chess and there for the other sort ... [that site doesnt allow engines]


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-07-23 14:00:26)
MoGo vs. Human

In 1997 Janice Kim (1 dan) beat Handtalk, then the strongest Go program, despite giving the program a 25-stone handicap.

On Thursday, August 7, Kim MyungWan 8p will play MoGo, probably the world's strongest computer Go program. MoGo will be running on a supercomputer boasting over 3,000 processor cores !! The game will be broadcast live on KGS - http://www.gokgs.com/download.xhtml

The human is "8p", meaning 8-dan professional; not quite 3 stones stronger than a 1d pro player, who in turn would give an amateur 1d at least 6 stones. Edward Lasker said that 3 stones handicap at Go is comparable to knight odds at chess.


Mark Hailes    (2008-07-27 02:47:12)
NJ is wrong

This game:

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=20553

Would seems to suggest the reverse of Normajean's hypothesis.


Philip Roe    (2008-07-27 03:39:07)
Notation

There is a history of chess notation at

http://www.excaliburelectronics.com/history0799.html
crediting algebraic notation to Philip Stamma in 1737 and stating that "by the 19th century Stamma's simple system had become the norm in some European countries".

So if Breyer did make the remark attributed to him it would probably have read something like "after Nf3..." bur with N replaced by the symbol for Knight in whatever language he was using.

Descartes of course, invented algebraic geometry, in which a straight line is represented by

ax+by=c

and so on.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-08-01 04:19:01)
Rybka 3 encrypted

It seems that Rybka 3 would be actually even stronger that the commercial version of Rybka 3, Rybka team (V. Rajlich, L. Kaufman) explains that the compiled code was encrypted, as a consequence the engine would lose about 60 ELO points in that process.

A smart move by Vasik Rajlich to prevent his engine to be cracked by using simple decompiling tools. (ICE may help the most motivated though)

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=5184


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.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-09 21:49:23)
Marshall Fest

I guess so Thibault. Kasparov never accepted the Marshall - always anti marshall. Still couple of high level white wins recently and Aronian opted for the Berlin the other day....


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-10 07:45:29)
Mogo

So mogo gets to put down 9 stones to start with but I dont know whether he moved first or second - it sounds like he moved first and there was no Komi. Anyway its a big handicap but the breakthrough appears to be that the win was achieved on a 19x19 board in a "long" game (1 hour) Kim didnt use so much of his time but said more time spent would not have made any difference prononcing Mogo invincible at 9 stones and very difficult with 8 stones. The programmers were excited because they said 1 year ago they needed 18 stones now 9 and maybe a year to lose the other 9! If they can maintain this rate of improvement then they are suggesting that in a few years mogo could be the strongest go player in the world. Interestingly there is a reversal here with chess: programs being stronger against humans the shorter the game (ie blitz) but Mogo did better with more time! I guess this is about the time Mogo needs to assess the long term consequences of each move.


Philip Roe    (2008-08-11 16:25:09)
Pie in the Sky

Getting free annotations from a strong player seems a bit much to expect.

If you belong to the Internet Chess Club, and type help Services, you get a list of people willing to teach lessons or annotate games. They all charge by the hour, depending on their strength and economic situation. An IM from a third world country charges about $20 per hour. I doubt that you can do better.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-12 08:54:10)
Latvian

I dont think black has anything better than 8...fxe maybe 9...d5 is better. But Whites 8 Nc3 seems a very good strong simple move. Its strange that it has not been analysed because the position has been looked at by Nunn and Watson - but that was in the pre Rybka era. Now 3...Nc6 looks too risky at cc. So 3 Nxe5 Qf6 is the best chance. Game 18479 (ongoing) is perhaps the most that black can hope for - for some people not much fun but for latvian fans survival is a triumph!


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-08-14 14:00:53)
Contest : FICGS, acronym for...

FICGS, acronym for Free.. French, Fries what ? .. What is it, what should it be, what could it be....... Any ideas ? :)


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2008-08-14 14:11:36)
FICGS, acronym for.

Feminist Inter Continental Gastro Sympathetic


Sebastian Boehme    (2008-08-14 17:36:41)
I think c,)

Hi, it is interesting that c.) appears as a possibility, because Thibault is a strong Go player himself. Now I wonder was maybe his original idea to only make this a Go server? I thus vote for c.) Regards, Sebastian


Mladen Jankovic    (2008-08-14 20:37:19)
Original name

b - because it's written on the front page.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-15 18:00:45)
Nunn "refutation"

Here is a summary of the analysis after e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 d4!: a.) 4…fxe4 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.Qh5+ Ke7 b.) 4…Nxd5 5.dxe5 d6 (5…Qe7 6.Qd4 and White is a pawn up, threatening Nc3-d5 – Nunn) 6.Bf4! “Black's position flat out sucks!” c.) 4…Nf6 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.e5 with a clear extra pawn. d.) 4…Qh4!? 5.Nf3 Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Black's Queen is exposed eg 6…Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 with advantage 8…0-0? loses to 9.Bc4+. e) 4...Qe7 is not analysed. 5 Nc3! (5 Nxc6 Qxe4+ 6 Be2 Qxc6 7 0-0 d5 8 Nc3 Kf7! and blacks not too bad) 5...fxe4 (5...Nxe5 6 Nb5!)6 Nb5 Kd8 7 Bf4 Nxe5 (7..Nf6 8 Nxc7!) 8 dxe5 and black cant develop eg Nh6 9 e6!d6 10 Qd5! In line a) 4..fxe4 5 Nxc6 Black can try bxc6!?(instead of dxc6)6 Qh5+ Ke7 planning to play Kf7 and d5. This might be the best try and although I white is better the positions are a bit unclear. After 4..fxe4 white also has 5 Bc4 d5 6 Bb5 Qd6 (6..Ne7 7 0-0 is strong) 7 c4 a6 when white will probably get the e pawn but black gets the bishop pair. So I am not now sure its a refutation!


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-08-16 12:29:32)
Questions to Xavier Pichelin

Xavier Pichelin is 1st FICGS chess champion after beating IM Gino Figlio in the first candidates final, he accepted to talk about his match, the tournament, his views around correspondence chess, chess engines and so on... The most important part may be he'll defend his title against the winner of the 2nd candidates final :)

Unfortunately, the complete interview is in french only as he doesn't speak english, but if someone finds a good translator (if possible better than Babelfish), he may post it in this thread. Thanks !


- Bonjour Xavier et tout d'abord félicitations pour ta victoire dans le match qui t'opposait au MI (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Pérou] dans la finale des candidats. Tu devais éviter à tout prix la nulle dans toutes les parties, finalement les noirs t'ont porté chance, comment expliques-tu ce résultat ?

Xavier : Bonjour, merci pour les félicitations. C'est vrai qu'en cas de nulles pour toutes les parties, le règlement indique Figlio Vainqueur en cas d'égalité avec victoire(s) et défaite(s) je remporte le match. Donc il fallait que je prenne des risques en attaquant et c'est avec les noirs que je l'ai fait car je pensais que Gino, dans ces parties, attendrait sans prendre de risques pour assurer les nulles.

- Peux-tu nous décrire la manière dont tu as abordé ce match contre Gino et son déroulement au fur et à mesure des différentes phases du jeu ?

X : C'est assez simple, dans ce match je n'étais pas du tout favori car avec plus de 200 points ELO FICGS en ma défaveur, et Gino titré Maître International avec plus de 2480 point ELO ICCF, je pensais que je n'allais pas résister sur 8 parties simultanées car sur une partie tout est possible mais sur 8 parties... c'était pour moi un grand défi ! Pour le déroulement du jeu j'ai joué la diversité sur mes débuts avec les blancs 4 parties 4 coups différents : 1.e4 1.d4 1.c4 1.Cf3. Gino a fait de même : 1.e4 1.d4 1.Cf3 1.Cc3. Ce qui m'a fait douter aussi car 1.Cc3 m'a surpris, je pensais qu'il avait prévu un début tonitruand et c'est là que je me suis dit qu'il fallait que je prenne des risques avec les noirs. Au fur et à mesure des différentes phases du jeu j'ai assuré les nulles des positions équilibrées pour me concacrer a deux parties avantageuses dont une avec les blancs et une avec les noirs pour au moins faire la différence dans une partie pour assurer la victoire. Et en fin de compte c'est 3 victoires qui me reviennent, ce qui me paraissait impossible étant donnée la qualité du jeu de Gino joué sur ce site pour arriver à la finale des candidats du championnat.

- Tu as réalisé pendant le championnat un parcours sans faute, aucune défaite à signaler, tu affiches également des statistiques stratosphériques à 78% contre une moyenne elo à près de 2200, quel est ton secret ?

X : Mon secret? Je n'ai pas de secret. Si j'avais un secret je ne le dévoilerais pas sinon je ne gagnerais plus ! Je pense que j'ai eu un petit peu de chance car il s'en est fallu de peu que je ne sois pas qualifié au stage 3 (robin-round final) car il y avait 3 joueurs à égalité et j'ai eu l'avantage du classement du départ de ce tournoi comme l'indique le règlement. Quant à mes statistiques, c'est aussi grâce aux erreurs de mes adversaires qui m'ont permis de gagner des parties équilibrées.

- Que penses-tu du système mi-ko, mi-toutes-rondes du championnat FICGS et de ses départages inédits lors des matchs en 8 parties ? Quelles modifications y apporterais-tu ?

X : Très bonne question ! Le système mi-ko pour moi est un peu trop rapide car un coup par jour c'est des heures d'analyses pour exploiter une position compliquée, ce qui est difficile quand on à plusieurs parties en cours. Surtout quand on travaille. C'est peut-être aussi grâce à cette cadence que mes adversaires, faute de temps, ont fait des imprécisions sur certaines postions ou exploité mes erreurs. Mais cette cadence a un avantage par rapport aux cadences ICCF qui est de 5 jours par coup, c'est que les parties durent 5 fois moins longtemps ! Le départage inédit des matchs en 8 parties est excellent, obliger le favori à assurer tous les matchs nulles pour gagner ce duel et sinon d'obtenir une victoire supplémentaire contre le challenger est un mode très bien pensé. La modification que je pourrais y apporter est peut-être la gestion du temps qui est rapide pour un système de jeu par serveur. Peut-être augmenter l'horloge de départ de 15 jours, soit de commencer avec 45 jours contre 30 en ce moment. Et aussi la possibilité des prendre des vacances uniquement sur le tournoi en cours afin de gérer les autres parties du site. Par exemple prendre 7 jours de vacances sur un tournoi d'échecs du championnat et pouvoir jouer un tournoi de Big Chess, de Go ou un autre tournoi d'échecs pendant ces vacances. Pouvoir choisir une date de début de vacances à l'avance serait également appréciable.

- Pourquoi t'être investi dans les échecs par correspondance ? T'apportent-ils d'autres satisfactions par rapport aux échecs classiques et au blitz ?

X : Je préfère les échecs par correspondance par rapport au temps. Car les échecs classiques se jouent souvent le week-end, à une heure précise et souvent en déplacement pour effectuer un tournoi. L'avantage, pour moi, des échecs par correspondance est que je puisse me connecter à n'importe quelle heure pour jouer mes coups, ce qui me permet, par exemple, de faire des repas de famille le week-end et le soir tard de jouer un coup, ce qui n'est pas possible aux échecs classiques.

- Tu as su ne pas céder à la tentation et te limiter à jouer un nombre très raisonnable de parties sur le site tout le long du championnat, penses-tu néanmoins que les échecs par correspondance soient addictifs et à quel point ? Ont-ils des répercussions sur ta vie de tous les jours ?

X : Oui ! Limiter mon nombre de parties en cours est pour moi essentiel pour essayer d'avoir des parties de qualité plutôt que de quantité. Avoir beaucoup de parties en simultanée est quand même une chose très difficile à gérer ! C'est peut-être la clé de ma victoire contre Figlio, j'ai regardé ses parties en cours, il en avait pas loin de 90 sur le site de l'ICCF, cela a pu se ressentir sur son temps d'analyse consacré à nos 8 parties sur FICGS. Sur la vie de tous les jours les répercussions sont familiales car il est vrai que je passe plus de temps à analyser les parties et moins temps avec ma famille, ce qui est assez difficile pour moi. Mais quand les résultats sont là je ne regrette pas !

- Que penses-tu de la place actuelle des moteurs d'analyse (Rybka, Shredder, Fritz et autres) dans les échecs par correspondance ? Quelles sont pour toi les qualités complémentaires essentielles du joueur par correspondance, devenu centaure avec la machine pour jambes ?

X : Les moteurs d'analyses dans les échecs par correspondances sont utilisés par 95% des joueurs... Maintenant il faut s'adapter et savoir utiliser ces machines à calculer. Car jouer simplement le meilleur coup de Rybka 3, de Fritz 12 ou Hiarcs 12 sans réfléchir mentalement mène à la nulle si l'adversaire fait de même ou possiblement à perdre si l'adversaire se donne la peine de réfléchir en les utilisant également. En sachant que lorsqu'on est dans le milieu de partie ces logiciels vous donnent souvent 4 à 5 coups evalués de manière semblable, et c'est là qu'il faut choisir le bon coup alors que celui-ci n'est même pas forcément cité par le moteur d'analyse...

- Tu joues désormais au Big Chess sur le site, curiosité ou intérêt ? Que penses-tu de cette version étrange des échecs ?

X : Par curiosité et par amusement et je pense que Rybka 3 ne joue pas encore au Big Chess ! Cette version est quasiment inédite je ne connaissais pas cette forme de jeu d'échecs auparavant donc celui qui a inventé ce jeu a très bien fait ! A propos c'est moi qui vous pose une question sur le Big chess... Y a t-il possiblité de roquer avec ce jeu si oui comment? (NDLR : Non, il est impossible de roquer au Big Chess)

- Et enfin la question que tout le monde se pose, particulièrement François et Wolfgang qui disputent la deuxième finale des candidats, penses-tu pouvoir défendre ton titre l'an prochain ? :)

X : Bien sûr ! Je défendrai le titre ! J'aimerais si possible savoir la date et la cadence du match. Et je souhaite à François et Wolfgang une belle finale ! Je dois faire honneur à cette compétition qui est bien organisée !

- Le match devrait pouvoir débuter durant la première semaine de janvier 2009, la cadence sera à nouveau de 30 jours et 1 jour supplémentaire par coup. Merci pour tes réponses, et encore bravo pour cette belle performance !

X : Merci ! Et à bientôt ! Bonne continuation à tous et bonnes parties !


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-16 22:10:38)
Burden of games!

" and if I am not wrong I am not far from winning WCH-03-stage2-group02 (possibly ex aequo with you)..." I think I might have some good news for you Marc :)


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-19 02:16:39)
Its a win !!!!

You must be joking!! Thibault its a definite win it will be over in a few moves!! If anyone thinks black can survive please suggest some moves. The key to the win is that the best black can do is reach the position in a) below with Bishop and 2 pawns v R and 1 pawn. White wins becuse his king has access to e4, the Bishop is restricted by his pawns on a7 and e5 and most importantly his passed a pawn is not advanced. It has been completely lost since move 63 ...Kxf4 Janos should have taken with the pawn 63..exf4 would have allowed him to reach a table base draw. On 66 Kd3 I had the win completely worked out and have been replying instantly since then. Adjudicating this is a draw is just plain wrong. Anyone who spends time on this position will see the win I have outlined and that there is no defence. The winning method is to force an exchange of rooks by Rc4-g4 with mating threats against the Black king - black cannot allow this and must play Rd4 allowing exchange of a pair rooks when the resulting R+P v B+P+P is won. Before playing Rc4 white checks with the other rook to cut off the f file. The only way to avoid the rook exchange is to allow the white King access to e4 - at the moment the black rook cuts off d3 and the bishop if it goes to b6 will cut off e3. If the king gets to e4 either the e5 pawn drops or the king gets to d5 and e6 either result is fatal Here are the main lines: a) 72..Bb6 73 Rg8+ Kf5 (73..Kh5 74 Rc1 Rd4 75 Rh1+ wins the rook) 74 Rf8+ Kg5 75 Rc4! Rd4 (see below a1 for 75..Bd4)76 Rxd4! exd4 77 Kd3 (This ending is completely won the white king penetrates through e4, the black bishop is useless - remove pawn at d4 and its a table base win) Here are the main lines 77... Bc5 78 Rc8 Bb6 79 Ke4 Kf6 80 f4 Kf7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Kf7 83 Ke5 a5 84 Rc6 Bd8 85 Bc7+ Kxd4 Table base win Or 77 ...Kg6 78 Ke4 Kg7 79 Rc8 Kf6 80 f4 (if the pawn on d4 falls eg 80 ..Ba5 81 Kxd4 its a table base win) Ke7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Ke7 (82 ..d3 83 Rc6+ Kg5 84 Rg6+ and Kxd3 = TB win) 83 Ke5 Kf7 84 Rb2 d3 85 f6 with a simple win a1)..75..Bd4 (instead of Rd4) 76 Kd3 Ba1+ 77 Ke4 Ra5 78 Rg8+ Kf6 79 Rc6+ Kf7 80 Rgc8 Ra4+ 81 Rc4 Rxc4+ (black cannot avoid exchanging) 82 Rxc4+ and this ending like the one above is completely won. eg 82... Ke6 (82...a5 83 Rc5 a4 84 Ra5 x a4 = TB win) 83 Rc6+ Kd7 84 Kd5 Bd4 85 Rh6 a5 (any Bishop moves loses a pawn = TB win) 86 Rh7+ Kd8 87 f4 x e5 = TB win b) If the Bishop does not go to b6 the white king gets via e3 to e4 and then penetrates through the white squares d5 and e6 and its over. Sample lines: b1) 72 ..Kf4/f5 73 Rf8+ Kg6 74 Ke3 Rd1 75 Ke4 Re1+ 76 Kd5 Be7 77 Re8 Bf6 78 Ke6 e4 79 Rc5+ and the bishop is lost b2) 72..Ba5 73 Ke3 Rb5 74 Rg8+ Kf5 75 Rf8+ Kg5 76 Ke4 Rb4+ 77 Kxe5 with a simple win b3)72 ..Rd7 73 Rxe5+ (take a pair of rooks off = TB win) Kf4 74 Rcc5 Rg7 75 Re4+ Kg3 76 Rc1 Bb6 77 Rh1 a5 78 Rhh4 - Reg4+ exchanges rooks = TB win


Normajean Yates    (2008-08-21 05:16:52)
O-O is output standard for pgn, but..

o-o is allowed as input. [again it depends on which version of the pgn standard we are talking about.] Also re Arena: it is just like: most C++ compilers for PCs do not implement the full C++ [or implement it wrong - Arena is a program; compilers are programs; programs have bugs aka features ;)] .


Marc Lacrosse    (2008-08-21 10:41:22)
Thibault I fear you are wrong ...

From PGN standard 1994.03.12 (8.2.3.3: Basic SAN move construction):

"SAN kingside castling is indicated by the sequence "O-O"; queenside castling is indicated by the sequence "O-O-O". Note that the upper case letter "O" is used, not the digit zero. The use of a zero character is not only incompatible with traditional text practices, but it can also confuse parsing algorithms which also have to understand about move numbers and game termination markers. Also note that the use of the letter "O" is consistent with the practice of having all chess move symbols start with a letter; also, it follows the convention that all non-pwn move symbols start with an upper case letter."

So only the "Ooh" letter is allowed, not the "zero" number.

Marc


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-22 20:18:54)
Round Robin qualification

"Round-robin tournaments are groups of 5, 7, 9, 11 or 13 players. The winner of each group is qualified for the next stage. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage." Thibault these are the rules upon which I entered the tournament WCC 3. I have spent an enourmous amount of time sweating blood to beat Janos Helmer so that I won my stage 2 group and qualified for the Round Robin Final now this tournament has started you have 1)placed 6 persons in the tournament which breaches the rules 2) You have placed Miranda Marcus in the tournament even though she did not win stage 2 group but tied on 4 out of 6 and had a lower TER. If I had known you were going to arbitrarily change the rules like this I would have agreed a draw with Janos a long time ago and Marc Lacrosse and I could have both gone through. We have 5 winners and I request you to comply with the WCC rules for this tournament and place the 4 stage 2 winners and and 1 stage 1 group M winner in the Round Robin final. I will wait for your decision before continuing. Thanks. I would like to know other players views on this. I have no objection to the rules being amended for future WCC but I want to know what the rules are when I start a tournament.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-08-23 11:40:09)
Not wasted time

"what would have happened if the game was a draw who would have been invited??" : that's the real question. I think about it after the result, not before - this is how invitations must be done. A player with a strong established rating who did not play in this cycle may have been invited as well. I understand that is 2 games more, the cycle is hard to play already but definitely 7 players give less chances to chance, so most probably more chances to you according to your result. It is too late to change this (imo) because many games started and I'm still not sure it would be a good choice. "Saying the administrators decision is final is saying you can suddenly change any rule at any time for any reason" -> that's true, and I think this rule is absolutely necessary but I would replace "for any reason" by "if best" which is technically the same... The aim is to do it well only. And of course I'm not error free, that's why I often discuss rules changes in this forum. "(...) the group is complete so no invitations arise and in your reply you agreed", true : my only fault. Obviously I changed my mind and created some confusion, I'm very sorry about that but now I really think that's a better choice.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-08-23 11:43:19)
Rules change

All members are invited to comment on these points :

1) "Should all groups in WCH tournaments consist in 7 players at least, several players being invited if necessary at the tournament director's discretion" ? I'll change the rules this way if a majority agrees. In all cases the 3rd round-robin final must continue this way IMO but I may add a new rule :

2) "Referees are not error free and are not supposed to change the rules anytime they estimate it is a better choice, players accept the view that a tournament should be modified or any error corrected in all cases." (this is not irony, I'm not sure such a rule wouldn't bring some problems but we may try it if a majority agrees with that).


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-23 17:59:14)
still a mystery

I know understand that you had decided (I dont know when??) that you would not allow 5 person round robin finals. So you were going to "invite" two players to make up the numbers in WCC 3 final. Nobody knew this only you. Second you are reserving the right to invite anyone according to make up the numbers according to your own preferences . It may be some all of those who tied for 1st place or you may choose to invite some other highly rated players who did not enter the tournament. Nobody knows! Firstly lets reduce the "invitations" as follows: 1) WCC tournaments will be made of at least 7 players. 2) Any shortfall will be made up of the best losers from the previous stage 3)Best losers will be selected from those who tied for place in a group in the previous stage ranked by tournament entry rating and /or from those who came 2nd ranked by tournament entry rating. Under these rules everone knows where they stand and its transparent fair and consistent with existing rules.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-09-02 15:14:21)
How good is the program vs the man?

True, I don't know about any recent experience like Hydra-Nickel... We may organize something like that with Rybka 3.0 and why not a strong Go engine too, any idea (rules, time control and so on) ?


Denis Ivanchenkov    (2008-09-05 09:50:19)
Igame.ru

I'm also from Igame.ru. My nick was fuzzydik ( that's not a swear word - just acronym :) )


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-09-12 16:12:04)
ICCF ratings

Quite hard to say, the rating calculation is not the same, but many players here who started with a strong established rating came from ICCF...


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


Dinesh De Silva    (2008-09-15 19:02:43)
Re: acronym for FICGS

FICGS = "Fricking Interesting Chess & Games Server". lol!


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.


Ruslan Kopytov    (2008-09-16 11:41:51)
igame.ru

Imho igame.ru was very nice place 2 play corr. chess. Alot of strong players, interesting personalities, really popular and actual threads in forum. It is very bad news if this site is down 4ever. Played there 2002-2008. Nick Ruslan73.


Denis Ivanchenkov    (2008-09-25 23:18:51)
I just realized ...

that there is no FRENCH(!!!) version of Ficgs.com. Or maybe I'm wrong?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-09-28 21:51:45)
Big Chess Championship

18 months is so long :/ .. In my opinion, the scheme could be the same than the Go championship :

"FICGS world Go championship is a 2 stages tournament. First stage is a single round-robin tournament, involving the 9 highest rated players who entered the waiting list. The winner of this tournament is the challenger for FICGS world champion title. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage. If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account. If current world champion defends his title, he will play a 5 games match against his challenger."


Iouri Basiliev    (2008-09-29 14:49:24)
By the way

Denis, your deductive abilities are very impressive but offten wrong. Russian and ukrainian are my native languages. I can speak english, french and german as well. >>I understand that he must be an immigrant from former Soviet Union.>> You are wrong. >>Very probably he is not well adopted in German society - and is treated as person of "lesser quality".>> I'm Prof. at Heidelberg Uni and do not feel "lesser quality" here or in France where i worked before :) Germany and France (at least the scientific community) are not the rasist countries. I wish you feel similar at Ukraine!


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-02 11:50:49)
Game 16370, towards a new rule ?

What do you think about this case :

http://www.ficgs.com/game_16370.html


Last move : Qe4+ 2008 September 30 19:57:40

White clock - 94 days 18:34:55 (58 days 08:20:25)
Black clock - 0 day 01:19:54

[Event "FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_A__000032"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2007.11.30"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Koch,Christian"]
[Black "Stephenson,Andrew"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "2140"]
[BlackElo "2104"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.h3 Be7 9.Qf3 O-O 10.O-O-O b5 11.g4 b4 12.Nd5 Nxd5 13.exd5 Bc8 14.Kb1 Nd7 15.Qe2 Bb7 16.f4 Qc7 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Qf2 Bd8 19.Bg2 a5 20.Nd4 a4 21.Rhe1 a3 22.b3 Ra5 23.Nf5 g6 24.Nh6+ Kg7 25.Qf4 Bxd5 26.Bxd5 Rxd5 27.Qxb4 Qc6 28.Rxd5 Qxd5 29.Qf4 f6 30.Bc1 Qc5 31.Rd1 Ba5 32.Qe4 Rc8 33.c4 Bb4 34.h4 Qc6 35.Rd5 Re8 36.Qf4 Bc5 37.Bd2 Qb7 38.Bc3 Bb4 39.g5 f5 40.Qd2 Bxc3 41.Qxc3 Kf8 42.Kc1 Qb6 43.c5 Qc6 44.Rxd6 Qh1+ 45.Kc2 Qe4+ 46.Kc1 Qh1+ 47.Kc2 Qe4+ 48.*


So here player Black has good chances to lose the game on time, even if the best thing player White can do is to draw the game. In my opinion, "in general" player Black should play his next move, unless an analysis prove that the game is a forced draw - according to the rules, http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#adjudications - and eventually the result will be corrected after the game, but I'd like to know what other players think about this situation in general...

Thanks for helping to build strong rules.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-03 21:37:20)
FIDE rating list oct. 2008

FIDE published the October 2008 rating list, the 5 top ranking players are in a 8 points range only...

I still wonder what would happen in case of a come back by the King (Gary Kasparov) .. Great thing to see a player like Morozevich at the 2nd place.

Rank Name Title Country Rating

1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2791
2 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2787
3 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2786
4 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2786
5 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2783
6 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772
7 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2757
8 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2751
9 Leko, Peter g HUN 2747
10 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2737
11 Wang, Yue g CHN 2736
12 Adams, Michael g ENG 2734
13 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2732
14 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2731
15 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2730
16 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2729
17 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2727
18 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2726
19 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2720
20 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2719
21 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2719
22 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2719
23 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2719
24 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2716
25 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2715
26 Bu, Xiangzhi g CHN 2714
27 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2711
28 Ni, Hua g CHN 2710
29 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2705
30 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2704
31 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2703
32 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2702
33 Cheparinov, Ivan g BUL 2696
34 Wang, Hao g CHN 2696
35 Sasikiran, Krishnan g IND 2694
36 Tiviakov, Sergei g NED 2686
37 Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter g ROU 2684
38 Najer, Evgeniy g RUS 2682
39 Bologan, Viktor g MDA 2682
40 Milov, Vadim g SUI 2681


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-05 20:30:11)
Go ratings, rule update

In order to limit the inflation of Go ratings, I've updated the rules for ratings superior or equal to 2000. The idea of the original rule was to help players to find their rating range more quickly only.

"Go ratings are first estimated from Go ranks (n kyu give a 2100 - 100 * n rating, n dan give a 2000 + 100 * n rating, n dan pro give a 2630 + 30 * n rating), then adjusted in real time after each result :

Performance = Opponent Current Rating + 350 if the game is won, -350 if the game is lost.

Case of a win (rating > 1999) : New Rating = ((9 x Current Rating) + (1 x Performance)) / 10
Case of a win (rating < 2000) : New Rating = ((8 x Current Rating) + (2 x Performance)) / 10

Case of a loss : New Rating = ((9 x Current Rating) + (1 x Performance)) / 10

The rating calculation does not take account of wins obtained by a stronger player when the Elo difference is superior to 350 points, the same with losses by a weaker player.

In case of a loss against a player rated more than 350 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Current Rating - 350."


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-06 18:03:43)
Rybka is World Computer Chess Champion

No surprise, Rybka wins the 16th World Computer Chess Championship (2008)... Strangely, Rybka was running on the most powerful hardware, a 40-core system, in comparison Mobile Chess was running on a Nokia cell phone, so results are to be compared. Anyway, good result for Hiarcs, and a (very) bad tournament for Shredder.

The tournament results :

Rybka 8.0 / 9
Hiarcs 7.0 / 9
Junior 6.0 / 9
ClusterToga 5.5 / 9
Shredder 4.5 / 9
Falcon 4.0 / 9
Jonny Beijing 4.0 / 9
Deep Sjeng 3.5 / 9
The Baron 2.5 / 9
Mobile Chess 0.0 / 9


Normajean Yates    (2008-10-31 03:17:50)
replies to thibault's question..

1. No, computers cannot yet. Not even near. Afaik not even 'strongly conjectured to be a white win' or 'strongly conjectured draw' (3x3 chess has been strongly solved - it is not really a game because there is no suitable starting position - but there are complete tablebases for every legal placement of chess pieces on a 3x3 board. I posted the links in a forum thread a few months ago...)

2. Why this variant is special -

if you think about it, 5x5 chess is the smallest notrivial *natural* contraction of 8x8 chess.

Plus - or that is why - it was thought of many decades ago - as far as I remember, when Martin Gardner mentioned it about 25 years ago in his column 'mathematical games' in the USA-based science magazine 'Scientific American', he was merely mentioning it, he hadn't invented it...

I am waiting for one bigchess opponent to time out before going on 15-day chess-leave -- [she (Nicola) would have timed out on 27 Oct but it got extended because of the 7-day addition to clocks owing to server change] --- then I plan to find out the current state of 5x5 - whether some university etc. is researching it, etc. If there are results that indicate forced draw (or win) then I agree that there is not much point in doing it here...


Normajean Yates    (2008-11-01 00:00:10)
a *playable* 3x3 chess :-/

Well as I said 3x3 chess has been strongly solved - by complete set of tablebases - but it is not really a playable game for lack of good starting position - the english wikipedia has links and info on 3x3, 5x5 [it *was* Martin Gardner who proposed it in 1969 acc to wikipedia], 6x6.

(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minichess)

Well here is a playable version of 3x3 chess - even 1x3 chess! at least Samuel Beckett would have called it eminently playable!

3x3: 2k/3/K2 w.
1x3: k1K w.

And the kings - wait for Godot!




Normajean Yates    (2008-11-01 23:43:03)
Benjamin Block - I agree

It seems there is some HP product that offers 5x5 chess of various kinds including the one I describled - it is called 'Gardner minichess' now. English-wikipedia 'minichess' entry has a link to that - and in a discussion forum on that HP thing I found - "recent play suggests that Gardner minichess is a draw".

So the first decent engine for it would finish it, it seems, as thibault said earlier in this thread...

Someone modify crafty for 5x5 and check - yawn - I am toooo lazy --- plus crafty [and all later closed source engines I suppose] are too strongly low-level optimised for 8x8 chess --- writing an engine from scratch? Well I know the seven steps [they are/were on an internet in a nice article] --- but I have retired from writing code --- written enough for three lifetimes; no more programming for me.

*Proving* that Gardner-minichess is a draw would be more difficult -- 20-piece tablebases! (okay, in a much smaller space) - that's for the universities --- they have to do something to give out M.S.'s and Ph.D.s - so let them do it :)

[they did it with draughts <called checkers in the USA> - it is solved ie proven to be a draw -- let them try Gardner-minichess now :)]

3x3 - as I said there are complate tablebases now including for positions with pawns on first rank -- so it is very-strongly solved [i.e. given *any* position, the result and the best play for that result are known - in fact online accessible -- instant results of course... you'll find the link on eng-wikipedia -- I have accessed it [3x3 chess site] before but yesteday it seemed to be down - the old link was http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/3x3-chess/ but it is broken now...


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...


Normajean Yates    (2008-11-07 09:27:35)
:0 - and Don Groves - thanks for ..

.. the German lesson! :) I stand corrected...

to Rodolfo : je suis'un croissant - :O :)

thibault, shouldn't they be liaisoned, suis and un to get suis'un - or is <<je suis'un croissant>> wrong?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-07 10:27:47)
Liaisons

Wrong, "je suis un croissant" is correct, the "liaison" is oral only :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-07 14:59:07)
Kamsky vs. Topalov

"Kamsky vs. Topalov" to sell...

Roustam Kamsky, father of world championship candidates Gata Kamsky had hard words against FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov : "I do not have any faith in FIDE and Mr. Ilyumzhinov who in front of the whole world breached his word, which is not the first time. Also, I do not have much faith in Mr. Makropoulos, a personal friend of Mr. Danailov."

More surprising, he said a few words about the former match Anand vs. Kasparov : "I would like to use this opportunity to congratulate Vishy Anand on his true victory. This is his third victory at the world championship. I think he could have achieved even more success if during his match against Kasparov he did not have as his trusted seconds grandmasters from the former Soviet Union. I was very impressed by the organization of Anand’s match in Bonn, Germany, except that the match should have been played between Kamsky and Anand. It was unjust to allow Russian GM Kramnik to play three world championship matches, in 2006, 2007, 2008, without a proper selection, just so Russia can maintain the world championship title."

The whole open letter is intersting to read...


Chessbase news :

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5002
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5000


Don Groves    (2008-11-07 21:55:07)
latus

Salut, Thib! I thought liaison also applied to words like "comment allez vous." The "t" is pronounced and runs into "allez" so it sounds like one word when spoken.

Is this also considered to be liaison?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-09 00:00:59)
Iatus

Salut Don... Well, I don't know the right terms, but some liaisons are written, some others are spoken... The aim of "apostrophe" symbol ' is (according to me) to make a written liaison while breaking a word in the case of two words that are hard to pronounce. Spoken liaisons happen more often (ie. "comment allez-vous ?") but are often not written. Hope I'm clear :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-09 00:08:30)
Fire on board...

Open letter by Gata Kamsky :

"Dear President, gentelmen, Susan,

When I first saw Bill's letter I was happy, because finally USCF has been showing strong support for their representative. Whether there could be a better solution or a more diplomatic one is a good question, but the reality is that there is no time to negotiate and given FIDE's strong-arm history of negotiating, it is not likely to succeed.

When I spoke with FIDE Vice President Mr. Makropoulos in Greece, it was decided that both my team and Mr. Topalov's team would meet during the rest day at the Olympiad in Dresden to negotiate and discuss everything, including technical details. With their last public statement, Mr. Illumjinov not only attempted to revoke his personal guarantee of the match, but he also imposed the time limit of one week for the players to acceed to his demands and at the same time re-awarded the bid to the Bulgarian Federation, which was the original FIDE's intention in the first place. You all are aware of the clause in the FIDE regulation for this "special" match that gave the Bulgarian Chess Federation a privilege of matching any bid that is coming from my side, which effectively ruined any attempt to find and submit a bid from the United States.

Throughout the negotiations with my managers, FIDE did nothing to find a sponsor on their own, despite the fact that it was solely FIDE's decision to create this match, and thus to allow Mr. Topalov a backdoor into the final steps of the qualification proceedings for the world championship title, quite unfairly, I might add.

FIDE's entire purpose, for chess players, for fairness, has been changed into a special interest group organization and I personally believe that any negotiations with FIDE rulers or tsars, or whatever you like to call them, will be unsuccessful.

The time for the negotiation is over and the only way to fight FIDE is to expose their mistakes, and perhaps fight them in a court of law if and when FIDE broke the law. Therefore, I would respectfully request all USCF Board members to unite and find ways to make sure that justice and fairness will prevail.

Sincerely,
Gata Kamsky

Saturday, November 8, 2008"


More informations on Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5004


Wayne Lowrance    (2008-11-14 00:58:53)
Future Rating

Hello Thibault, In the short msg's window all I was asking for was what happened to the feature ! I click on my tournaments, click on magnifying glass, then try to click on elo, but no longer does this respond. What am I doing wrong sir. I accepted a draw offer, wondering what impact it will have Thank you. Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-20 12:47:15)
"Are all chess players machos ?"

An interesting interview of Levon Aronian in Chessbase news !

His answer : "As a chess player one has to be able to control one’s feelings, one has to be as cold as a machine. We men do not let ourselves be, let us say, seduced by our emotions and feelings. But there is a paradox in chess. - Which is? - The paradox is that the best chess players are the most emotional ones."

"A gentleman at the board can suddenly turn into a barbarian. Like Anand."

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5025


Dinesh De Silva    (2008-11-20 19:29:38)
Re: Are female chess players 'macho?'

Eureka!!! I think I've got it....I've solved a great, longstanding mystery! The aforementioned strong, 'macho' female chess players were actually MEN in WOMENS' DISGUISE! Whoa!!!!!


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


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-23 15:39:23)
Show both cards at Showdown

A small update to come for Poker Holdem as, according to the rules, if a player must show his hand, he's required to show both pocket cards, even if one (or two) of these cards are not necessary in the best hand. (thx Volker :))

I understand that this rule applies in all cases, please correct me if I'm wrong.


Francisco Gramajo    (2008-11-26 18:43:12)
Best hand or best played hand?

Any hand can be the best, when is played correctly... and that depends on prior hands. Not in the cards showing up. A good hand? I just had one full house K-K-K-10-10 ironically I was playing for K-K-2-2-2 or 10-10-2-2-2 or 10-10-10-2-2. For me the way to play is the key. Later we can discusse about the algorithm to generate cards. Thanks for this website, it is amazing!


Don Groves    (2008-12-02 23:09:05)
Speaking of doping

Lance Armstrong says he will ride in next year's Tour de France. Gives the judges one more chance to catch him doping ;-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-12-08 19:33:05)
Levon Aronian's open letter

Now Levon Aronian comments the latest FIDE's decisions in an open letter :

"(...) With the GA's recent actions, it seems that there is a democratic deficit within FIDE. The GA did not consult the players currently taking part in the Grand Prix in their decision processes. Please keep in mind a very important point – these players, including myself, have a legally binding agreement with FIDE regarding the World Championship cycle and the Grand Prix. Therefore it is FIDE's duty to consult the other party of the contract – the participants.

Does this mean that the chess players have lesser rights than others? The GA appears to act with no concern for the players. The decision to suddenly change the World Championship cycle has damaging effects on the career plans of leading chess players. It is also reasonable to ask: why should we go through several tournaments over several years and fight for a place in a tournament that another player gets by losing a match? The GA's decisions remove the motivation for players like myself to take part in the World Championship cycle."

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5059


Normajean Yates    (2008-12-11 01:46:47)
my response...

Excellent, thought provoking article.

About subconscious thinking - I am in two minds: as an existentialist I am uncomfortable with the concept: yet there are memory/thought acts which bear no other explanation yet. The famous existentialist psychiatrist R.D.Laing who applied Sartre's work to psychiatry, also did not dwell on this issue, really..

I believe it is partly volition, partly innate - the innate part being proneness to 'subconscious', involuntary and in particular obsessive-compulsive thought patterns in OCD or in certain bipolar depressive states [I am bipolar depressive type 2], which responds to high-dose fluoxetine...

I am more comfortable with the part of the article I quote in the next paragraph, although there no reason we should have a specifically '*chess* pattern-recogniser organ' [1] - more likely we have an innate but more general 'chessy' pattern-recogniser-faculty ('organ') which takes in chess too. [our music-hearing faculty i.e. the ear can hear music, but not only music..] *This* is what the author Rune Vik-Hansen means, I am certain.

[from the article:] 'Playing on Noam Chomsky’s LAD, or Language Acquisition Device, we might say that chess players are guided and supported by a, perhaps slightly Kantian sounding, CAD; “Chess Acquisition Device, making is possible to display sound chess judgment which foundation is the subtle interplay between knowing what to keep and what to discard among triggered moves and in the final part of this article, we will have a closer look as how to increase and improve our chess judgment to form better decisions over the board.'

I will only add that subsequent investigations and deeper questioning of de Groot's subjects (experimented chessplayers? ;-) ) has shown that this faculty/device/organ is less important to chess ability than de Groot thought...



[1] I am calling this presumed faculty/device an 'organ', just like Noam Chomsky occasionally does [in his *linguistics* output, not in his *political* output! :)] - even if you choose to think of it as just a metaphor, it is a very hepful and suggestive metaphor.


Philip Roe    (2008-12-11 15:32:43)
Interesting for sure..

Impressive, not so much.

He seems to make a big distinction between conscious and unconscious thought with no real justification. The fact that electrical activity can be detected prior to awareness does not tell us much. Daniel Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" is the most satisfactory account that I have read, and his "multiple drafts" theory is not unlike Runes, except that it allows for a more sophisticated interaction. Roughly, the conscious mind sets goals "I want to attack on the k-side" and the subconscious suggests means "How about Qh5" which the conscious rejects or selects for further review by setting a new goal " Lets see if Qh5 works". By ignoring this interplay Rune creates difficulties from which he cannot extricate himself. And Dennett also asks himself much tougher questions like "why is there consciousness at all? What evolutionary purpose could it serve?"

Interestingly, the subconscious seldom suggests really silly ideas, like Qh5 if there is a pawn on g6 and nothing else going on. Indeed, the filtering out of "non-candidates" can be quite impressive. I recall a moment from the BBC TV series The Master Game. Bill Hartston, an IM and a psychologist, was momentarily taken aback by an unexpected move made by his (weaker) opponent. "Why didn't I see that?" A few seconds later "Oh, that's why I didn't see it!" (the move involved an unsound combination) Hartston was about to coauthor a book on chess psychology with John Wason, and his remark was not entirely in jest.

Hartston was suggesting, by his remarks, that he could usually trust his unconscious not to show him anything irrelevant. That, to my mind, is one of the things that characterizes a strong player. The irrelevant moves just don't occur to them.

So then what about blunders? Well, the system is very fallible. It IS just made of meat, and the real surprise is that blunders do not occur more often. But the blunders made by strong players seem different from the blunders made by rabbits. They are usually relevant to something, but they have a hole in them. I dont see anything at all about Runes proposals that would eliminate blunders, except through the indirect route of making you a stronger player.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-12-13 23:42:25)
FICGS poker holdem championship

The waiting list for the 1st FICGS poker holdem championship is open, as all ratings are not established, the rating limit has been changed to 1600.

Only the 9 highest rated players at the beginning of the tournament (february 1, 2009) will play it, consequently the best way to improve your rating before the deadline is probably to play POKER HOLDEM BULLET BRONZE games (you may use the challenge function in My games).

The current rules :

"FICGS world poker holdem championship is a 2 stages tournament. First stage is a single round-robin tournament, involving the 9 highest rated players who entered the waiting list. The winner of this tournament is the challenger for FICGS world champion title. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage. If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account. If current world champion defends his title, he will play a 5 games match (3 games with White, 2 games with Black) against his challenger.

All games are played in 30 days + 1 day / move. Rules for poker holdem are official rules. You may find more information about the FICGS betting structure in FICGS rules. Both players must play until one resign or game is adjudicated. One game is played in 3 winning rounds of 100 chips by player played in no limit mode. The minimal bet is always 1 chip and does not depend on the blind's value. The small blind's value is doubled after the 50th hand, then after the 70th, 80th, 90th and 100th hand (the big blind then is 64 chips) of each round."


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2008-12-15 12:22:46)
More hydra ...

This time seriously, I have got an old version here:

http://tonythomas.mylivepage.com/file/240/5286

I have played with it using Arena but this old version seems not as strong as Toga.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-12-16 11:17:29)
40 cores

That's true, we'll have some surprises yet in this area. But the more chess knowledge, the less impact the processor's speed, I'm not sure that the score of Rybka was so impressive because of her hardware. But I agree that "admitted" was a bit strong :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-12-22 20:48:12)
Ilmars & Ben

Hi Ilmars, yes it is possible (if you know their email)

Ben, did you use the inviter mode or email mode ? The Epoints are only added in the inviter mode (it would be too easy to enter an infinity of wrong emails in the other mode).


Matteo Tognela    (2008-12-25 16:56:46)
Small Linux script - pgn to clipboard

I know it's not of vital importance... but looking for some more automatic way to copy to clipboard the moves from a game window, say to be pasted into db software, I I've written this little bash script. (this requires xclip to be installed; for the rest I make reference to gnome&firefox, but it should work also in other environments)

#!/bin/bash
#content of grabpgn
xclip -i -selection clipboard $1
exit

...chmode +x grabpgn, and then associate the extension pgn to be opened with it (in gnome it's quite easy, but for sure there's some conf file where you can do it manually)
Then from a game window, click the "download" button, and in the dialog box, select "open" and check "always perform this action on similar files".
Done! now when you hit "Download" you end up with the game in your clipboard, ready to be pasted wherever you want.
(you can still download it with a right click on the link)


Gultekin Gumusyazici    (2008-12-28 18:57:50)
Advanced chess game project

A. Primitives about common chess. 1-Although there is at least 50 more variation of chess game. They are not evaluated as common as standard.(Since they have no software with bot players that is strong as human at those variations, And Standart chess players have no tendency for them cause they re not up enough yet with that stupid standart chess game which is most suitable for software. Or might them be less intelligent as expected?) 2-Rules are rules even they are meaningless. 3-It reflects only bi-dimentional thinking. 4-Mostly depend on probability. (Remind you that probabiliy is a tool applied only known data- "not unknown") 5-No one complains much. (That is Conservation, And it is against the realization of Universe and science). 6-.............. To start with responsing against me please fill your facts about chess here. Then we can evaluate fact about chess. To develop advanced chess rules that mostly suits human to enlight his abilities not robots.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-01-03 19:02:44)
A world champion with no privilege ?!

... finally, looks like even the top GM are decided to kill the show in the FIDE WCH cycle :

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5129

>> Address by Mr Henrik Carlsen on behalf of GM Magnus Carlsen

"(...) In a future Magnus would like to see a world championship cycle with a minimum of privileges, or no privileges at all.

(...) What about the privileges of the reigning World Champion? This is a difficult question but we see strong arguments for reducing the privileges drastically or even abolishing them outright. In the past, with the right to a re-match, a reigning world champion had about 75% chance of retaining the title against an evenly strong opponent, leaving only 25% chance for all the remaining chess players in the world. It was ridiculous. Even without rematches, the 50% chance of today strongly favours the reigning champion. This may have made sense in the past when there were few serious contenders for the title, but today, with about 30 top players within 100 rating points of the top, this is no longer fair."


There are many good points but I'm not sure the game will win at the end. Any opinion ?!


Wayne Lowrance    (2009-01-06 05:11:28)
Challenge

Well Ben as I said I am not inclined to accept your challenge, but if It could be proved your using only r3 + your best book, you would not have much success against strong centaurs Wayne


Ben Milton    (2009-01-06 11:08:51)
Question

Would someone please tell how to be a strong centaur player? I have been playing online computer assisted chess for 2 years now and still have not learned how to be stronger than rybka 3 by itslef. I use Fritz11 GUI. Any reccommendations? would be appreciated


Marc Lacrosse    (2009-01-06 21:30:45)
Wayne ...

... We all had to wait according to these rules that are present since the very beginning of FICGS
I do not see why your impatience deserves changing what has been running for years.
If I see well you have one FEM norm recorded and wish to see the second one recorded as soon as possible
So far you played against a mean 2000 rated opponents
Most top accounts have mean opponent rating higher than 2200
This is probably the reason why you do not achieve more master norms at a faster pace
Do play in higher rated tournaments and you will soon earn as many norms as you wish if your playing strength is OK against stronger opponents
The best way to enter high-rated tournaments here is to go as often as possible in Ficgs-Wch qualifications tournaments
Marc


Don Groves    (2009-01-07 08:40:46)
Procedural question

Suppose another player and myself want to play Bullet Bronze Hold'em but a third person's name is already on the waiting list. How do we proceed?


Hannes Rada    (2009-01-08 20:06:47)
New strong player !

Banikas, Hristos GM 2582 Bravo. That's what FICGS needs. More Players, More strong players. Is he an OTB GM, or Corr GM ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-01-09 08:44:35)
Why ?

The purpose is only to show if Rybka 3 can be or not a strong correspondence chess player already, nothing more. Ben has no interest to try to cheat and it would be a big work to change the full Rybka analysis (ie. 5 first lines for each move) that would be copy-pasted here.


Tom Smith    (2009-01-15 07:10:20)
wow...

normajean you are one crazy lady. Thibault, I have chosen the wrong site I feel, would you please cancel my membership, I entered a standard 40 day tournament, would you please remove from that too as I wouldnt want to hold that up. Thank you


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-01-19 05:19:52)
Traxler is lost ?

Come on, If this gambit can give someone an attack then be attack, sacrifice your meterial for a strong and trown the rest at the ennemy king. That is the traxler way of doing things... Halloween gambit and queen gambit Are both need, They should be accepted, As halloween gambit refused is a dull game.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-01-27 16:40:31)
We need more Big Chess players !

Come on, let Rybka & other chess engines work in your 8x8 games & play Big Chess with us, that's the real life, amazing chess & the only way to see such incredible moves :)

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=24656&move=85

Waiting lists > Big Chess standard tournaments !

Waiting for strong players in Big Chess standard M tourney.


Normajean Yates    (2009-01-28 21:13:52)
re - NPS

Well in the mid-90s some of the fairly good programs were open-source : crafty one of the the strongest open-source programs, and its author Bob Hyatt used to dicuss chess-programming related issues...

Even with closed-sourse proprietory programs, however, the *empirical* fact of NPS being not so relevant can be established statistically by just seeing the results of inter-engine tournaments..

[of couse NPS is not totally relevant! a 1 NPS engine is likely to be quite bad in comparison with a 10000 NPS engine on the same hardware! :) And a 0-NPS engine can only generate moves by using a random number generator ;) [not-necessarily uniformly distributed] - or by tablebase lookup ... but is the present position counted as a node? If yes, then 0 NPS can do nothing at all, not even check legality of move! :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-01-29 12:33:51)
FICGS

Hi Francisco, these important points need to be discussed for sure.

1) As it has been said here on another point, I shouldn't try to protect players from themselves, but I've to protect players from other players (speaking of the quality of the games, general forfeits & so on - or the posts of Garvin & Josef in this thread). You can play poker all over the internet, it's up to you only. I'm not sure I should feel responsible of players addictions, the whole world (commercial issues) is about addictions that exist anyway. In my experience, I was not really addicted to poker as a gambling game, I never played it in casinos but I like competition and that's the way I introduced poker here, quite different from the casino games (by the way a few "pro" poker players here do not even understand it).

2) "Play poker heads-up one to one, is bored, the winner is not always the best", so chess, so Go... of course. I may be wrong on the poker games format (3 winning rounds / 100 chips), we'll see it in a few months as the rating list will evolve.

3) "Poker insults chess", I don't agree with this but I understand & respect this opinion (that could probably be "Poker insults" in some cases). Only 1 player cancelled his membership because of this at the moment. I'm sorry about this, I can't satisfy everyone when making updates but be sure I'm working for FICGS firstly as a chess place and thanks to poker (even with no money), we welcome more players & the prizes (for chess tournaments) will increase a lot in the next months. That's quite good for the site in my opinion. Anyway if I realize I'm wrong, no doubt I'll change it.

Anyway, that's an interesting & important discussion and I'll listen to all your points.


Normajean Yates    (2009-01-29 14:59:36)
re: rybka era v open-source

I've not been keeping in touch with post-2002 developments in chess programming [that is, the literature - I have no energy to try to reverse-engineer closed code, and my skills in that are 15-years out-of-date and out of touch :(]

- Also, I think there are fewer and fewer of comparatively strong enough open-source engines now :(

Which is the strongest *open-souce* engine now, and how does it compare to even rybkas of the 3.1.x generation? I do not know [frankly, since 2002 I am too busy with literature and political activity; even though it looks like I am playing chess all the time ;)]

But I'd be interested in knowing and grateful to everyone who posts info this and related questions...

The questions are of the form of comparative strengths of stongest post-2005 open-source engines versus rybka; and *published* new ideas in chess programming which have been implemented and have been shown to improve engine strength.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-02 21:54:00)
Poker championship : New rules, deadline

Finally, a 2 stages single round-robin tournament (no ratings limit, everyone can play) seems a better choice for the poker holdem championship !

The deadline is now february 8, 2009... Join the fun !

Here are the new rules :

"FICGS world poker holdem championship is a 2 stages single round-robin tournament. All games are played in 30 days + 1 day / move.

Round-robin tournaments are groups of at least 7 players. The winner of each group is qualified for the next stage. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage. If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account. Groups are built grading all players by rating and distributing them to obtain similar elo averages. Players may be invited to complete a group or to replace a forfeiting player.

Rules for poker holdem are official rules. You may find more information about the FICGS betting structure here. Both players must play until one resign or game is adjudicated. One game is played in 3 winning rounds of 100 chips by player played in no limit mode. The minimal bet is always 1 chip and does not depend on the blind's value. The small blind's value is doubled after the 50th hand, then after the 70th, 80th, 90th and 100th hand (the big blind then is 64 chips) of each round."


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-03 13:37:42)
Chess WCH 4 round-robin final

The chess wch #4 round-robin final should start as soon as the situation is a bit clearer in game 22698 (Helmer vs. Broniek)

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=22898

I can't analyze it right now, any predictions ? :)


Wayne Lowrance    (2009-02-03 18:59:13)
octal vs single core in CC

I am using a Octal computer now for perhaps 6 months, before that a very old single core slow comp. came across a inheritance so I splurged. Prior to purchasing for this octal I had many talks with the experienced folks on the "Rybka forum". I inquired would an octal computer provide better play in CC. The typical response was the main advantage is the octal is faster, but my older slower comp given little more time would play close to identical, (but not 100 % identical). I have found this to be the case. I have compared single core with octal core using my octal computer and find the single core lagged the octal on average only one ply, but got the same answers on the whole. I like my MacPro (2.8 gihz) very much don't get me wrong but the most important chess playing feature is the program. I thought some of you would be interested in my little tidbit....... Wayne


Normajean Yates    (2009-02-04 01:45:47)
re Wayne's point:

Well if the program is not written to use parallelism [or written badly so that it spends too much time synchronising outputs of various cpus] then it wouldnt do very well on octal compared to single-core and might do worse :)

Chess programs unless really horribly written should not have this problem: typically different cpus will analyse different branched, and hash is sliced but from time to time 'pooled' - ie the hash slices are updated from other hash slices...

Some very old RAMs would have problems with multiple cpus trying to access them: but that would be early 1980s at most: just before the invention of the personal computer :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-04 13:47:29)
Roadrunner vs. Jaguar

I found these informations on Roadrunner but I must admit I'm unable to compare it with a typical 2GHz processor, any idea on this ?

System Name Roadrunner
Site DOE/NNSA/LANL
System Family IBM Cluster
System Model BladeCenter QS22 Cluster
Computer BladeCenter QS22/LS21 Cluster, PowerXCell 8i 3.2 Ghz / Opteron DC 1.8 GHz , Voltaire Infiniband
Installation Year 2008
Operating System Linux Interconnect Infiniband
Processor PowerXCell 8i 3200 MHz (12.8 GFlops)


http://top500.org/


Normajean Yates    (2009-02-05 04:19:20)
Don & I - same pt fr diff directions:)

Don - no use if hardware doesnt 'fit' software [engineer's way of putting it ;)]

me - no use if software doesnt 'fit' hardware [programmer's way of putting it ;)]

(prefix 'retired' to 'engineeer' & 'programmer' )

We are saying the same thing!

Another point: debugging parallel programs is much more tricky than debugging - uh - non-'parallel' programs

I have no engineering experience [1] but I'd venture to guess that a 'parallel' electronic machine of any kind [not necessarily a computer] which has to synchronise signals from various sources, and do it fast, would be much more of a design challenge than a non-'parallel' one...

[1] (well I did assemble my first personal-computer - a BBC[2] acorn - by cannibalising parts from discarded damaged BBC acorns and some borrowed parts - with a scope and a soldering iron - does that count? But that was back in 1983-84... and I had help....)

[2] yes, BBC = beeb (British Broadcasting Corporation) - they *used* to do meaningful things - but that was long ago....


Don Groves    (2009-02-19 05:33:24)
23x23

Even with Monte Carlo simulation, a statistically significant number of games must be played for the result to have high confidence. A 20x20 board size would add 39 points to the board and hence multiply the number of possible games by 2 to the 39th power. So, a simulation would have to run a much longer time to achieve a result with same confidence factor. 23x23 would multiply the possible number of games by an astronomical number. I could be wrong about this, of course, but that's the way the numbers look.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-28 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!


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-10 11:10:11)
Big Chess Games

That's the problem... Usually a big chess game is quite short (often shorter than regular chess games), but between two strong opponents, theorically it may last more than 1 year with time control 30 days + 1 day / move.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-11 11:58:44)
Unrated class tournaments ?

Now I just wonder if there should be unrated class tournaments, maybe less categories (maybe 2000+ and 2000- would be ok) but it may be more interesting for strong players... I'm not sure, what do you think ?!


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-15 18:17:32)
Anand vs. Computer

I don't remember Anand playing a match against a computer like Deep Blue, Deep Fritz, Junior, Rybka & so on... But it is quite possible to find a few games like Anand vs. Fritz 3, 4 or other old programs in chess databases IMO.

Anyway, it is quite hard for me to answer your question as I still think the world is divided into 2 categories, Garry Kasparov and those who dig :) (The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, of course) .. More seriously, Anand is probably one of these 4 or 5 best players of all times, but who may be quite irregular (or just human), unlike Kasparov. Tal was another genius, maybe more a gambler, but none (Topalov, Anand, Kramnik...) ever reached the level of Garry Kasparov in my opinion.

I'm not sure Anand will be interested in losing to a chess computer, particularly as even Fritz is getting stronger & stronger.


Scott Nichols    (2009-03-18 10:28:13)
Ratings floor.

Hi Thibault. One thing I would like to see implemented is a ratings floor here. By this I mean a player can never drop below one class below his/her ratings peak. e.g., a player with a 1951 rating can never drop below 1600, a 2001 player can never drop below 1800. In the U.S. (and maybe worldwide, not sure) we have this system to keep strong players from sandbagging and artificially let their rating drop so they can play in the lower sections of big money tournaments. On FICGS I don't think that is a big problem. The problem here is that Corr. chess takes long term dedication and some players tend to drop out for whatever reason and resign all their games or just quit and let their time run out. This also drops their ratings artificially low levels. Then, as it seems to always happen, Caissa's power sweeps over them and they get back in. Or, they just bought a new super computer and want to show it off. Anyway, when they do get back in....you have an expert player coming in with a very low rating. This to me is unfair to the other players who try very hard on their ratings. e.g., In the current world Ch. cycle I am playing a very strong player who is over 800 points below my rating. I would appreciate any other opinions on this subject. Thank you.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-31 22:22:54)
Poker ratings

I've just changed the rating rules for Poker. I noticed that poker ratings moved really fast, most probably too fast. Also I think it is better to favour experience to new ratings, at least under a certain rating limit (just like Go rating rules). I'll keep an eye on ratings during a few months. Consequently now the poker rating rules are :

"The poker holdem rating list takes account of rated poker holdem games played at any time control.

If you have no poker rating, you have to play at least one rated poker holdem game to appear in the rating list. Poker holdem ratings are adjusted in real time after each result :

Performance = Opponent Current Rating + 350 if the game is won, -350 if the game is lost.

Case of a win (rating > 1999) : New Rating = ((19 x Current Rating) + (1 x Performance)) / 20
Case of a win (rating < 2000) : New Rating = ((18 x Current Rating) + (2 x Performance)) / 20

Case of a loss : New Rating = ((19 x Current Rating) + (1 x Performance)) / 20

The rating calculation does not take account of wins obtained by a stronger player when the Elo difference is superior to 350 points, the same with losses by a weaker player.

In case of a loss against a player rated more than 200 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Current Rating - 200."


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-31 23:52:44)
Rating lists

Hi Don, I agree.. rating lists also show players who entered a provisional rating, actually I didn't think so many players would estimate themselves as advanced players when filling the registration form. Anyway this update should slowly solve the problem, question of weeks/months, 1800 is the same provisional rating as in chess, strong players should be able to reach 2000-2100 in a while.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-04-01 18:09:47)
FIDE rating list April 2009

The new FIDE rating list is out.

1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2812
2 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2783
3 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2770
4 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2759
5 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2756
6 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2754
7 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2753
8 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2751
9 Leko, Peter g HUN 2751
10 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2748

Veselin Topalov is ranked number 1 again, over the 2800 mark. Magnus Carlsen is more and more impressive.

You may find a more complete list in Chessbase news :

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5323


Nick Burrows    (2009-04-01 20:01:57)
ratings

It's good that Anand & Topalov will play a match - they have both been in the top 3 or 4 for many year, and right now are the best 2 players in the world

Surely within 2 years Magnus will be unstopable!?

I very much like the play of Aronian, plays with great creativity...


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-04-07 13:45:37)
Rating calculation

Thanks for encouragements, Scott :)

The question could be now : Why not to install the same system for Go, but it seems to me that instant ratings are justified in this case by the duration of the games : 1. There's no real difference of level in blitz & correspondence games, so only one rating list is best. 2. Due to the difference of ratings between strong & weak players, new players can find their right place quickly this way.

Now about Poker I'm not sure yet, maybe the 2 months system would be better. To be discussed in a few months.


William Taylor    (2009-04-12 14:41:59)
FICGS Oympiad

Not sure if this has been suggested before, but how about a big tournament on FICGS with teams from different countries, like the Olympiad? The number of boards per team would have to be thought about carefully to get the right balance between number of teams able to participate and number of players from each country able to participate. The Austrian team would probably be favourites (headed by Aigner, Rada, Kund), but there are other potentially strong teams too.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-04-14 17:19:23)
Shogi & Xiangqi

Hi Samy, I'm not so opposed to introduce these interesting games here but there are no players enough yet to envisage it, that's the main point IMO (then if I remember well computers are stronger than the best players already). We'll probably discuss it again in a while.


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2009-04-14 22:58:05)
Draw

Human factor always on the top!


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-18 23:17:19)
Don+Rodolfo, what about verbal *moves* ?

By the same logic, what is wrong with my saying 'my next move will be Ne4' and helpfully putting a link in the message to a diagram of the resulting position?

after all, you get clock time for free, because you are thinking on my time!

Would you consider *that* binding? If so, would it be 'binding' for you to do the right thing i.e. request Thib to add time to my clock and subtract it from yours? [if Thib. doesnt, at least you tried..)] ;)

Extending the logic - start a game here but make moves informally by email, AFTER the game is over then for ficgs's record we repeat those moves on the ficgs board [which is still at starting pos.] --- how much of that is 'binding'?


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-23 00:12:57)
Lehnhoff, you are not the only one..

see my prev post in this thread: called imagine... and the post is: 'imagine there's no country...' [the john lennon song]

I wasn't joking (I don't joke about lennon's *post-beatles* songs); in fact my position is stronger: if this is going to be *primarily* a nationality-based thing (even if mixed-nationality teams were allowed) then I am not interested in this.

Which comes down to, I suppose, that: I am not interested in this. (without 'if's and 'but's. A USA-an would put it thus: I am not interested in this, period.)


William Taylor    (2009-04-23 00:30:52)
Go

Regarding go, have you seen 'The Interactive Way To Go' (http://playgo.to/interactive/)? That's an excellent free online guide for beginners. I'd also be happy to give you a teaching game if Thibault could set one up, though I'm not strong myself (about 6 kyu KGS).


Nick Burrows    (2009-04-23 01:03:09)
The Lennon Olympiad

Well i don't believe that a competitive game that symbolically warfare is very much in the spirit of John Lennon in the first place.

I feel for a team competition to work there needs to be a strong theme, playing with a random collection of players to me feels like a 'meaningless' competition.
Playing by nationality is a well established theme that is used in every single competitive sport, because it creates interest - that is all. The team members immediately have something in common, and can play as if mimmicking the real thing. Just as kids playing soccer pretend to be in the world cup...

@William - To begin with there will only be enough interest for one competition, hence the extreme views. It's just a healthy dialectic weighing up the various merits. I always seem to be in the minority ;-(


Scott Nichols    (2009-04-23 22:26:53)
If everyone played...

As far as I can tell if everyone played in a FICGS olympiad, AUT (is this Australia, Austria??) would by far be the strongest team with four! players in the top 20 active players.


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-24 03:49:01)
and I *did * read the posts carefully!

And I *did* read Nick's and everyone's posts carefully - not like taking a pro-or-anti stand on The Satanic Verses (or Orientalism, or The Selfish Gene [the last when it first came out was criticised as a Thatcherite book!]) without even reading it!

(Some of my favourite parts of 'the satanic verses' are: the 'My Mutual Freind" scene; and the scene where Gibreel confronts Saladin with the pistol hidden in the lamp - re the last, I hope I have worded it so it is not a spoiler)


Don Groves    (2009-04-24 07:18:10)
Like over the board?

It isn't quite the same as OTB. In OTB, my opponent will know that I have denied his offer and will make his next move. On FICGS, the system says it is *my* move, not his! So, how does he make his next move when it is not his turn (although it should be)?

The "My moves" page is wrong and there seems no way to correct it.


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-26 21:40:27)
Thibault, of course not! :)

I was happy, in fact! :) And thank you for your appreciation!

As far as the previous post is concerned, it is to remind Don Groves [he is 70 years old and probably doesnt realise when he is insulting / being patronising to people.

That's why if you think it is inappropriate, I request that you wait till Mr Don Groves reads it [or mail it to Mr Don Groves] before you delete that post (and this one)...

But Thib, even if you have to delete the posts, keep the first line of this post, please? - The line about my happiness and my gratitude to you! I am human after all and *need* some appreciation!


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-04-27 14:29:37)
Normajean,

Once more, I do not know you well of course, but I could have said it also *because* IMHO there's no need of great reasonings to make one's own idea about you by reading this forum, your verve helps a lot and you said many things about yourself.

As far as I know Don (mostly through this forum - noone knows how you actually know him [point 1, btw "I don't really know him" and "Don Groves is obviously..." is quite ambitious :)]), you're totally wrong in your point 2, of course I may be wrong myself but by reading his posts in this forum, I have a very different idea.

Finally everyone makes his own opinion, no matter, but whatever this sentence was familiar or insulting, noone but yourself can approve or disapprove here so I don't see the point to respond in this thread indeed, a private discussion would have been ok to disentangle all this, I suppose :)


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-28 09:34:38)
To Thib: the purpose of my point 2

Thib, of course you are right when you say that I am *wrong* about point 2 [of to be precise, there is *no* evidence for my point 2]; but:

The point of my point 2 was the english proverb 'What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander'.

That is, if someone asks "what are you smoking" he is asssuming that I am smoking something the smoking of which is generally socially disapproved. If that is fair, the it is fair for *me* to make assumptions, however unfounded, about that person; specially since I was careful to make those assumptions which are in fact generally (if in my opinion regrettably) socially *approved* !

Finally, you (Thib.) did not as a matter of fact say it; and if you had, I would hardly have noticed or minded; because you are young and *provenly* liberal. It would *not* be an insult if *you* had said it.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-04-30 12:47:48)
Rated or unrated ?

Should this team tournament be rated or not in your opinion ? At a first sight it seems to me that high-rated players would think about playing twice as they can meet players with low ratings, but according to at least one of them I may be wrong on this...


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-05-01 01:23:07)
Thanks

While I thanks for the credits, I'll tell you that I am not a woman, ( why i have that name, you doN,t want to know kay. I got a wrong name, but I like it. )

I saw to real way for black to check mate white. But to get a queen take the weak pawn. And white does it faster.

1 e4 j13 2.Ba6 h14 3. Nh4 m14 4. Qk3 Bm15 5. Qxk5 mate. was the lines I poster in the internationnal chat. ( I am not a girl. )


William Taylor    (2009-05-03 01:36:13)
Team tournament ethics

Good question Don. In OTB team tournaments team members might help each other to prepare for an opponent before the game, but of course couldn't help during the game. I'm not sure if we'll know who our opponents are before the games have started here, so that approach may not be possible. It would be nice to have some sort of cooperation, but one thing that should be avoided IMO is a strong player getting 3 weaker team members and essentially playing their games for them.


Scott Nichols    (2009-05-05 04:09:49)
The "Theme"

You are missing the theme, it's not Batman, Darth Vader, or even Monty Python. It is how you will feel when trying to "see" into this teams strategy. You will see shadows of Bishops sliding in front of you, you will see Knights suddenly appearing behind you, you will see pawns at every turn wielding their swords of death. You will only feel the Queen's presence, something all powerful hidden behind the veils of darkness. You pray for some sort of light, but all you can see is a brief reflection before the axe ends your existence.


Normajean Yates    (2009-05-16 04:01:40)
oh - right, Don!

yes I remember now - jihad <-> mujah-i-din : 'din' pronounced 'deen' = religion/faith.. [<-> = coomon root; I dont know what the root is - I purchased the Oxford english <->arabic dictionary but it is at present tedious for me to refer to because Ive to learn or look up the arabic alphabet first, in the arabic alphabetical order]

thanks Don -- (also, happy that my recent stupidity seems to have been really excused; I wrote that request to Don [to 'look it up' - i meant 'unless you know already' but forgot to put that in :)] with (apologies to Kiekegaard) 'fear and trepidation' ..


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-05-18 15:23:59)
Teams

Hi Benjamin, if you read all posts in this thread by reverse chronological order, you'll see that Sophie and Vadim are in the "Ghost Knights" team. (am I wrong ?)


Normajean Yates    (2009-05-22 05:19:29)
Curioser and curiouser! How..?

I don't see how the following happened, given my reading of the rules: William Taylor, you are probably the best person to explain where I am getting the rules wrong!

William Taylor in:
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_02__000005:
points: 6/8. *not* the leader: Domenico Riccio was the sole leader with 7.5/8, second was Norman Wilson (6.5/8) -

William Taylor, you were third in your stage-1 group so how did you get to reach stage 2?
(FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_2_GROUP_04__000004 William Taylor and four others tied for 2nd place out of 7)

Well I suppose the stage-1 group-2 top two players withdrew, right? (I *could* check it myself, but the tedium/learning ratio would be too high ;)


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-05-23 07:43:14)
I good games

»I think there will plenty of interessing games.


I find it strange to play on table 3, but it may be true that yugi is stronger then me, I just have his number...

Why I could not play versus you thibeault.....

I am not worry, I will hold still for sometimes.

Our team king. what a name to use, ho well, good idea, never tought about it... it feel not original, but it is.


Good games for everyone.


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-05-25 22:51:34)
Wrong account.

Sorry for using the wrong account...

I feel as his account is mine... What a friend I am.... (Sarcasm. )

Just waiting for sacrifice to appear and it may okay.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-06-04 00:45:17)
Consecutive draw offers verbally refused

This may be an issue : Should there be a rule on consecutive draw offers verbally refused in a chess game (which may be considered as impolite in some cases, justified in some others) ?

What do you think ? Do you know how this is ruled in other organizations ?

As for me, I have no strong opinion yet on this subject... Maybe we could only add something in the rules without any consequences on the game, just like a complement to the netiquette that players could refering to, but it may not solve the problem in some rare cases.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-06-10 02:07:26)
1.f4 ? 2.c4

It seems to me I tried it in some blitz games against a stronger player a long time ago without great success :)


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-06-23 17:00:16)
Strange Joseki

GoPosition (see diagram)

(reminder : see Help to know how to post a diagram)


Hi Ulrich, that's why I like Go :) .. It reminds me certain gambits in chess.. theorically inferior (actually I'm not even sure here) but if you don't know the lines, you're done !

Don Groves played this joseki against me a few weeks ago (games 30935 & 30934) for the first time, obviously it is very interesting against a player who did not experience it before... If White plays q3 or q17 after that (which I did), he may have no space enough quickly and Black may build big shapes. Well, I'm not strong enough to bring an interesting comment on this joseki anyway, maybe Mikhail can share some ideas on this :)


Alejandro Suarez-Moreno    (2009-06-24 00:43:28)
Strange joseki do it by a good player

Hi Ulrich and Thibault,
this joseki present a good problem. Black stones are ready to form a big shape on the right side and white have to decide "a fast fight for these corners or a strategical fight for zones of influence". I played many games with Don Groves and his style is strong. Maybe he is not dan player, but you'll have to fight very hard for the victory against him!
On the diagram I prefer 4...o16, or 4...r10. The invasion to back corner still remain possible and black attention have to put here during many plays.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-07-01 16:20:17)
FIDE rating list, july 1st 2009

The new FIDE rating list is out, Veselin Topalov (2813) still tops it 25 points ahead of FIDE world champion Viswanathan Anand (2788), in third place Magnus Carlsen (2772)...

All players rated over 2700 :

1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2813
2 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2788
3 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2772
4 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2768
5 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2760
6 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2759
7 Leko, Peter g HUN 2756
8 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2756
9 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2755
10 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2751
11 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2740
12 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2739
13 Wang, Yue g CHN 2736
14 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2733
15 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2732
16 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2727
17 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2721
18 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2717
19 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2717
20 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2717
21 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2716
22 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2716
23 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2716
24 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2714
25 Akopian, Vladimir g ARM 2712
26 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2710
27 Motylev, Alexander g RUS 2710
28 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2707
29 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2703
30 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2703
31 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2703
32 Bu, Xiangzhi g CHN 2702
33 Ni, Hua g CHN 2701


Nick Burrows    (2009-07-04 07:55:18)
Minimum rating idea

A common problem encountered in correspondance chess is that of strong players forefitting several games and their rating dropping by hundreds of points

This spoils the tourny for lower rated players who often have a 2200 rated player in their group with a misleading rating of 1600.
It also de-stabilises the ratings across the whole site as many players grades are false.
Lastly, and of least concern because players who made the drop deserve some handicap - the artificially low-graded player has a whole year of uncompetitive matches as he waits to regain points.

In o.t.b tournaments in England, a method employed to stop rating cheats is that a player who has won a certain class of tournament previously, cannot re-enter at that level.
The equivalent here would be that your rating has a minimum value, equal to the highest rating requirement of a tournament class you have previously won.

This seems to solve the problems experienced by many on this site.

It may be said that the rating drop is a necessary deterrent to prevent players from doing this. My experience is that it occurs from factors out of one's control (illness) and any deterrant is irrelevant - just as a death penalty doesn't stop heroin addicts from stealing!

What d'yall think?


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-07-08 15:05:34)
Kasparov meets Obama

This is quite a surprise to me already, Barrack Obama met former chess world champion Garry Kasparov and other opposition leaders in Russia !

Nobody knows exactly what has been said during this meeting but the site Theotherrussia.org provided a full transcript of United Civil Front Chairman Garry Kasparov’s statement to president Barack Obama and an interesting interview of Garry Kasparov... The name of the forgotten Khodorkovsky appears several times.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5562

A good summary could be : "Obama seems like a man who doesn’t try to solve problems that don’t have solutions. He saves his energy and political capital on realistic goals. If there’s a big obstacle he simply takes it off the table and deals with what can be done." (Garry Kasparov)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-07-27 15:53:29)
p4 or n5

Hi Ulrich, yes probably many players would have tried p4 at move 12, but is it necessary to save the stone while n5 starts to build a bigger shape. I don't know if I would have played it though, that's why Svante Carl is much stronger than us :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-05 17:16:53)
Bruce Lee quotes

I did not know the quotes by Bruce Lee, so I looked for more :) Among the best I found :

"Life is wide, limitless. There is no border, no frontier."

"The meaning of life is that it is to be lived, and it is not to be traded and conceptualized and squeezed into a pattern of systems."

"Knowledge will give you power, but character respect."

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bruce_Lee


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-08 11:26:55)
MoGo vs. Many Faces Of Go

Just read in the AGA newsletter (American Go E-Journal vol. 10) on the rematch between Myeong-Wan Kim 8p vs. Computer :

"Many Faces was very different, it behaved more like a human, while MoGo was pure computer and very unpredictable. It was easier to play Many Faces -- though it may be the stronger program -- because I could predict what it was going to do. Many Faces made better shape, but MoGo had better reading. I’d really like to see both programs play each other and see what happens."

I never played MoGo, but it may be instructive...


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.


William Taylor    (2009-08-12 19:25:31)
To Mr Tano-Urayoán Russi Román

True, the top players do give simuls on occasion. I meant that I'm not aware of any really top players trying mega-simuls like this, trying to break the record (Martin, Polgar, Georgiev etc. are strong players of course, but not top ones). I certainly agree with you that it's a huge accomplishment to complete a simul like this, but I'd dispute that 'the physical fitness needed for this is the same as a top athlete'.


Nick Burrows    (2009-08-14 14:50:13)
more quotes

Don't know who the first 2 are by...

'I would rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal labotomy'!

'Alcohol may be man's worst enemy, but the bible says love your enemy'

'Life is the sum of all your choices' - Albert Camus

'Don't go around saying the world owes you a living; the world owes you nothing; it was here first.' - Mark Twain

'An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.' - Ghandi

'In spite of the cost of living, it's still popular.' ~ Kathy Norris


Michel van der Kemp    (2009-08-25 19:47:10)
Mistake in ELO calculation?

I got this email from an advanced match.

Game 27857


[Event "FICGS__CHESS__BULLET_BRONZE__000132"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2009.8.23"]
[Round "1"]
[White "van der Kemp,Michel"]
[Black "Goršek,Gregor"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1966"]
[BlackElo "1623"]

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Be2 O-O 6.O-O c6 7.a4 a5 8.h3 Na6 9.Be3 Nb4 10.Qd2 Qc7 11.Rac1 Rd8 12.Rfe1 d5 13.exd5 Nbxd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bh6 Be6 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 17.c4 Nb4 18.Bd3 Nxd3 19.Qxd3 Qd6 20.Re3 Rd7 21.Qe2 Re8 22.Rd1 R7d8 23.Re1 Rd7 24.b3 b6 25.Ng5 Bf5 26.g4 1-0



Move sent : 2009.8.23 - 17:54:11
Move replied : 2009.8.23 - 19:10:44


Player resigned.




WhiteELO : 1966 ... 1961
BlackELO : 1623 ... 1627


This email was generated automatically by http://www.ficgs.com/
My rating went down after winning a game :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-27 01:58:03)
Parmet - Porkolab

The result has been recorded but here is the explanation : "The rating calculation does not take account of wins obtained by a stronger player when the Elo difference is superior to 350 points, the same with losses by a weaker player."


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-28 01:06:17)
S.C. von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion !

Svante Carl von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion, for the 3rd time... after winning 2 more games in the 5 games final match which looked like in some ways to the previous one with Ke Lu.

Congrats again Svante Carl ! Definitely we need more strong players to try to rivalize :)

Here is the 4th game that just finished :


( ; FF[1] GM[1] SZ[19] AP[Ficgs] RU[Chinese] GN[von Erichsen,Svante Carl-Lu,Ke] HA[0] KM[7.5] WR[2653] PW[von Erichsen,Svante Carl] BR[2483] PB[Lu,Ke] DT[February 28 3:6:11 CET 2009] RE[W+T] ; B[pd] ; W[dc] ; B[pp] ; W[eq] ; B[pj] ; W[nq] ; B[lq] ; W[no] ; B[pn] ; W[kp] ; B[lp] ; W[lo] ; B[kq] ; W[jp] ; B[jq] ; W[ip] ; B[hq] ; W[hp] ; B[gq] ; W[gp] ; B[fq] ; W[fp] ; B[er] ; W[dr] ; B[dq] ; W[ep] ; B[fr] ; W[cq] ; B[cj] ; W[ch] ; B[co] ; W[cn] ; B[bn] ; W[dn] ; B[cm] ; W[nc] ; B[kd] ; W[ne] ; B[pf] ; W[ng] ; B[gc] ; W[ic] ; B[id] ; W[jd] ; B[jc] ; W[je] ; B[ib] ; W[kc] ; B[hc] ; W[de] ; B[lc] ; W[ph] ; B[oh] ; W[qe] ; B[pe] ; W[pg] ; B[og] ; W[of] ; B[pi] ; W[qf] ; B[rh] ; W[qd] ; B[pc] ; W[qc] ; B[qg] ; W[pb] ; B[ob] ; W[qb] ; B[nb] ; W[nh] ; B[qh] ; W[pl] ; B[om] ; W[qo] ; B[po] ; W[qp] ; B[qn] ; W[pq] ; B[oq] ; W[pr] ; B[or] ; W[rq] ; B[mj] ; W[mc] ; B[kb] ; W[lf] ; B[lh] ; W[jg] ; B[ji] ; W[mb] ; B[oc] ; W[ie] ; B[he] ; W[hf] ; B[gf] ; W[hg] ; B[mf] ; W[me] ; B[mg] ; W[ke] ; B[ld] ; W[le] ; B[nf] ; W[eh] ; B[hi] ; W[kh] ; B[ki] ; W[rn] ; B[rm] ; W[ro] ; B[ql] ; W[bk] ; B[bj] ; W[cl] ; B[dm] ; W[bm] ; B[bo] ; W[dl] ; B[dp] ; W[br] ; B[em] ; W[en] )




Svante Carl von Erichsen    (2009-08-28 09:44:30)
Thanks

Thank you very much.

I must admit, though, that I am a bit disappointed that all these games were decided by the clock. Game 1, I am definitely behind, Game 2, I think that I have a winning position, Game 3 is very close and would have been decided by endgame (there are some very large points open), Game 4, I am back in the game after installing a group in his moyo, but I believe he is still slightly ahead, Game 5, I think that he has to defend the group at the bottom now, so I can reduce the left side, then switch to the top right corner; I am still relatively thin at the top (compared to the rest of the board), so I think the game would have had to be decided in a fight there.

So, all in all, I think that these were really interesting games, and it is a pity that they were finished too early. Lu Ke is a very strong player, and I am really lucky to have a positive score against him. I just hope that my next opponent pays a bit more attention to the clock.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-02 02:06:53)
Response

The rationale for the 400 points bands in class tournaments and 200 bands in rapid tournaments is to reduce the number of opportunities to play rapid tournaments (that are much more time consuming and may lead to general forfeits)... I still do not understand why 400 points bands are a problem as most players play the tournaments that may help to increase their rating (as Michael said, by the way the Rapid M seems quite dedicated for 2100-2199 rated players, actually a future improvement may be 100 points bands).

Anyway, I see no strong reason not to try this change... let's do it unless someone sees this strong reason.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-02 18:00:40)
FIDE chess rating list, september 2009

As Veselin Topalov (former FIDE world champion) & Viswanathan Anand (current FIDE world champion) did not play any game since the july rating list has been published, they remain number 1 & number 2 in the top rankings, but their followers played quite many games : Levon Aronian is now number 3 with 2773 points while Vladimir Kramnik & Magnus Carlsen are number 4 and 5 with 2772 elo points.

Here are the 2700+ players :

1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2813
2 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2788
3 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2773
4 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2772
5 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772
6 Leko, Peter g HUN 2762
7 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2757
8 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2756
9 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2756
10 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2750
11 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2742
12 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2741
13 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2741
14 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2740
15 Wang, Yue g CHN 2736
16 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2735
17 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2733
18 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2730
19 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2725
20 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2722
21 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2721
22 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2719
23 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2718
24 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2717
25 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2715
26 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2711
27 Motylev, Alexander g RUS 2710
28 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2709
29 Short, Nigel D g ENG 2706
30 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2703
31 Kasimdzhanov, Rustam g UZB 2702
32 Bu, Xiangzhi g CHN 2702


Scott Nichols    (2009-09-16 08:58:46)
Quick Corr. Chess

With the recent narrowing of the band in standard tournaments, it occurred to me that there is even less opportunity to get games than before. For those of us (and I think it is many) who check the site many times daily waiting for the next move, there just isn't enough games to feed our tremendous appetite for chess. I propose a new catagory, Quick Corr. chess, I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but here it is. It would have it's own Quick chess rating. Bands would be, Over 2000, 1600-2000, and under 1600. Time limit-10 days per game, increment-8 hours. I truly believe there is a market for this here. Advanced chess requires that you actually be at the comp. for a length of time till game is done, so it is not an option for many. But as you can see there has been quite an increase in advanced games being played. So---if you are one of those players like me, that check for moves first thing in the morning and last thing at night, sneak your laptop into the bathroom at work to see if your opponent took the sacrifice you just offered, etc., and time after time are disappointed at not seeing any new moves, please offer your support and suggestions on this. Thank you, signed "Starving for chess". :)


Garvin Gray    (2009-09-27 12:55:35)
different design and direction

I thought that the fritz designers had taken the decision a while back to focus more on features for the program rather than just trying to make fritz as strong as possible against other engines.

So I would be surprised if it was as good as rybka in competitions.


Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman    (2009-09-28 22:21:17)
Promotion

The promotion has centered around the new interface(GUI)and the new pemium membership for playchess. About the engine they just said "new stronger engine" but no numbers given.

Seems they emphasize the GUI and Shredder 12 the new human levels. Not as much the engine strenght as they gave up in chasing Rybka. I agree with Garvin I doubt Fritz will be close to Rybka 3


Nick Burrows    (2009-10-09 20:09:13)
Game from today




William Taylor    (2009-10-13 14:08:30)
C

C is the only option which I would have time to play (at the moment that is - in uni holidays I'd have time for any of the options). I may not play anyway though during term time, so I don't have a strong opinion on this.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-10-22 20:41:56)
Huayong Yang is the new Go WCH finalist

Congrats to Huayong Yang who made it in the Go WCH 4 preliminary tournament with an outstanding 8/8 !

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WCH_TOURNAMENT__000004

He will play Svante Carl von Erichsen in the next Go WCH final match...

Huayong started with the minimal authorized rank (10 kyu) without an official rating but obviously he's much much stronger ... His current rating is 2334 (3 dan) already, so the question is : do his opponents have an idea on his real strength ? :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-10-23 14:16:12)
ICCF - final

Congrats Peter, a very strong tournament!

That's a pity the top seeds 2700+ do not play this one :/


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-10-29 23:01:27)
Most active players, amazing statistics!

These statistics (updated every 2 days) are available at :
http://www.ficgs.com/about.html


And the overall winner is........ :)

Players most active : General (moves played)


1. Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff : 124234
2. Rolf Staggat : 81806
3. Anderson Barradas : 55829
4. Stephane Legrand : 47936
5. Scott Nichols : 46711
6. Mark Noble : 37387
7. Findlay Murray : 35874
8. Volker Koslowski : 33241
9. Don Groves : 29539
10. Thibault de Vassal : 26104
11. Francisco Gramajo : 25281
12. Sergey Uzdin : 25256
13. Michael Sharland : 24890
14. Josef Riha : 24193
15. Jason Repa : 22765
16. Laurine Ségur : 22577
17. Alexis Bromo : 20198
18. Benjamin Collette : 20112
19. Fernando Vasquez : 19928
20. Laszlo Kis-Kos : 19174
21. Christian Koch : 18450
22. Evgeny Yarkov : 17168
23. Xavier Pichelin : 16559
24. Garvin Gray : 16388
25. Ranganathan Raman : 15750
26. Sebastian Boehme : 15190
27. Zdravko Stoyanov : 15186
28. Nick Ioffe : 15151
29. Phil Cook : 15007
30. Sean McNabb : 14572
31. Daniel Parmet : 13814
32. Ilmars Cirulis : 13118
33. Joaquim Malpalma : 13057
34. Dmitriy Panov : 12733
35. Nelson Bernal Varela : 12119
36. Marco Roncagliolo : 11741
37. Dmytro Romaniuk : 11648
38. Miroslav Rakovic : 11435
39. Nick Burrows : 11242
40. Janeen Walden : 10967
41. Claude Brisson : 10812
42. Sandor Porkolab : 10714
43. Christophe Czekaj : 10678
44. Janusz Kepinski : 10675
45. Peter Willoughby : 10634
46. Benjamin Block : 10633
47. Kate Lubeck : 10155
48. Charlie Neil : 10076
49. Darko Pipac : 10072
50. William Taylor : 10036



Players most active : Go


1. Don Groves : 17026
2. Claude Brisson : 10812
3. Nick Ioffe : 10795
4. Alejandro Suarez-Moreno : 10018
5. Mickaël Simon : 8986
6. Thibault de Vassal : 8870
7. Sean McNabb : 8666
8. Sergey Tarassov : 8236
9. Phil Cook : 8186
10. Tetsuya Kobayashi : 7816



Players most active : Chess


1. Josef Riha : 24119
2. Fernando Vasquez : 19820
3. Zdravko Stoyanov : 14523
4. Anderson Barradas : 12587
5. Ilmars Cirulis : 12200
6. Laszlo Kis-Kos : 12068
7. Janusz Kepinski : 10675
8. Garvin Gray : 10638
9. Scott Nichols : 10211
10. Charlie Neil : 10076



Players most active : Chess 960


1. Christophe Czekaj : 1224
2. Joaquim Malpalma : 916
3. Frederick Estieu : 672
4. Ilmars Cirulis : 605
5. Pavel Háse : 600
6. Sefa Sarihan : 524
7. Sandor Porkolab : 512
8. Jay Melquiades : 495
9. Christian Koch : 470
10. Rick Spangler : 447



Players most active : Big Chess


1. Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff : 5583
2. Peter Willoughby : 4368
3. José Carrizo : 3319
4. Thibault de Vassal : 3199
5. Mark Noble : 2949
6. Sandor Porkolab : 2467
7. Volker Koslowski : 1887
8. Paul König : 1790
9. William Taylor : 1706
10. Ranganathan Raman : 1620



Players most active : Poker Holdem


1. Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff : 111119
2. Rolf Staggat : 75570
3. Stephane Legrand : 41639
4. Anderson Barradas : 38671
5. Scott Nichols : 36500
6. Findlay Murray : 33008
7. Mark Noble : 31172
8. Volker Koslowski : 25829
9. Michael Sharland : 20721
10. Francisco Gramajo : 20431


Congrats Heinz-Georg, definitely you're the most addicted player ;)


Garvin Gray    (2009-10-30 14:04:54)
accept challenge

William, you could start by being white against me in lightning bronze :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-11-03 11:40:33)
FIDE november rating list

Finally, Magnus Carlsen crossed the 2800 mark and reaches the 2nd place on the FIDE november rating list, ahead of world champion Viswanathan Anand. The next months will be interesting, at last :)


FIDE November 1st 2009 – Top 20 Players

Rank Name Title Country Rating Games BirthYear

1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2810 10 1975
2 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2801 10 1990
3 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2788 0 1969
4 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2786 13 1982
5 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772 0 1975
6 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2758 11 1986
7 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2758 11 1968
8 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2754 17 1976
9 Leko, Peter g HUN 2752 10 1979
10 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2750 0 1977
11 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2748 10 1987
12 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2739 13 1969
13 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2739 5 1983
14 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2736 13 1983
15 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2736 10 1983
16 Wang, Yue g CHN 2734 27 1987
17 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2729 15 1983
18 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2723 12 1990
19 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2719 25 1985
20 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2719 18 1972


More details in the Chessbase news :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5879


Philip Roe    (2009-11-03 18:15:59)
Only after the finish

Suppose A is the strongest player in a WCH qualifier, and B is his nearest rival. A could use the thread to give advice to B's opponents.


Nick Burrows    (2009-11-06 06:56:01)
"At a Vacation Exercise in the College"

Hi Phillip. I had a look around also, many sources site the quote as being wrongly attributed to the baseball player Branch Rickey.
The poem itself was written in Latin & English, then finished with lines of prose which are usually not published.
The quote is said to come from this prose and not the main body of the poem.


John Smith    (2009-11-14 12:18:56)
thanks for the update!

Therefore I should be looking into purchasing Rybka and another engine whose style is different, and the two put together could create some controversy.

Which (strong) engines have a style that is as far as possible to Rybka's?


John Smith    (2009-11-17 04:11:40)
thanks!

Nothing wrong with your English!, it was just a matter of definition :) I am not familiar with advanced chess so it was the first time I came across the term "critical points" in chess.


John Smith    (2009-11-17 09:54:56)
engine styles

I would be thankful if I had a little more information on engine styles:

- Which is the most positional engine(s) (has positional knowledge+plays more positionally)?

- Which is the most solid engine(s)?

- Which engine(s) that goes for wild complications most often (and is strong in complex/unclear positions)?


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-11-17 12:15:57)
One engine vs. several engines

Naum discontinued ? Really ? That would be bad news...

In my experience, other engines do not really give "additional informations". One chess engine give informations, several chess engines give odds. Other (weaker) chess engines may give bad odds as well and actually quite often. Only your analysis will give you true informations, you just have to explore not only the best variant provided by your engine.

Finally most important is to NOT trust chess engines IMO. In most cases at correspondence chess against strong players, in some ways "I" won some games (by analysis and ideas) and "engines" made me lose some others, that's correspondence chess... (hear me, of course it was my entire responsibility in all my losses & I wouldn't have been able to get good results without the help of engines :))


Iouri Basiliev    (2009-11-18 16:40:46)
1st team tournament : games & results !

FSF vs. Yellow blue warriors : 3-0 ***WRONG***


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-11-19 15:53:28)
Chessbase humor :)

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5924

The winners at the closing ceremony: Sergey Karjakin (Bronze), Vishy Anand (Silver), Kirsan Ilyumzhinov (Natural Gas and Oil), Magnus Carlsen (Gold)

:)


Henri Muller    (2009-11-21 18:38:03)
marc lacrosse

hello marc!! on s'est connu à l'occasion de nombreux échanges d'idées - sur les échecs et autres.
Nous avons aussi joué qqs parties ensemble. Mais que s'est-il donc passé ?? Je viens seulement d'apprendre la triste et pénible nouvelle. Repose en paix, Marc. Je pense que tes amis - tu en avais bcp ! - se souviendront de toi comme d'un joueur au fair-play exemplaire ; aux idées larges et à la compréhension totale et amicale de tes adversaires. Tu nous manqueras. Adieu l'ami.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-11-27 19:30:34)
Ivanchuk may quite professional chess

What's wrong with Vassily Ivanchuk ? In his interview in Chessbase news, he says he may quit professional chess because of this match lost to an unknown player... Not only a match, a "crucial" match he said (like any other?), but it seems to me that there are a lot of things hidden behind the words. Maybe it's just time for him to change his life, at least I hope it is so simple.

End of the interview : "I only feel that the world has crashed down around me. Everyone is against me, and I don't see the way out…"

Strange...

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5941


Wayne Lowrance    (2009-12-11 21:08:34)
clock implementation

Hello Thibault. In my tournament SM11 my clock increment may not have been added after first 10 moves in all my games. If you have a time stamp would you please examine it. My remaining days left does not suggest that 40 moves have been added at end of the 10 move slot in my games. Knowing my operating habits it sure sound wrong.

Understand this please, unless you can verify with time stamp or whatever I do not want any adjustments. I will play as the remaining time in each game remains. Wayne


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (2009-12-22 17:59:10)
The best one

@( Locking firmely the window serve nothing, only small thiefs pass there, the big thiefs, enter trought the front door )@ Luc-Olivier Leclerc..



So, how it is that ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-12-27 14:08:37)
10 moves rule

IMO this rule is important because :

1) It dissuades cheating by creating several accounts playing together through proxies... This rule makes it really hard to win some points this way, it would be detected even more easily.

2) In many cases, new players (who did not realize that computer assistance was authorized, who do not like the correspondence time controls or who just wanted to try) forfeit their games after 3 or 4 moves rather than let it go. There is no doubt to me that this phenomenon would have much more bad effects on ratings.

3) It is likely that a player who "miniatures" another player is actually much stronger than his opponent, so his rating shouldn't increase so much.


Finally and that's the main point IMO, "unfair" situations are statistically negligible compared to the other possible rules. See the other servers...

So far I'm quite convinced that it is one of the best implemented rules here, and this is exactly the way I optimise the programs: "Statistics give better results than looking for perfection" :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-12-27 19:13:04)
Rating calculation

Re... nos réponses précédentes se sont croisées, désolé :) Le prochain classement est calculé en tenant compte du classement courant donc cela ne change rien puisque l'on ne peut pas vraiment prévoir quand se termineront les parties... on gagne forcément des points en faisant 50% contre des joueurs qui avaient un TER plus fort que le classement courant, idem dans l'autre sens. En général, la "gestion" des résultats n'influe que très peu sur le classement final.


Wayne Lowrance    (2009-12-29 00:56:03)
Rybka demise

Howdy all. I feel like voicing my opinion of Vas and Rybka. I honestly feel his hold on the chess community has weakened to the point of breaking. He has his problems. His source code apparently has been compromized. This has led him to not releasing a Rybka3+ as promised. The release of Rybka4 is very cloudy. Then there is this cloud Rybka internet rentel thing that is supported by no one it seems, me for sure.
Anyways this is just back drop for recent developments in free software engines that are very strong and are pushing R3 in ratings. I am thinking about the following engines, that I have downloaded and find very interesting AND strong :

Stockfish 1.6
Brite 0.4A
Spark 0.3

I have minimal experience with these engines. I just want all my friend here on FICGS to be aware of them and if interested they can download them and be on equal footing. My wish is for better chess and I have no ambition to have secret progams.
The important thing I feel is that the loss of Rybka engine does not put much of dent in play quality. It was gonna happen sooner or later, and now it seems sooner.
My honest evaluation today is that Rybka3 still provides the best insite to best mid game play.
I want to put in a word for Zappa. I fairly often use Zappa as my CC engine partner because of better end game analysis. Rybka has no peer in mid game analysis. Well I share these thought with you all for what it may be worth. Best 2010 Cheers. Wayne


William Taylor    (2009-12-29 15:49:17)
Rybka demise

Thanks Wayne - an interesting post. I've downloaded Stockfish and am currently testing it against Rybka - 50% so far. While searching for the engines you mentioned I came across an engine called RobboLito (and Ippolit and Igorrit which are similar I believe). Opinion seems to be divided as to whether or not it is a Rybka clone, and how strong it is. Is this what you were referring to when you said Rybka's code may have been compromised? Any opinion on RobboLito?


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-12-29 19:50:45)
RobboLito vs. Rybka 3

What are RobboLito, Ippolit and Igorrit ? It looks like these names are invading computer chess forums... As you may have read in the discussion mentioned below, the Rybka 3's source code may have been compromised and these engines "may" be clones of Rybka 3 (everyone does not agree on this). Good or really bad news, anyway this open source chess engine may have many consequences on the computer chess world, and correspondence chess as well...

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=8031


From the wikispace mentioned below :

IPPOLIT : Intellectual Persons Promotion Of Leninist International Tradesunions (!??)

Q. What is RobboLito?
A. RobboLito is the version of IPPOLIT that now contains endgame tablebases, the RobboBases.

A few links on RobboLito 0.085f1a, Ippolit & Igorrit (says it all IMO) :

http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/
http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/RobboLito
http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/Igorrit
http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/FAQ

see also : ippolit.wikispaces.com/Clone+(Question)

http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/News
-> IPPOLIT banned from chessprogramming wiki!
PlayChess banned IPPOLIT from use online also.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r_V_QkmHjo
http://www.chesslogik.com/robbolito.htm
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/free-chessengine-robbolito-is-1-at-swisstest-rybka-2?lc=1
http://www.cyclonechess.com/rybka3.htm

"RobboLito is an open-source UCI chess engine by: Yakov Petrovich Golyadkin, Igor Igorovich Igoronov, and Roberto Pescatore."

RobboLito does not yet support: multiPV, own book, egbbs, tablebases, multiple CPUs/cores, chess variants

Estimated rating: ~ 3300 ELO

Available versions:

RobboLito 0.085g3 w32 (optimized windows 32-bit executable and source code)
RobboLito_0.085g3_w32_no_SSE2 (optimized windows 32-bit executable - for older CPUs that don't support Intel SSE2 instruction set)
RobboLito 0.085g3_x64 (fast windows 64-bit PGO executable compiled by peterpan)
RobboLito 0.085g3l_x86 (optimized linux 64-bit executable and source code ported to linux by unisky)

http://www.cyclonechess.com/robbolito.htm
http://www.cyclonechess.com/rybka3.htm

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1261597025/4
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1258991841
http://queenchess.blogspot.com/2009/11/fritz-12-vs-robbolito-e2-latest-version.html
http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/next?t=663 (french)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-12-30 00:39:48)
RobboLito NOT a clone of Rybka ?

According to Tony Thomas, RobboLito & Ippolit wouldn't be a clone of Rybka 3... and it would be 50 to 100 points stronger!

http://tonythomas.mylivepage.com/forum/134/2663/Ippolit%20&%20Robbolito%20are%20NOT%20Rybka%20clones


William Taylor    (2009-12-30 22:17:44)
Wayne

Stockfish is not a commercial program, and has only been released relatively recently (I think), but it is already at about the level of Rybka. I know it's based on Glaurung, which has had years of work put into it, but perhaps Robbo is also based on a strong open source program. I'm not saying Robbo's not a Rybka clone - very likely it is - I'm just pointing out that it is possible for free, open source programs to approach or surpass the level of commercial ones.

On another note, for anyone interested I ran a quick 12xRR 2 2 tournament today with Rybka 3 32-bit, Stockfish 1.6 JA and RobboLito 0.085g3 w32. Rybka scored 13/24, Stockfish 12/24, and Robbo 11/24. Of course, the time control was very quick and I'm not putting this result forward as a serious test, but it seems that the 3 (or 2) may be close enough to be competitive. An interesting time for computer chess.


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2010-01-01 02:50:25)
Open Source ...

Really I think a commercial program like Rybka will be very likely the strongest not because of the software developers working on ir, but because they can get some tips from open source programs, like Robbolito.


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-01-07 18:45:05)
Fed Up

Thib you missed my point. It is the forbidden, hush hush, "dont you dare mention that name here" that bugs me the most. I have always been a strong supporter of the Vas "lil girl", followed her tournaments etc etc.
Oh well it is not worth my concern anyhow. As I said I owe no loyality to Vas any more, If his continued Rybka programing yields the best engine, I will buy it. Results is what matters.
Wayne


Don Groves    (2010-01-11 07:56:19)
Accept Draw and resign......

Remember Murphy's Law, Rodolfo -- if something can go wrong, it will ;-)


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-01-11 21:33:11)
Fed Up

Howdy Thibault. Clone or no Clone. Technically I am not qualified to check source etc. But I will say this. The evals are very very often identical after checking .
Also, in some brief eng-eng matches, I find that Rybka is stronger, at least for longer timers which would suggest favorable CC play. Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-01-24 20:18:09)
Resign before 10th move

Hi Kamesh, as I replied in the chat bar, it is not possible to save his elo by resigning before the 10th move, he'll lose the same number of points as if he resign at move 24 or 67. Indeed, the game is not rated for the winner before his 10th move, but if you are stronger than your opponents in this category, you'll gain almost the same number of points anyway. This rule is statistically fair, then this is only a question of time.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-01-26 10:42:07)
Kasparov article on computers in chess

A must read...

The end of the article on computers & Poker is interesting too. Not a word on the game of Go, too bad.

I will quote this: "Perhaps chess is the wrong game for the times (Garry Kasparov, 2010)"


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-01-26 16:24:43)
Go chinese rules : should pass count?

A player just told me that in chinese rules for the game of Go, consecutive pass change the score of the game (thus in some cases the winner as well), I just visited a few websites that do not even mention this rule that is taken in account by some Go programs.

In my opinion it does not have any sense to link this to the score of the game, but I may be wrong... Does anyone have an opinion on this and clear examples that show it should be taken (or not) here at FICGS ?

I'll add a word on this in the rules after it is clearer to me.

Thanks in advance!


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-02-03 16:52:19)
Huang Xiangren 4p vs Lin Shengxian 7p

The first black moves looks very interesting and indeed it rotates... I feel I'm not strong enough to start to understand this.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2010-02-19 19:50:51)
Curious opening

7.5 (!) games won by white
7.5 (!) games won by black

smth wrong


Svante Carl von Erichsen    (2010-02-21 02:51:44)
Learning Go

Recently, someone asked how to learn Go, or who would teach Go, on the side bar chat. The question and my answer has been removed from there, so I'll post some hints here.

First, to learn the rules, I would recommend "The Interactive Way to Go" at http://playgo.to/iwtg/en

To learn playing, play as much as possible, first on small boards (9x9), then going to bigger ones (13x13, 19x19) when you feel that you can keep track of the game there. Play with proper handicaps to keep the game even and improve your feeling for the board.

Teaching can take the form of simple game reviews, where the stronger player analyzes a single game and shows the weakest points and how to correct them; the "Go Teaching Ladder" organizes a lot of such reviews (http://gtl.xmp.net). It can also be done in interactive sessions; these require either face to face contact or a "live" server, though (e.g. KGS at http://gokgs.com). It is generally thought that the teacher should be about 5 stones stronger than the pupil.

Especially in the beginning, the advice is to play, play, play, and not be too fixated on ranks or winning percentages.


Garvin Gray    (2010-02-24 11:21:51)
Ficgs clock setting

Hello Thibault,

The ficgs clock seems to be 'out' by ten minutes ie it is always ten minutes in front. If it is 10 past the hour by my clock, the ficgs clock will say it is 20 past. This happens regardless of what time of day it is.

Has anyone else noticed this?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-03 14:29:25)
Hosting tournaments

Sure it is possible, I would even create such tournaments for free (if not too many ones) but it would be played with FICGS rules which are slightly different from FIDE rules. About players able to create their own tournaments, closed or not, I would have to think about this, I'm not sure it is really necessary as e.g. I always add thematic chess tournaments that I'm suggested, and "private" tournaments may be not so easy to start, but if there is a strong demand, I could arrange that.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-12 18:38:47)
Poker Min Bid

In some cases I guess that there is no other choice than to bet less than the big or small blind !?

Even if players have no reason to do that, I preferred to offer the choice... maybe I was wrong, maybe it will be changed, not a big deal IMO.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-03-11 00:41:07)
Poker Min Bid

I don't think you should be able to bid less than the blind... bidding one when the blind is two seems wrong.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-16 10:37:01)
Interview with E. Kotlyanskiy

Congrats again to Edward Kotlyanskiy, new FICGS chess champion after beating Xavier Pichelin (2577) in the 12 games final match of the 3rd cycle.

Edward kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match and correspondence chess in general :

_________________________


> Hi Edward, first of all congratulations for winning this 12 games match against the former FICGS chess champion, Xavier Pichelin. You had to score at least one point more than your opponent, what was your strategy when the games started?

Knowing that I had to score at least +1 against Xavier, I had to try to get the games into complex positions where there are many options to play for both sides. At the point when the games started, I was the underdog to Xavier (mainly due to the face that I was rated about 200 points lower). In part, I think that one of the reasons why Xavier allowed the games to reach such complex positions is due to the fact that his rating was undoubtedly higher than mine and therefore he probably assumed that he could “outplay” me. Although this was simultaneously a brave and admirable choice, I think an option that many other players would have pursued would have been to play “drawish” lines with the hope of having all of the games ending in draws. I have great respect for Xavier due to the fact that he didn't choose such a path and allowed us to put on a hard fought show that was worth watching.

> What could you say on the hot moments of the match?

The first game in which I thought I had very good chances to win was game 34739. In this game (particularly on move 18) Xavier played the move Nb8?? Looking back at the move, I realized that the game was lost for him. I assumed that Xavier probably underestimated the threat of f5. There were no good responses and/or countermeasures for the move f5. For example, if 19) gxf5, I have 20) Nxh5 Nc6 21) Rc3! Bxh4 (Qd8 was also possible) 22) Qf4 Be7 23) g4! His king is just clearly caught in the attack! 19) exf5 also fails to 20) e6 f6 (trying to keep the king safe) 21) Bxh5!! gxh5 22) Nc6 Rc3 and therefore it’s easy to see that it is just a matter of time. Xavier did try something better although even that failed due to some nice moves. I believe that 21) g7 came as a surprise to Xavier (or that at least he hadn't seen this move when playing Nb8). After Nxh5 (another neat move), another line that I thought Xavier would enter (which is also losing) is 22) Qxc2 23) Qxc2 Rxc2 24) Nf6+! Bxf6 25) exf6. Clearly my pawns are just too strong! Knowing that I am winning after the mentioned alternatives, the other games (although I won three others) were just necessary to hold without falling for any tactics/tricks.

A second game I want to briefly comment on is game 34729. I played a very nice (although I am not sure if it is winning just yet) move known as 17.a4! It was a very nice way to open the position on both of our kings. In all honesty, the move that I think was winning in this situation 25) Rd3, I did not even consider too highly until the position reached that very move. After a relatively short analysis, I was indeed pleasantly surprised to see that; overall, it was completely winning for me.

> What could you say on the advantages and inconveniences of this 12 games match format played at a quite fast time control?

From the days when I first starting playing correspondence chess, I have always been accustomed to making moves rather quickly. In fact, when I first started playing, in some games I made moves within 10 minutes of looking at the position. Although I take a lot more time to analyze now-a-days, I still consider the speed of my play to be relatively faster compared to most other correspondence players. Playing 12 games simultaneously can have drawbacks as not having enough time to properly analyze; however, I didn't have such a problem. With the exception of a few games that I was playing on IECG at the start of the FICGS Championship, the 12 game series was my main concern.

> Without revealing your secrets, how would you define modern correspondence chess as a centaur (playing with chess engines)?

These days, it is impossible to play correspondence chess on a high level without consulting the engine. It is also unlikely that one can achieve a lot of success just by following the engine blindly (even after a long analysis). Personally, I know that some of my friends believe that in correspondence chess you are just following the engine but I believe that most “high level” correspondence players know that it just doesn't work that way.

In my opinion, one of the most important skills that a correspondence player should have is having some sense of where the engine he is analyzing with is faulty. To give a well known example, many people know that there are certain endgame positions that an engine alone can't be trusted in (a simple case is the wrong color bishop). In essence, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of whatever engine you are analyzing with is critical to playing correspondence chess at a “high level”.

> Why did you choose to play correspondence chess, do you play OTB (over the board) chess as well?

Before starting correspondence chess, I played OTB chess for quite a few years. When my schedule became busy, I realized that I wouldn't have much time to play OTB in clubs. I came across correspondence chess and got hooked on it very quickly. Also, I began to enjoy more of the subtleties of the game; something that is just lacking in OTB blitz games. I imagine that some people prefer to play practical chess (OTB) in which a move order wouldn't make much of a difference; however, I guess I am a perfectionist and believe the game should be played on as high of a level as possible.

> How many correspondence games do you usually play at the same time (on different chess servers or by email)? Would you say that it is an addiction?

Usually, I played about 5 to 10 games on average on all different sites. I did play via email on IECC but wasn't fond of playing by email therefore I went back to server only sites (IECG, FICGS, Schemingmind).

I can definitely say that correspondence chess is an addiction. All too often, I catch myself analyzing games when I really should be doing something much more time sensitive. Well, at least I can say that this addiction paid off in that I am the new FICGS champion!

> Are you interested in other games?

As far as board games go, chess is primarily the only game I play. At times I do play games like monopoly and scrabble with my friends. Another interest that I have is billiards.

> The next challenger for the FICGS chess champion title is SM Eros Riccio (winner of several PlayChess PAL freestyle tournaments). Do you think that you'll play him? What does this perspective inspire in you?

I can't wait to play Eros! I believe that he would be my toughest opponent yet (although I have played GM Leitão, Rafael (fide elo: 2619) and managed to draw). Eros is like an unstoppable juggernaut in corr chess. That said, I look forward to our games and I am certain that they will simultaneously be challenging and entertaining.

> Thanks and best of luck in your future games!


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-20 22:24:31)
Firebird, Ivanhoe vs. Rybka

Of course, since the free open source chess engine Ippolit is available, clones have appeared, starting with RobboLito & Igorrit, now Ivanhoe & Firebird, and some may be even stronger...

It seems that we still do not have any clue to know if Ippolit is itself a clone of Rybka or not, anyway it would interesting to compare these new engines.

Does anyone have any informations, tournament results or something for these new engines?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-21 22:52:10)
SSDF rating list (march 2010)

The new SSDF rating list reveals at least one thing : Between an old Athlon 1200 and a modern Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, there is at least a 120 point gap. Unfortunately, Ippolit/Ivanhoe/Igorrit/Firebird are still out of the list.


SSDF RATING LIST 2010-03-21 %120316 games played by 311 computers
Rating + - Games Won Oppo
------ --- --- ----- --- ----
1 Deep Rybka 3 x64 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3227 27 -25 1005 83% 2962
2 Naum 4 x64 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3149 25 -23 986 74% 2963
3 Deep Shredder 12 x64 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3124 26 -24 863 70% 2972
4 Deep Fritz 12 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3117 37 -36 373 60% 3043
5 Deep Rybka 3 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 3090 39 -38 332 58% 3033
6 Deep Fritz 11 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3081 22 -21 1142 68% 2946
7 Zappa Mexico II x64 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3068 27 -26 696 59% 3002
8 Naum 3.1 x64 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3052 30 -29 572 59% 2990
9 Deep Hiarcs 12 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3039 22 -21 1087 61% 2958
10 Deep Shredder 11 x64 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3038 26 -26 726 58% 2981
11 Hiarcs 11.2 MP 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3010 25 -25 761 54% 2984
12 Glaurung 2.2 x64 MP 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 3007 22 -22 1001 60% 2933
13 Shredder 12 256MB A1200 MHz 3006 39 -39 320 45% 3040
14 Naum 4 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2998 29 -29 574 50% 2996
15 Deep Junior 10.1 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 2975 25 -25 766 48% 2992
16 Rybka 2.3.1 Arena 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2926 22 -22 964 52% 2912
17 Fritz 11 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2915 27 -27 669 47% 2935
18 Deep Fritz 8 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 2912 25 -26 753 39% 2991
19 Shredder 8 MP 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 2908 28 -29 603 39% 2984
20 Deep Shredder 11 256MB Athlon 1200 2907 30 -30 534 45% 2941
21 Hiarcs 11.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2879 23 -23 941 49% 2882
22 CM King 3.5 x64 MP 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 2866 31 -32 530 33% 2990
23 Junior 10.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2864 19 -20 1271 47% 2882
24 Deep Junior 8 2GB Q6600 2,4 GHz 2859 29 -30 589 36% 2961
25 Fritz 10 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2851 34 -33 458 64% 2749
26 Zap!Chess Z. 256MB Athlon 1200 MH 2842 21 -21 1060 50% 2840
27 Fruit 2.2.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2833 19 -19 1385 62% 2750
28 Spike 1.2 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2817 26 -26 714 57% 2766
29 Chess Tiger 2007 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2775 25 -26 748 46% 2805
29 Rybka 1.0 beta 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2775 64 -69 115 38% 2860
31 Zap!Chess 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2737 30 -29 562 53% 2713
32 Gandalf 6.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2735 24 -24 855 56% 2693
33 Pocket Fritz 3 Hiarcs Ipaq 214 624 MHz 2733 64 -58 142 66% 2617
34 Chessmaster 9000 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2720 36 -35 385 56% 2680
35 Pro Deo 1.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2714 24 -23 876 57% 2660
36 Pocket Shredder Ipaq 114 624 MHz 2698 83 -70 100 74% 2520
37 Deep Sjeng 1.5a 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2675 31 -31 493 52% 2663
38 CEBoard Fruit 2.3.1 XScale 400 400 MHz 2647 65 -61 129 62% 2564
39 Revelation Rybka 2.2 XScale 500 MHz 2632 47 -45 240 62% 2549
39 Ruffian 2.0.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2632 49 -49 205 46% 2661
41 Pocket Fritz 3 Glaurung 2.1 Ipaq 614C 2528 69 -74 100 40% 2604
42 Pocket Fritz 2 XScale 400 MHz 2508 48 -46 225 57% 2459
43 Resurrection Rybka 2.2 StrongARM 203 MH 2484 43 -43 260 51% 2477
44 Resurrection Fruit '05 StrongARM 203 MH 2395 67 -63 120 60% 2320
45 Hiarcs 9.5a/9.6 Palm TungstenE OMAP 126 2392 35 -35 400 45% 2426
46 CEBoard Crafty 2004 HP RX4240 400 MHz 2375 52 -54 180 41% 2443
47 R30 v. 2.5 2274 41 -38 343 69% 2136
48 Palm Tiger 2009 Tung C 400 MHz 2229 66 -71 110 38% 2317
49 Chess Genius 1.4 SX1 OMAP 310 120 MHz 2151 50 -48 210 60% 2081
50 Chess Tiger 14.9 Palm m515 16MB 42MHz 2103 69 -74 100 39% 2182


William Taylor    (2010-03-22 12:50:15)
Freestyle Cup: April 2010

The original dates are better for me, as I may be playing an OTB tournament on the 17th. That said, Garvin's desire to play in this event may be stronger than mine. ;)


Garvin Gray    (2010-03-26 22:54:42)
Freestyle Cup: April 2010

Sonnenborn-Berger is a terrible tie break and I strongly recommend that the tie break either be progressive or buchholz.

SB does not tell you much about the path a player took in the tournament (Progressive), or the strength of the opponents they played (Bucholz).

Why does there need to be a tie-break, when we are talking about first place here?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-31 09:09:20)
Poker dealing algorithm

In terms of probabilities, everything that is unlikely to happen is likely to happen one day :)

Many hands have been generated so far, so I'm not astonished if some kind of repetitions occured already.

I created the random-like algorithm and I doubt there's something wrong in its "random" part. If needed I can prove that no card is dealt out of the algorithm, but I'll have to change it then. Anyway, if you wants to make statistics, you're welcome :)


Svante Carl von Erichsen    (2010-03-31 19:42:53)
Poker dealing algorithm

"..., but of course if I reveal it, I'll have to change at least some parameters of the algorithm for the next games."

I don't get this. There is a well known algorithm for shuffling cards, the Fischer-Yates-shuffle. All you need is an unbiased random number generator. There is no need for secrecy.

If you use anything else, it is most likely wrong.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-31 20:30:54)
Freestyle Cup: April 2010

To the players who will participate to the next freestyle tournament, be sure to read the following discussion before to play :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=8345

I recommend to practice this new option (touch move) by playing a few bullet bronze games before the tournament ;)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-05 00:58:06)
Advanced chess ratings calculation

For some reasons that I'll explain below, I updated the advanced chess (bullet, lightning, blitz, freestyle) rating calculation rules to the following :

"Performance = Opponent Current Rating if the game is drawn, + 350 if the game is won, -350 if the game is lost.

The following bonus / malus applied to White and to Black makes ratings fair, as it is not possible to force a player to take White or Black before a game :

(White) Performance = Performance - 50
(Black) Performance = Performance + 50

If there's a winner and if his rating is below 2400, his new rating his :

New Rating = ((8 x Current Rating) + (2 x Performance)) / 10

Otherwise :

New Rating = ((9 x Current Rating) + (1 x Performance)) / 10

The rating calculation does not take account of wins obtained by a stronger player when the Elo difference is greater than 350 points, the same with losses by a weaker player.

In case of a draw or loss against a player rated more than 200 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Current Rating - 200. A player who wins a game cannot lose Elo points, a player who loses a game cannot win Elo points."

More details :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_advanced_chess


The rule that just changed is "If there's a winner and if his rating is below 2400, his new rating his : New Rating = ((8 x Current Rating) + (2 x Performance)) / 10".

This rule will probably be updated again in a few months with a rating limit of 2200 instead of 2400, when advanced chess ratings will be more coherent with correspondence chess ratings.

The reasons are :

1) Advanced/freestyle chess is often neglected partly because players will likely lose some rating points (many strong players using Rybka 3-like engines still have a rating of 1800 or 2000, there are several reasons to this), the main point is probably the interface but I'm fixing it (e.g. the new touch-move option - see Preferences).

2) Chess engines are just stronger and stronger while the ratings do not increase with the previous rules, as a consequence players who just tried advanced chess once years ago shouldn't still top the rating list. It is of course a way for players to find their place quicker in the rating list & to incitate players to play more games as well.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-05 13:52:12)
Chessbase april fool's joke

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6232

Worth to read... among the April 1st three stories, "Fischer’s remains to be exhumed?", "Magnus Carlsen's cousin in America (Matt Damon)" & "LHC goes online – chess grandmasters worried" on the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, it looks like the trap worked quite well (I thought it was Fisher's also), what story did you think it was the april fool's joke ? :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-11 20:59:51)
Match Against Rybka Forum

Oh ok, thanks Robert, I didn't see this discussion at Rybkaforum before...

The idea discussed with "Vytron" is : Half players would play their game here at FICGS, and the other half would play their game at the Rybka forum... Of course there would be a kind of time control there but this would be a friendly match before all!

So please post here if you're interested to play in the FICGS team and specify if you would be ok to play your game at the Rybkaforum.

I'm in, of course (if my new rating allow me to play :)), and I'm ok to play at the Rybkaforum.


Garvin Gray    (2010-04-12 06:02:19)
Freestyle Cup: April 2010

I would certainly prefer only one or two games per night a longer time control.

I am strongly against the idea of allowing free entries whilst other pay. With allowing free entries, they have not done anything to show their commitment to finishing the tournament and could just withdraw/not show up at any stage.

While this can also happen for those who have paid an entry fee, at least these players would lose their entry fee.

Also, I am strongly against this idea of free entries and no chance to win prizes as it means some players can just play risk free with no concern for their overall tournament standing, whilst those competing for prizes have to be mindful of their tournament position.

In effect it will create two different mini tournaments and some players will be adversely affected.

I would rather a smaller tournament, but where all the players are playing under the same conditions ie time control, entry fee, ability to win prizes.


Peter Marriott    (2010-04-13 21:56:25)
Firebird, Ivanhoe vs. Rybka

All I know is that Firebird is dang strong. When I did a match of FireBird vs. Rybka 3 the results were 36/50 for FireBird.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-13 22:30:46)
Big chess ratings

Hi Lazaro!

"Big chess ratings are first estimated from current correspondence chess ratings (current rating -300 points, with at least 1400), then adjusted in real time after each result (...)"

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_big_chess

When you entered your first big chess tournament, the TER was not specified but your current correspondence chess rating was used (minus 300) to calculate your first big chess rating with your first result, so a rating of 1609 seems ok taking account of your opponents ratings. The first results may look quite arbitrary but some rules prevent to lose too many points when losing against a strong opponent with a low rating. Anyway there should be more class categories to get more chances to improve ratings (to be continued), we needed more players but maybe we can do it now.


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-04-15 17:06:14)
Computer keeps locking up... assistance

Thank you Josef. But a lone time back I did see it (I thought). Maybe I remember wrong. Anyone with Fritz11 gui see it ? thank you
Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-21 15:15:22)
Match Against Rybka Forum

Here are the pairings (games started at RybkaForum & are to start here)

Games at Rybka Forum:

Bobby C (RybkaForum) Vs. Harvey Williamson (FICGS)
Kamesh Nookala (FICGS) Vs. Mark Eldridge (RybkaForum)
omprakash (RybkaForum) Vs. Sebastian Boehme (FICGS)
Thibault de Vassal (FICGS) Vs. SpiderG (RybkaForum)
Weirwindle111 (RybkaForum) Vs. Wayne Lowrance (FICGS)
William Taylor (FICGS) Vs. Vytron (RybkaForum)

Games at FICGS:

Garvin Gray (FICGS) Vs. burch_michael (RybkaForum)
clement_george (RybkaForum) Vs. Michel van der Kemp (FICGS)
Mircea Hrubaru (FICGS) Vs. Gaetano Laghetti (RybkaForum)
Ivan Trajkov (RybkaForum) Vs. Robert Mueller (FICGS)
Samy Ould Ahmed (FICGS) Vs. José Sanz (RybkaForum)
Plant_Kevin (RybkaForum) Vs. Stéphane Legrand (FICGS)


Let's have fun :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-21 15:20:31)
Match Against Rybka Forum

About the rules :

Time control 20 days + 20 days / 10 moves at FICGS... for the games played at RybkaForum it is 24/48 hours per move in average & in relax mode, there will not be "losses on time"...

It seems to me that there is no other special rule, I just asked Vytron to confirm.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-21 15:22:13)
Final Match details

It is not so clear yet indeed, I just asked Vytron to confirm, if there's a special rule, I'll specify it as soon as possible in the original discussion :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=8422


Garvin Gray    (2010-04-21 21:30:59)
Wider rating range tournaments

Returning to the 400 rating range will not help for two reasons.

1) Players have shown with both the 400 and now 200 rating ranges that they will not join a tournament if most of the other players are rated below them, even if e-points are offered for winning the tournament
This will not change by going back to 400 point rating bands.

2) The only time players participate in tournaments where they could lose rating points is in the World Champ tourneys, where the prize (qualifying for next round and six games against strong opponents) is greater than the risk of losing rating points.

Hence why I have at least brought up the idea of another set of tournaments. The idea would be every one enters, players are allocated to groups (each group is as equal as possible), then the winners of each group go through to another round robin final group.

The difference between this and the World Champs is that there is no knockout stages and everyone starts from stage one. This means even the 2400's would have to play in stage one to win the tournament.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-22 00:14:03)
Match Against Rybka Forum

All games started !

You can see all boards for games played at FICGS here :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__FICGS_VS_RYBKAFORUM_MATCH&boards=1

The other games played at Rybkaforum :

Bobby C Vs. Harvey Williamson
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=16385

Kamesh N. Vs. Mark Eldridge
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=16389

omprakash Vs. Sebastian Boehme
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=16388

Thibault d.V. Vs. SpiderG
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=16383

Weirwindle111 Vs. Wayne Lowrance
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=16384

William T. Vs. Vytron
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=16390


Have nice games :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-24 17:02:39)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

Tano-Urayoán just posted an interesting idea in the following discussion:

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=8507

I was totally opposed to this idea at a first sight, but after a while I found some real advantages.

The idea : Any player could pay an entry fee to enter a high class chess tournament (e.g. 20 Euros for class M, 40 for class SM, 60 for class GM), whatever his rating.

Of course what we all see first is : Anyone can pay to make increase his rating faster, that is just unfair!

But let's imagine that a player rated 1800 pays an entry fee of 40 Euros to enter the class SM waiting list.

1) The waiting list will be filled faster!

2) If this player is actually stronger than its rating show, he'll find its place faster (the other players will not lose so many points because their ratings are protected - see rating calculation rules).

3) There could be such an extra rule: Players who are already in the waiting list or who will play the tournament may share 50% of the entry fee in Epoints, which would be a kind of compensation for them.

4) These entry fees will help to have more prizes in free tournaments (another compensation) and bigger prizes in e.g. freestyle cups, although I don't have any idea on how many players would be interested in this, so the site will become more popular and so on...


Anyway, please share your views if you have any idea to improve this one, and your opinion is needed here of course!


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-24 14:30:18)
Wider rating range tournaments

I also think about the possibility to imitate the advanced chess (Go as well) rating rules :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=8375

There may be several advantages to this:

1) It would give a better image of the quality of the games compared to the past as engines are stronger and stronger but ratings do not increase in average...

2) It would allow players to access more easily the next category...

3) Old best ratings achieved a few years ago wouldn't be unbreakable anymore...

4) It may motivate retired players to come back to the fight :)


What do you think?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-25 01:50:10)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

Okay, that's what I thought :)

Anyway, the silver games are another way to play stronger players. So that was not necessary in any case.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-25 02:52:37)
FICGS

I understand you Wayne, I don't want to make such mistakes and that's why we talk so much about these changes in this forum :)

On entry fees for a higher class tournament, I agree on the main point of course, but some advantages had to be discussed. The success of this site is also money and money prizes in the future IMO so I prefer to discuss such ideas than to do nothing.

That was the first point. Then there are some other points that remain to be discussed IMO : 1) Maybe correspondence chess ratings should increase (in average) as engines become stronger. 2) Titles calculation rules should probably be harder as a consequence, maybe it should have been changed already.

Correspondence/Advanced chess is constantly evolving, our marks move fast, so rules may have to change. I don't think that FICGS can turn into a kind of Yahoo chess (I did not ever play there btw), the most important thing is the atmosphere and I know that if I make a mistake, someone will let me know very quickly as it happened once a few months ago. We all make that success in that way!


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 :-)


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2010-05-02 17:19:25)
Speeding up Poker games

There will be a problem for those players who can only move once a day. If they live on the "wrong" side of the world and / or they only can move between 5 and 6 o'clock of our time, 10d+12h will not work. If you only offer this time control they will not be able to play.


Don Groves    (2010-05-09 22:43:13)
How many games at once?

Thib, the difference between 8 hours and 60 days is laughable. No one is advocating anything close to 8 hours, just something more reasonable than 60 days. I can see nothing wrong with 7 days, but if that's too short for some, then 14 days. If a person cannot make one move in each game every two weeks, they have too much on their plate.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-09 23:31:20)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Sorry Garvin, I was not clear enough, I meant "what to do if let's say 5 players rated 2000-2200 (who won 5 different tournaments !) suddenly ask for an entry in a 2200+ (class M) waiting list".

We can discuss your other suggestions of course, everything is possible there, but we must find an "agreement" on the other points before :)

> The entry fee for this qualified player should be the amount they won in their previous division.

I guess that we could try this way, but it seems a bit unfair for the winners of strong tournaments, any other opinion?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-09 23:44:16)
Time, time

I don't think we should hear Don this way, I understand that correspondence chess or Go asks us to have a "flash forward" of 1 year, sometimes more, and that may be a real problem in some cases.

I remember the case of a strong player & gentleman, Einar Andreassen, who had to forfeit several games kind of that way :/


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-10 12:34:09)
More Big chess categories

Also I've added a few more big chess tournaments categories to help players to find their place faster in the rating list.

It is also possible to play Big Chess bullet bronze games, as a test for now...


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-11 15:28:54)
Rybka 4, news, tests & results

...and he probably has much more to do this time to protect his source code & make an engine stronger than its possible clones... so we'll see :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-11 18:01:16)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

Hi Michel! Thanks again for discussing it.

> What's next? Next FIDE world championship challenger is going to be the one that brings the largest bag of money to the table?

I don't know if this was designed to be humor (I guess, but maybe you meant FICGS instead of FIDE?) but in the context of current FIDE rules I find it very funny :) .. by the way if the same rules were applied at FICGS, anyone could challenge the champion for the title for $500,000 or something like this. Of course that would be great for FICGS and the current champion may appreciate such a prize as well, but that's not the point here.

However yes this FIDE rule may be compared to my suggestion, at a very different level though (the basic idea is the same: to build prizes for more interesting [free?] competitions), in my opinion an entry fee of 10 Epoints is quite different from what I suggested before already. Note that even if FICGS was not free, it would not justify such special entry fee more (not saying it cannot be justified!), after all there's an entry fee in the vast majority of OTB tournaments, if you don't pay it (but GM/IM that are generally invited to play for free - and most often take the prize), you cannot improve your rating, the problem is that the entry fee depends on the tournament, and the entry fee for closed tournaments (the main/only way to get norms) is often much higer.

I agree that things are somewhat different here as the main idea of FICGS is to be completely free. So the real question is : "Is FICGS still 'free' if a tournament's winner can choose to pay an entry fee in a virtual money (by the way it is quite easy to get Epoints without having to pay anything) to enter the next tournaments category".

- If despite of all the answer is "no", then FICGS is NOT free right now anyway as any player can play a rated 2 games match RAPID SILVER with an entry fee against a higher rated player to have more chances to win elo points. This way even IECG was not free (chessfriend), and even if something is really 100% free, it still doesn't mean fair, which is the main point here. Even if a tournament's winner could enter the next tournament's category for free, such a rule would NEVER be completely fair, as I described the particular cases.

Quite complex :)

Finally I'm not saying you're wrong in any way. Free or not free is a really complex question IMO, in my point of view, FICGS will remain free as noone needs to pay to become champion or to achieve the highest ratings (unlike FIDE). But if it is 99% free only while offering money prizes, I'd choose it anyway for sure.


Garvin Gray    (2010-05-11 18:25:23)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

Michel van der Kemp - I think you need to read, or re-read all of the comments and proposals, discussions again.

The key feature of this is that a person has to win their own rating group tournament in either standard or rapid before being able to enter a higher division.

There is no case where anyone can just buy a spot into a higher division. They have to first earn the privilege. Then in simple terms they would only be using the epoints collected from their win of said division.

I really do hope you have read the previous comments over the few threads that have eventuated on this topic, as they are crucial to understand the concept.

I have spent quite a lot of time typing out proposals and thoughts on this idea, so if you have not read them and instead just come into the forum and protested at the first thing you think it wrong, then I will be rather pissed off at you and anyone else that does it.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-05-11 19:25:22)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

I am very much in favor of the winner of his/her own class tournament earning as a prize the right to play one up class. This actually brings a relevant prize to the tournaments! Up until I have had no reason to care if I won a tournament or not. Why? What do I get? Pride? Ego? Bragging Rights? Epoints? I get nothing! Now I earn the right to player stronger players! A true prize indeed!

I don't agree if two players tie though that one just mystically be given the prize and the other not. I understand you don't want to dilute the rating pool... but you can force one person to wait til waiting list fills and each person can sit in it one at a time.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-05-11 19:39:23)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

I very much like option 1. I would also point out that this is the appeal of the WCH tournament. You get to play some stronger players and if you manage to win your group... your prize is even stronger players!


Garvin Gray    (2010-05-12 08:59:48)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

Thib- I really think this voting idea is the wrong direction indeed.

The number of votes that you will receive will be so small as a representative of the whole site that it is not representative at all.

Furthermore, those voting most likely will not have read all of the history, counter-arguments and posts that have been made explaining why things are being proposed.

I am getting quite frustrated at reading some of the posts. I really would just like to see option 1 enacted by yourself, even for a trial period of one year.

One year might seem like a long time, but considering that this rule would only apply from when new tournaments have started, it could take a while for tournament winners to become apparent and then for them to accept their entry and then for those 'going up' to have achieved results that are worthy of analysis.


William Taylor    (2010-05-12 17:53:24)
Rybka 4, news, tests & results

I was under the impression it was being released as normal, but there may be a stronger version held in reserve for the online thing.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-05-12 20:25:24)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

I think option1 is the best. But I completely agree with Garvin. Why not try it? We tried those silly rating band idea even though we knew it was bad. Why not try this? I think its a good idea. I agree that options 2-5 are silly.

Right now as it stands, you get nothing for winning a tournament, you might not even get many points either. If you are 1990ish and beat 6 1800s. They might have been much stronger than 1800 but the results also came in slowly 1/1 for each rating period... you don't stand to gain very many points maybe not even enough to get you to the next rating band... but you would be guaranteed to play the next rating band for sure because you won the tournament. I think you'll see alot of the invitations into the rating bands helping people out that are only missing it by a few rating points anyways. Besides its a REAL prize for winning the tournament, right now all we give is a pat on the back!


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-05-16 21:42:34)
Quick review Chess Engines

Howdy, Rybka 4 Beta 5 is out for beta testing. It is much too early to draw conclusions regarding elo strength. So far it is not looking great.
Many of the bugs from R3 are at present in R5 beta. For example the tablebase bug, bishop under promotion still not fixed, 5.04/5.12 bug tree search is reportedly still there.
In addition It is said to have severe time problem.
This is a summary of what I have been reading. But, these reports are beta remember. So R4 may still be top program after release.
In the mean time Stockfish and fire are 2 programs that are right there with rybka3 and maybe a little stronger. On my computer testing R3 is still tops.
Now, there is a new program, Houdini is available. I downloaded it this morning and have been running eng-eng matches with R3, 2 threads. So far Houdini is holding it's own. You can download the program here.
http://www.cruxis.com/chess/houdini.htm
I think CC players now have many equally strong engines available to help with their Centaur abilities and should be interesting to see the progressions Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-06-01 22:42:07)
Rybka 4!

Strange... many rybkaforum members will harass Vasik with questions on these performances, most probably :/

Just looking at the new CEGT rating lists, Rybka 4 would be 30 to 80 points stronger than Rybka 3 :

CEGT 40/20

1 Deep Rybka 4 x64 4CPU 3220 39 39 200 74.8% 3031 40.5%
2 Rybka 3 x64 4CPU 3181 10 10 3099 73.9% 3000 35.3%
3 Stockfish 1.7.1 x64 4CPU 3159 11 11 2201 69.1% 3019 40.3%
4 Rybka 3 x64 2CPU 3146 10 10 3481 72.6% 2977 35.7%
5 Naum 4.2 x64 4CPU 3140 15 15 1226 61.5% 3059 44.4%

CEGT 40/4

1 Rybka 4.0 x64 4CPU 3265 24 24 500 70.7% 3112 40.6%
2 Rybka 3.0 Dynamic x64 4CPU 3233 19 19 1200 79.8% 2994 25.9%
3 Rybka 3.0 x64 4CPU 3231 9 9 4300 78.0% 3012 30.2%
4 Rybka 3.0 Human x64 4CPU 3229 21 21 1000 78.8% 3001 26.8%
5 Stockfish 1.7.1 x64 4CPU 3198 13 13 2150 72.2% 3032 33.1%


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-06-02 01:57:19)
Rybka 4!

I am not trying to discourage anyone from buying R4, not at all, I purchased it.
I am just going by my quick blush testing, and I am not very impressed. I ran a 50 game match with fire 3.1.1 and the results were about equal.
You know guys, I would rate at R3+ as it has some of the annoying bugs fixed. BTH. I have not yet able to get"large Pages to work" should add up to 10 elo, but not on my comp which will be somewhat less. I will be happy to put the engine up for bronze games for evaluation, Wayne


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-06-02 16:39:14)
Fire 1.31 vs. Rybka 4

Thibault the changes are, Maintanence release. Some cfg issues fixed. But I think what ever it, is stronger than 1.3.0. Just my gut feeling.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-06-02 16:43:27)
Rybka 4 wins ICT10

Rybka 4 just won the latest edition of the International Computer Chess Tournament (ICT10, 10th edition) ahead of Deep Sjeng (surprise!?) and far from the other Chessbase engines: Hiarcs, Deep Shredder and Deep Junior...

Interesting to see that Rybka (by Vasik Rajlich) only lost to Deep Sjeng (by Gian-Carlo Pascutto) and won all the other games, including against the well known Hiarcs (by Mark Uniacke) and Shredder (by Stefan Meyer-Kahlen).

Rybka 8/9
Deep Sjeng 7/9
Hiarcs 6/9
Deep Shredder 6/9
Deep Junior 5.5/9
Komodo 5/9

The other participants were Pandix, The Baron, Spark, The King, Kallisto, Almond, RedQueen and Joker.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6381


Peter Marriott    (2010-06-03 20:48:56)
Fire 1.31 vs. Rybka 4

You mean 1.2 is stronger than 1.3? I don't think so, 1.3 definitely stronger, maybe not by much, but stronger. 1.31 is a maintenance release, not 1.3. If you wanna know specifically what the improvements are, go to: http://www.chesslogik.com/fire.htm


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-06-04 00:34:04)
Contest : FICGS, acronym for...

"First International Community for Global Sleep" (Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff) :)

Sorry, I couldn't resist.... :>


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-06-04 00:39:43)
Fire 1.31 vs. Rybka 4

! implied that 1.3.1 is stronger than 1.3.0 But maybe not. I have some testing results using Nunn2 database, eng-eng.
R4- Fire: 9-6=15 I terminated match.
R4-Stockfish: 15-11=24
Not making claims for strength just my short results thus far. But I like R4, lots of settings to play with. BTW R4 settings were not default.


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-06-28 18:40:50)
Save/Reload hash in Rybka

Howdy. I had all sorts of trouble with it too. I finally posted it on Rybka forum. But first, I am not sure your going about it correct. You just need to go to select new engine, then set engine parameters, and there you find save/load hash. Sounds like your getting to this point anyways.
Ok, I paste what was told me at the forum.

This is msg I get when ticking Save Hash (Save hash failed). I created a folder R4.rsh
but apparently it is not found the path is:
C:\users\administration\documents\ChessBase\nogames\EngineParameters\Deep Rybka 4x64\R4.rsh
What am I doing wrong. R4 manual no help.
Fritz12 GUI & Vsta

That was question post:

I think you need to create a file not a folder. :grin:
Nothing ventured, nothing gained...
Reply Report

this is 1 of 2 responses. Other is from Vas himself as follows.

You need to create a dummy file - you can just do that with notepad or something.

This last was from Vas.
Ok, summary :) All you have to do is create a file.rsh: (By the way, My Son stopped bye and he said "dad I will do it for you)" So he created the dummy file "file.rsh". works fine :)
Hope this helps, Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-07-03 13:03:04)
FIDE ratings july 2010

Once again, Magnus Carlsen makes the news with the 2nd highest rating ever reached (2826)...

Rank Name Title Nation Rating

1 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2826
2 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2803
3 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2800
4 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2790
5 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2783
6 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2761
7 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2760
8 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2755
9 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2749
10 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2748
11 Karjakin, Sergey g RUS 2747
12 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2739
13 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2739
14 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2734
15 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2734
16 Leko, Peter g HUN 2734
17 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2732
18 Navara, David g CZE 2731
19 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2729
20 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2726
21 Wang, Hao g CHN 2724
22 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2723
23 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2723
24 Vitiugov, Nikita g RUS 2722
25 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2720
26 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2719
27 Almasi, Zoltan g HUN 2717
28 Wang, Yue g CHN 2716
29 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2716
30 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2715
31 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2713
32 Jobava, Baadur g GEO 2710
33 Tomashevsky, Evgeny g RUS 2708
34 Nepomniachtchi, Ian g RUS 2706
35 Adams, Michael g ENG 2706
36 Onischuk, Alexander g USA 2701
37 Nielsen, Peter Heine g DEN 2700
38 Kasimdzhanov, Rustam g UZB 2699
39 Caruana, Fabiano g ITA 2697
40 Fressinet, Laurent g FRA 2697
41 Vallejo Pons, Francisco g ESP 2697
42 Bologan, Viktor g MDA 2695
43 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2691
44 Akopian, Vladimir g ARM 2691
45 Timofeev, Artyom g RUS 2690
46 Short, Nigel D g ENG 2690
47 Efimenko, Zahar g UKR 2689
48 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2688
49 Miroshnichenko, Evgenij g UKR 2686
50 Motylev, Alexander g RUS 2685


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-07-07 12:07:52)
Class GM 2 : Rating average 2496

It seems to me that the strongest FICGS chess tournament (7 players or more) so far just started, I would like to apologize to my opponents, if I didn't lose so many points, it would have been a category 11 tournament for sure... :/

https://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_GM__000002

Good luck everyone!


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-07-28 16:00:14)
Match vs. ICCF

Hello Thib,

I am not sure. Somewhere from within my 1kb memory, i vaguely remembered that FICGS played with ICCF in the past and lost. I may be wrong too.

But, that's a real challenge and we got players who have nothing to lose. They know the tricks of trade and can grill the ICCF players. I suppose they will come up with weaker players, but not the top level. Once we show our mettle, only then will they know that FICGS means Real Business.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-07-28 16:21:55)
Match vs. ICCF

No, there were no FICGS vs. ICCF match yet. We lost our two previous matches against IGAME.RU (with engines, against a very strong team mainly from Ukraine! the site died since that time) & GAMEKNOT (without engines).

I doubt that ICCF will be interested in playing such a match (maybe Gino or anyone involved can say it), but maybe someone can throw the idea in the ICCF forum, like I did in RybkaForum... who knows after all.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-08-03 11:49:16)
Match vs. ICCF

Hi Gino, thanks for your precious advices... Good ideas, and indeed ICCF could host the whole event (if they wish).

Still thinking about it... another idea (among others) : if only FICGS players who are not members of ICCF could enter the FICGS team, maybe the experience could be interesting as well as I feel that many 2200-2300 players here are getting stronger [maybe also due to the increasing level of engines] and will probably reach 2400 in a while, so they would have a chance to play a match against very strong ICCF players... The idea would be to see the real strength difference between these 2 categories of players (ICCF would be almost sure not to lose but for us the challenge would be even greater).

The other idea behind this is that ICCF may see an opportunity to make discover their server to these new players.

Finally we may suggest several ideas to ICCF, Gino's one, this one & maybe others... Whatever they choose, it could be interesting for the players, what do you think?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-08-11 11:09:44)
Future Rating Question

No problem, it is always good to check from time to time if everything works fine :)

So, your current rating is now 2031.

1) Game 39469, win against TER 1980, more than 10 moves, the game counts! It is obvious when looking at the Opponents elo average in the Future rating : Games calculated : 1, Result : 100 %, Elo opponents : 1980

2) Game 45063 : less than 10 moves played.

3) Game 45064 : does not count, explained by the rule "The rating calculation does not take account of wins obtained by a stronger player when the Elo difference is greater than 350 points, the same with losses by a weaker player." <- see http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_chess

4) Game 45065 : same reason.


Of course you cannot win Elo points by beating opponents who are much weaker (even if you have to play them sometimes, e.g. in WCH tournaments)... That's the core of the Elo system.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-08-12 22:46:32)
Replacement in Class GM 2 & rapid SM 6

Hello all, 2 players are needed for a replacement in the tournaments CHESS CLASS GM #2 (average 2496) and CHESS RAPID SM #6 (average 2408).

Please send me a private message (or email info*ficgs.com) if you're interested, thanks in advance.

Note: There's no specific rule when choosing players for replacements so the fastest players with the strongest ELO will play.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-08-27 09:42:06)
Quote festival, part 6

-Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
-Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.
-We live in a society where pizza gets to your house before the police.
-The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.
-If I agreed with you we'd both be wrong.
-Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.
-Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should both be changed regularly, and for the same reason.
-Evening news is where they begin with 'Good evening', and then proceed to tell you why it isn't.
-I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted pay checks.
-A bank is a place that will lend you money, if you can prove that you don't need it.
-A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
-God must love stupid people. He made SO many.
-The sole purpose of a child's middle name, is so he can tell when he's really in trouble.
-The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!
-You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-08-27 09:43:22)
Newest/oldest posts first

whats wrong with having the option? Then people can have whichever way they prefer it.


Garvin Gray    (2010-09-11 19:03:18)
Next freestyle tournament

Hello all,

From just seeing a couple of comments in the chat section, I am very concerned regarding plans for the next freestyle tournament.

It seems like it is going to be organised at short notice ie just one or two weeks notice.

I think this is a major mistake and would result only in those who happen to be available by coincidence being able to play.

I really do hope I have wrong. I think the next freestyle tournament needs at least one months notice so it can be properly promoted.


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.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-09-18 19:23:42)
Corr. Chess Maxims

I disagree with two of your ideas Scott. The first player to offer a draw should be the higher rated is wrong. And a draw can only be offered every 10 moves. These are clearly wrong ideas.

In fact you may recall from our own game, where you admitted to being wrong on said issue.

In general, I think it should be the person with the reason to play on should be the one to offer a draw. If its clearly so dead equal then either player. Definitely not by rating though.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-09-20 00:13:09)
Corr. Chess Maxims

I'm not attacking you. I'm attacking your silly ideas which I've proven 100% wrong and you have yet to defend in any way. You are attacking me. Therefore, your own quote defeats yourself. Irony for you.

I think its best to finish this note on the fact that most players who play this game have never read the rules. Not for USCF, FIDE, or any of the sites they play on. Try looking up the draw rules sometimes, you might be shocked to find out about the fact that no place would ever honor your maxim.


Scott Nichols    (2010-09-20 00:34:24)
Corr. Chess Maxims

I knew you'd keep it going. You can't tell a bullhead like you or Obama anything. I know the reason you don't care about ratings is the same reason every loser says after he's lost again. "Well, I don't care about that anyway."

You haven't proven anything except that you seem to want to have the last word in any discussion. See you STILL can't seem to grasp the fact that a maxim is NOT a rule. If you can scroll back up to the top you will see that maxim #2. says "Generally one offer of a draw is enough for at least 10 moves" In your first post you already got it wrong by saying, "And a draw can only be offered every 10 moves." So the only thing you've proven is that you can't read and can't understand English. Here is another maxim.."Always check who the TD is before you enter any tournament."


Daniel Parmet    (2010-09-20 01:22:07)
Corr. Chess Maxims

Haha you're psycho, you call me the bull head yet you're the one who has managed to make 7! posts without a single point. All insults. Obama this Obama that. What the f does Obama have to do with anything? You brought up and you keep bringing him up for god knows what reason.

Your lack of logic is astounding. You admit 1 rating point is enough that the lower rated should still be allowed to offer a draw but not at 80pts. What about 2 pts can he offer a draw here or is it still illegal? Where do you draw the line? Can't you see how stupid this is? You know ratings are considered on 200 pt bands right and anything within 200pts is always considered comparable skill levels hence why terms such as Class B( 1600 1799) and Class A 1800 (1999) developed in the first place. Guess what, 80 pts is less than 200 so its the same skill band hence why they were in the same tournament in the first place.

I know exactly what a maxim is and what a rule is. I know the damn difference. You seem to not understand that your proposition is not acceptable as either. In no circumstance should rating ever matter when a player is thinking about whether he/she wants to offer a draw. It is irrelevant as I've proved to you time and time again.

I do care about my OTB rating yes because I try my hardest there when I have time. But my corr rating nope. Its meaningless. I've given draws in winning positions many times because I don't care. What you describe is utter insanity (must be your philosophy). You realize whether your 2084 or 2240 or 2300 or 2400 you're just a fish right? Trying to brag like its an accomplishment is a joke beyond all measure. There is ALWAYS someone better. As IM William Hartson aptly put it, "playing chess badly is where the growth is."

And don't worry you don't have to check for my tournaments as TD because I wouldn't permit you in my tournament anyways. I don't want known trouble makers.

oh well: " If I agreed with you we'd both be wrong."


Daniel Parmet    (2010-09-20 02:41:00)
Corr. Chess Maxims

Um... you mean your indefensible position? Like I said your #1 is a good idea and both Garvin and Sebastian added good ideas too. You just need to give up your #2 &#3 as I've proved repeatedly. I'm sorry that your and my insults derailed this thread. I really shouldn't have responded to your insults but i'm not used to putting refusing to use any kind of logic whatsoever. I apologize for going down to your level. At any rate, it is you as I said before that went off on psychotic ramblings not I. I just repeatedly proved you wrong.

"Adults are stupid and must be destroyed!" - Stewie Griffin


Daniel Parmet    (2010-09-21 04:23:11)
Quote festival, part 6

"The high road is always easy to find, just not always easy to take."
--Patricia Potyka

“You can't do anything about the wind, but you can always adjust the sails." --Dr. Bob Chope

"It takes less time to do a thing right, than it does to explain why you did it wrong."
--Henry Longfellow

“If you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."
--Wayne Dyer

“The true triumph of reason is that it enables us to get along with those who do not possess it.”
--Voltaire


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-05 19:32:33)
WCH Stage 1 Tiebreaks

"the tiebreaker may NEVER matter" is strange or wrong cause it may matter... but more simply a few players may be invited to play stage 2, according to their results & rating. The same occurs in e.g. IECG championship (until the very last tournament if I remember well).


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-12 01:40:51)
Road to Grandmaster

You know this little blog and chessbase article has sparked a debate on whether people believe in whether its possible for a 1900 21 yearold to ever make GM.

Despite the fact I've constantly said it is. I've been told i'm flat wrong again and again by every person i've talked to. But I don't understand why, Kasparov said Talent is all a matter of time and effort. I don't see why not. The reason kids excel at chess is because they have no responsibilities. They have PURE time and when a kid gets attached to something... their effort is also unwavering.

I have offered the answer that the problems with adults improving is mostly the fact they have too many demands on their time already (work, family, school, other hobbies) or lack proper motivation (getting too easily discouraged or not wanting to work on their weaknesses).

However, I've noticed the naysayers tend to fall into three camps. 1) The camp that says talent is genetic and you can't make up for it regardless of how much you work. 2) People that say 21 is too old, only kids can improve. These people irk me the most. I have only been playing chess for 2 years and I went from 1000 to 1900 in under a year because I spent alot of time on it. I see no reason why any other adult can't do the exact same. Granted 1000 to 1900 is not 1900 to 2500 + 3 norms... but the point remains the same: time and hardwork. I think here multiple studies about the 10,000 hours required to master an activity is relevant. 3) People that are flat out freaking jealous. They know they themselves won't make GM or maybe even IM so they decry anyone else that wants to try.

Anyways, curious what others peoples thoughts are?


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?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-22 10:25:55)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Hi to all the FICGS players! In the last few days there has been in the works a strong tournament on the Rybka Forum. I know that most of you play a lot of games not only here but on others sites. I have been looking into the interest of having a type of World Chess Corr Blitz Championship. With the time controls being 2 to 3 days per move. There will be a time out or some kind of extra time system in place to get you a chance to AN critical positions. As of now there are discussions on the Rybka Forum for a Tournament Format that would be comfort to most of the players who play. I have been talking to the person who does the web design there and would are working out a new sub forum to keep this tournament organized and working a clock system so everyone can keep track of there time. I'm also having a prize fund organized to the top 10 finishers. Not so much for give money to the players, but as more a means to keep all the players interested and not have any problems with aborted games. This tournament will have 3 TD's to help with any problems that may come up. We are planing on having the tournament just after the new year. I have the interested of Wayne Lowrance and Ruben Comes has said he will play. If any are interested in playing in a World Chess Corr. Blitz Championship or if you have any questions or comments. Let know on here or your can leave a message on the rybka forum my user name is "thehug"


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-22 11:13:09)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Now I have the interest of Harvey Williamson


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-22 16:59:29)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

You now have interest of Garvin Gray :)


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-22 19:44:39)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I'm interested.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-22 20:56:57)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Hi,

Gary- Thanks for your interest, I do remember to some of your replies to the FICGS vs Rybka Forum match. As you are a guy who likes some order in the matches. When I make the the pairings for the tournament I will be taking into account of ratings. And will make them fair. There are a couple of people who may not have official rating on the rybka forum, but I have a good idea of there strength :) One of them is actually playing reben a great game in the B90 a variation.

Daniel Parmet- Thanks for your interest I have you down.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-22 21:16:49)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

When would this start and how many games/rounds?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-23 02:39:34)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Just after the new year, It will be flexiable as I will give all the players a chance to make it the games. It will be something like a 1 to 1 1/2 week window to get all the players sign in and know what the groups would be. As of now I'm still working on how many games will be played. I will be caping it around 30 people or so give or take a couple. So I will update you on how many games. For rounds Im going to say right now it will 2 rounds as I know most don't want to drag it out to long.(If there is interested I will look into having a semi final, and championship match if people would want it.) The number of games will be flexiable for the FICGS players. As I know most of you have a lot games going on.


Sebastian Boehme    (2010-10-23 02:41:41)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I would be interested in playing, in case such details as time control (especially how this shall get done on a forum software like Rybka forum, i.e. keeping track of the time used up for a move) and tournament mode are clarified in beforehand.

Cheers,

Sebi


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-23 04:04:54)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thanks for your interest Sebi. This is being talked about now. I will send you a link. this will be the post for the discussion about time contorl

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=19220

As we speak Dadi Jonsson the person who works on the forum. Is working on the details for a clock system. Not only that but we are going to make it a sub forum by itself so people can find there games easier. Let me know your opinion on here as we are working out all the details so it will be comfortable to all. I will being submitting the 1st proposal shortly. Thanks for your interested!

Jimmy


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-23 23:57:41)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I have the interest of Gino Figlio and a couple of other strong FICGS players Im still trying to find out witch ones they are. The FICGS side is starting to look very strong if all players will play. The tournament format is coming a long. And when I have an update I will post.


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-10-24 22:57:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Jimmy I am following your progress. I continue my interest in the Tournament. We have discussed my thoughts via PM, but to review here are the things of concern to me. First I do not want to overload my chess obligations in Tournaments I am involved with at FICGS now. I have a hunch that a Start date at or shortly after the year will work out provided it is possible to have no more than one (1) game running at a time.
Other features of interest to a lesser degree are management/monitoring of matches to make sure that excessive time outs are infrequent. A player should not be allowed to go on vacation so to speak during a match. In the event of hardware problems a player should have to live with the timer obligations and not making a unfair match delay.
Player ratings could be considered in pairings. Somewhat like board seeds. Top rated sits at board #1 etc.
I think this can be sorted out easily. Your have excellent inputs from others such as Vytron etc regarding timer details. 2 days/move sounds good to me Jimmy.
So continue your good work, I would be proud to participate god willing.
Wayne


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-25 01:30:27)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thanks for your continue interested Wayne! Yeah as of now. I think we are doing a two game per round(1 white and 1 black) set. And I think there are players who will being playing a one game at time approach. And to help with the time difference we are working on a quicker format to help offset the time difference. I still believe that Havery Williamson will still consider playing if the gameload is not that great. Even if he still declines I think with yourself I have 3 or 4 players that are inside the top 25 on this site. I'm hopeful that devassal thibault can help me get the word to the other top players in a effort to get a couple more of the top 50. It will help when I finally can have a 100% idea of the format. I'll you posted on here or on the Rybka Forum. When we finally have more or all the details worked out.
Jimmy


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-25 02:42:33)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Hello Jimmy! Sure, I keep an eye on the discussions... I may spread the word when all this will be a little clearer to me (maybe I'll consider to play if I'm not too busy and if the tournament is open btw, will it be a round-robin tourney? what happens if you have too many players?) Feel free to use the chat before that though.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-25 08:28:18)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thanks Thibault, My hope is to finish the details within the next 2 weeks. No not a round-robin, because that would simply be to much and to long. So I have gone with Vytron idea of a type of Elimination/Knockout tournament that is currently being discuss. As you are good about getting tournaments formed if you can read the current discussion and give some feedback on here or the rybka forum I would be grateful! It is in the corr chess section on the rybka forum.

Here are some of the key points and some interesting ideas that are being thrown around.

As I know most of the FICGS players play a lot of games so I have made a system that you play a 2 game match per round (One white and One Black). This would usually be a bad idea because of CC high draw rates. But we are thinking of using a unique draw odds system. Thought to many this may sounds a little strange its actually a great idea to inspire fighting chess for both sides. The idea was given by FICGS player Gino Figlio

"The scoring system idea- to draw with white (0.4), draw with black (0.6), win with white (1.0), win with black (1.1), loss with white (-0.1), loss with black (0.0)"

Another thing we are working on is the pairing system. As of now the only idea is to use a swiss pairing system after the first round.

Time Control- Since this is going to be called a "World Blitz Correspondence Chess Championship" The time controls are going to be a little faster than normal corr chess. It will be 48hr per move. But there will be a bluff time in here to help AN critical positions. This is also being debated. Right now we are looking at something between 1 weeks to 2 weeks(168 hours to 336 hours).

I had announce on the Rybka Forum in the last couple of days that a prize fund was being offer. I haven't had all my sources comeback to me yet. But as of know the fund is $1500 USD. It could be more, but I'll make official amount known before the tournament will start. I would say the winners share will be between 500 to 750. It all depends on what info I get back. I'm going to try and make all the prizes reasonable. And try and make it for the top 8 or 10 players. Also the winner will be announced the "World Blitz Correspondence Chess Champion"

I will be trying to finalize the details of the tournament in a quick fashion so I can figure out if the players interested would want to play or not. The tournament will begin just after the new year. It will be flexiable so get all the players in and know who they are playing.

The final details are that we are working hard to make the Rybka Forum really to play this kind of tournament. There is a new sub forum that will be made to help with out the traffic that would be going on with all the games. There is almost plans on getting a clock system work out. As at these time controls that would be critical.

Thanks in advance for any feedback form Thibault de Vassal and any other FICGS player!

Jimmy


Scott Nichols    (2010-10-25 21:07:25)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Hi Jimmy, I left a message on your forum. That format very new to me, :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-25 21:16:09)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Well, I still do not understand how a scoring system can exist in a knockout tournament... but let's take an example, what the tournament will look like if you have 16 players? Best is to do a complete simulation.

As I just posted on Rybkaforum, I suggest several double round-robin class tournaments of 5 players with a longer time control (on forums I suggest 10 days + 3 days per move). The whole tournament would be played in 1 round, with less stress for everyone as I really think that 30 days + 1 day/move is the fastest acceptable correspondence chess time control.


Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman    (2010-10-25 23:43:59)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I also do not understand scoring system, most probably both games will end in draw, is there a talk about an even faster time control for tiebreakers?


Gino Figlio    (2010-10-26 00:55:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The proposal was based on the assumption that it was a double elimination knockout, meaning you get dropped if you lose 2 games. Since there may be a lot of draws, the new scoring system may allow to drop players with the lower scores after 2 rounds and will give more weight to better results with the black pieces. This is experimental but may stimulate more fighting chess.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-26 01:04:19)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Wait what? You are going to drop a player that drew 2 games because they might be rated 1 pt lower? Insanity. What horrible logic.


Gino Figlio    (2010-10-26 01:08:19)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Where did you read that?


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-26 01:10:12)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

oh my apologies I thought it said lower rating not lower score. You'd be surprised some people are in favor of such crazy ideas.


Gino Figlio    (2010-10-26 01:17:26)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

not a problem, I'm known for my crazy proposals :)


Peter Marriott    (2010-10-26 03:00:51)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I'm in.


Scott Nichols    (2010-10-26 05:33:11)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I very much like the idea of giving more weight to Black, whether it is a win or draw. I agree it will make for fighting chess and possibly make White (or Black) try some different variations to go for the win.


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-26 18:53:19)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I am not a fan of the Double Elimination concept for this. Does not mean that I would not participate. But since DE is being used, why not just have it as an open swiss instead?

With an open swiss, those that do not want to continue can just withdraw, instead of being eliminated. Those that want to finish the tournament can keep playing all rounds to enjoy the experience.

A couple of issues with DE that need to be explained further:
1) After round one, are the first round losers seeded to the other half of the draw so they can not meet their first round opponents again till the preliminary final.
2) For the person who gets to the Grand Final without losing a match, do they stil have to be beaten twice to be eliminated ie the winner of the preliminary final has to beat them twice to win the competition.

I have wondered how long an open swiss would actually take in competition like this and would prefer to play in that rather than a DE.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-26 19:27:17)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

An open swiss should be at least 6 rounds long, that's the main problem. I still don't get how this tournament may run, a complete simulation with 16 players would help me, definitely.


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-26 19:37:21)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

TDV- An open swiss would take just as long as a DE.

In regards to your comment about not understanding how this tournament will be run, are you asking about the concept of double elimination formats as a general idea, or you do understand about DE formats and are wanting more information about this tournament specifically?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-26 19:38:21)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thanks to Thibault, who has what given his input into the tournament. As to the last two replies. The tournament format is an on going process. But I think the time control that has been stated by myself in just the last few hours. Is pretty reasonable to have a blitz control. 25 days per side + 10 days after move 40. That would be 60 days total. So that would be within 2 months. To be honest even if you see the games I post on there. You see even if you don't have serious tournament conditions all games were very close to finishing within 30 to 60 days.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-26 19:44:18)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Two more quick announcements.

1.The new forum for the WBCCC-->World Blitz Corr Chess Championship has been made as of last night my time. But has not been up to everyone yet. It will be soon, I'm still talking to my Technical TD about that.

2.I'll be capping the tournament very soon as to keep the numbers reasonable and to have a tournament done in a more timely fashion. I'm going to guess when its all said and done. The finally number will be between 24 to 28 players that will play. I'll being posting a list here shortly


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-26 20:11:52)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The players that have said they would play or are interested are as follows

For FICGS-

Wayne Lowrance
Garvin Gray
Daniel Parmet
Sebastian Boehme
Thibault de Vassal
Gino Figlio
Kevin Plant
Scott Nichols
and one guy called "Djevans" on my forum still trying to get a name. He has said that he is a FICGS__CHESS__FREESTYLE_CUP winner and twice finalist in the freestyle tours on chessbase. So a pretty strong player.


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-10-26 21:03:53)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Yes I have committed to Jimmy, I am in


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-26 21:29:20)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

"Djevans" is David Evans, he won the FICGS__CHESS__FREESTYLE_CUP__000002


Peter Marriott    (2010-10-27 00:01:33)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Hey Jimmy! I would like to play.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-27 01:07:49)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Ooooook... just read this interesting article on double elimination "knockout":

http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/sonas010704.html

I must admit I did not hear about this one before, very interesting idea even if it looks quite unnatural (I mean not "beautiful") to me and longer than the usual knockout. Anyway IMO it is probably too long for a correspondence chess tournament.


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-27 03:10:37)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Now Thib sees why 6 or so round swiss would not be any longer than Double Elimination :)

Also with the DE format, the player from the winner's side has to wait a full round while the two remaining losers play their preliminary final two games.

In regards to tie breaks from second round onwards, the person who has the better score from previous rounds could have draw odds.

To explain- lets say in round one Player A wins 2-0 and Player B wins 1.5-0.5. In round two Player A and B meet. In this scenario Player A would advance if their match was drawn.

This method of tie break would count no matter what round it was. So in the Grand Final, who ever had scored the most amount of points previously would have draw odds.


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 03:22:31)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Where am i? :-p


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-27 03:34:59)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Sorry Kamesh, I didn't know if you was really to play mores games or not after reading your email. I'll put you on the list now.

Also sorry to Peter Marriot who I have on the official list on Rybka Forum :)


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 03:38:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Lol Jimmy,

It was more like "I am lost!" haha. AS of now, i have stopped all stuff. Just enjoying. But as your tour is scheduled somewhere in the new year, who knows I may jump in.
As of now, banging my head as to whether I should check IN into the current FICGS Freestyle or not :)

Regards


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-27 04:13:32)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Kamesh, stop banging your head and enter the freestyle comp.


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 04:22:51)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

lol Gray,

i might :-o (still banging) :-p


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-27 04:37:36)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Well Kamesh, the game load is going to be pretty low. I won't pull your leg or anything :) lol


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 04:38:22)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

hahaha


Sebastian Boehme    (2010-10-27 04:42:52)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I wonder whether Eros and Alberto will join this.
Might be there will soon be more interesting participants!


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-27 04:58:50)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I would love to get these two great players to play! It would be helpful that the tournament conditions be clarified. With the kind of money that could be on the line. It maybe of interest to them. But I don't think that would be the most important thing to them. I know Eros has account on the Rybka Forum, but I haven't hear form him on there so I don't know.


Scott Nichols    (2010-10-27 05:17:18)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

May I ask who may we thank for putting up the prize fund?


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-27 05:21:09)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

what is the prize fund?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-27 05:53:42)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

@Scott-Myself and a couple of other friends who love chess. By the way I send you a message on the Rybka Forum to help with game details. If you have other questions let me.

@Daniel- Right now I its 1500 USD total, but I don't have all my sources bact to me yet. So it will probably be more. I'm planing on having prizes down to 8 to 10 players, with the winner most likely will win 500 to 750 depending on final numbers. Also the winner will the World Blitz Corr Chess Championship or so I dubbed.


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 06:16:34)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Who is Eros? I don't care about names when it comes to strong chess. What I see is blood on board and fear in my opponent's eyes. May be with IDEA technology, I may have to think again :)
But, come what may, I am prepared
Oh forgot (baning my head again)
And also btw, to whom it is intended ............. :-o


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 06:24:22)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Banging*


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-27 06:28:36)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Well Kamesh, maybe playing on the Rybka Forum has brought you luck :), BTW interesting game between you and Vytron


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 06:35:12)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Well not really.

I am sorry if am being candid in stating that my first access to corr world is FICGS. It created the best impression which even ICCF could not. I am confident that your efforts will bring a great change to the rybkaforum. Keep the spirits high my friend, come what may :)

As far as my game vs Vytron, I am not sure where it is leading me


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-27 06:37:02)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The games could always be played on ficgs :)


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-27 06:48:42)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Not at all my friend, Kamesh. I was joining you with humor. I can understand the feeling of playing in your first place like this.

@Garvin- With all the efforts to play it on Rybka Forum I don't know if I could change it. If the tournament is successful I may consider playing the next one on here. Of course I would have to talk to Thibault about that.


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 06:53:20)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I just expressed my opinion Jimmy. You are trying to organize a major event. Am commending ur efforts. Keep pushing. Especially, am flattered when ya said ya and few others wud be sponsoring the prize fund. Who does that? So, ya too made ur impression.
All the best Jimmy, go go go go ....
:)


Scott Nichols    (2010-10-27 19:47:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thibault is also offering a generous prize for freestyle tournament this weekend. We would welcome any Rybka forum players to come and compete!


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-10-27 20:15:05)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I will only play to win if the prize is an EVGA SR-2 mobo and 2 Xeon processors :-p


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-27 22:24:14)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Tho this is only a minor note the new forum was made and is open now. Look for WBCCC on the front page of the forum


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-28 05:16:30)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I've been given it some thought the last couple of days and have came with an update. My last proposal was to do a 2 game a round swiss tournament. I've post it here

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=19220;pg=3 Look at the bottom of the page for all the details. You can give your input here. Or if you have an amount you can post it there


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-10-28 05:22:18)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

the above url does not seem to work,
Wayne


Peter Marriott    (2010-10-28 05:44:56)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

it works for me...


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-28 05:46:01)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

If not this one works go to pg 3 and its on the bottom

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=19220


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 05:21:56)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Just to let everyone know I've added a standing page and an unique commentary and recap page for fans and players a like a chance to look at all the game a little deeper. I'll invite any of the strong players to comment on the games as they go. As long as they don't give moves away that may affect the game. I thought this would add to unique style of the tournament.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 11:40:25)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The tournament format has been decide. It will be a 2 game a round swiss tournament. Now my working on a pairing system as we spoke. I've been told by garvin gray that he is an official FIDE arbiter who has the latest programs to be used on swiss tournaments. I'll keep that in mind going forward. As everyone here has official rating. It will be my job to work something out with the other players on my forum who don't have ratings. This being a Swiss tournament with having a chance to play with both colors. I should be about to just do subjective pairings and be fine. I have a pretty good idea of were the players stand rating wise. I hope everyone is really for an competitive and enjoyable tournament!

Jimmy


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-29 12:27:09)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

That's better than a DE knockout IMO! .. and finally what about the time control?


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-29 12:50:29)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

With it being two games and a swiss, the initial ratings do not matter so much.

Players will get sorted pretty quickly. With using total game points as the first pairing criteria, each score group will have less players, meaning that most of the time there will only be two or three players in each score group, rather than 10 or twelve like in an over the board tournament.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 12:54:10)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

well to keep within a 2 month point I thought of 25 days a side with 10 more days after 40 moves. That seems pretty reasonable even with 2 games with the same person. As a interesting side note Kevin Plant has sent an email to ICCF GM Arno Nickle if he would have any interests in playing in this event. I doubt that there not many people who don't know who this very strong corr player is.


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-29 13:38:24)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Are the 10 days repeating, so after 80 moves the players receive another 10 days?

If not, then I can see major issues with players running out of time in long games, if for the only reason of time difference between countries around the world.

I would advise a time control of something like 14 days plus 2 days per move.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-29 13:58:51)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I must say that 25 days a side with 10 more days after 40 moves is really frightening to me, even with a single game... but maybe I'm really slow. I agree with Garvin, but of course the nature of the tournament (6 rounds) is in question again then.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 14:00:52)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

so 10 days for every 20 moves after move 40?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 14:03:40)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Even that would probably keep it with in something like a year.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-29 14:10:20)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

25 days for 40 moves is too fast, definitely... In my game at Rybkaforum (with SpiderG) I had to take 5 days (maybe more) for a single move sometimes, and unfortunately that was not always to analyze it.


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


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-29 14:33:12)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The rapid tournaments here use 30 days plus 1 day per move ie person starts with an initial 30 days, then for each move they receive an extra 1 day.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 14:33:16)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I've trying to look at the other players games for the Rybka Forum match. I got the feeling that most players made there moves fairly quickly. I would say there are players who think that 5 days a moves isn't blitz time controls.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-29 14:38:24)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The problem is: Sometimes (Scott knows it), it is possible to play a complete corr. game [more than 60 moves] in about 30 hours! But sometimes it takes 8 months... Believe me, if I chose 30 days + 1 day/move as the fast time control at FICGS, it is because faster was not possible. And that's why there is a WCH cycle every 6 to 8 months, no more.


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-29 14:42:27)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Jimmy- I think it is extremely unlikely that any kind of correspondence tournament can finish in one year, unless you have an extremely short time control and are willing to have many games time out. It is just the nature of the beast with players from all over the world.

Also, what Thib means is that a new WCH cycle starts every 8 months, not that the WCH cycle takes 8 months to complete.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-29 14:46:09)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Sure, sorry... I meant one round takes 6 to 8 months.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 14:48:56)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I see the flexiable of playing something like 30 days + 1 day/move. My intend was to try and make a tournament within say 60 to 70 as a max. But that probably means this is more a tournament for players that make a move 1 to 2 days at a time


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 14:50:06)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Sorry quoted per round of 60 to 70 days


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-29 14:54:31)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Each tournament is slightly different and if a faster time control is used, then players will adjust. Just like playing rapid time controls in otb chess.

It is advertised as a blitz tournament, so of course the time controls will be shorter than the normal type of corro time control. All I have been trying to do is point out issues relating to players competing from different parts of the world.

I am certainly one of those who would be seriously affected by using the 40 move time control you have suggested previously.

I live in Brisbane Australia, so most of my opponents will be at least 4 to 8 hours at least behind me, so it is very common for me to receive moves in the middle of the night, or have a whole batch of moves awaiting me when I wake up.

This can mean that I already start with losing about 8 hours on the clock before I even get to look at a position.

I accept this in the time controls on here because that is just how it is and I am not that disadvantaged as it works the other way where I reply and my opponents are asleep/at work.

But under the 40 move time control posted, I would be severely affected and my only 'crime' would be living in Australia.


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?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-29 15:11:05)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I know Wayne has told me that he is trying to draw some of his games. Before my tournament starts. What he is doing is honorable. But I don't wish for others to have to do drastic things to play in this tournament. So I'll try to adjust the best I can.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-29 19:58:13)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

of course you talked about this tournament starting in Jan correct? so we all have time to finish some of our games before then.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-30 01:02:41)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Your right Daniel, some players will have games finish by then. By now I understand what is being talked about, by not having time on the end to have for the endgame. I'm thinking of some kind of adjustment like after the 30 move mark to have something like 15 days per 20 move after that so players don't get kill by the time


Ramil Germanes    (2010-10-30 10:30:27)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Sir Jimmy: Please include me if I'm qualified. I want to join the tournament. Thanks!


Ramil Germanes    (2010-10-30 10:50:47)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

What will I need to do so I can join the rybka tournament?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-30 11:24:51)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

go to the rybka forum http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/forum_show.pl Get a user name and leave me a post on the forum with WBCCC or just sent me a message


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-30 11:27:56)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

my user name is Thehug, The tournament will begin in January. Be prepare as the name subjects its going to be a Blitz Corr Tournament. So most players will make a move a day or over other day


Ramil Germanes    (2010-10-30 12:15:28)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

ok thanks!


Ramil Germanes    (2010-10-30 12:29:44)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

@ Sir Jimmy: Already sent you a pm at the rybka forum. My name at rybka forum is "ralunger". Hope you will include me in the tournament. Thanks!


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-30 12:35:35)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Your in I wrote you down


Ramil Germanes    (2010-10-30 12:37:57)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thank you sir!


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-30 12:38:50)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Hope my name has been written down lol


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-30 12:41:38)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

It is, I have official list I just edit it on the rybka forum I'll update it today sometime


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-30 21:32:50)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Jimmy, will you apply strict rules during the tournament? What happens if a player suddenly takes 2 days, then 3 days, then 4 days for each move? Will there be a flag applied by the forum software or by the tournament director?

As there may be obvious problems in both cases, I'm really curious to know how you'll handle it. Also will players have a few days of vacation?


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-31 13:27:35)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Your right Thib, there are going to be some risks in playing in this kind of tournament. I had to think about a lot of things. I would love to do a round robin system as this is probably the most flexible of all of them. By a majority was against it because there would just be to many games to play and not enough time to go around for all of them. I to have a lot of ideas to make a swiss system work. I believe with the input I have gotten back. That all the players that are playing are going to play and if they couldn't that wouldn't play. I know as well as you that in the end there really isn't one system that is 100% prefect. And you just have to make adjustments. Dadi Jonsson is working very hard to get the time system to work 100%. So yes the flag will be in. If not then such a tournament probably couldn't happen.


Jai Prakash Singh    (2010-11-01 05:10:26)
Eros Riccio wins the 3rd Freestyle Cup !

Congrats to Kamesh too for getting 3rd position in this strong tournament.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 09:18:34)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Oh ok here is another Time Control proposal. 25 days per side to move 30 and 15 days per side for the next time control. Would move 30 be good to reach the time control? As most books should get you to move 20 or so and would you have enough time. If this blitz corr chess.


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-02 09:25:13)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The issue is not whether extra time is added after move 30 or 40, that is kinda irrelevant compared to what appears to be a final 15 days after move 30/40. That is the biggest issue and something that needs to be solved before the tournament can go ahead until any reasonable conditions.

Either after move 30/40, there is a re-occuring amount of time just like from move 30 ie 30 moves in 25 days, followed by 30 moves in 25 days repeating, or like we use on here for rapids, 30 moves initial plus 1 move per day increment.

The final time period can not be guillotine for all the reasons previously discussed regarding time zones.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-11-02 09:33:25)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I agree with Garvin there.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 09:46:20)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Oh ok I have talk about about 30 days+ 1day as an option. As talking to you two. You have given me a lot of input. I think you Gray are a pretty fast player by most measures so on avg oh long can your games go at this time control? I really don't mind corr games going 2 or 3 months or so. As Thib pointed out some games at this control can go 8 months which to be honest isn't an option. I think I heard Gray say once something about 14days + 2days per move. Would that be a blitz control?

Again one to point out there not going to be a flag or something for taking 4, 5 days. The times will go as usually.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 10:05:38)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I know most of the players that have said they would play usually move pretty fast.


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-02 10:28:10)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

At 30 days plus 1 days, I think about 3 months is a fair average.

I am not sure if I am a fast player or not. I do use most of my time across all games, but that does not mean I am looking at all games all the time.

For just a two game match, I would have no issues with 30 days plus 1 day increment and it would not feel fast to me.

14 days plus 2 days per move I think is a better time control for a few reasons.

It will let the organisers know for certain early who will lose their games on time ie two weeks from when the round starts, so decisions about whether to let them continue or kick those players out can be made earlier.

With a 2 day increment, it does give some opportunity for players to analyse for a bit of time in endgames.

If you are wanting to avoid unnecessary delays, the easiest way to it to have rule that as soon as a game reaches a 6 man tablebase position, the result will be declared.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-11-02 10:33:17)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

14 days + 2 days / move is much longer than 30 days + 1 day / move. Maybe 20 days + 1 day / move, or 10 days + 1 day / move could be ok... 1 day increment is the strict min. 10 days initial clock is min as well IMO. So a game could last ~180 days at most = 6 months anyway !

Honestly, maybe you should give up the idea that everyone (eg. me) should be able to play, if you think that most players interested are ready to play a really fast corr. time control, maybe you should do it this way but IMO an increment less than 12 hours may lead to many losses on time.


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-02 10:42:21)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

TDV- Honestly, maybe you should give up the idea that everyone (eg. me)

GG- Who is you? in the quote above?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-11-02 10:44:26)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

You = Jimmy (does the whole sentence mean something? sorry my english still weak :/)


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-02 10:46:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Its alright. Sometimes I just like to clarify matters. In this example, I was not sure if you meant me or Jimmy as you had replied straight after my post and so could have been directing the YOU at me, instead of Jimmy.

Probably the best course of action to avoid confusion in multiple person replying topics is to refer to people by name, rather than just using you or he.

:)


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-02 10:47:06)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

And, I am sure your English is better than my French :P


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 10:50:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I can always say you have a very honest opinion. I can bet even if you decide not to play. You will be watching with interest. I know players like Wayne Lowrance liked the idea of a little faster controls. Gino, Scott, and David Evans like to play a little bit faster controls. And they will make this a very strong tournament anyway. And yes the add one day per move looks to be the min. It will just be looking at the total time.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 10:53:01)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

My above comment was at Thib


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 15:37:29)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Your doing a good job Garvin, everyone thought your idea of ending the game at 6 man tablebase positions was great 100%. And you more or less suggested the 2 game a Round Swiss was taken very well to. Maybe I should let you be my TD lol. I think I can let you do my Pairings to if you want. My only question to you is what rating list would be the best to use? As far as the ratings of the Rybka Forum players I'll have to give you my ideal ratings for them.


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-11-02 16:33:06)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Nice idea Garvin, (6 man). It means a lot of work for some one to check it. Not all players I think have very many six man, including me (about 30 of em). How would that workout ?
Wayne


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 16:57:23)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I don't think this would be as hard as you think. There as 6 man tablebases online that can easily do that. Here an example

http://chessok.com/?page_id=361


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-02 16:58:34)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Sorry for my horrible english sometimes. The above link would work well for it.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-11-02 20:48:21)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

For 6 man tablebases, there is also:

http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database.html


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-11-02 22:18:30)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

yep, I am aware of both sites. That is not the problem as I see it.
Those sites are good if you have arrived at 6 man positions. The problem occurs far before that during analysis. Example player(a) in deep analysis with his hardware/programs determines that a 6 man tablebase will occur and player (b) with his hardware/program is unable to verify that and thus will object to 6 man ruling as He cannot verify it. Not much time will be saved I am afraid if the game continue until the current position is a 6 man position.
Of course a lot of communication can resolve it for player (b) but that is a big work load for someone. So I am very much in favor of the idea, but do not see clear solution to it.
Wayne


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-11-03 18:28:57)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Okey Dokie, Garvin & Jimmy. Sounds good. It will save some time.
Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-11-03 17:52:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Finally I added a "last post" link for Garvin & deleted the other thread that could bring some confusion in the discussion...


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-03 11:16:59)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Wayne, not sure much can be done about the situations you are talking about. I guess they are just how it is when games are being played with tablebases.

I still think my suggestion will knock off some time from each round.

Perhaps, what could occur is that one player claims either for win or draw and the arbiter investigates by asking the other player how they plan to get their desired result.

I know this sounds rather wishy washy instead of being a nice formulated rule, but I am not trying to post a forumulated rule at this stage, until I know if I am going to be person responsible for pairings, being arbiter etc.


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-03 11:17:16)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

By the way Jimmy, you have a pm on rybka forum.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-03 11:47:37)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Yeah you will be helping me with it. I would say that to make things easier just remember you will be my arbiter. I sent you an PM that will explain somethings. I will change the words to make it easier for everyone to understand


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-03 11:59:49)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

All is explained now between my message back to you and I edited what was on the forum. Thank you for you help


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-04 13:15:38)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Garvin I sent you another PM. Maybe you can give me your 2 cents worth


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-05 02:09:05)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The last pm I got from you was about the order of players and who has entered.

I have received nothing since then.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-06 03:44:55)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Well Thib it looks like a lot of people like the idea of doing 30days + 1day per move. That may open the door for you to play if you wanted to.


Garvin Gray    (2010-11-06 06:19:34)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Jimmy,

Possible slight change to start date proposal.

I would like to see the competition either start on December 1 (one month earlier), or on about January 14.

The reason for this is to try and reduce the impact of Christmas. If the competition starts on January 1, games could time out without people even knowing that they started due to being on holidays.

Perhaps starting earlier might be helpful as it means the competition starts while there is the current momentum for it.

But middle January is also good as it will give a chance for the new ficgs ratings to be used.

I think it would also be prudent about a week before the start of round one to personally contact all the participants and get them to confirm they are playing. Only those that confirm their participation will be paired for round one.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-11-06 07:30:29)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

You make a good point about Christmas and even sometimes people do things on the New Year. I have to probably go with the January 14th idea. If only because I would like to give Dadi as much time as he needs to get the clock system to work. By I will leave a line on the Forum and see what people say. As for the give a week to get play to reply. I had already decide on that. I will be so much easily to do it that way. As to have to repair 2 or 3 times.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-11-06 15:00:19)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Hi Jimmy, good news! I'm sure that this format will attract more players.


Mircea Hrubaru    (2010-11-06 15:05:31)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I am also interested in participating.


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.


Hannes Rada    (2010-12-15 21:56:00)
Chess positions too complex for engines

Hi Thibault,
Thank you for the examples.
I do not agree with your position against Peter Schuster. Almost every engine is now playing Qe2 i.o. Tb1 ?
So the engines now 'understand' this position a little bit.
Your position against Wolfgang Utesch is a classical fortress and indeed a bit funny. Here all engines show +5 and Rybka even +6 .... :-)
The 'tragedy' here is not the final position, but the fact the engines would go for such a position in their analysis, as it seems to be a clear win for white. I would file this under typical missing endgame understanding.
I.e. Rybka still does not understand wrong bishop endgames....


Peter Unger    (2011-01-03 00:26:00)
Private messages to the webmaster

I cant get to the following tournament - why - the accepted participants have no ELO 2300+
FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_SM__000008
(type : rated round-robin, time : 30 days, increment : 1 day / move)

7 players, 6 game (1 game against each opponent)
entry fee : 0 , prize : 20 (E-Points)
elo : 2300+

POL Broniek, Mariusz Maciej 2106
SVK Gazi, Miroslav 2289
USA Nichols, Scott 2200


Garvin Gray    (2011-01-05 02:13:43)
WBCCC Pairings for Round 1 will be here

Click on this link if you wish to see the pairings in a more user friendly format: http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?pid=300666;msg=ReplyPost No Name Rtg Total Result Name Rtg Total

1 LOWRANCE, Wayne (1) 2488 [0] : RALUNGER, (18) 2122 [0]
2 VYTRON, (19) 2120 [0] : LOBOESTEPARIO, (2) 2438 [0]
3 MOZ, (3) 2345 [0] : DEKA, (20) 2110 [0]
4 PARMET, Daniel (21) 2087 [0] : BOEHME, Sebastian (4) 2327 [0]
5 NATIONAL12, (5) 2290 [0] : MARRIOTT, Peter (22) 2079 [0]
6 SCHACHMATT, (23) 2063 [0] : OMPRAKASH, (6) 2285 [0]
7 ELDRIDGE, Mark (7) 2271 [0] : WEIRWINDLE111, (24) 2050 [0]
8 STEPHANIE, (25) 2000 [0] : CÓMES, Rubén (8) 2260 [0]
9 BALABACHI, (9) 2257 [0] : JITAN, (26) 1900 [0]
10 NATMAKU, (27) 1900 [0] : CUMNORCHESSCLUB, (10) 2246 [0]
11 KEOKI010, (11) 2209 [0] : TOMSKI1981, (28) 1900 [0]
12 WIGHT054, (29) 1855 [0] : SEKOS, (12) 2200 [0]
13 NICHOLS, Scott (13) 2199 [0] : INDRAJIT_SG, (30) 1800 [0]
14 DONKASAND, (31) [0] : EVANS, David (14) 2197 [0]
15 PPIPPER, (15) 2160 [0] : FULCRUM2000, (32) [0]
16 MARGE, Anne (33) [0] : SCHACHPROFI, (16) 2150 [0]
17 NOOKASH, Kamesh (17) 2147 [0] : THEHUG, (34) [0]

No Name Rtg Total Result Name Rtg Total

1 DEKA, (20) 2110 [0] : LOWRANCE, Wayne (1) 2488 [0]
2 LOBOESTEPARIO, (2) 2438 [0] : PARMET, Daniel (21) 2087 [0]
3 RALUNGER, (18) 2122 [0] : MOZ, (3) 2345 [0]
4 BOEHME, Sebastian (4) 2327 [0] : VYTRON, (19) 2120 [0]
5 WEIRWINDLE111, (24) 2050 [0] : NATIONAL12, (5) 2290 [0]
6 OMPRAKASH, (6) 2285 [0] : STEPHANIE, (25) 2000 [0]
7 MARRIOTT, Peter (22) 2079 [0] : ELDRIDGE, Mark (7) 2271 [0]
8 CÓMES, Rubén (8) 2260 [0] : SCHACHMATT, (23) 2063 [0]
9 TOMSKI1981, (28) 1900 [0] : BALABACHI, (9) 2257 [0]
10 CUMNORCHESSCLUB, (10) 2246 [0] : WIGHT054, (29) 1855 [0]
11 JITAN, (26) 1900 [0] : KEOKI010, (11) 2209 [0]
12 SEKOS, (12) 2200 [0] : NATMAKU, (27) 1900 [0]
13 FULCRUM2000, (32) [0] : NICHOLS, Scott (13) 2199 [0]
14 EVANS, David (14) 2197 [0] : MARGE, Anne (33) [0]
15 THEHUG, (34) [0] : PPIPPER, (15) 2160 [0]
16 SCHACHPROFI, (16) 2150 [0] : DONKASAND, (31) [0]
17 INDRAJIT_SG, (30) 1800 [0] : NOOKASH, Kamesh (17) 2147 [0]


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-01-12 21:01:31)
Eros Riccio is the new FICGS chess champ

Congratulations to SM Eros Riccio who made it in the 4th FICGS correspondence chess championship, beating FICGS WCH Edward Kotlyanskiy 6.5-5.5

As he already won the candidates final match in the 5th FICGS chess WCH, we'll have the next final match "Eros Riccio vs. Eros Riccio" :) .. just joking, means that Eros just won the 5th FICGS championship as well... 2 titles at once, an amazing performance!

Sure that we'll need veeeery strong players to try to move the new FICGS king (who also won 2 FICGS freestyle cups) in the next WCH cycles! :)

Congrats also to Edward who was really near in this match, maybe the players will explain what happened in the only game that didn't finish into a draw... Finally many thanks to both players for a nice show!


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-01-18 21:11:52)
Following the WBCCC games Round 1

With less than 3 hours to go for the WBCCC Round 1 to begin. I will help everyone out here to follow what games they want to follow. Here are all the links for games.

B=Board, this is so you know who is at the top table and so on.

()=There real name on here if its needed.

B1-Wayne Lowerance vs ralunger(Ramil Germanes)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20187

B2-Uly(Vytron) vs Loboestepario(Gino Figlio)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20188

B3-Moz vs deka
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20191

B4-parmetd (Daniel Parmet) vs Sebastian Boehme
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20192

B5-National12 vs SpiderG (Peter Marriott)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20193

B6-Schachmatt (Matt O'Brein) vs Omprakash
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20194

B7-Mark Eldridge vs Weirwindle
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20195

B8-stepanie vs Ruben Comes
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20196

B9-Balabachi vs jitan
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20197

B10-Natmaku vs CumnorChessClub (Kevin E. Plant)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20198

B11-Keoki010 (George Clement) vs Tomski1981
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20199

B12-CumnorChessClub(Kevin E.Plant) vs wight054
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20215

B13-Scott Nichols vs indrajit_sg
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20201

B14-donkasand vs David Evans
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20202

B15-ppipper vs Fulcrm2000
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20203

B16-Anne-Marge vs SchachProfi (Alex)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20204

B17-Kamesh(Kamesh Nookala) vs TheHug(Jimmy Huggins)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20225

Everyone plays 2 games in our Swiss style format per round. This is everyone's 2nd game.

B1-deka vs Wayne Lowrance
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20206

B2-Loboestepario(Gino Figilo) vs parmetd(Daniel Parmet)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20207

B3-ralunger(Ramil Germanes) vs Moz
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20208

B4-Sebastian Boehme vs Uly(Vytron)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20209

B5-Weirwindle vs National12
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20210

B6-Omprakash vs stephanie
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20211

B7-SpiderG(Peter Marriott) vs Mark Eldridge
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20212

B8-Ruben Comes vs Schachmatt(Matthew O'Berin)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20213

B9-Tomski1981 vs Balabachi
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20214

B10-CumnorChessClub(Kevin E.Plant) vs wight054
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20215

B11-jatin vs keoki010(George Clement)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20217

B12-Sekos vs natmaku
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20219

B13-Fulcrum2000 vs Scott Nichols
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20220

B14-David Evans vs Anne-Marge
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20221

B15-TheHug(Jimmy Huggins) vs ppipper
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20222

B16-SchachProfi (Alex) vs donkasand
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20223

B17-indrajit_sg vs Kamesh(Kamesh Nookala)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20224

This should make it easier for everyone to follow the games. Please leave comments for the players. They will would very much like it. I will try to update the forum as games go on and finish.


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 :)


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.


Scott Nichols    (2011-02-17 15:21:36)
request again tour

Gee, the response is better than I expected. After giving it a little more thought, an increment of maybe 4 to 8 hours could be added to accomodate people with commitments other than Chess, :) It would also take into account connection problems, etc. The E-point entry fee could be varied like the Bronze, Silver and Gold formats. Also, since it is unrated, anybody could enter if they dared, :)


Garvin Gray    (2011-02-27 02:47:16)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

Thib, I have explained my point of view quite a few times and when you reply you keep either accidently mis-interpreting it, or are doing it deliberately.

I suspect there might be a language issue between English as a first language and French as a first language.

My issue is with the first stage groups, to which most of the players are allocated.

In none of my previous posts have I mentioned UNDERRATED players ie those who have established ratings on here, but most likely their true playing standard is higher than their rating.

I will try and explain my position again and I now see I am not alone in having this opinion.

With 15 or so groups in the first stage and having some players provisionally rated at 1800, this means those '1800' are seeded in the different groups at player number 3 or 4.

But a few of the '1800's' turn out to be quite stronger than that rating, meaning the genuine rated 2100's in that group get another person who can play to their level, whereas in another group which did not have an '1800er', the group that did not have the provisional 1800 gets a statistical advantage by having one less stronger player to qualify for round two.

Now to the argument that putting the provisionals in groups by themselves only delays the problem.

If there are only one or two provisional groups, then this means that only one or two provisionals make it through to round two.

While this idea makes those groups of questionable standard, it is extremely likely that whoever comes out of the provi groups is going to be of decent standard.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-02-27 21:20:59)
Plea for classical rating help

I don't know if only the defending champion and/or finalist "should" have any treatment after all... That's the whole debate of the FIDE WCH and I wanted to make it quite the opposite way.

On the opportunities for 2100-2200 players to cross the 2200 barrier, your last 4 ratings were 2160, 2157, 2160 & 2135. The tickets system also allow you to enter the CLASS M (2200+) waiting list for 10 Epoints if your rating is above 2150. I'm not trying to sell anything there but it is an option that is dedicated to help in such cases.

On the WCH cycle, maybe another idea would be to "extend" the M Groups idea to the 2200-2300 players. With 2200 to ~2400 players in these groups, there will be more strong players in Stage 2... I'm not sure about the whole consequences but it may be worth a try, what do you think?


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-02-27 21:34:13)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

Hi Garvin, sure there might be a language issue... sorry about that :/ I think I only try to interpret what you say in terms of consequences on the whole thing but I may be wrong at some points, be sure I'm not trying to avoid anything deliberately.

The provisional rating already takes account of if the player uses an engine or not (at least I try to make an estimation on what the new member says in the registration form).

As I just said in the other discussion, maybe we could try to extend the M groups to the 2200-2300 players, it may satisfy everyone as it is probably easier to cross the 2000 barrier than the 2200's, what do you think?


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-02-27 22:46:42)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

??! but this way 2000-2100 rated players have much more chances to win 1st stage groups and to play 6 strong opponents the stage after instead of only 1 in these groups... well, it looks like a bit a contradiction to me to agree what Garvin says and to say this, or maybe I did not understand something again. Let's see what Garvin & others will say.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-02-28 21:02:18)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

@Garvin:

I suggest that all 2200+ players (but the 8 of the knockout tournament) play the M group at stage 1 OR that all 2100+ players (but the 8 of the knockout tournament) play the M group at stage 1 with the new rule that only half the players in these M groups can qualify for stage 2 and still 1 for stage 3. This combined to another new rule that would allow new members declaring to use a chess engine (not so many so far, maybe 20%) when registering would have a provisional rating of 2000 would solve IMO this issue (2000-2100 players would lose less points to those strong provisionally rated players during the wch) and would help to somewhat inflate the ratings that would be a logical thing when seeing the whole correspondence chess standards at the other sites (some already use this 2000 prov. rating). The ratings may even deflate due to the 10 moves rule. Actually I think I would be very favourable to one of these changes.

@Jimmy:

Fortunately there are players like Garvin, Scott, Gino & others who really helped to build the FICGS rules :) On the numbers of players by rating range, it is quite different from a cycle to another, sometimes we have 2 M groups, sometimes there is no M group at all so I'm not sure if it would be representative. Still I'm not favourable at all to have groups of provisionally rated players.


Daniel Parmet    (2011-02-28 23:29:13)
Plea for classical rating help

I feel I have the same problem as Garvin. But it does not bother me as much as I consider playing otb the real place for improvement. I just use corr as a chance to test my otb ideas. However, I still try to seek out the strongest players I am allowed to play. The restrictions I have found in most correspondence sites though is that I am not allowed to play the stronger players. The 2150 rule does not help me as I am at a mere 2100.


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-02-28 23:37:33)
Plea for classical rating help

I guess that is one reason why you like my tournament. You get a chance to face strong players at every point, almost.


Daniel Parmet    (2011-02-28 23:50:22)
Plea for classical rating help

yes this is exactly why I love your tournament ;) losses do not bother me. I learn from them. This has been my philosophy ever since I picked up chess a mere 3 years ago. What bothers me is all the restrictions people put into to place to prevent players from improving. Most do it unintentionally. However, many US organizers do it intentionally. They either cap their event sections strictly for 2200+ or they make insane rating determine entry fees. For a non 2400+ player to enter a GM norm swiss event it can cost $400. Or for an expert to enter a 2200+ section will cost you an extra $50 at the Goichberg style events or an extra $100 for the National Open.

It is this kind lunacy that makes improvement hard. You can have all the time and money in the world and still find through no lack of effort or skill that you are not allowed to improve.

I find most of the otb tournaments I am allowed to play in now... I usually end up being seed 1 or 2. Not exactly encouragement for me to use my whole weekend is it? I would dream to be able to enter a swiss where I am the bottom seed. But for this to happen I have to break the barriers without the extreme advantage of being allowed to play strong players.

FYI, I practice what I speak. The local tournament I am running next in my area will feature 5 masters (1 IM, 2 FM and 2 NM) - and it has a low entry fee. This is the type of event I wish was more common...


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-03-02 15:44:26)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

Hi Garvin :)

The main point is IMO this suggestion:

"All 2100+, 2150+ or 2200+ players (but the 8 of the knockout tournament) could play the M groups at stage 1 with the new rule that only half the players in these M groups can qualify for stage 2, while the winners will qualify for stage 3 as before.

Combined to another new rule, that would allow new members declaring to use a chess engine (not so many so far, maybe 20%) when registering to get a provisional rating of 2000, it could solve this issue.

Indeed 2000-2100 players would lose less points to those strong provisionally rated players during the regular wch groups, while they keep more chances to qualify for round 2, and it would help to somewhat inflate the ratings that would be a logical thing when seeing the whole correspondence chess standards at the other sites (some already use this 2000 prov. rating).

The ratings may even deflate due to the 10 moves rule."


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2011-03-06 08:56:45)
Strange game

Hi;0)
maybe I am wrong in my opinion, but I think, that playing chess is for fun! I have a 7yo son, and he traing hard to learn playing chess. In lose position he play move by move and what is bad in that situation? It is only a hobby, its only for fun.. Not for rating, not for 1,0,=. All in FICGS used computers to play, he used a young brain and learn lose too. It is very important in my opinion. I have few games in the same sytuation - I am winner - but I have a time and... dont wont to die too ;0)) BECAUSE IT IS ALL ONLY FOR FUN.
Kind regards to you Alexander
Mariusz


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2011-03-06 14:14:48)
Strange game

dura lex, sed lex ;0)


Daniel Parmet    (2011-03-10 02:54:11)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

No, it makes it pointless. You are the top seed. You play underrated players or weak players both of which are a waste of time. You lose massive ratings points and never get a chance to play the stronger players. It is a complete waste of time to enter as the top seed.


Daniel Parmet    (2011-03-10 03:15:04)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

btw your assumption that all the 1st seeds get through is wrong. In fact, I didn't get through on my last go around because all the 1800s played drawing lines as white to try to make as sterile a position as possible. This of course forced to play for a win from a drawn position which exactly as you expect - lost. These new proposed changes are in my opinion extremely silly and biased towards people in certain rating brackets. Therefore, I can't participate until I'm on the better half of the bias 2150+


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-03-10 12:40:21)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

Hi Daniel, I don't get your point. Now you're rated 2094 so you would be probably a top seed in the next regular group, playing maybe 2 provisionals (maybe one centaur rated 2000 and one centaur or human rated 1800 or 1700) instead of ~2 centaurs rated 1800 + playing as Black against a player rated 2200. I really think that it is a better "deal" for players rated 2000-2100 also. Yes you may still lose a few points (less than before IMO), but your chances to go to round 2 and play stronger players are much higher... I cannot say more.

@Garvin: your proposal makes sense. By "if possible" I mean that the rule is not strictly 2150 or 2300, I'll just try to make coherent groups (in size & ratings) so it quite looks like your way in practice I think.


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2011-03-17 10:07:03)
Strange game

No, you are wrong ;0)


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


Daniel Parmet    (2011-03-27 09:22:53)
FICGS Quote file

Tell me this whopper isn't worthy!

"If you are not prepared to be wrong then you will never come up with anything original" - Sir Ken Robinson

!!


Don Groves    (2011-03-28 22:56:13)
FICGS Quote file

How so? They both say that the inability to be wrong inhibits creativity.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-03-31 23:07:22)
FICGS Birthday?

Nope, I remember that I announced in the forums about FICGS in April 2006, and many strong players registered very quickly...

By the way the archives tell it:

http://www.ficgs.com/archives.html

At the very bottom of the page (or almost), the server started on April 5, 2006. About 220 players registered the first 25 days...


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-04-13 14:07:34)
CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000009

Hi Peter. It should be closed in 2 days from now, all replacements and/or new groups will be done then.

I must say I am quite surprised to see several very strong players entering the waiting list after the tournaments started. Too bad that other matches cannot start in the knockout tournament :/

So I may include you in another group M in the round-robin tournament, if you wish!?


Daniel Parmet    (2011-04-17 10:27:09)
CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000009

I thought all strong players had free entry to the next round anyways? I thought that was the conclusion of the silly rule changes. This is why I chose to sit out.


Peter Unger    (2011-04-19 23:34:25)
You can't enter this tournament

Why? There are players with 2145etc. in the waiting list?
See the following?

FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_SM__000008
(type : rated round-robin, time : 30 days, increment : 1 day / move)

7 players, 6 game (1 game against each opponent)
entry fee : 0 , prize : 20 (E-Points)
elo : 2300+


You can't enter this tournament :
Your chess rating : 2166 , is out of the restrictions.

Waiting list :

POL Broniek, Mariusz Maciej 2152
SVK Gazi, Miroslav 2272
USA Nichols, Scott 2184
DEU Wosch, Arkadiusz 2145
KAZ Alaguzov, Maxat 2415
PRT Pessoa, Francisco 2528


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-04-24 12:03:10)
Active rating lists

Hello Harshil.

It is mathematical, actually. Your rating cannot reach 2000 if you play only class D tournaments (players rated 1400-1600), which is your case. By the way you played only 3 chess rated tournaments, that is still quite few...

High correspondence chess ratings take always 1 full year to be reached, every strong player knows that.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-04-27 12:40:42)
Active rating lists

Obviously such changes are not good, but not doing these changes would be just worse... for Poker this is different, new players can estimate their level, existing players with no rating start at 1600, but it is quite easy to reach 1800.

For chess, maybe it should have been possible to start at 2000 from the start of the site (as it is possible in some cases at other sites), but by experience I thought it was too much, and engines are stronger today. Well, actually better would be to have a test to estimate a provisional rating... Still it wouldn't be perfect and not sure it would be appreciated :)


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!


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-05-10 12:38:23)
Active rating lists

Hi guys, sorry for the delay for this one... :/

@Don : it may take a while, but I don't feel it's so hard for a good poker player... but it's kind of hard to say anyway.

@Paul : thanks for such a post with many ideas & questions! this issue is really complex of course but I made some observations during these years and my conclusions were:

- in average, self-estimated ratings are best. during the first years all players with no FIDE/IECG/ICCF ratings started at 1400 or 1700 and it quite distorted the list as many strong centaurs started from the bottom. your idea makes sense but it looks more "esthetic" for a centaur with no official rating to start with a 1900 or 2000 rating than e.g. 1937 :/

- your idea of 10 lightning games is very interesting! but not many players are involved in these games (I guess because of the time they spend on corr. games) and not many would accept to play unrated or low-rated players. I'll think about that though...

- about option C, there were early general forfeits by players FIDE rated over 2200, that's a pity and it distorted (not so much) a few ratings temporarily [actually it also helps to maintain a small inflation of ratings, which is logical] but in the other hand FIDE/ICCF ratings given as provisional ratings help to build a rating list with ratings that "tell" something... such choices are not obvious, obviously :)


Kamesh Nookala    (2011-06-01 14:08:38)
I am exhausted

@ Wayne - There is always a start point and a corresponding end point. You have done so much in your life. But, now, your life needs a bit care from your end. I am just 34 and your chess experience and game play are far bigger than my age. But, the end is inevitable. It is better to put an end for your games Wayne, which you did. What is important for me at this point of time is you and not your games. So, follow what doc says, take rest and I am pretty sure you will be strong enough again. But, then again, just WATCH chess, do not play it.. Else, it may drain your energy again. For whatever happened to me at WBCCC, I quit the tour Wayne. Just enjoying my life :)
Warm regards my good friend...

@ Thib - Yes, lot many changes. Had to quit smoking, though that was never a concern or a cause for my illness. I received only humiliation round after round at WBCCC. I couldn't take more and had to put an end to my corr. chess career for the time being. I am regrouping myself. And, certainly, FICGS is the place where I will come back to.

@ Sebi - Thanks friend. I am not a great corr. chess player. Just a player :p

Regards
Kam


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-06-22 06:54:36)
The rise of freestyle chess again.

Hello to all my FICGS friends! I was wanting to post here to let people know about a live broadcast later today. Me and ICCF GM Arno Nickel will be having a match later to help promote freestyle chess. In truth this is another practice match to try and test a server for freestyle chess. He had own 1st match yesterday. And it was nice to see it being followed. I hope some of you come watch the event. Comments are welcome! :) The match will be at 6:30am Central Standard Time/7:30am Eastern Standard Time/12:30 GMT/ 11:30 Rybka Forum time. Look for a thread in the Rybka Forum/ Computer Chess subforum. The thread will be up several minutes before the match. The time control will be 60min+15sec, which is a common time control for freestyle chess.

For those of you who don't know ICCF GM Arno Nickel. He is in the top 10 in the ICCF and is one of the leading people to promote and bring freestyle chess to the fore front.

I hope to see you today and I'm sure there will be other matches to follow in the future. This will all lead up to a great tournament later on this year. :)


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-06-22 06:56:30)
The rise of freestyle chess again.

But the way his user name is Ciron (Arno Nickel) and my is TheHug.


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2011-06-22 16:49:31)
Thank you!

Dear FICGS Friends, Because of very bad health condition I have to take a break of playing chess. I am so sorry. I want to thank you, my Friends, for all good games and friendship. All the best to you! Kind regards, Mariusz M. Broniek


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    (2011-08-03 20:37:12)
@Don

Well, I guess that players as White do their possible to find bloody lines in order to win, as losing (even in these lines) becomes more and more unlikely due to the recent engines. But I may be wrong, are there obvious counter-examples?

Then should Black be incitated to try harder to win instead of trying to find a quick drawish line?! ... I don't know.


Alvin Alcala    (2011-08-10 11:30:23)
Ideas for a Freestyle tournament

In free style cup section why not make an option of a freestyle tour so anyone online can immediately arrange a tour with entry fee of say 10 e-points or even bronze. Then the format would be minimum 2 players or even number of players. Money prizes will be broken down accordingly. I loved to play advance chess a lot but it will be more exciting if you will play more people.


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-08-11 00:10:16)
Ideas for a Freestyle tournament

@Gino- That sounds like a decent idea. I kind of liked the thought of playing on back to back Saturdays. Maybe I'm wrong, I find it easier sometimes to give a few hours on one weekend day than to do it on a Saturday and Sunday. Of course if we agreed to Sat-Sun I could do it as well.


Garvin Gray    (2011-08-12 16:22:08)
Ideas for a Freestyle tournament

I think if you are going to close entries early and post pairings for round one, then there will need to be a decent entry fee.

If entry is free and pairings are posted early, it is extremely likely that one or more people will pull out through dis-interest, when in all likelihood they were not that interested in the first place and as soon as the pairings are posted, they realise the full magnitude of having entered the competition.

While an entry fee will reduce the total number of entries, it will certainly make your life easier in actually running the competition.

Another idea is to introduce a bond system. Everyone pays a set amount up front and then those who have played all rounds get their money back. Those who do not complete the competition for any reason do not get their money back.

Especially relevant with more than one night competitions.

Thinking more about time zones, for what I favour depends on number of days and number of rounds.

If just two days, then I favour Saturday/Saturday. If more than two days, I favour Friday/Saturday/Saturday.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-08-19 11:43:45)
Rybka banned from ICGA

Clone or not clone, I'm not sure if this question is worth something in computer chess but ICGA did it: Rybka was banned and stripped of titles...

I just partly read RybkaInvestigation document, a few points are particularly ridiculous (like 2.2 "Sudden Strength Increase"), I have no idea on the other ones and I'm not sure if this is really important in the real world.

Finally, the punishment:

- to strip Rajlich of all ICGA Tournament Titles and,
- force the return of trophies and prize funds to the ICGA and,
- ban his programs from future competitions until he can satisfy the ICGA that they are no longer derivatives and that he has satisfied the conditions of any other penalties the ICGA imposes.
- encourage other tournaments (Leiden, Paderborn, CCT, TACCL, etc.) to disallow the entry of Rybka until it is proven “clean”.


ICGA Panel Members

The Secretariat members:
Robert Hyatt - (Crafty, Cray Blitz, World Computer Chess Champion in 1983 and 1986)
Mark Lefler (author of Now)
Harvey Williamson (part of Hiarcs Team)
Panel members:
Albert Silver (software designer for Chess Assistant (1999-2002); currently editor of
Chessbase News (2010-present))
Amir Ban (author of Junior: World Champion 2002, 2004, 2006, World microcomputer
Champion 1997, 2001)
Charles Roberson (author of NoonianChess)
Christophe Theron (author of Chess Tiger)
Dariusz Czechowski (author of Darmenios)
Don Dailey (author of Cilkchess, Star Socrates, Rex, Komodo)
Eric Hallsworth (part of Hiarcs Team, Publisher of Selective Search magazine)
Fabien Letousky (author of Fruit)
Frederic Friedel (Chessbase.com)
Gerd Isenberg (author of IsiChess)
Gyula Horvath (author of Pandix, Brainstorm)
Ingo Bauer (Shredder team)
Jan Krabbenbos (Tournament Director of Leiden tournaments)
Kai Himstedt (author of Gridchess and Cluster Toga)
Ken Thompson (creator of Belle Chess Machine, World Computer Chess Champion
1980, Turing Award winner 1983, creator of B and C programming languages,
Unix and Plan 9 developer).
Marcel van Kervinck (author of Rookie)
Maciej Szmit (assistant professor at Technical University of Lodz)
Mark Watkins (MAGMA Computer Algebra Group, School of Mathematics and
Statistics, University of Sydney)
Mark Uniacke (Hiarcs, World Microcomputer Champion 1993)
Mincho Georgiev (Pawny)
Olivier Deville (Tournament Director of ChessWars)
Omid David (author of Falcon)
Peter Skinner (Tournament Director of CCT--the major annual online computer chess
tournament)
Ralf Schäfer (author of Spike)
Richard Vida (author of Critter)
Richard Pijl (author of The Baron)
Stefan Meyer-Kahlen (author of Shredder, multiple world champions from 1996-2007)
Thomas Mayer (author of Quark)
Tord Romstad (author of Stockfish, Glaurung)
Tom Pronk (ProChess, Much)
Vladan Vuckovic (Axon, Achilles)
Wylie Garvin (game Programmer at Ubisoft Montreal)
Yngvi Björnsson (The Turk)
Zach Wegner (author of ZCT and Rondo, an upgraded version of Anthony Cozzie’s
Zappa program, which was world champion in 2005)
ICGA Board
President - David N.L. Levy
Vice-President: Yngvi Björnsson
Secretary-Treasurer: Hiroyuki Iida
Programmers Representative: Rémi Coulom
WCCC Tournament Director
Jaap van den Herik

http://www.chessvibes.com/plaatjes/rybkaevidence/RybkaInvestigation.pdf

http://www.chess.com/news/rybka-banned-and-stripped-of-titles-3798

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQshTNJ4pSM


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-09-26 18:03:55)
Italia & Eros strike at ICCF team champ

Italia made it very well (so Eros Riccio 1st at 1st board, and Mauro Petrolo 2nd at 6th board) against a very strong field in the ICCF european team championship!!

Italia finish second, Slovakia wins...

http://auryn.obolog.com/scacchi-l-italia-guidata-da-riccio-seconda-agli-europei-1282242

http://www.iccf-webchess.com/EventCrossTable.aspx?id=17521
http://www.iccf-webchess.com/EventCrossTable.aspx?id=17522


Congrats guys :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-11-13 19:52:28)
List ordered by rating

Here is, but as usual the new ratings (january 2012) will be taken in account...

Erwin Thiering 2515
Michael Bergmann 2475
Xavier Pichelin 2454
Thibault de Vassal 2449
Herbert Kruse 2436
Pavel Háse 2332
Ljubomir Tsenkov 2314
Rubén Cómes 2300
Wayne Lowrance 2266
Dariusz Fraczek 2261
Ramil Germanes 2255
Miroslav Gazi 2255
Alexander Blinchevsky 2253
Michael Sharland 2251
Sergey Kokoryukin 2251
Andrey Razumikhin 2250
Valery Nemchenko 2245
Lubos Fric 2241
Kevin D. Plant 2237
Christoph Schroeder 2236
Viktor Shishkin 2234
Slobodan Ilic 2218
Dmitri Mamrukov 2211
Vitaly Rudenko 2203
Alvin Alcala 2203
Carlos Sánchez 2203
Garvin Gray 2200
Scott Nichols 2189
Peter Unger 2181
Martin Zeman 2181
Christian Koch 2167
Stephen Hamby 2163
John Schutte 2136
David Evans 2132
Nelson Bernal Varela 2130
Darren DiAlfonso 2123
Ardiantez Polkwitzauer 2123
Thomas Dineen 2118
Peter W. Anderson 2112
Steve Lim 2110
Yu Ming Hoe 2100
Arkadiusz Wosch 2093
Djordje Kasabasic 2093
Luis Flores 2084
Daniel Parmet 2083
Lalit Kapoor 2080
Erik L. van Dijk 2074
Bernd Wolf 2072
Jose Lopez 2071
Sergey Uzdin 2064
Rodolfo d Ettorre 2064
Janos Helmer 2063
Om Prakash 2053
Mykola Simashkevitch 2043
Alexis Duenas 2037
Ireneusz Kasznia 2036
Mihail Larsky 2028
Joop Simmelink 2026
Pan Hardfeldt 2020
Henri Muller 2000
Jaroslav senior Pech 2000
Jaroslaw Gibas 2000
Bogoljub Teverovski 1997
Willy De Waele 1996
Fernando Vasquez 1992
Jose Moreira 1979
Andrew Endean 1975
Henri-Louis Muller 1972
Jose Maria Velasco 1972
Jordi Domingo 1969
Janeen Walden 1958
Andy Richard 1956
Roberto Migliorini 1949
Erika van Dijk 1943
Daniel Reboredo 1938
Coco Maceda 1938
Michael Rogers 1933
Aleksandr Aksenov 1927
Mariusz Maciej Broniek 1923
Robert Wilhelm 1901
Kieran Moore 1900
John Dyson 1889
Catalin Nita 1888
Daniel Jabot 1878
Johanes Suhardjo 1875
Mikhail Ruzin 1871
Benjamin Block 1863
Ilmar Ambos 1859
Vyacheslav Shchelykalin 1859
Jan Peter Lommler 1844
Stanislas Gounant 1840
Mircea Hrubaru 1838
Sasha Lipsits 1833
Nilson Pereira 1833
Aleksey Payzansky 1804
Jai Prakash Singh 1800
Fredi Brumec 1800
Gleen Duran 1800
Josef Strohmeier 1800
Ryszard Sternik 1776
Stepan Pech 1767
Dieter Faust 1764
Dmitriy Malish 1760
Dimitrios Ropokis 1743
Hasan Kirali 1715
Eddit Moreul 1700
Behzad Shahmiri 1700
Jaimie Wilson 1684
Dinesh Bhandarkar 1682
Philip Roe 1667
Olli Ylönen 1660
Graham Cridland 1655
Juan Alvar 1653
Jeremy Banta 1644
Luís Gonzaga Grego 1643
Pablo Siciliano 1623
Mariusz Jandula 1600
Sergey Biryukov 1598
Alejandro Canovas 1589
Jimmy Huggins 1577
Matthew O Brien 1575
Pablo Ruano 1565
Khaled Toutaoui 1528
Stanimir Denchev 1505
Leo Malagar 1500
Richard Hendricks 1479
Eric Price 1469
Antonio Pereira 1456
Angelo Piantadosi 1420
Simon Huxtable 1388
Peter Krakovsky 1326
Marc-Antoine Leurette 1243
Jorge Orden 1204
Hana Pechova 1204
Jorma Häkkinen 1192
Des Jefferis 1186
Deon Whittaker 1111
Matej Pech 1074
Jiri Mach 1022
Cédric Cavaillé 1003
Jay Melquiades 0909
Jaroslav Pech 0697


Alvin Alcala    (2011-12-05 16:05:38)
4th FICGS freestyle cup

Many thanks, It was a lucky two days for me as the top guns are not around (Eros, David, & Ruben). Also much much stronger opposition if Alberto, Sebi, Kamesh, etc are included. In the next tour I hope more people will join as we barely have this type of a tourney in a year. :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-12-29 14:48:20)
5 player double round robins

I agree on "if it's not rated, it's not real" but the fact is that many players are afraid to lose many points against maybe strong 1800 players... Actually the rules evolved about 2 years ago to avoid this, ratings are quite protected (never enough) in such cases but it looks like it is not well intergrated yet.

On the other hand, if there's an entry fee & prize, it's even more real... If we start with that idea, maybe it can be unrated. I'm still not sure...

Your opinion for a double round robin with entry fee & money prize, should it be unrated or rated?


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-01 20:12:07)
On rules & players who lost 300 pts

Hi,

I've been told about a recurrent problem: is it fair to play against a stronger player who just lost 200 or 300 elo points because of many games lost on time (or whatever)?

IMO it is. Because as usual correspondence chess is not a matter of chess only. Of course such games may be harder for his opponents but there are good chances to see those games lost on time again (by experience).

Losing points is the only way to keep those games serious and protect players against this repeated again and again. So I don't think that rules should be changed, but any opinions & arguments are welcome here.


Scott Nichols    (2012-01-02 03:22:46)
Chess world championship #10

Some interesting and strong groups! Will be fun to watch.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-02 14:08:37)
On rules & players who lost 300 pts

Statistically playing 1 game in a tournament against an underrated player is not so much while losing 200 or 300 pts means a lot... And once again, quite often underrated players because of a mass forfeit will forfeit again! There are well known examples (very strong players rated 1900-2000) here. IMO it's the only way to prevent mass time outs!

I played at IECG and I was very disappointed to see games with an advantage simply cancelled after 30 moves or so, because of a time loss or just "forfeit". That is a non-sense to me. Rated games have to be rated!

So you suggest to simply punish players by not allowing them to play tournaments anymore (during 1 year or so)!? On the other hand, if players do not lose rating points what to do if a player has recurrent problems and has to resign his games once every year. Then many ratings will be hustled.

At last what will be a legitimate reason? It is so... so complex.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-02 14:11:49)
Chess world championship #10

:o) Sorry, that's pure luck (or unluck)! :)

Anyway this is definitely the strongest FICGS chess championship until there... with 205 players (5 have to find a group yet), a record! The knockout will be very interesting to follow as well with the participation of our top seed, Michael Aigner.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-03 13:57:46)
Houdini and draw rate evolution at ICCF

No, chess engines are not to solve chess yet :) But this blog (link posted by Wolff Morrow in the chat) is quite interesting anyway!

http://blog.chess.com/FirebrandX/are-computers-closing-in-on-solving-chess

There you'll find the draw rate evolution at ICCF these last years, a clear influence of the strongest chess engines (Rybka, Houdini, Fire, IvanHoe, Stockfish & so on...)


Philip Roe    (2012-01-04 00:02:21)
On rules & players who lost 300 pts

There are players (who I could name if asked) who are capable of strong play but who start many more games than they finish. Whatever the outcome, there is little satisfaction to playing them. The problem with trying to impose any penalty is to identify them without closely policing the sytem.

A possible solution might be that players who have recently lost many short games could be restricted in the number of new entries that they can make.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-10 23:07:31)
Ratings UpDates

Correspondence chess ratings (that are taken in account when a new tournament starts) do not change after every game, but yes you can see your provisional "future rating" as George says.

It is different for Go to allow strong players to climb faster the enormous ladder (2500 points for Go at most). For Poker the difference is less obvious but the game is less serious than chess and it is quite exciting to see this rating list evolving each day :) At the end I wouldn't change anything now.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-18 17:03:41)
Standard open : DRR with entry fee/prize

Well, I really don't mind if the entry fee is 10 or 30 euro... it could be even free, but would it work? As we had silver & gold games, I just tried to find something between (and it had to be of interest for strong players to play lower rated ones).

The path towards a paid site (as far as I know, much more Epoints are given than taken) will be very... very long :)

The reason for this tournament was mainly that you asked for such a tournament so that more games can start & more quickly, it is also a good experience before to make such drastic changes to modify a whole tournaments category. I'm still not sure it would be a good idea!


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-18 18:19:13)
Standard open : DRR with entry fee/prize

IMO strong players will have no interest in this, but well... we can try it.


Scott Nichols    (2012-01-18 20:57:37)
Standard open : DRR with entry fee/prize

Hmmm, I must not be as strong as I thought, :) J/k, I know what you mean. BUT, the whole idea was to get a more variety here, all the free games haven't gone away, you just added something new, which IMO was sorely needed. If you look at the stats Thib, probably last year my games here dropped off, not because I wasn't entering, but because it was hard to find a game. Plus the WBCCC had an impact, at least IMO, I don't know the stats. I still play for the home team as always will as long as you are here Thib, but I also admit, I learned a lot at that forum.


Paul Campanella    (2012-02-26 19:44:53)
New Player Ratings

I started at a 1600 rating. Personally, I find it completely UNACCEPTABLE that new players start at 1800 because it is a misrepresentation of their poker skills.

I started playing poker approximately a year ago on this site and I had to work exceptionally hard to make it into the top 20. As a past low ranked 1600 player... it was not easy to advance my elo to 1800+. It took considerable time and dicipline to hone my skills and get to the B-Level Tournaments. Playing those lower ranked players developed my skill because it taught me to expect the unexpected and learn all about odds and player styles.

Allow me to present some examples of players in relation to starting point and current rating:

A) I started out as a 1600 player... there were many people that were low ranked. As of now, the only 2 players that I recall advancing from a low rank to the top 20 are Paul Campanella (#16) and Dmitriy Panov (#17).

B) Slobodan Ilic (#6) and Trond Amile (#11) are both high rated good players but the reality is that it is much easier for people like them who entered in as 1800 elo to advance to the top compared to people who entered in at 1600 elo.

Now it seems that all new players get a "free ride" to the B-Class Tournaments and 200 elo points for doing absolutely nothing!

Starting at 1600 elo and advancing through the ranks is the true definition of skill. In order for players' ratings to accurately represent their skills, EVERYONE should start at 1600 and WORK their way up!


Don Groves    (2012-02-28 05:26:02)
Folding in Poker

I, for one, do not have the time to sit in front of my computer for several hours to finish one game. There are probably many others here who feel the same. Freestyle is fine for those can do this but I doubt it's anywhere near a majority. So to say that freestyle would find the best player is not true in my opinion.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-03-05 00:22:47)
FICGS poker ratings

I knew that you would answer this way... And you are right on several points.

I read the rules before to write this, we could envisage to change the rules on the general forfeits issue but it wouldn't probably be so easy to "fix" it. Maybe another discussion is needed.

About chess, this has been done the same way several times for different reasons, see Wolfgang Utesch, Wayne Lowrance... The only difference is that Nelson gave a bad reason (with the excuse that he may have done this to help to find the best rating rules, which was not necessary). But he could have said something else. What would be the perfect rule? The current rule was probably discussed in the forum previously. Nothing better was found, that's all.

Anyway, this site stands for applying rules... and IMO I have the choice between doing nothing in this special case and preventing Nelson to enter a waiting list during 2 months. Nelson was totally wrong to do this... (also because of Paul's previous message that proves that it is possible to climb the scale quite quickly, which IMO goes in the way of not changing the rating rules) but now that it's done, I think that the best thing for the site is to let him continue, at least we'll learn something from this and it will improve the rating rules.


Niklas Hallqvist    (2012-04-19 11:53:19)
XFCC Play

I wish XFCC was considered, it would clearly ease the coupling between my local chess database and analysis environment and FICGS. Today I rely on copy/paste and it's really tedious, esp. when running many games.

Just my $.02


Garvin Gray    (2012-04-20 15:24:51)
Slow tournament entries

Thib: I do apologise in advance if this reply is regarded as too strong, it is not meant to offend, but could be taken by yourself or someone else as too strong.

In my opinion, creating ANOTHER division is possibly the worst decision that could be made. Leaving the time control as is would be a better decision.

We have three divisions classical rating sections, plus an advanced rating list and multiple thematic, unrated, epoint and other options.

I think adding another division would just spread things out wayyy too far.

It is not like we have an over abundance of players and need to offer more options to satisfy a wide market.


Garvin Gray    (2012-04-20 15:28:37)
Slow tournament entries

Ramil:

When I first came across this site, the rating bands used to be 400 points, and then after a lot of negotiation, debates and cross topics, it was changed to 200, with the even numbers (2400, 2200, 2000) in the standard category, and (2300, 2100, 19000 in the rapid category.

While I understand your point that perhaps these should be changed to 100 point bands as this is what I think the market is trying to say, I think it is an issue of total number of players.

If we had many more players, then each category would fill quicker. Your point is certainly worth discussing and I would not be upset to see it work in practice, but we have had quite a few changes, and another change might just be a bit much for Thibault to consider at this stage.

I could be wrong though ;)


Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-21 01:34:43)
Slow tournament entries

Well my reason for not playing at FICGS (despite the fact it is the best site out there!) has been that I can't play the stronger opponents. The rating restrictions have forced me to ONLY play unrated events here or seek other places to play.

However, other than ICCF which costs money there are no other places to play strong players. I just had the most horrendous chess experience of all time at LSS. So my conclusion is that I have probably reached the end of my correspondence career altogether save the ocassional unrated ficgs game if I notice a strong cue up in one of them. I certainly won't be playing my rating class ever again.

The problem IS NOT the time control. The time control here is lovely. I am curious what Thib's solution might be.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-21 01:48:03)
Slow tournament entries

FICGS strengths:
Free
Well Managed
Friendly
Well Programed
Easy to Navigate
User friendly
Great rules
Great vacation settings
Great Time controls
Great variants / choices

Problems:
Lack of players
Lack of ability to play stronger players.

For all the awesome things here.... the one weakness makes it hard to continue to find people to play.


Ramil Germanes    (2012-04-21 02:01:43)
Slow tournament entries

Daniel:

If we have the option to challenge a player of our choice then your second problem is solved.

Your first problem is partly due to negative reactions of players here due to not able to play stronger players but if that is met we all be satisfied and might give good overall reactions about ficgs which might help to attract more players in the long run.

The more important part is the current players here must be satisfied for the site to attract more players.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-21 16:48:24)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I previously erroneously had this as a sidebar chat.

I will post the story here.

I had 22 games running on LSS. All of a sudden a game disappeared. I checked and found the administrator had decided to resign for me in a game where I had a cleanly winning position and 43 days on my clock. I contacted the administrator politely to inquire why he had done this. He answered rudely explaining that he did not care about my problem. After his uncalled for rudeness, I explained to him I was no longer interested in playing further games on this "joke of a server" so please remove me from a tournament that was about to start. He responded with pure insults and a memberships suspension but *did not* remove me from that tournament. When the new tournament started, I explained to him again that he was supposed to have removed me. I was only interested in finishing my current games out of respect for my opponents. The administrator then went and forfeited all currently running 19 games and placed a ban on me playing there again until 2013. I told him that was disrespectful not just to me but to my opponents as well. He then deleted my account entirely (which doesn't bother me as I would have asked for this after my 19 games finished). There you have it... Ortwin Paetzold - the bat shit crazy administrator.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-21 16:49:34)
Slow tournament entries

I won't play in the ficgs wch because I am the top seed and this is disgusting to me. Not only does it mean I won't get strong players, it also means I will lose massive ratings points which will in the future ALSO prevent me from playing strong players. Two awful effects!


Peter W. Anderson    (2012-04-22 15:39:16)
Slow tournament entries

Let me start by saying that I really like this place. The software is reliable, the interface is clean and people are generally polite. Thank you Thibault.

I don't buy Daniel's argument about the bandings. It is quite possible to score 5 or 5.5 in a class A, and it is quite possible to move swiftly through class A.

I am trying to move through Class M. I may or may not suceed. If I don't, I won't be complaining about not being able to play stronger players, I will blame myself for not playing better.

My only concern is what happens if I do manage to reach 2300. The rapid time control suits me (I am retired) and I would not have the patience for the slower time control. As far as I can see no-one over 2300 enters rapids. So I might end up having nobody to play apart from in WCH.

There are two solutions that I can see. One is to adopt Garvin's mixed ability group suggestion; this could be in addition to the existing banded tournaments.

The other is simply to get more members, so that there are more people willing to play in a particular category. I for one will try to do my bit to recruit some people onto here.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-22 17:08:16)
Slow tournament entries

It is my fault that I don't get to play stronger players? Interesting... logically impossible but I'm curious how you drew such a wrong conclusion.

Of course, whether or not you accept my argument is irrelevant because my argument is why I don't play. It is why others don't play. It is also why many don't sign up. I showed my roommate this site when he wanted to start corr chess and he saw he would be forced to play weak players for years before he'd get ONE decent game. He decided to join chess.com instead.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-04-22 18:49:49)
Answer from Ortwin

Well, here is the answer from Dr. Ortwin Paetzold (LSS/IECG) that he asked me to post here. I'm glad to do it of course so that we can hear from both sides and make our own opinion with:

>>>>>>>>>>

Daniel Parmet is twisting the reality a bit. I take the right to quote my full answers, however as I do not have the permission to do so, I will not post the notes from Daniel to me, unless he quoted it here himself already.

Fact 1 is that Daniel has not read the rules of LSS or forgot about them. There is a function in LSS which lets the webmaster check this esp. in case of rule questions. Therefore he might not have known about the rule, however, when registering on LSS each player is asked to study the rules and to play according to them. I am sure, the same holds for FICGS and any other server.

Fact 2 is that on 4th April Daniel Parmet has lost a game on time by violating the 30-days-rule. The server automatically stopped the game and awarded the point to the opponent, independent from the position. The server also imposed the two week suspension to start a new tournament. The 30-days-rule was installed at IECG more than 10 years ago and I had included it into LSS right from the beginning. Daniel Parmet asked politely why the admin has cancelled his game (which I had not).

Fact 3 is that in my answer about the query why the game was finished, I have answered with reference to the rules:

“Your game was forfeited, because you did not move for 30 days. This is the maximum number of days to be used per individual move, independent of the total amount of time you have left. See the Rules and Usage Section under "Violation of Time Control". This is also the reason of your two-week-suspension. “

In his response Daniel Parmet called the LSS “a joke of a site”.

Fact 4 is that I answered to this insultation:

“Well, it is not my fault that you have not read the rules during the past five years you have played here! To be honest, this is impressing!”

I do not think this is more rude than insulting me/LSS because one has made a mistake!

Fact 5 is that I did not remove him from the waiting list of the LSS Anniversary 2012 as requested, because I thought that – once Daniel thinks reasonably about the case – he might want to continue, esp. as he wanted to continue all other games. Furthermore LSS has a feature where each player can remove himself from the waitinglist of this tournament. This all happened on 5th April! I then forgot about the matter.

Fact 6 is that on 19th April the LSS Anniverary groups were created including Daniel Parmet to one of the groups. As he was no longer suspended that time I missed that he still was on the waitinglist. I would otherwise have tried to get a replacement, which I did in other cases . When he claimed not to play in the anniversary on 20th April, I decided to remove him from all tournaments he was playing. As the tournaments were in an early stage (start date 15th Feb, Parmet finished only 3/10 and 1/12 games in them), I believe it makes less impact to withdraw a player then letting him influence the outcome, esp. as e.g. he would not use a potential qualification to the LSS WC Semi-Final or the Consolation Finals. I commented that action with the following message:

‘I have withdrawn you from this "joke of a site" (your own - wrong - words. It is not my fault that you have not read the rules!)

Thanks for playing here.’

The answer was unfriendly so I decided to cancel the membership permanently.

I would like to thank Thibault for the opportunity to express my view. I do not intend to comment anyfurther in this matter, as I think the two different versions are speaking for themselves.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-22 19:43:08)
LSS is the worst Corr server

FICGS already has a rule like that in that its every 60 days here which is far more reasonable. And I have used that to great effect to beat a strong player it required 49 days of analyzing some tough lines to win. If at 30 days, I was forced to move, it would have been a draw.

Mr. Ortwin forgets to mention I didn't violate this rule. But then Ortwin has shown himself to be a very unreasonable character.


Peter W. Anderson    (2012-04-22 21:27:28)
Slow tournament entries

That wasn't really my point, but as you rasie it, it is a combination of two factors that prevent you from playing stronger players outside of the WCH - the banding rules and your perfornmance. That is just fact.

My point was that it is possible to get good rating results against weaker players and it is practically possible to move up a category in months not years. Equally you should not fear playing in the WCH on the same basis. Win your group and then you will get plenty of strong opposition.

I accept that if someone is finding it hard to break through the top of one category then they will not get practice against much stronger players outside of the WCH. That is a disadvantage of the current banding rules, and might prove frustrating to some people.

However, the alternative has disadvantages. If you remove the banding you will end up playing not only stronger players but much weaker ones too.

Perhaps the best answer is to offer a mixture of both types of tournaments.


Don Groves    (2012-04-24 18:17:47)
Do the cards really matter?

The term you guys are looking for is "table stakes." There is no limit on betting but you can't go in for more than you have in front of you at the start of the hand.


Garvin Gray    (2012-04-25 04:43:19)
Ficgs World Cup

I think everyone needs to be completely clear when they mention the term rating bands:

In the context used on ficgs, it means a minimum and maximum rating that players can play in. For example in the rapid waiting lists, there is a rating band of 1900-2100. Meaning only players between 1900 and 2100 can play in that group.

If you are talking about players being suspended, then please specify that and be clear that you are talking about suspensions.

I apologise if this reads as a cranky reply, but this whole concept is being devised to not have any kind of rating bands, or special exemptions for any player.

So I bristle quickly and strongly as the suggestion of rating bands or special exemptions, to the point that I will abandon this concept if rating bands or exemptions are going to be implemented.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-26 01:13:45)
Ficgs World Cup

Great idea Garvin.

As far as activity goes, I think it should be either an established rating with a history of no time forfeits. It definitely should not be calculated based on RATED games. This is silly. I play many unrated games these days because its the only way to play strong players. I don't play rated here anymore because of the rating bands. So your activity requirement would exclude the very type of player you are trying to grab.


Garvin Gray    (2012-04-25 09:16:51)
Ficgs World Cup

Ahh now I think I understand some of the previous comments.

What you guys are talking about is a rating floor, not a rating band. With a rating floor of say 1999. So all players must be rated above 1999 to participate.

Not a big fan of a rating floor for this as it goes against the original objective, which is to provide more opportunities for players of different ratings to compete against each other. This does not only apply to 2000's v 2200's, but also applies further down the rating list as well.

The effect is not as pronounced, but still applies for the original objective.

I am in favour of an activity requirement. The standard in otb chess is that a player must have played nine rated games to get a rating, so the minimum activity could be ten completed games.

I am not as strong on the idea of an activity requirement as I am on no rating bands (which is very different to rating floor).


Gino Figlio    (2012-05-02 23:16:16)
Slow tournament entries

Thib,

FWIW I don't see anything wrong with your current setup. Good work and do what you think is best.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-05-03 04:30:30)
Slow tournament entries

That time control is impossible (20 days plus 1hour). 30 days plus one hour was barely playable! Minimum increment needs to be 12 hours to cover for sleep/work times but more like 24 hours. The WBCCC was awful directly because of its bad time control. The only reason I played the WBCCC at all was to play strong players.


Peter W. Anderson    (2012-05-03 18:28:20)
Slow tournament entries

Of course there is no perfect time limit. What is too slow for one person will be too fast for some others. The current Rapid speed seems to get the balance about right - quick enough to allow a sensible length to the tournament but slow enough to allow some real thought even if you are working or have significant family commitments.

But perhaps the acid test is how many people are prepared to play at that speed. It does not seem to put people off playing in the current WCH, so whilst it will not be everyone's favourite, it does seem to have a broad enough appeal.

In terms of format, I think large groups (say 11+ people in each group) work well and I think better serve the idea of giving people a chance to play stronger players better than a Swiss, which is fine for a game or two and then flattens out.

In summary, I think Garvin's original suggestion works well.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-05-09 01:46:02)
Xiao Tong on his win in 6th FICGS Go WCH

Xiao Tong, winner of the 6th FICGS Go championship, kindly accepted to answer a few questions, here is the first part:


FICGS - Hello Xiao, congratulations once again for winning this nice match. Svante Carl von Erichsen was FICGS champion from the start of the site, after winning 5 championships. What did you think about his play & yours in these games?

Xiao Tong - Mr. Svante Carl von Erichsen is the strongest player I have met on this site. The games are so tough. In the middle of this match I thought I would lose in at least two games. At last I am lucky to have a 4-1 winning.

FICGS - Would you like to tell us a few words about you (where you live, other games you play, Go servers you play on...) so that we know you better?

Xiao Tong - I live in China but when I started to play Go on this site I was visiting France. In China when we play Go face to face, generally it takes 2 or 3 hours. But when we play on the ineternet, we always choose 30sec/move. I always play on TYGEM site, which is a China/Korea cooperated site. Before playing we need to install a client software. You can visit this address http://www.tygembaduk.com

FICGS - Unfortunately you are one of the rare chinese players at FICGS, but obviously they do very well. We all know many chinese Go champions names, could you tell us your opinion on the state of Go in China and in the world nowadays?

Xiao Tong - The past 10 years can be called Korea decade. They won more world championships than Chinese players, because before 1990 few Chinese children studied Go. But when China won several matches between China and Japan in late 1980s, more and more children started to study and play go. And then these millions of Go children grew up. Now Chinese players can get more world champions than Korea. I think besides the several world champions there are 30 young players in China who may win world championships in the future. They aged from 16-25.

FICGS - The best Go engines would now reach a level of 4 or 5 dan, is computer Go something that helps in such a correspondence Go championship according to you (and without revealing your secrets of course)? Do you think it is becoming a danger as it is for chess?

Xiao Tong - I don’t think computer Go engines can do anything. They are too weak.

FICGS - Do you watch other games played by your opponents before starting your games? Do you think that preparation is really important like it is in Correspondence chess?

Xiao Tong - I don’t take much time to analyze my opponents. But I will watch their games to get a first evaluation. World champions need to prepare before the game, because preparation can save their time in game. For me, preparation mean nothing.

FICGS - This FICGS Go championship is still young, what did you think about it? Would you change something, any rule, to improve it?

Xiao Tong - 1, Encourage players to play live games. One game can be finished in 2 hours when they play at 30sec/move. The more they play, the higher the site level will be. 2, when the world champion match is live on net, encourage player watch the games through your site. Let the watcher can bet on the live games. It will be more funny.


Many thanks to Xiao for these instructive answers, to be continued...


Paul Campanella    (2012-05-11 04:57:14)
Playing poker for e-points

Members of FICGS are able to play chess for e-points but poker challenges are only allowed in "bronze".

Why are members of FICGS not allowed to challenge other members to either "silver" or "gold" poker games?


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-07-28 00:10:50)
FICGS IS BACK !!!!!!!!!

First of all, I've added 15 days to all players in running games because of the delay and the fact that many of us may have no access to internet during the summer vacation (this time is added to the 46 days, 13 hours and 20 minutes since the crash for players expected to play), this issue was discussed at Rybkaforum, of course it may be unfair to few players in certain games where their opponent had few time but I did not find a better balanced solution, sorry about that :(

Among other consequences, the current championships cycle will last 10 months instead of 8, and july correspondence chess ratings will be updated very soon.

Well, how to start... fortunately such an event is rare but possible, and following the Murphy's law, it happened (first time for me), the server's hard disk crashed and the least I can say is I've not been lucky, even if I obviously did some things wrong.

Of course I had enough data at home to rebuild all games until a few hours before the crash but I thought it was worth it to pause the server during a few days/weeks to recover more moves, and if possible ALL moves. I really hoped that it would work and at the end it did, but not completely... for unknown reasons. I had also other data to recover from the server, including some FICGS data that were not backuped correctly (my bad), because I did not think far enough 6 years ago when I coded the first FICGS scripts... That will be fixed very soon.

So, because the DDrescue process did not work -unlucky- just after the crash, my server provider (OVH in France) had to send me the hard drive and it took sooooo much time already :/

Then I tried to recover some files and the databases by myself and I learnt much on how to save a hard drive but each process was really long, it took several days again...

Finally none process completely succeeded, few sectors of the hard drive remained unreadable and unfortunately the FICGS database is divided into very numerous parts written everywhere on the disk.

At the end, I brought the disk to the very best professionals able to save it... the process was quite long again and it did not completely worked as well, for an unknown reason the current database was still not readable but they did much better than me at the end.

Finally the whole process was worth it, but I did not expect it could take so much time.... 46 days, 13 hours, 20 minutes. And that's a shame :(


Of course, I could have used a RAID 10 server, I was not favourable to this choice because it is not 100% safe as well, I don't know it enough and it's much more expensive. I'll reconsider it though.

But the other things I did wrong are clear anyway, I lacked of experience in such a situation and most important, I'll do now better backups also on another server every hour. Next time (if any), we'll lose at most 1 hour of moves but the server will be able to restart within 1 day.

One thing is sure, internet was really empty for me without FICGS during this long month and a half and I missed our tournaments too much so that happen again! Have no doubt, FICGS would not have stopped in all cases but once again I'm really sorry about that and all consequences... I can only hope that you'll enjoy your games as before.

Thanks for your understanding.

Best regards,
Thibault


Rolf Staggat    (2012-08-18 17:56:35)
This is Russia :(

No sad day for me.....

This man still thinks, he is the most important person in the world.

He only went to "Pussy Riot", because he wants to be seen on TV. He hates people like the Pussies, but he thinks it is good for HIM to provocate in front of the cameras of west-medias.

He does not know, what is reality. So now some policemen have to show him, what is real. No average intelligent person would try to find that out.

He never will be president of Russia, to be against Putin does not mean to be for Kasparov.

Kasparov only thinks in "white" or "black", but there are many more colours in real life.

By the way, the Pussies would never be known outside Russia with the noise that they call music. Now they have the time to learn.

2014 number 1 in all charts:
"Pussy Riot featuring Grandmaster Garry" the new super-group with their new song "Who is the greatest idiot"

I more prefer Grandmaster Flash.....He knows about real life.


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2012-08-19 03:56:37)
This is Russia :(

Kasparov is a well-paid shill of the globalist power.

"Is Kasparov an anomaly or does he fit right in with this coven of far-right loonies? And who are some of the prominent members of the Center for Security Policy? Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Frank Gaffney, James Roche and Laura Ingraham. Oh, boy. The whole front office of the neocon’s cuckoo’s nest. Now tell me, dear reader, with friends like that; what should we really think about Kasparov’s performance in Moscow? Is he really interested in "democracy promotion" as he claims or is their acting out a script that was prepared in Washington?"

http://www.counterpunch.org/2007/12/05/why-murdoch-s-journal-loves-kasparov/


Vadim Khachaturov    (2012-08-19 22:32:38)
This is Russia :(

Rolf, pussies arent the matter. The matter is that its possible in Russia today to be prosecuted as criminal and adjudged that without commiting a crime. Today its PR, tomorrow it will be anybody who cares about freedom and says "wrong" words about putin.It is a pure political case and Kasparov just says about that. And , of course, Kasparov and many others, who there were at the court on Friday, know, Rolf, the bitter russian reality far and far better, than You can imagine.


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2012-08-19 23:12:08)
This is Russia :(

EURO: I would like to move from chess to politics. What do you think about the proclamations of Garry Kasparov, do you see the Russian political reality in a similar light?

KRAMNIK: I disagree with him. It seems to me that his political opinions are empty. Garry is too destructive for my liking. According to him, everything in Russia is wrong, Putin did everything wrong. But that is simply not true. I am convinced that if Kasparov wants to be in politics he needs to offer something positive too, something constructive. Even in the field of human rights protection in Russia there are a number of people doing a lot. Apart from criticising, they create something positive too, by helping some people. Garry’s approach to everything is just demagogic and destructive. I disagree with his opinion that the situation in Russia is as critical as he sees it. I go there often, my brother and my parents live there, so I think I have a pretty good insight. If you want to judge the current situation in Russia you must not take single aspects of it out of the general picture. It is the same as judging a position during a chess game – you need to bear in mind an entire chessboard.

Of course Russia is not a democracy on the same level as countries such as Germany or France, but you cannot judge today’s situation without taking in the historical context. Russia had never been a democratic country in the past, so that is why the transition is not easy. Nevertheless, nowadays eighty percent of the Russian population is not forced to fight for their existence, as they had to, some ten, fifteen years ago.

http://www.kramnik.com/eng/interviews/getinterview.aspx?id=178


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2012-08-22 12:43:03)
This is Russia :(

Talking about politic Have you watch the Game of Thrones? By "mistake" the head of George W Bush was shown in a stick with other executed fellows...:-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-08-22 16:28:37)
Game of thrones

I saw that :) Last episode of season 1 if I remember well.


Daniel Parmet    (2012-08-25 23:43:21)
money prize tournaments

3,1,4,2.
I would definitely pay if it was a strong tournament.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-09-20 12:07:21)
Limit number of poker games

Don, I'm afraid that's mathematically wrong... compare 5 single games and a 5 games match (that counts for 1 game), a score of 4-1 does not have the same impact on ratings than a score of 1-0, the chancy factor is not the same. The aim of the whole thing was to have ratings not too close from each other, in other words significant (and I think they are).


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-09-27 23:39:12)
Eros Riccio wins 6th and 7th chess WCH

By beating Alberto Gueci in the final match of the 6th chess championship & Ostap Hladky in the candidates final of the 7th chess championship, Eros Riccio will remain FICGS chess champion for at least 16 months! After this huge performance, Eros accepted to answer a few questions:

----------------------------------

- Hello Eros and congratulations again for winning your 3rd and 4th (respectively 6th and 7th cycles) FICGS chess championships in a row, beating Alerto Gueci in the 12 games match of the final match and Ostap Hladky in the 8 games match of the candidates final so that you meet yourself in the last round that thus will not happen for the 3rd time of the championship (first time was during the first cycle because there was no champion yet). All games of the two matches were drawn, but it does not say much on the intensity of the match as we all know your strategy since your win in your first final match vs. Edward Kotlyanskiy when you explained that your preferred a draw that guarantees the victory than a possible win where a mouse slip is still possible. Obviously your strategy works very well but one can add that you had an impressive number of running games at the rapid time control, so very much pressure... How did you live these last months of correspondence chess and these two matches?

Hi Thib! And thanks once again for the congratulations. These 28 games (let's not forget also the 8 games match against Gino Figlio) probably started in the worst moment for me, just a few months after the very important European Team Championship on ICCF had started. When I told my captain that I was starting another 28 games... he was very disappointed and worried, as he had repeated a lot of times to every player of our team not to start new tournaments and to focus only on this tournament. Also for this reason I had decided not to join the new Italian Championship and other tournaments and to withdraw from the Champions League, but unfortunately I had no control on when to start my FICGS games. So... my priority was for my ICCF games, and fortunately for me all I needed to do in my FICGS Matches to win was to make draws, and that's what I tried to do in most of my games as fast as possible, and to my surprise my opponents accepted to draw many games quite quickly, not trying to fight each game "to death" like I would have done if I would have been them. This of course only created quick boring games, but I didn't see the point in putting energy in trying to win games myself.... I think my opponents should have done that!

- We all know that you and Alberto are good friends from long time, did it influence your match in the 6th WCH in any way according to you?

Well, it's a good think knowing your opponent's habits... you can send your moves as soon as you know he goes to bed :-)

- Ostap Hladky is undoubtly one of the strongest players at FICGS, was this match (7th WCH candidates final) very different from the other one?

Hladky was the strongest player I had ever played on FICGS, he is very unpredictable, he simply plays unexpected moves that engines don't suggest, but if you show them those moves, they slowly realize those are very good moves. I risked to lose more than one game vs him, even as White. Luckily I still managed to draw, and in my opinion he also accepted some draws too quickly.

- With the last evolutions of chess engines, playing better & better chess, would you say that you now spend less time on each game or not at all?

I don't spend less time on my games, I still try to use (almost) all the time on my "clock". Trying to analyze as many variations as possible with the time you are given has little to do with engines improvement, who still are far from being able to always suggesting the best move by simply letting them run for hours on a static position. You need to analyze going "forward" in the position in order to be able to find the best moves.

- By the way, it is said sometimes (again) that correspondence chess will not survive the decade, what do you think? Do you envisage to change for Go or poker like many players? :)

Wins and Losses still happen even at the highest levels at the present time. I think that many years still have to pass before having all draws in high level tournaments. When that happens... and it will probably happen sooner or later as chess in my opinion is a draw with perfect play... then probably new rules will be introduced, maybe the board will be enlarged and even new pieces with new movements might be invented.

- You now are ICCF GM with an impressive 2624 rating, how are going your other correspondence chess competitions? Do you have any goal to reach yet?

All my ICCF tournaments are going good, and very soon I will be Italian Champion once again (just waiting my last opponent to resign a lost position). I still haven't reached the first place in the italian elo rating list though. That would be a goal I would surely have pleasure in reaching, and of course I would like to win the ICCF's World Championship at least once. After that I can retire :-)

- Thank you Eros, also for this great correspondence chess lesson.

Welcome Thib! A pleasure for me.


Wayne Lowrance    (2012-12-02 04:54:10)
Problem with new groups for the chess WC

Robert, I do not think it is fair to insert Alexander with those too strong players. It is a problem. I can understands Thibault's problem now. Well what ever he decides is oki with me. but I would really oppose suggest divergent ratings in a group. In fact Rada has a problem he is by too high for even being that 3 group. I just do not know enough about these things to contribute.


Robert Knighton    (2012-12-02 14:45:47)
Problem with new groups for the chess WC

My computer broke down on me about 2 1/2 months ago. I have been without a computer until a couple weeks ago.

I could not have signed up on time :/

And I'd be willing to bet most late signups were for lack of knowledge of the tournaments available, how they work, or that they exist at all. This site is not exactly new user friendly. Getting games is confusing until you understand the unique system being used here. Same goes for finding and entering tournaments.

If I cant get in then so be it; no hard feelings, but if I can get the chance to play, that would be wonderful. What I really want is the chance to play stronger opponents. I'm still stuck in the sub 2k rating bands until more of my games finish.


Alexander Blinchevsky    (2012-12-03 06:55:41)
Problem with new groups for the chess WC

Wayne wrote: "I do not think it is fair to insert Alexander with those too strong players."
Actually I like to play people stronger than me, so the suggested 3-man group will be very exciting for me.
Any decision will be understandable :)


Wayne Lowrance    (2012-12-05 18:27:37)
Problem with new groups for the chess WC

Robert Knighton. You dont understand me. I was saying it is unfair for the two strong player having to compete against a much weaker player. It would have cost him point 4 sure.
BTW I must say. I very much agree with Don Groves opinions he has stated. here. Chess is a very structure event. Touch & move example. Thib's rules are just wrong ! period.I have said with rules in place he has a very difficult task. I said I would support him in his decision. But if it were left up to me. I would simply state, Late and your out ! NO excuses. that is just the way it should be. Sorry if I am offending anyone, it certainly is NOT my intention
Wayne


Robert Knighton    (2012-12-05 21:34:02)
Problem with new groups for the chess WC

Wayne Lowrance said: "Robert Knighton. You dont understand me. I was saying it is unfair for the two strong player having to compete against a much weaker player. It would have cost him point 4 sure. "

Yeah I see what you mean there. Even if I could compete at that level then those players at a higher rating would suffer for it.

Also, no offense taken. We can peacefully agree to disagree on issues and perhaps we can settle it with a game one day :)

Seems like there should be a provisional tournament that new players coming to FICGS enter into automatically to determine rating, but that is a discussion for another place.


Garvin Gray    (2012-12-13 16:52:12)
WBCCC 2013

This information is in regards to the World Blitz Correspondence Chess Championship for the year 2013.

It is held on Rybka Forum www.rybkaforum.net.

There is a full sub forum located on that forum that explains a lot of the rules, current list of players and specifics of information.

For a general run down, read on:

My name is Garvin Gray and I am the organiser and arbiter for this event. This event attempts to bring as many strong correspondence and freestyle players together from all the different playing sites, such as iccf, ficgs, playchess, lss and many other sites.

As the title says, this is a blitz event, meaning the time controls are short compared to normal correspondence play. This requires players to devote a greater share of their focus to these games than would normal correspondence play.

This event has been held for two years now, with the 2012 version still in progress. Feel free to browse the 2012 sub forum to see the games and how the structure works.

In the two years of this event, I feel that many new discoveries have been made and advanced freestyle chess knowledge has certainly been increased, to the benefit of all. Those who have participated in both events have gained a lot from their participation and I want to see this continue.

To allow this event to start and finish in one calendar year, we start in mid January and for 2013, it will finish in mid December. The format requires that you will play one game as white and one game as black in each round. There are 10 games in total.

Each round is paired as an individual swiss using the dutch pairing rules, but accommodations are made because each person must have one white and one black game per round.

Kibitizing is allowed and encouraged, but discussions about future positions, game analysis or anything else that could affect the result of the game is not allowed. Feel free to read the thread on game commentary.

There will also be a thread for each round that allows discussion of events during the round, general discussion about games or other general chit chat.

We do seek to provide a friendly, but competitive environment for those who want to advance their freestyle skills, or test themselves against other players from the different sites. This event will take up quite a bit of your time as the time control is fast, the play is difficult and the enjoyment factor high.

This is not meant to be a deterrent, but I feel I should make it clear that you need to be dedicated and willing to play each and every game/round.

Withdrawing or timing out mid game is not acceptable and will see you removed from the event. If you think you can not complete a particular round, it is better to contact me and have you withdrawn from that round. You are free to rejoin the event in these circumstances, but will receive zero points for those two missed games.

I hope to see more entries and good freestyling to everyone.

Cheers,

Garvin Gray
WBCCC 2013 Organiser


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-12-21 00:56:41)
Chess Server Team Tournament

Dear chessfriends,

I just received this proposition to play a "Chess Server Team Tournament" that would be played on ICCF web server:

Any opinion? Who would be interested to play such a tournament?

____________________________

Dear Thibault!

In recent years many friendly matches between different chess servers have been played. It has become a good tradition to organize such matches. A very good idea is to organize a round-robin tournament to find out the strongest team of a chess server.

We invite a team of your server to take part in the first unofficial correspondence chess championship for chess servers.

The championship is unofficial, because ICCF Officials do not head it.

The Organizer and Tournament Director is Pavlikov Andrey Nikolaevich who is experienced in organizing and directing both domestic (Russian) and international correspondence chess tournaments.

Invitations have been sent to administrators of the following chess servers:

Bestlogic – http://www.bestlogic.ru/
Chesshere – http://www.chesshere.com/
FICGS – http://www.ficgs.com/
GameKnot – http://gameknot.com/
LSS – http://www.chess-server.net/
SchemingMind – http://www.schemingmind.com/

Chess Planet – http://chessplanet.ru/pages/game-zone (to play chess on this server one must have a client program which is free to download at main page of the site)


If you have a proposal to add any chess server, it will be taken in consideration.

Regulations of the event
http://www.mocorrchess.narod.ru/wccstc/en/regen.html

Information on the event may be seen at http://www.mocorrchess.narod.ru/wccstc/wccstc.html


Best wishes, Andrey Pavlikov,

Russian Correspondence Chess Association Vice-President,

The Organizer of the event


Daniel Parmet    (2013-01-10 20:37:23)
Chess Server Team Tournament

Thib... I know its a lot of games but it is also a very long time control! It would be great if you played. We need strong players and its your server we're coming to represent! I will volunteer to take captain duties so you don't have that work load.


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-01-10 22:26:30)
Chess Server Team Tournament

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Dear friends,

I'm very sorry, it seems that only 8 teams can play the tournament and they just found 8..... So we cannot play it.

Maybe 2 parallel tournaments could be possible but well, it wouldn't be the same thing, I guess.

That's my bad, I didn't think this would be a speed race and I was not so confident to find so many players interested. Obviously I was wrong :/

My apologies to all. Anyway, that's a good thing to know that server team tournaments played at ICCF web server are popular in the whole correspondence chess world. We'll be there next time!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Dmitriy Malish    (2013-01-12 16:17:34)
Progressive Chess

In progressive chess, every move is a series-move. White starts with a series of 1 move, black answers with a series of 2 moves, white answers with a series of 3 moves, etc.
White starts the game by playing one move, Black answers with two and so on, always increasing by one the length of the series. Check may only be given with the last move of a series and must be defended with the first one.
Example.
1. e4
2. e6 Bb4
Bb4 seems to be ineffective.
3. a3 axb4 Nh3
Nh3 protects f2.
4. b5 c5 d6 Kd7
At first sight Black's moves seem valid but
they leave too much room for White to operate.
5. d4 dxc5 Bg5 Bxd8 Qxd6+
White has a strong position. First, Black must move the
King, and then he needs a least three moves to eliminate
White's Queen.
6. Ke8 Nf6 Nxe4 Nxd6 Kxd8 Kc7
There were not too many possibilities left.
7. Ra6 Rxd6 Bxb5 Ba6 Na3 Nb5++
A nice mate.

What about making this game on site?


Don Groves    (2013-01-13 05:07:27)
Progressive Chess

Seems to strongly favor White. Any statistics?


Garvin Gray    (2013-01-16 14:49:14)
FICGS admin scam me

Help me out here, according to Horatiu I have done 'something' wrong, but I am not sure what it is, or when it was done.

So what have I done wrong since I am personally named?


Horatiu Adrian Petrescu    (2013-01-16 19:39:22)
FICGS admin scam me

@Riha,(what a name is this? gipsy name?)YOU are unrespectful and your patron admin.You kiss his bottom because he let you play here with program? Very nice.


Daniel Parmet    (2013-03-11 13:46:38)
What size groups do you prefer?

I don't think the problem here is with group size but rather the silly rating brackets we switched to some time back. It makes it virtually impossible to play strong players.


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-03-19 11:25:56)
Vacation: change for 3 days minimum?

I just received a long and detailed private message from a very strong chess player who explained how vacation have influenced some of his games and I must say it was quite a strong demonstration of the issue.

Obviously it is a problem for certain players.

I'm not really favorable to a change here as it will complicate rules and the use of the site but here are the facts:

- Vacation are just rules... vacation may mean anything. So it is ok right now.

- Is it normal to save games thanks to vacation by gaining day after day ? It is just a question of point of view but IMO the answer is no. At least it cannot be done for each game separately, which is a great thing.

So we have a contradiction here.


Finally my proposal is a change for 2 days minimum that I would install in 2 months from now.

I think it would be a fair compromise... It should reduce the effects on the games in the future and it is quite short yet.

Any opinion on this change for 2 days minimum? Acceptable or not?


Rolf Staggat    (2013-03-19 17:05:12)
Vacation: change for 3 days minimum?

Thib, the "very strong chess player" is a MINORITY here. If he does not want to talk in this forum, his opinion is irrelevant.


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.


Eros Riccio    (2013-05-10 16:29:52)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH

Hi Alvin:

1) It depends on the position. Deciding a move may take from a few seconds to many days. My longest thought was 64 days for a move, in a decisive game of a past Italian Championship, the move was so hard for me that I also used the 30 days leave in order not to exceed the time limits for a single move. If someone is curious, it's move 40...Rh3 of the game Baiocchi - Riccio 0-1, 57 Italian Championship, played in 2007. Back then, after all my analysis with many different engines, I found out that Hiarcs was the engine that understood better than all the others that endgame, so I sticked to it mostly and its suggestions rewarded me with a win that allowed me to become Italian Champion.

2)The top 2 engines, which I usually use (and consider about equal) in infinite analysis at the same time with 3 cores each on my 6 cores computer are houdini 3 and deeprybka 4.1. Then come all the others, hard to pick a third place, probably critter or stockfish, depending on positions (stockfish is very strong in endgames, critter in tactical positions)


Neel Basant    (2013-06-03 06:48:54)
Playing activity top 20 players

Will there be rating update before starting of the tournament ?
And i think it is not fair to advance to the next stage .[To the player with the strongest tournament entry rating]
As per FIDE tournament standing ( final Rankig)the lower rated player with the equal points wins because.


Daniel Parmet    (2013-06-06 14:47:11)
Playing activity top 20 players

I know I don't count as one of these "higher rated players." But I have purposefully curtailed my activity here in favor of ICCF. The reason for my decision is because all the rules here are slanted against preventing a person from playing stronger players. The WCH is a perfect example; 2200's are given a free ride to the next stage while a 2150 has to play stage 1 as top seed where he will lose 35 points while WINNING the stage. So never having the opportunity to improve anymore here has forced me to find places where I can achieve that goal.


Daniel Parmet    (2013-06-07 01:07:26)
Playing activity top 20 players

Thib, I already went from a 2100 rating to a 2372 rating (and my rating is still CLIMBING FAST) with to SIM norm events on ICCF in a mere 32 games. While I have played over 200 games on FICGS and have yet to have a SINGLE opportunity to play a strong tournament. My strength grows but my rating does not grow because this site has gone out of its way to establish rating barriers. Why should I push myself to unbelievable lengths to try to break this site's barriers when I have another site that will happily let me play players of my own strength or slightly stronger without any such herculean effort?


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-06-09 01:46:15)
Playing activity top 20 players

I guess there are more strong players at ICCF to build rapid tournaments with more rating ranges, sorry for not being able to do that here :/

Finally, many players got a 2400 rating while starting at 1800 or even less... so maybe than playing a few games at standard time control would have brought you faster results than playing 200 games at rapid time control.

Sorry about that in all cases.


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-06-10 00:16:11)
Playing activity top 20 players

I do understand that you choose the stronger opponents (like most strong players), that's why you could have chosen the class M tournament with the ticket opportunity... That's the point I still don't get.

Thanks for your words and your proposal... I'm always looking for ideas to spread the word about FICGS in the chess world. The more players, the more fun for everyone!


Garvin Gray    (2013-07-01 13:35:39)
Wch cycles possible changes?

I guess no one else wants any changes.

Oh well I am proposing a small change in regards to the TER rule.

As it stands=

The winner of each group is qualified for the next stage.

In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage. If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account.

I would like to see these reversed, so it is the rating at the end of the event that decides who goes through. The logic of this is based on the theory being used. The theory is that the reason for highest rating moves forward is that it helps to ensure that the next group is as strong as possible. Well surely then that the most current information is the best guide to strength of play, so in my opinion the TER criteria should change to reflect this.

So the new rule would read:

The winner of each group is qualified for the next stage. In the case of equality, the player with the highest rating when the next stage begins will be qualify. Should their ratings be equal, then the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage.


Robert Knighton    (2013-07-03 19:02:38)
Wch cycles possible changes?

TER is the only fair way to decide other than tie breaker matches (time consuming) or pushing forward to the next round every player with the same score.

I can see where TER could be frustrating though.

If PlayerA TER 2049 and PlayerB TER 2050 both score 5.5/6 in round 1 then this does seem fairly unjust for player A because playerB only had to fight for a draw to win the round where PlayerA must get a win.

this gives PlayerB a strong advantage over a measly 1 elo.

1 elo also says nothing meaningful about which of the two players has a better chance in the tournament.

Factors such as number of games played or percentage of loss on time would be far better indicators than a single ELO point.


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-07-15 14:16:39)
Interview with new FICGS Go champion

Yen-Wei Huang, winner of the 8th FICGS Go championship, kindly accepted to answer a few questions for this very interesting interview!

_______________________


- Hello Yen-Wei and congratulations for winning the FICGS Go championship! Xiao Tong was obviously a tough opponent, yet you won 5-0, what happened during this match?

Hi Thib. Thanks again for your kind invitation. Xiao is definitely one of the strongest Go players on FICGS, and I was really, really lucky to have won all five games. In fact, I was behind in three of them until Xiao made some mistakes late in the games: in game 69092, I forced a tough ko fight which jeopardized my lower group. Xiao made a mistake at P2 as he missed my T3 could force another ko. Game 69093 was very close towards the end but I think the move at C13 caused him the game. Game 69096 was even closer that I won by half a point thanks to the big 7.5 komi. The other two games were not easy either and I am glad I could have hung on to the lead. Overall I really enjoyed our match and I would love to have a rematch with Xiao in the future.

- You're from Taiwan, could you tell us a bit more about you? At what age did you learn Go? Do you have any other ranks (e.g. at other sites)?

I learned Go when I was 5 and I have always enjoyed playing all my life. I used to play on servers like KGS and Tygem and I was around 6-7 dan on these sites. Recently I don't have that much time to play so that's why turned to turn-based server like FICGS.

- What do you think about the world of Go these days? Who is the very best player in the world according to you?

I think the past two years were the "warring period" in the world of Go. I would say Lee Sedol was the best player two years ago, but he seems to have lost his dominant position recently. There are many rising stars that are winning the world champions. I am especially keeping an eye on Yuta Iyama, who I think is No. 1 in Japan and has started to threaten the dominance of Chinese and Korean players.

- What about computer Go and its future? How many years do you give to the human before losing to the machine?

As a software engineer I foresee the computer Go beats the world's No. 1 player in two decades. Crazy Stone already beat Yoshio Ishida with four handicap stones earlier this year, and I believe it wouldn't take long for computers to beat pros in two handicap stones. The real challenge will come when computers need to go from handicap games to even games since they need to advance from defensive mode to attack mode. I am really excited to see how Artificial Intelligence can surprise us with its "creative" moves when the time comes.

- Do you use engines or databases? What advice would you give to beginners (and to your future challengers :))?

I know there are many useful Go engines and databases that are being developed these days, unfortunately I don't really know much about them. I do use http://ps.waltheri.net/ if I need to look something up, and I go to http://tom.com for commented games (they're in Chinese, nonetheless). Advice to beginners: just go to any search engine and you can easily find all the free resources you want. Advice to my future challengers: just try the new variations since I know none of them :)

- What new features would you like to see at FICGS?

Firstly I'd like to thank Thib for maintaining such a wonderful site. I enjoy playing Go and Poker here and maybe I'll start playing Chess sometime (I really suck so I'm not ready to embarrass myself yet). The ability to play different games is what makes FICGS unique. As Thib mentioned earlier, we need much more players, and I think FICGS simply needs to host much more tournaments, probably some with shorter time settings. With more games and more player engagement, more people will stick around. Another feature I'd really like to see is FICGS client for cellphones/tablets. The main advantage of turn-based servers is that it allows people to play wherever for whatever period of time: a 1-min ride in the elevator, a 10-min wait at the bus stop, or a couple of hours at home. If playing on FICGS is made easier, I know I will be more addicted to it :)

- Thank you very much and good luck in the next final match...

Thanks! And please go easy on our Poker match...


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-10-08 11:17:13)
My tournament activity

Health before everything (and particularly chess), Wayne!

Say hi to wise Dorothy for me and take care, anyway you'll always be one of the strongest players having played here :)

See you, wherever on the internet...

Cheers,
Thib


Garvin Gray    (2013-10-20 12:50:19)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

Was attempting to find the thread on allowing players to enter the next section up by winning the lower section.

Time for a review of this practice I think now that it has been going for a year or so.

I think it has had some benefits, I certainly have benefited from it ie have helped moved me up the rating list faster than otherwise would have occurred, I have noticed a couple of large issues.

In some groups, the waiting lists are taking much longer to form when two players from a lower rating group have entered early.

For instance a 2300+ group can be showing players with ratings of 2150 or so. This is possible when two players buy their ticket after winning a lower division and then their rating drops. This situation has occurred.

From then on for that group to form, it requires another 5 2300 players to join the group. That is a long and tedious process.

I think the rules on the upgrade ticket process need to be re-written to as follows:

A player, who has won the lower division, can only use the higher division ticket, once five or more places have been filled in that group.

The purpose of this rule change should hopefully show to keep 'strong' players that if they get in quick they can get a group going full of players of the ratings they want.

The market can then choose by entering quickly and watching the rating lists.

With the current situation of difficulty getting divisions started due to the number of wch groups started at the same time, some changes are required.

I think this rule is one area that needs to be reviewed urgently.


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2013-10-22 23:42:15)
Kievan Rus

Very likely? Yeah, to "democratic" and "objective" Western historians who re-write and falsify everything. :) I wish the above link was in English...

It's the eternal struggle of the "sea civilization" with "land civilization" (Mackinder's Heartland Theory).

"Moscow and Peter's town, the city of Constantine, these are the cherished capitals of the Russian monarchy. But where is their limit? And where are their frontiers to the north, the east, the south and the setting sun? The Fates will reveal them to future generations. Seven internal seas and seven great rivers from the Nile to the Neva, from the Elbe to China, from the Volga to the Euphrates, the Ganges to the Danube. This is the Russian empire and it will never pass away, just as the Spirit foretold and Daniel prophesied." - Fedor Tyuchev 1848


Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman    (2013-11-07 07:02:14)
ChessBase Light activate code

Sir you are in the wrong place.


Peter W. Anderson    (2013-12-26 15:47:53)
FICGS World Chess Championship results

Thanks. I put the wrong link in.

This should work OK

http://chessengines2.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/ficgs-correspondence-chess.html


Joerg Moormann    (2014-01-22 15:08:06)
Bug? Mate but game not finished

Hi

I played 29.... Re3# at 18. Jan. 2014.

http://www.ficgs.com/game_77611.html

It's checkmate, but the server did not finish the game. What went wrong?


Garvin Gray    (2014-02-03 02:10:36)
Standard time control abusers

Suffering again with two players abusing the time control.

Sick of this site with an administrator who will not doing anything about it when he has the ability to do so. I believe it is time to start naming and shaming these people and will start to do so in the next post after replies from others. I really do not care anymore, it is time this issue is exposed for the disgrace it is. Perhaps by exposing them, they will be gotten rid of. They hide under the cover of anonymity.

I am strongly considering resigning both games, telling Thibault what he can do with his site and leaving. I have had a F****** gutful of these actions and having months of my life wasted.


Garvin Gray    (2014-02-15 08:59:20)
Standard time control abusers

Ok, I have long had enough of this and since Thib believes that everything is a ok, it is time to start naming the abusers and their actions. Perhaps that will force Thib to start taking action against these people, because I, for at least one player, have had a bloody gutful of this player wasting my life.

The player concerned is: Mariusz Maciej Broniek and the game in question is: https://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=71232

He has repeatedly made all his moves in the last 5 days of the time control, then let his time run down to the 5 days and then made another 10 moves and rinse-repeat and will do it again.

Mariusz is clearly able to move faster, but is deciding to 'game' the time control in an attempt to either annoy the S*** out of me, or hope that I will resign.

The significance of this game is that whoever wins, wins the tourney and all the e points, totalling 48 e points. I am +10 ahead and it is time Thibault stepped in and put a stop to this behaviour.

Either Thibault applies the 'bringing the game into disrepute rule' against players like this, by firstly giving a warning and then declaring the game lost, or Thibault makes it clear he stands on the side of those who seek to abuse and 'game' the time control and does not give a stuff about the lives of the members who they continue to stuff over.


Garvin Gray    (2014-02-25 11:36:55)
Standard time control abusers

Broniek is now down to seven days in my game against him and has 9 moves to make. I have no doubt that he will make the time control, then will sit on the game for another 35 days.

Thanks Thibault for wasting my life like this.

You have a choice, you can either be on the side of the abusers or the victims. It is clear which side you are choosing. At the clear cost of the site.

I know why most people are not commenting and this because they are scared to offend you, even though they hate behaviour like this. Instead they just do not participate in the events.

I have noticed that no one is promoting ficgs anymore. Perhaps it is because the members have grown tired of seeing a site admin allowing members to act in manners like this and not being held to account for it.


Thibault de Vassal    (2014-03-03 11:14:15)
Standard time control abusers

Not "any" player though, Heinz-Georg :) You know like me that Garvin has some experience and knowledge on all these topics and I respect it, even if I disagree with him sometimes or often.

In this case, I estimated that either I had to prove some things, or something good could comes out (if I'm wrong). We all know that we miss new players for about 2 years, so it sounds important to do something that can be seen even if the real game is behind the server itself...


Thibault de Vassal    (2014-03-03 23:41:34)
Standard time control abusers

At least you join Garvin on the WCH groups point (and consequently the Cup idea)...

Anyway, as there are very few new strong chess players yet, this is a quite good time to try this change. Let's see in a few weeks/months if it has first effects.


Garvin Gray    (2014-03-04 01:15:06)
Standard time control abusers

FWIW, seems like at least one person thinks I 'got my way'. This is incorrect, I did not 'get my way'.

I wanted Thibault to take action against standard time control abusers, which he has not done.

Btw, in one of my games I am now on move 70 and have mate 13 and I think my opponent is going to make another move and then try and sit on the position for another 35 days.

Will Thibault step in then?

The closing of the three standard class divisions was a response to this issue and the fact that they have not started for a long time and that something needed to be done.

It is only after a decision had been made one way or another that some comments have started to come. I gave, some days, between replies, for others to comment, so others had an opportunity to cast their opinion, disagree, give alternative opinion and also to add new rules if they wish.

Then as nothing was happening with the discussions and my opponents were continuing with their actions, the need become more pressing. I have never said for a second that there is anything wrong at all with a person who moves at a rate of one move every five days.

It is with players who are so arrogant they believe it is their right to waste their opponents lives when they clearly can play at a faster rate. If they can not move at a faster rate, how come they can make 9 moves in 3 days, then not move for 35 days?

A person who is legitimately time poor will make one move every few days to make the time control.


Peter W. Anderson    (2014-04-10 11:14:59)
Alvin Alcala in Freestyle Battle 2014

Yes, excellent performance by Alvin.

Anson Williams is interesting. I can't find him on any correspondence sites. I believe he is English but I cannot find any record of an English Chess Federation or FIDE rating for him. The only type of chess he seems to play is freestyle and he seems to do very well at it. He must have a lot of natural talent because there are some strong OTB and correspondence players in that tournament.

Good luck Alvin for the last round :)


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!


Garvin Gray    (2014-08-30 07:46:33)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *

Had some more time to think about this. Read the rules, read them again. Especially about where if a person asks for a financial payout from e points to Euro (and then converted to their currency.

They receive 75% of the stated e point amount.

So by my calculations-

David Evans paid 100 euro to enter the waiting list.
Nick Burrows paid 100 euro to enter the waiting list.

The advertised prize for winning the match is 196 e points.

So lets say that this match was played on merit and Nick won 2-0. He would receive 196 e points in his account. That is already 4 e points that FICGS is keeping for itself.

Then if Nick decided to 'cash out' those 196 e points, he would receive 75% of that- so 147 EURO.

This means that FICGS has received 200 EURO originally from these two entries, and paid out 147 EURO to Nick for his win.

Now, in the circumstance that has occurred here, the rule mentioned is more designed for multiple player tournaments to stop rating manipulation (sandbagging and the like), not for this circumstance.

Also, this rule states- For example if a participant obviously lost quickly one or several games only to allow his opponent to get the money prize (and particularly if it happens several times). This would then be saying that David Evans deliberately lost both games on purpose to attempt to give Nick the prize (even though David paid the money out of his own pocket). Why wouldn't David just give the money straight to Nick?

If FICGS really does believe that part rule I have quoted has been violated and that David has engaged in game fixing, will FICGS be taking strong against David Evans, including suspensions or banning him from this site. It would be the logical conclusion for game fixing. Since this is the rule being quote to deny a payout.

Now the only other circumstance that I can think of why FICGS has attempted to deny a payout if that FICGS believes that Nick only entered the GOLD match, believing that David would not play the two games. That is a risky strategy for Nick to take, considering David is an active player, especially for 100 euro and 2 games.

Considering that even if FICGS pays out the money on this two game match, the site still makes 53 euro from a 2 game match, and I do not see a rule that justifies not paying it out, this money should be paid out.

A further question now is- Are these fees fair? A 53 euro profit from a 2 game match?


Thibault de Vassal    (2014-08-30 22:44:50)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *

I have to specify here that the rule mentioned is absolutely not about rating manipulation (by the way, there is already another rule for this), it is about money prize in 2 players matches only, maybe with 3+ players in unlikely cases! It was added when a player got a money prize after getting a few free Epoints and without playing any move... Of course, that was not acceptable (the prize was paid though, following the rules) as games recorded -especially silver/gold tournaments- should be worth to watch. So these are the reasons for this rule: To avoid empty games, to punish the player who didn't play (by taking Epoints, which is a obviously strong act in this particular case) and to redistribute Epoints to players who deserve it. Just like the rating rule, why a player should get a money prize by winning games without fighting?

I don't think that suspension or banning is necessary here (it would be really hard according to me, anyone can have good reasons for a long absence, but I'll consider this option if many players complains on this point).

To answer the last point, I don't and I cannot know if Nick entered this match believing that David would not play and I don't think that should be the point. As always, we need undisputable rules, as fair as possible, and I do think this one is a good one.

One important thing: The site does not make 53 Euro from this match, at most the site makes Epoints (on the other hand, most are offered by the site, by far). That makes a big difference!

Finally, if I understand Nick's point well, the way to understand "if a participant obviously lost quickly one or several games only to allow his opponent to get the money prize" may be ambiguous so it could be not possible to make the decision (who can know if David really wanted to play these games, wanted that Nick or anyone else get the prize?). So I probably should make it more clear to avoid such situation - even if I doubt that players realize about this rule before entering a silver tournament.


Thibault de Vassal    (2014-08-31 20:50:58)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *

That's wrong, it is specified in the My account page (within days):

"Please send us a message through the form below after any payment on FICGS account, mentioning your name, address, country, account (email) at Moneybookers, the number of tickets you bought and the amount transfered. Your account in E-Points at FICGS will be updated within days."

Anyway, definitely I do not have to know that you bought it for this specific match or to act according to this view.

On the casino-like point, I invite you to contact the french government like I did, they will explain you why it is either the same or different in so many ways that it is impossible to know for sure at the end. At least I'm sure that the part of random is not the same in poker than in chess and that I have no right to act like a casino: all prizes must be related to tournaments, there's no possible "cash out" there.


Thibault de Vassal    (2014-09-10 16:38:26)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *

You could also look for a player by using the chat bar and start the match if you estimate that he's not too strong (or sleepy) for you...


Garvin Gray    (2014-10-31 16:00:59)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess

There have been quite a few changes. But considering our continual disagreements over many issues and the fact that apart from this event, I have walked away from this site, it is not my job to now go ahead and do your work for you.

I am not your research assistant. I offered you my advice many times over the years and in almost all occasions you flatly rejected them, or took so long to come around to them, that I have taken the decision to walk away from this site.

The new fide laws of chess have been on display since July 1 and have been confirmed in stages since then. I am not going to be your research assistant and now sit down and prepare a full document on what has changed and how it should be incorporated into this event- ESPECIALLY- when I know from your past form- that you will flat reject most, if not all, of my recommendations.

So I am not going to waste my time being your research assistant.

I have my own event to prepare for in 2015 and prepare the rules for in that event, which I am working through.

I can give you a word of warning though. If you think that the default time is the only major change, you are very wrong.


Thibault de Vassal    (2014-11-02 14:19:06)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess

About repetition and number of moves without a pawn move or capture, FICGS rules already specify that it does not apply here so there is no change to make.

The rest of your message explains the context I was talking about. But we don't have to agree on anything: As I explained when FICGS started and many times after that, I wanted to make it (particularly the championship cycle) different from what already exists (and closer to previous FIDE cycle). Obviously, you prefer the other way, that's not a big deal, and there is ICCF or LSS. I would have been ok to make a cup cycle if we had players enough but that's definitely not the case. What to add? There are many reasons why FICGS has quite few members (real names to start...) but there are well known advantages to this. Otherwise there are chess.com, gameknot, so many sites full of players. Finally, complaining players are probably the most important ones here because they constantly bring ideas. There was many many improvements in the first years and it did not go against the coherence of the site. Your cup cycle idea does not even go against the coherence of the original idea of the site, only the context is wrong here. Changing the WCH cycle for a ICCF-like one would be the worst thing to do in this point of view. But that's only a point of view.


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!


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-05-15 00:02:50)
Alcala wins 1st Centaur Weekend Tourney

Our freestyle chess champion Alvin Alcala just did it again at InfinityChess server by convincingly winning the last freestyle tournament that took place on May 8th, 2015. Frank Karl Werner finished 2nd, half a point from Alvin.

All details are reported by GM Arno Nickel... One notable thing is that all players used either Stockfish 6 or Komodo 9, most probably the strongest chess engines these days.

Congrats once again Alvin, your results are definitely not the fruit of chance :)

http://infinitychess.com/Web/Page/Public/Article/DefaultArticle.aspx?id=215


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?


Alvin Alcala    (2015-07-10 14:46:26)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

Hi everyone. GM Arno wants to post in this thread as he has trouble logging in.
Introducing a 3/4-1/4 score for stalemate does not mean changing the whole game. Lasker and Réti, the fathers of this idea, knew quite well what they did, when they said, it's only a minor change (btw following the ancient chess, when mates were rare and a stalemated player had to pay half of his stake).
Some people on ChessBase argued and feared that the game might become bloodless as players would fear to sacrify material. But that's a wrong assessment.
Here is a "normal" classical GM game with a Morra Gambit, that could have happened the same way under the new rule:
E.Berg - S. Rocha (POR 2013)
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0–0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 e6 11.Rfd1 Qc7 12.Rac1 Be7 13.Bb3 Rc8 14.Nd5 exd5 15.exd5 Ne5 16.Qe3 Qd7 17.Rxc8+ Qxc8 18.Bxe5 0–0 19.Bf4 Qd7 20.Rc1 Bd8 21.Qd4 Re8 22.Qb4 Be7 23.Ba4 b5 24.Bb3 Rc8 25.Rxc8+ Qxc8 26.a4 Qc5 27.Qe1 Kf8 28.Be3 Qc7 29.axb5 axb5 30.Qb4 Qb7 31.g4 h6 32.Qd4 Nd7 33.Qe4 Bf6 34.Qb4 Qa6 35.Bc2 Ne5 36.Kg2 Nc4 37.Bc1 g5 38.Bd3 Qa1 39.Bxc4 bxc4 40.Qxc4 Bxb2 41.Be3 Bf6 42.Qc8+ Kg7 43.Qf5 Qc3 44.Qe4 Qb2 45.Qf5 Qc3 46.Qe4 Qb2 47.h4 gxh4 48.Qf4 Qe5 49.Qxh6+ Kg8 50.Kg1 h3 51.Qxh3 ½–½
Follow the comments in the MegaBase.
White sacrifies a pawn at move 3. He regains it at move 18 by a typical piece sacrifice. Later White, who is pressing a lot, while Black defends quite well, could have won a pawn by 38.b3 (instead of 38.Bd3?): e.g. 38...Qa1 39.Bxg5 hxg5 40.bxc4 bxc4 41.Qxc4.
Berg argues he might have had practical winning chances. Either 1-0 or 1/2. So what is the big difference, if we would say: either 1-0, 3/4 or 1/2? It's just making the game more exciting, more fair and a bit less drawish, what is badly needed for correspondence chess. The basic wrong assessment is that it might be significantly easier to achieve a stalemate advantage. But it isn't (and that's why only a small percentage of games will end like that). Last but not least, players who achieve a clear endgame advantage deserve a 3/4 point instead of 1/2. K+P, K+B, K+N vs. K should be a difference to K vs. K." Thanks again, Arno


Scott Nichols    (2015-08-05 17:11:02)
Improving netiquette rules

Yes the remark in public was wrong also. There is not much to do if a player lets his clock run out instead of resigning. Just wouldn't play them anymore unless you get paired in a tour.

I've seen games where the player resigns and then finds out later he could have won. But this is common I'm sure.

As for the suspension IMO Thib has the right to do as he sees fit, he is always fair, and even if I disagree sometimes I find out later he was right, :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-08-06 01:38:48)
Improving netiquette rules

Thank you Scott! Goes right in the heart.

Just trying to find the "best" way, this is really hard in some cases (e.g. such case), that's why help and discussion are always welcome ^^

About this case, I think I'm still following my line (also strongly suggested by Gino during the first months of FICGS) that human decision should be reduced to the minimum. It is obvious that it demands strong rules and patience to all players (particularly during a possible Dead Man Defence)... Here, it is important to check if the "insulting" aspect is subjective enough or not, I must say I don't feel qualified to say it. I had to make a decision by myself, but I'd prefer being able to read it in the rules next time.


Scott Nichols    (2015-09-13 14:22:27)
New quotes?

Chess holds it's master in it's own bonds, shackling the mind and brain so that the inner freedom of the very strongest must suffer. (Albert Einstein)


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-10-01 01:50:23)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

Oh, right... big mistake, sorry :) I was probably influenced by your comment "But even fide has recognised that the draw odds to the champion gave too much advantage" (heard "that's why they changed the format to RR")

Anyway, ok I also recognize that the draw odds to the champion gives too much advantage... but this system still looks better than any other one to me. I also remind that even Eros agrees with this draw issue. Finally, yes I'm open to any suggestion for a change, but we really have to find something strong.


Garvin Gray    (2015-10-09 16:57:51)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

Thib: I have not replied to this topic since my last comment for two reasons. 1) Nothing new to add 2) I had seen Scott's comment and was rather upset by it as I saw the danger in it. This discussion, in my opinion, is about one topic only.

We have discussed the ficgs world cup and other formats before, and can again, but this discussion is for one item only, so I did not want to contribute in any way to derailing the discussion. So I decided to refrain from comment as I had nothing to add.

To respond to your comments Thib- timing of the championship cycles will always be an issue, no matter the format. Regardless if you use 12 straight games, my format, or Alvin's. Or any other version.

We already have different groups starting at different times, and the final starting at different times to the other groups. This is just how things happen. It is possible that the final could be over in 8 games and in a shorter time period and time gained.

I think this format is worth trying for at least one cycle. That is also what happens with the otb world championship. There are format changes from time to time. Some are successful, some are not. Matches used to be 24 games in length. Now they are 12 games. One was played as an 8 player double round robin.

Things change as the environment changes.


Herbert Kruse    (2015-11-15 19:43:01)
repetition wrong in ficgs

i just had a game drawn, but it was wrong, because only 2 times the same side was on the move

i am angry!


Herbert Kruse    (2015-11-15 19:53:42)
repetition wrong in ficgs

wikipedia

the threefold repetition rule (also known as repetition of position) states that a player can claim a draw if the same position occurs three times, or will occur after their next move, with the same player to move.


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-11-15 21:44:52)
repetition wrong in ficgs

That's right!

I send a message to you then fix the game.

Best,
Thibault


Sergey Zemlyanov    (2015-11-16 22:09:27)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

Hi all. I try to express my opinion.
The main idea of mass round-robin tournament is good but
I think that the strong players might reject it.
As it seems, I see 2 different ways here:
1st. To have a strong tournament with top players.
2nd. To have a mass tournament just for fun.

In order to organize the 1st tournament you should do the next things:
1. To set up money prizes for winners (more prizes -> more top players might be interested in).
2. To send out invitations for players by email and etc.
3. The time control should not be too fast here if you want a qualitative games
and good tournament.
4. About splitting into the groups.
4.1 Semifinal stage.
I offer to play several qualifying semifinal rounds with 2-3 chessplayers coming into the Final stage.
For example, we have 50 players. So we can create 5 Semifinal groups with 10 players in each with 3 coming out places for the Final.
The time control here I offer 10+2/21 with vacation.
4.2 The Final stage.
I offer 15 players for the Final stage and 14 games for everyone,
or, another variant is 7-8 finalists and 14-16 games with color change for everyone.

About the 2nd tournament my opinion is:
1. To set up money prizes depending on entry fees, for each player.
2. To play mass round robin tournament with 1 game against each player
with faster time control, 10+1/21 for example.

In 1st variant you need to find a contributor to organize the tournament.
But it should be interesting. The 2nd variant with entry fees is interesting too, I think.

AMICI SUMUS,
Sergey Zemlyanov.


Stephane Legrand    (2015-11-26 18:48:38)
repetition wrong in ficgs

Wrong draw in Game 82598. Last position white to play... ??


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-11-28 21:23:37)
repetition wrong in ficgs

Finally... the bug seems fixed! The game just restarted at the last position.

My sincere apologies for the inconvenience.


Herbert Kruse    (2015-12-14 10:04:54)
repetition wrong in ficgs

ok, i will test it now, i make a move and have 3 times the same position, but antonov has to move now, before i was my turn 2 times


Herbert Kruse    (2015-12-14 10:08:21)
repetition wrong in ficgs

ok, it worked, nicely done .)


Paul Valle    (2015-12-25 20:32:20)
wrong name in chessbase database

Hi,

all my games here are listed under the wrong name in chessbase database. They should be listed under "Valle, Paul", but are instead listed under "Vale, Paulo Alfonso da Co" and under the Portoguise flag and not the Norwegian flag.

Why is this?


Garvin Gray    (2016-01-06 09:38:59)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

Jan: This is the thread for the ficgs world chess cup. Are you in the wrong thread?


Alexis Alban    (2016-01-17 15:37:10)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

I disagree with the idea that a champion should have to start over from the beginning each year and have to work his way up to retain the title every year.

I however think that it is wrong for a champion to only need to play one match to defend his title. I think the 2015 champion should have to play in the 2016 quarterfinals and work his way up from there.

If that seems unfair then just make the champion play in the semifinals.


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-01-19 00:25:30)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

Yes, correct. Thanks for this answer!

Isn't it a problem that in a few groups, half players take White one time more than Black? ... and some to have one game/opponent less than in other groups? (by the way, a bit harder to code/launch the games)

These points (equity) were always of first importance to me in all tournaments and I don't remember having seen this elsewhere (but I can be wrong, I'm not used to ICCF tournaments, for example). What do you think? Why is it such a problem for you to wait a few more days to "complete" a waiting list? Please note that I'm not really opposed to this idea, I just want to be sure that not all players disagree with this.


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-01-21 02:25:52)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

Okay, I get it now! :) I said this in the chat bar, too quickly of course... This was wrong indeed. Thanks!


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-02-03 19:19:05)
AI beats a professional Go player

Yes, well... Obviously Fan Hui is not as strong as Lee Sedol but a first match between the champ. and this almost-AI would be interesting to watch :)


Scott Nichols    (2016-02-06 18:36:40)
New quotes?

"Where are you going, mon ami?

"Why, ro the Cafe de la Regence to watch Voltaire and Rousseau play at chess."

"Pooh! Mere scribblers!"

"True, but today they play Phildor."

(Chess Chronicles)


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-05-26 22:09:27)
Server crash (april 2016)

So we're back!

The good news after this new episode is that I'm becoming even more paranoid about backups, so I'm installing stronger processes again.


Herbert Kruse    (2016-08-12 22:17:07)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP

so far you are the only one with wins in this Quarter Final ;)
but if opps are strong there will be no win anymore i guess, only mouse errors :)


Jan Ohlin    (2016-08-13 07:50:52)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP

So far, yes! ;-) I look at all games and also follow Anderson - Strömberg, a match very interesting from an advanced chess view. The strongest computer win against best player, when will that scenario begin to happen...?


George Jempty    (2016-09-13 14:41:12)
Missing chat

I once accidentally deleted a comment the first time ever I clicked on the triangle -- I did not realize the purpose was to delete. Rather I thought it would "expand" a chat topic. This was probably close to a year ago. In the meantime yes I primarily delete my own comments. However recently Duenas decided to post comments about an ongoing game of his with Cirulis, which to me just seems inappropriate for chat as there is a message box for each move of a game, as well as private messages. Those comments bumped a bunch of other comments possibly relevant to the whole FICGS community off the front page, so I deleted them.

I'm sorry if you Mr. Brodie if you think this makes me a cretin, but I'm just trying to keep the chat relevant to *everybody* on FICGS, not just two players, and in any case I think you rather over-state your case: "illegal hacking", references to "justice", etc. -- it's just a chat board. In any case what you are suggesting is a "policy" issue, but I think there is a "technical" issue too. And that is, once you click on the triangle you get a popup box with one button (an "alert") instead of two buttons (a "confirm"). A confirm would allow you to undo the delete, for instance if you accidentally clicked the triangle. Thib if you are reading this I am a web developer with nearly 20 years experience and could quite easily implement this, as I know you have a lot of other priorities.


George Jempty    (2016-09-13 14:43:41)
Missing chat

I am wrong, I just tried to delete a comment of my own, and there's a cancel button. I guess if you post to chat you are just at the mercy of community/volunteer administrators -- this is not uncommon on other chat boards. I guess if Thib think's you're doing it too much, he could revoke the deletion ability for individual users.


George Jempty    (2016-09-13 14:48:57)
Missing chat

Maybe I am wrong that I am wrong? I clicked cancel but my own comment still got deleted


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-11-07 19:15:35)
Poker Poll

Bernal & Nichols :)

Well, I quite agree with Scott, the fairest test may be a 12 (or more) game advanced poker match.

2400 will be very hard to reach but with some optimization, it may be possible. But to stay over 2400 while finishing games that go wrong would be much much harder IMHO.


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-12-02 22:06:28)
Future penalties for games lost on time

Hi all,

On dead man defence, Herbert said it all and as far as I can see, this rule works (when used, of course)!

On losses on time, I'm still not sure of what rule is best but I'm quite sure that simple rules are often best. However, I guess that rules could be more incitative about finishing games even without sanctions ("threat is stronger than execution") I'm not sure how efficient it could be on a free website though, FICGS context is not ICCF context. So I'm open to any change but I'm still not favourable to any suspension or banishment (that could lead to even more games lost on time). Also, I do know that life events could lead to this, I do know that there are many good reasons to lose on time, unfortunately :/


Roger Llull    (2017-01-21 06:23:47)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw

This Russian line:
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nxe4 4.Nc3 Nxc3 5.dxc3 f6 6.Nh4 g6 7.f4 Qe7 8.f5 c6
It's incredibly sharp. I'd tell my experience with it, and what makes it so unique, but I don't wanna give hints on how to play it, in case it's selected. Suffice it to say that engines do get it wrong.


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?


Peter W. Anderson    (2017-04-19 16:03:14)
WCh and other ramblings

To my mind big hardware only helps a little bit at FICGS speeds. Yes if you space bar everything then it might make a lot of difference but if you are prepared to work hard analysing variations properly then I think much less so - working hard is far more important than having a big computer.

For me it is more a question of how often whilst analysing those variations I can see a mis-evaluation or come up with an idea that the engines miss. It still happens but less often now than 5 years ago.

But I take your point about poker. And at faster chess speeds big comps are essential. The ideal configuration for the Infinity chess tour? - a strong human player who is experienced at advanced chess and 6 (or more) big comps running :)


Herbert Kruse    (2017-04-20 08:23:31)
WCh and other ramblings

i someone quits anotherone will try it ;)

i am ready :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-04-21 22:54:00)
WCh and other ramblings

Thanks for these words & analysis Peter! Yes, I don't know yet if Eros will fight one more time to retain the title but obviously he did it very well during these last years... the strongest engine alone would certainly not have been able to achieve this. Anyway, Herbert (& others) looks like to be ready for the challenge and this could be very interesting to see such a match! Well, let's see how this tough candidates final with Pablo finishes before :)

Well, the cup format was a first step towards a championship with more chances for everyone... the future "King's supertournament" will be another one with a thematic bigger round-robin that should definitely avoid the drawish problem & a new attempt to give sense to correspondence chess. To be continued...


Daniel Parmet    (2017-07-01 07:48:12)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

I know this thread is old but I feel Garvin made an amazing point that got lost:

"It was to give players who were in the 2100 to 2200 and below more opportunities against players rated 2300 and above, whilst still also giving the top players something to play for ie the tournament win."

I haven't played actively since 2010 for exactly this reason. I did play over 470 games though but found that I was permanently locked into this rating band despite being far beyond the skill level of this rating band solely because I was never allowed to play stronger players. So I moved on to ICCF where I easily was able to compete against 2370+ players all the time.


Sergey Zemlyanov    (2017-07-03 22:02:59)
My new match with GM Eros Riccio

Hi all! I just transfer 100 euros to the site in hope to play with GM Eros Riccio in Standart Tournament with 100 e-points as entry fee. I know him as one of the strongest corrchess players of the world, but I'll try to survive in two games. And I'm not going to purposely shut out the game.


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-07-08 19:26:50)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

Rules asked by players do not converge all the time, that's the least to say. Many prefer that games lost on time be punished by massive losses of elo points to prevent games lost on time, while many prefer that ratings stay coherent, whatever the losses (mainly on time)... And of course, games played at FICGS are not as important as games played at ICCF for most strong players. Conclusion is easy. But maybe there should be a change in the rating calculation to create some inflation... This could be worth a discussion.


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-08-28 21:56:28)
Kasparovs comeback in chess

A summary of the former world champion's performance in St Louis tournament with Caruana, Anand, Navara, Aronian, Karjakin, Dominguez Perez, Nakamura, Le & a few others... and Garry Kasparov of course.

http://en.chessbase.com/post/kasparov-in-st-louis-a-closer-look

Well, it was just blitz & rapid but maybe a first step before a true comeback? Anyway, he did better than Viswanathan Anand (that's not meaningless) and a few games are worth a glance in my opinion.


Herbert Kruse    (2017-09-07 11:47:10)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

the problem is, that computer helps any player and so its slowly doing down

so in consequence not playing holds your rating high

but there should be a strong motivation for playing


Sergey Zemlyanov    (2017-10-09 08:11:36)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *

Hello, Thibault,

Well. I hear you. This is a real scam ("lohotron")! However, from a legal point of view, you are right. Because the text of the rules was written in a small font somewhere on the site. And still, such important moments should be in a visible place, so that beginners can immediately familiarize themselves with the site rules. From the point of view of morality it is a fraud. Similarly, I will give an example: often, when a person, which is a pensioner or disabled (by health), comes to the Bank, then the Bank offer to him to make a loan at high interest rates. Then the bank's employers give him a document in which you can see (only having good eyesight!) a rule written in a very small font and in future that document will eventually bankrupt this poor person! Very unpleasant incident, Thibault! 100 euros is a big money for me! I am disabled for health reasons and my pension is about 250 euros, most of this money goes to expensive medications. When I agreed to the match with Eros, I didn’t know all the tricks and traps on you site.

Okay, I'm ready to agree with you if you spend my money on charity. There are so many unfortunate people in the world now!


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-10-20 11:45:32)
AlphaGo Zero

The correct pronoun is "she".


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-12-07 16:44:05)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

It looks like there's no more month without news from Google Deepmind... This time again, this is quite stunning!

AlphaZero would have been able to beat (crush) the most recent version of Stockfish, that is also the world champion program and of course the free engine well known by correspondence chess players.

But most important is that actually AlphaZero would have outperformed Stockfish after only 4 hours of training (if I understood well), while it took 8 hours to outperform AlphaGo Lee and only 120 minutes to outperform Elmo at Shogi! However it seems much much harder for the neural program to improve at chess after this stunningly fast auto-learning.

100 games played (25 wins & 25 draws with white! 3 wins with black... no loss, either with white or black, which is an incredible performance)

All details available (must read) here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815.pdf

http://www.sciencealert.com/it-took-4-hours-google-s-ai-world-s-best-chess-player-deepmind-alphazero

A few games played by AlphaZero against Stockfish are included in the arxiv article.




Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-07 18:08:10)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Let's ask Stockfish to make their own "Zero" version. :) Get some 1000 donors of computing power, that should be enough to reproduce this result in a year or two, I believe.


Arturas Drozdovas    (2017-12-07 20:42:55)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Stockfish was like a beginer compared to alphazero :) brilliant games


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-12-08 00:59:20)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

What do you mean by "Zero" version Ilmars? Would this be about the computer hardware according to you?


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-12-08 03:47:56)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

According to Chessbase, there was 24 hours of self-learning before the match.

Also, "AlphaZero was calculating roughly 80 thousand positions per second, while Stockfish, running on a PC with [32-cores, was calculating] about 70 million positions per second.", about 900 times slower that is quite significant.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-future-is-here-alphazero-learns-chess


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 10:00:57)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

No, just do some collective, distributed training of the neural network (multiple machines doing self-play, one doing update sof the network), with public weights of the resulting neural network and open-source "Stockfish-Zero" for running it.

The Leela author is doing something similar with Leela-Zero project, for example.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 11:01:15)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

The result could be run on any machine - either with possibly beefy video cards, or using only the slower CPU.

On correspondence time controls that would great analysis tool in any case.


Garvin Gray    (2017-12-08 15:07:01)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Thanks for the extra information Thibault about processing speed available to both engines.

Also, I wonder how AlphaZero would go against the latest Houdini and Komodo with equal equipment?

The question is not one of curiousity, but is more that I have a suspicion that also the AlphaZero programmers had the opportunity to gain quite an advantage because Stockfish is open course and so they could really work out how the engine 'works'.

This process would be much harder against Houdini or Komodo. So a long time control match against either of those engines with equal processing power would be a fairer test.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 18:10:02)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

That too close to conspiracy theory. If one can't trust Deepmind, well, there are even worse ways how they could cheat - including completely falsified games by some bored grandmasters with engine and lots of free time.


Timofey Denisov    (2017-12-08 20:58:14)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Then WHY AlphaZero isn't in CCRL?

I think it was such method of cheating: different hardware. So AlphaZero has much more CPU time. It's explains all...


Timofey Denisov    (2017-12-08 21:03:17)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

And UCI protocol don't require "per se" alpha-beta search algorythm. Engine can send to analysis NOTHING, and respond only MOVE with any score.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 21:12:35)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Btw, AlphaZero and the match is proof of concept, for research purposes. And that was done excellently.

If one remembers that Deepmind priorities isn't being computer chess or Go champion, but advancing Artificial Intelligence research (and earning money for Google - using those advances and gained experience) then any accusations of cheating or not participating in CCRL seems meaningless.


Arturas Drozdovas    (2017-12-08 21:16:36)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Just look how alphazero plays, strategic moves that lead to a win. Its impossible for houdini, komodo or stockfish to find these moves with any of the hardware.


Arturas Drozdovas    (2017-12-08 21:19:34)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Probably not a single correspondence player would find a win as black in a game posted above :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 21:23:22)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

There will be some more matches, I hope. I expect that at least some criticism about settings and machine of chess engine will be heard.

Also more serious paper about AlphaZero (chess/shogi/go) will be publised.

And then Deepmind are going to leave chess in the past, in the same way as it did with go. At the best, it will be used for testing some of next research ideas, and we will get few more games to look at.

And then it will make a superhuman Starcraft player, then maybe some AI that can do math research like the humans do (I would like to live so far :D), then maybe computer will learn languages properly... :)

Chess is just random checkpoint for Deepmind. We will have to make our own AlphaZero to play with, anyway. :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 21:25:17)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

* published

(Demis Hassabis said that on Twitter - i mean, about more serious publication.)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 21:34:20)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Here:
https://twitter.com/demishassabis/status/938347604462542849


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-08 22:56:07)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Here is also a Reddit thread with few comments/answers from Stockfish author Tord Romstad:
https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/7igro1/alphazero_reactions_from_top_gms_stockfish_author/

One quote from it.
<< But please note that I don't really blame Google. They didn't do anything wrong. They were running a scientific experiment, not a sporting event, and their experiment convincingly demonstrates what they set out to prove. >>


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-12-09 00:08:28)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Many thanks.

With all these informations, and now that I've seen the games, I must say that I have more and more doubts about the significance of this match... To be continued.


Garvin Gray    (2017-12-09 09:09:47)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Just to be clear, or a clarification for those who need it. I never stated that anyone from AlphaZero cheated, or did anything of the kind.

All I stated was that because Stockfish is an open source program, they had the opportunity to study how the program works and tune AlphaZero to take advantage of that.

Any opponent should take advantage of any small advantage they can gain.

I also made clear mention of the processing speed differences. This presented AlphaZero a clear advantage. The issue of same hardware being used is not a new topic. It is brought up in almost every tournament when chess engine tournaments are being played. That for a fair and level competition, the engines need to compete on similar strong hardware.

Reading some of the other replies and thinking further about my first post, I wonder how AlphaZero would go if a four engine event was held, with one game per day between Houdini, Komodo, Stockfish and AlphaZero with equal hardware being used?

Little opportunity then to tune AlphaZero to one specific engine and it would be more a test of the overall strength of the engine in long time control play.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-09 11:24:21)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Tuning against specific opponent = 100% cheating, in this context. In that case Deepmind simply lied in their own article.


Herbert Kruse    (2017-12-09 17:04:48)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

i am not impressed at all, in corr chess AZ would be no help


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-09 21:49:56)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

If you limit it to only one minute, then I
almost agree.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-09 21:51:51)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Although, with one minute for one correspondence game move... no engine is any help.


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-12-09 23:04:05)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Or... on 2000 cores, any engine can help :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-10 00:51:56)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

For 6000$ one can buy necessary hardware for running AlphaZero. :)
(In reddit comments there were recomendation of Titan-V: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/titan/titan-v/
Buy two and you supposedly have about the same big machine as AlphaZero used for playing match games.)

If I had the money, I would buy. Probably wouldn't use for chess, anyway, but that's option for true chess lovers (who already have fully trained AlphaZero somehow :D).


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-10 01:03:35)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

No idea how much would 2000 core machine cost. :)


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). :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-14 12:12:53)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Sure, give each engine both CPUs and GPUs. :D

Also, look at suffering of Baduk/Go community and try to evaluate - what's the probability that Deepmind will release the trained Neural Network of chess playing AlphaZero. :) It's about zero.

They don't care about TCEC, they are in machine learning business, not chess business.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-12-14 12:20:51)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

The best we can hope is:
1) release of other 90 games against Stockfish
2) some self-play games of AlphaZero, when it's fully trained
3) *maybe* some additional games against more powerful Stockfish or some other engine

The best thing in all cases all - possibility to see more AlphaZero games. More very interesting, strategic games.
I can run Stockfish on my computer and only wait 20-50 times longer to get highest quality games of it (sorry, slow computer :D), but I can't do that with AlphaZero, until chess community hasn't made their own version.


Arturas Drozdovas    (2017-12-14 20:42:02)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Nice games, especialy i liked a game where alphazero let capture of the knight (longterm piece sac) and won. No engine would do such a thing :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-12-14 23:06:08)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

I quite agree with Garvin & Ilmars, if it's possible without any contradiction :)


Kym Farnik    (2018-01-17 00:34:08)
Conditional chess moves (again)

Hi
First thanks for making your position clear.

Yes, JS talking Ajax to a PHP handler.
I have implemented this type of thing in the past.

Even if the main FICGS code is totally procedural, it is not uncommon to build a new feature using an OO module, and in time either run old and new code in parallel. Or... migrate all the code to a new OO framework over time.

The play move and add conditionals interface would need to be made JS and redesigned. The back end would I expect have a game/move/conditional validator function.
There are plenty of JS chess interfaces that could be used as design input.

I recognize this is a major project for a one man team. I'd say 4-6 weeks of full time effort, possibly longer if we have to design a OO framework for the back end. Hence my offer to help as I'm semi-retired and have time.

A good isolated dev and test environment is mandatory. This is not just a simple site hack.

I hope this helps!


Garvin Gray    (2018-02-22 11:22:43)
Norm qualification criteria, incorrect?

In looking at the current group/event that I am playing in, which is Rapid SM 15, according to the current way FICGS sets the scores for norms, to get a FIM norm for that event, FEM is at 4 and FIM as at 4.5 for all players.

It has occurred to me that this is different to how fide works out norm opportunities in round robin and swiss events.

In those events, each players average rating of their opponents is worked out and then that is plugged into the system and then that expected score is used to work out what score they need to get a FEM or FIM norm or higher.

To explain further as that might be unclear.

In the group I am talking about, PoulErik Jorgensen has an equal chance of getting an FEM or FIM norm than someone who is rated lower than him, even though that other player is playing a field who is stronger.

So using the FIDE way and the percentages for FEM and FIM norm, I play and average rating field of 2337.8, round up to 2338. This means that in a category 4 event, I need to score 56 percent, or 3.5 for an FEM and 67 percent or 4 points, not 4.5 for a FIM norm.

Now also doing some further calculating, Alex Wosch is able to score a FSM norm as his average rating of opponents is 2,329 and would then need to score 4.5. Under the current arrangement, he is deprived of this opportunity.

Therefore, I could give a rundown of all players, but I am of the conclusion that the current method of calculating Norm qualifications is inadequate and needs to be refined.

My thoughts were triggered to this from the FICGS world cup when any player to reach a FEM norm needed to score 12/16, which was clearly an outlandish score given the field.


Garvin Gray    (2018-03-03 05:44:33)
World Championship Groups

I know this is not the first time this question has been asked, but thought this could be explained again as I am a bit confused.

I have looked at the layout for the stages of the World Championship Groups and the path that each group takes, but I am a bit confused about how being put into a stronger pool of players ie Group SM is an advantage.

It seems to be that the players in Group SM or M are still starting from stage 1.

So, the players who finish at the bottom of this group can be bundled out of the event, whereas someone who was in Group 1 starts at the same level and plays against players 2000 or so.

I am confused as to what advantage there is to being put into Group SM is?


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-03-30 20:19:27)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

Hello Herbert,

I think you may misunderstand what Garvin said there: "The simple explanation is that I had the white rook on h3 instead of h2" ... probably meaning that the analysis was based on the wrong position at one time or another / since one or several moves.

Let's wait the end of the tournament. Of course, losses on time are always bad in such tournaments, but it can happen for many reasons.


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-04-01 22:49:28)
Poll: renaming the Queen as Dragon

Why not Elf... maybe not Dwarf (even if the tunnel thing is pretty cool). I think we should completely replace chess for a "Game of thrones" or "Lord of ring" game ^^


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-04-07 03:09:02)
Harold Moye, man of arts... and chess

I'm very sad to announce here that we just lost a chess friend, Harold Moye, who played chess with us while he was involved in a much more difficult battle. My condolences to his family.

Here is the first part of the obituary:

"Harold Anthony Moye, age 62, died on March 4, 2018, wife Linda (Polhemus) Moye at his side. They were devoted to each other for 17 years since vowing their love on a mountain in Wyoming. For 13 of those years, Harold endured bone marrow cancer (Multiple Myeloma) with grace, unusual resilience, and quiet courage.

He loved poetry, languages, art, music, history, philosophy, astronomy, cinema, flying airplanes (actually and with flight simulator) and coffee. Some of his favorites were Shelley, Blake, Rilke, Shakespeare, Norse sagas, VanGogh, Mahler, Bach, Beethoven, and Sumatran and Guatemalan beans. Harold said that Blake taught him the most about art; Shelley was his brother; VanGogh his first cousin; and coffee a major food group (along with pizza and cookies). Above all, he valued imagination, compassion, and generosity of spirit in others. He played Shogi and Chess with friends all over the world online and in person, reaching the distinction of Chess Master when he coordinated tournaments in Wyoming. (...)"

http://www.ficgs.com/moye_harold.htm


Aniruddha Duttagupta    (2018-04-09 16:36:15)
unable to play my move!

Dear Mr Thibault, I am sure I played 7...0-0 as the game showed.Ng4 was my intended move after White played 11.f4.But my move was not permitted by the server.I am sure I used the text field.But now I click the pieces as I play my moves on my mobile.I wonder if my 7th move was wrong how the game continued upto 11th move of White!


Peter W. Anderson    (2018-05-15 11:29:42)
Leela Chess Zero

Hello everyone :)

I guess most people here will be aware of the Leela Chess Zero project.

I was interested in whether anyone here is already using Leela? I have run a few of my old FICGS games through it quickly and it gives very different evaluations to the standard engines in some positions - I am not sure if they are better or worse at a quick glance but they are different!

For those who aren't familiar with Leela it is an attempt to recreate something like Alpha Chess Zero for the PC. It is not yet as strong as Stockfish etc but is as strong as most grandmasters and some weaker engines and is gradually increasing in strength as it is trained. It comes in two versions: one to run on the CPU and one to run on a graphics card. A high end graphics card gives the best results, but it runs OK on CPUs.

Leela is nowhere near as tactically strong as the best engines (whether it ever will be on "normal" hardware is an open question). However, to my eyes, it generally exhibits pretty good positional judgement, and so I am figuring it could provide a useful alternative view for correspondence games.

You can contribute to this really interesting project by helping to train it by donating computer time. Helping with the training is pretty straightforward. A guide of how to help is at

https://github.com/glinscott/leela-chess/wiki/Getting-Started

A forum and progress chart is at

http://lczero.org/

I found getting it to run under GUI's as an analysis tool a little more fiddly as it not yet fully UCI compliant. However, I have got it to run OK under Chessbase, Shredder, and Arena OK for analysis. For running matches Arena or something like Cutechess may be best.

I would interested to know your thoughts on this.


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-05-29 02:37:09)
Komodo 12 with AlphaZero techniques

Hi all! As you may know, Chessbase chess engine Komodo 12 is now promoted as having a Monte Carlo version, looking like AlphaZero algorithms... It would play a more human-like style. But does it really make a difference on a "normal" computer? It would be about 30 elo points stronger than Komodo 11 (quite a good improvement anyway)

Any tests or thoughts?


Peter W. Anderson    (2018-06-01 18:36:45)
Komodo 12 with AlphaZero techniques

Well I am a bit sceptical Thib.

Yes it is using Monte Carlo, but it is not using a neural network which is what made AlphaZero interesting (and hopefully will eventually make Leela really special).

The Monte Carlo version of Komodo is a lot weaker than Komodo 11 at the moment and time will tell if the Monte Carlo version will ever be as strong as alpha-beta searching, but my guess is that for normal engines it will not be as strong.

As an aside, the claim of a 30 Elo improvement from version 11 to 12 of normal Komodeo may be a bit extravagent judging by the ccrl rating lists.


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    (2018-06-09 19:39:18)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

This 1st chess cup just ended, time to comment :)

First of all, congratulations to Herbert Kruse for this nice win! The opposition was strong and the final result not so easy to guess until a few weeks ago, obviously...

Second of all, to end the cheating suspicion topic, I can only say this: correspondence chess is not soccer, round-robin tournaments are not knockouts, when participating in such a championship on the internet, we have to accept the risk that a few players may (for any rare and obscure reason here IMO) intentionally lose to another one. BUT there is definitely no way to be sure about that, no way to adjudicate games 100% fairly on such suspicions, whatever happening in any game. Of course, it would always be very easy to cheat discreetly enough. And once again, I designed the FICGS WCH to avoid as much as possible what happened during this tournament, it is players choice to accept this and to choose the tournaments they will play in the future. Now let's see what the second edition will propose :)


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    (2018-09-07 20:40:30)
Netiquette reinforcement

I agree, but it should be avoided that a few understand there that "any kind of message that seem provocative according to anyone will lead to instantly lose a game"... only a moderator/referee should decide it, probably.

Even if this remains quite fuzzy in all cases, the main idea is here: a threat is stronger than execution.

But... you may be right at the end, we'll see... I'll update it if this reveals to be not efficient enough.


Garvin Gray    (2018-09-08 02:29:41)
Netiquette reinforcement

I have a couple of revisions to the rules that I would like to see. Some of these do come from otb practices, but they also apply here.

In otb, when a player wants to make a claim to the arbiter, or wants to make a complaint to the arbiter about their opponent (for any reason), they stop the clock and call for the arbiter (or find the arbiter themselves in a large hall).

Then the arbiter will rule on the claim, make any decisions about the game, adjust the times on the clocks if necessary, and then start the clocks again.

So for FICGS, I think there should be a change here. When a player presses call referee, the clocks should be stopped/frozen. Currently, the clocks keep running.

This is wrong. The player has called for the arbiter, but the clocks keep running.

If the arbiter (Thibault in this case) rules that the player had no grounds to call the referee, then he can apply a time penalty and take time off the clocks of the person who stopped the clocks.


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-09-24 00:15:43)
Some questions to H. Kruse, WCH finalist

After that the last FICGS chess WCH final match finished, the choice was made again to ask a few questions to Eros Riccio's challenger: Herbert Kruse, for the 2nd time. He kindly accepted to answer it so let's learn a bit more on our top-ranked correspondence chess player.

______________________________


Hello Herbert, you're not really a player to introduce as you're very active here and at several chess websites for years, with outstanding ratings in each one (as far as I know), you're the 1st FICGS CUP winner & several times FICGS WCH challenger, each time facing "the wall" Eros Riccio, what could you tell us about yourself particularly as a chess & correspondence chess player?

- i began late with 16 to play my first tournament game, but with 18 i already was kicked out of a night club in company with tony miles ;) (dresscode) had vlastimil hort as trainer for a short time and played in teams with gutman, michalchisin, klovans, gipslis and some other GMs. corr chess i began, because i love to find the truth and because of freestyle, where i began to build very strong computers


What kind of computers do you build? Is it all dedicated to chess?

- i have several dual xeon e5 computers with 64gb ddr3 and 16 to 20 real cores and they all play chess ;)


Once again, GM Eros Riccio managed to draw the 12 games of the match. What are your feelings on these games? How did you estimate your chances to destabilize your opponent in the openings and to create complications enough with White (or Black)?

- this time my feelings were neutral. 1% chances to win, but i hoped he would lose his concentration if i began more games with him (we played 6 other games at the same time)


Doesn't "1% chances to win (the match)" mean about 0.17% to win only one game with White, even when losing one with Black? Isn't it a bit pessimistic after all, or is it the new so called Riccio-effect? :)

- if the strongest players face each other there is no win possible, except some has a mouse slep or forgot something during human interfacing


When did you start playing correspondence chess and what changed since that time? What attracted you most in the game?

- 2004 and evaluation of the position is the key point of improvement since then. attractive was to be better than actual world class players :)


Could you tell us anything on the way you work chess and play your correspondence games? Any tip or secret? (nothing to lose to ask :))

- with black i play for fastest way to 0.00 and with white i try every promising way to make a game for a longer time complicated


Do you use several ones at the same time when analyzing a game? (still grabbing some tips)

- i only use the newest stockfish versions of brainfish and corchess because the other engines are not so good. because i have many games i decide which one gets the most cores and time and let them run in infinity mode until i am happy that can be after 1 week or more sometimes.


You're not far to rank 2nd as a poker player at FICGS, you obviously started to take on Big Chess as well. What other games do you play? Did you consider to play Go already?

- i played go against the german champion and lost so i quit :)) played backgammon money game and internet (in fibs with kit woolsey i played over 100 matches) in bridge i was best bidder in germany 1994 to 1995, but dont play much nowadays


Do you have specific goals to achieve as a player?

- 2 goals, since a long time: be ficgs world champion and win one german bridge championship


How do you imagine correspondence chess evolution within a decade? What kind of engines/computers do you expect to use and what will look like centaur chess according to you? (in other words, what part will remain to the human player in the decision?)

- i think the engines today are already unbeatable, so in 20 years the would still not lose and chess is dead since about 4 years


What did you think about Google Deepmind's Alpha Zero performance vs. Stockfish?

- it was a joke because they let a bad version of stockfish play. i would not have lost one game against az0 and maybe won 2 til 5 out of 100


Conditions of this AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match were very specific (opening books, unbalanced hardware...) What weaknesses did you detect in AlphaZero play?

- it was the lack of precision, what would let it lose against stockfish in its tuned newest version but i look from a view of a player who is used to play with deep 60 :)


It seems that computers did not completely take on Bridge yet, what do you expect within a decade?

- i have not seen bridge programms, but the game is so easy that it must be already mastered by computers


William Taylor    (2018-10-30 12:05:46)
New Chess Record...

Remarkable, but still some way short of Tiviakov's record. (Ding has of course been playing much stronger players than Tiv.)


Garvin Gray    (2018-11-19 02:36:26)
World Championship Groups

Ok, please clarify- your comment in the chat box is: A few more players for an additional chess WCH group?

The key word to me is 'additional' chess Wch group.

In your latest reply, you say accepting a few later runners to add as replacements into existing groups to substitute for those who have not started their games or forfeited out.

I have no real objection to the later, but I have a strong objection to creating a completely new group from those who did not enter on time and that new group could potentially not be as strong and evenly distributed for ratings from the original WCH groups.


Paul Larwinski    (2018-11-19 16:39:10)
World Championship Tie-breaks

herbert! i hope we play soon here a chess match together , maybe your strong computers will help you :)


Paul Larwinski    (2018-11-19 20:20:40)
World Championship Tie-breaks

herbert in first lost game you have proofed that your computer is stronger , really


Garvin Gray    (2019-01-24 08:15:24)
WCh groups...

The winner of each group is qualified for the next stage.

In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage.

If tournament entry ratings (TER) are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account.


Thibault de Vassal    (2019-01-24 18:59:10)
James Romig

But I may be wrong after all... Do you agree with this?


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.


Fred de la Foret    (2019-03-15 17:24:35)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?

I play correspondence chess with a strong chess engine to WIN, loathe drawn games and study the games that I lose to learn to play better.


Thibault de Vassal    (2019-03-18 22:59:01)
Leela Chess Zero & neural networks

Month after month, it looks like Leela Chess Zero is taking on computer chess... what do you think? Actually neural networks engines could even solve the future CPU problem (i9 and Threadripper seem much stronger than the first versions of i7 but what next... technology seems to reach some limits) by using GPU in an efficient way instead.

Does anyone use it to analyze correspondence chess games already?

In my opinion, most top centaur players will use Leela or another neural network chess engine (more or less based on ideas that made the success of AlphaZero) within 1 year...

Actually, I'm more and more concerned with the spectacular way & speed A.I. now improves, I just spent some time to understand it better and I wouldn't be surprised if our societies are really shaked in many ways (and more and more) within the next few years.


Thibault de Vassal    (2019-04-26 19:55:38)
Chess DB

As for me, both... but databases are not enough (some lines are even wrong), of course.


Thibault de Vassal    (2019-06-27 00:16:57)
Android App not working

The FICGS website did not change, but the apps were updated (maybe something wrong there). Do you know what browser is used by default when you open the app? A browser by Xiaomi or Chrome/Firefox?


Thibault de Vassal    (2019-09-24 21:33:24)
World Championship Groups

This is specified in the WCH rules (2nd paragraph):

"The knockout tournament is played into 8 games matches. The special rule (avoiding short draws) is that in case of equality (4-4), the winner is the player with the strongest tournament entry rating if all games are draw, the player with the lowest tournament entry rating if not all games are draw. The winner is qualified for the next stage."

I hope it is clear enough, maybe I should rewrite it.


Garvin Gray    (2019-11-10 12:08:50)
Fat Fritz vs. Stockfish

Interesting this post has been made. I was about to ask what people think of Komodo 13 and how many cpu's do they think it requires to get the full value of Komodo 13.

When AlphaZero 'won' against Stockfish, I think I was one of the first posters that I saw who criticised the conditions and that Stockfish was almost handicapped out of the match.

This match between Fat Fritz and Stockfish seems to have had more even conditions, but I do wonder if the Stockfish 10 engine, was just the one straight off the download, or whether the Stockfish designers were consulted and allowed to tune their engine for the match, just like Fat Fritz would have been.

Those items I think are most important in making any conclusions about how much better Fat Fritz is in front of Stockfish.

And I am always left to wonder about two items when I hear about the results of these matches:

1) Stockfish feels like a very good engine to analyse your correspondence chess games with, but when it is put against some of the other top engines in head to head competitions, it competes well, but loses by a small amount.

So it feels to me like Stockfish has been designed for a purpose, to assist people with their correspondence chess analysis, rather than just being a brute force engine killer.

I would like to see Komodo and Houdini against Fat Fritz or any other contender, with equal conditions and both of those engines having being tuned for the match before hand.


Thibault de Vassal    (2019-12-05 21:32:38)
IECG chess-server.net

Does anyone know how things are going at (IECG) chess-server.net ?

For those who don't know, this correspondence chess server was born at about the same time as FICGS (for about the same reasons) as an evolution for IECG where I used to play correspondence chess by email until 2006, so it's kind of "big brother" by history and "little brother" by chronology... and quite different on many points AFAIK.

As far as I know many of the IECG players continued to play there, after that many joined us here (FICGS started maybe few weeks before). As for me of course I concentrated to play at FICGS all these years so I'm not really aware about Ortwin's server. Now I can see that its traffic recently went badly down (like many chess servers actually and even very impressive ones)... that's the reason for this post: any news about it?


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.


Thibault de Vassal    (2020-05-05 17:54:22)
AlphaGo, the movie (Deepmind)

For all Go lovers, the film about the victories of AlphaGo over professional players, european champion Fan Hui 2 dan then Lee Sedol 9p and Ke Jie 9p.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXuK6gekU1Y

Of course, AlphaGo was the start of the "AI" adventures in the Go game when it played Fan Hui... AlphaZero was even much stronger not long after that.


Thibault de Vassal    (2020-09-03 00:09:24)
Stockfish 12, neural network

Stockfish 12 is available, and surprise surprise it includes NNUE (efficiently updatable neural network) out-of-the-box. It would be significantly stronger than its predecessors.

https://blog.stockfishchess.org/post/628172810852925440/stockfish-12

Did anyone try it in deep already? Any thoughts?


Steven DuCharme    (2020-11-23 18:42:54)
On Another Site...

the system there said my position was lost...I disagreed...I said I didn't like the system...(I have since learned I was wrong)...I have been suspended there until March 18


Daniel Parmet    (2020-12-04 01:39:36)
What happened to all the players?

Thibault,

You maybe misunderstand me or perhaps I am not being clear by conflating so many issues at once.

1) 1st issue, I did not mention Queens Gambit at all as this show has done very little for chess. The numbers were already skyrocketing on lichess, chess.com and other places due to lockdowns, lack of socialization and spending more times indoors. If anything, it is the SHOW that piggy backed on THIS trend in order to achieve its own popularity (not the other way around).

2) I mean to refer to the fact that many more players used to play here that no longer do which were very strong SIMs and GMs in 09-12 but they're gone now. Why?

3) The growth. Yes, I currently have two otb IMs I am playing against their first games on ICCF and I have already played against 3 GMs whose first games it was on ICCF. Look at the recently started USA/A It has 3 otb GMs that have no corr games. Or how about GM Sam Sevian? https://www.iccf.com/event?id=80817 GM Elshan Moriadiabadi https://www.iccf.com/player?id=517491 And on and on I could go.

4) Separate entirely is how hard it has become to find players of your own level to play, maintain one's rating and the DMD issues which caused LSS to announce their own special DMD rules.


Yeturu Aahlad    (2021-04-12 19:10:42)
Poker Rating

At big chess, it is fairly common for one side - typically Black - to be down a pawn early in the game. I have had at least one opponent immediately resign. At Go, a player may blunder in a corner and immediately resign.

On the other hand, I have won many games on time and in many of those cases, the opponent didn't make any moves at all.

Perhaps a subjective challenge deserves a subjective response - I am seeing sound arguments on both sides. Suggestion - if a game concludes under 10 moves, and the winner thinks she has a genuine grievance, she can appeal for the ELO grant and a referee will adjudicate. Herbert's case is very strong. If the losing side didn't make any moves, adjudication need not be allowed, or may be automatically denied. Too many frivolous appeals from a player can lead to disciplinary action including a loss of this privilege. (I don't expect that to happen in this community)


Thibault de Vassal    (2021-04-18 22:39:47)
Wch 22 Stage 2 ended

With all my respect Garvin, you couldn't be more wrong on that one... To me, FICGS is everything but perfect. Actually it is so heavy (mainly because it was coded very very fast - way too fast - with the [bad] idea to make it simple and to save as much processor & memory as possible) that some changes are very difficult to make. In this way, some good ideas could be very hard to bring to life.

But these 2 changes asked in the 2 running threads would be very easy to make! So it is only a question of time (it is most often bad to make a change fastly). For now, I have no clear opinion in this discussion and we could easily add a rule that states that any stage could start as fast as possible. And in the other discussion, the 10 moves rule could disappear even if I think it wouldn't be a good idea. Or it could evolve as it has been mentioned.


Garvin Gray    (2021-06-13 11:22:28)
Wch 22 Stage 2 ended

Now that my ficgs cup group has finished, I feel I can reply without feeling like I am pushing my own barrow.

When I highlighting the issue of when there is a group of 5, I was not intending it to be related to either championship.

This is because, in my view, the issue is the same, regardless of whether the group of view occurs in the WCH, the ficgs cup or a general group game.

I am aware that some people probably have read my replies as being rather strong on this topic, and in some cases, unhelpful, but if you look at it from the viewpoint of having engaged in genuine dialogue, exchanged viewpoints, debated back and forth, and gone over many topics again and again and finally after all that time, have gotten in writing and published rules that changes will be made, and then as soon as the situations come up again, the old rules are enforced again and nothing changes, then it becomes quite a bit more understandable why a negative tone and suspicion is underlaid in the discussions.

And as for why not walk away?

Had I been told that the entire format for the FICGS cup was going to be disbanded, that groups of 5 were going to be used and only single round robin was going to be used and three or four stages were going to be used, then YES, I probably would not have entered, and I would have made my feelings known as to why I was not entering.

And, I would have been looking to not enter any further World Championships as well. I have a Round Robin group coming up, as well as a Stage 2. These I will complete and do my best to advance, but if the old rules are maintained, then I will not be entering any future cycles.


John Dyson    (2021-06-23 15:20:47)
Fat Fritz 2 vs. Stockfish 13

Stockfish 13 appears a little stronger than 11 or 12. Fat Fritz 2 I haven't tried because it costs money!


Thibault de Vassal    (2021-07-04 01:01:42)
Stockfish 14 is out

Recently speaking of Stockfish 13, the next gen is already there: Stockfish 14 for Windows, MacOS, Linux & so on... it is said more accurate & quite stronger than its predecessor. Any comparison will be welcome!

https://stockfishchess.org/download/


Thibault de Vassal    (2021-07-09 01:59:50)
Next Ficgs World Championship Tournament

Of course you make a point there, but it also questions 7 players groups (after all, rating difference between seed 1 & seed 2 is not much lower in average, and 12 games is still feasible in regular groups).

When groups should be double RR or not? Well, I agree that simple RR is not the most fair way, but as I explained about a decade ago, the idea of this championship was not to be the most fair, it was to multiply occurences without loading a too large number of games (and keeping rules as simple as possible, which was not a great success there by the way ^^).

Anyway, I won't say you're wrong, I think it was just a choice like another one.

But we can give it a try (maybe it will be a way to get some impressions & comments), so we'll have 5 players double RR tomorrow if it has to happen.


Juri Eintalu    (2021-10-21 16:36:16)
After 23.75 years...

Apronus:

"This website is in financial crisis. Please consider donating regularly to keep it functional."

https://www.apronus.com/chess/

Apronus is excellent for creating chess tactics problems and sharing them on the blog.


Juri Eintalu    (2021-11-29 11:09:53)
Unvaccinated correspondence chessplayers

During the epidemics, restrictions and quarantine are traditional and usual measures. If the restrictions are applied, it is natural that the OTB (over-the-board) chess tournaments are cancelled, and the coaches cannot give indoor lessons. However, such restrictions should not be applied to online chess or coaching as there is no such thing as "online coronavirus".

Suppose that wearing the masks reduces the probability of being infected and also the probability of spreading the virus. Then, it seems natural to demand that the OTB chess players should wear masks. Moreover, chess is not wrestling.

One can also plausibly argue that in the case of contacts with other people outside the home, at least one of the measures should be applied: masks, distance, negative result of the test recently made, or vaccination.

The question of vaccines involves scientific, moral, and political aspects. The scientific issues involve the effectiveness of the vaccine and its side effects. How probably the vaccine reduces the rate of infections, and how probably it reduces the rate of deaths among those infected. How severe is the virus, and how often and how serious are the vaccine's adverse effects. Some religious moral systems, in turn, reject vaccines produced in some specific way. International law rejects uninformed non-voluntary human experiments, etc.

Suppose that the aim is to reduce the rate of infections, and the vaccine is highly effective and without serious side effects. Suppose also that we are utilitarians and aim to maximize the wellbeing of society as a whole.

In the case of such presumptions, it seems natural to demand that the chess coaches giving indoor lessons be vaccinated or show the test results, etc. However, it still does not follow that the unvaccinated chess player cannot play online chess or give online lessons — because there is no such thing as "online coronavirus".

Thibault de Vassal: "Fortunately, the context of correspondence chess is not the same as parliaments."

— Yes, but this is precisely the question: what's the difference? Note that one might also argue that unvaccinated chess players should not play online chess, but the unvaccinated selected deputies should have the possibility to give speeches — because they are political representatives of the people.


Thibault de Vassal    (2022-04-20 23:32:42)
Stockfish 15 available to download

About 36 elo points stronger than its predecessor, Stockfish 15 is out & available to download...

You can read all details here:

http://stockfishchess.org/blog/2022/stockfish-15/


Thibault de Vassal    (2022-05-11 01:02:59)
Carlos Alcaraz y el ajedrez :)

The recent winner of Rio, Barcelona & Madrid Open 2022 talks about his incredible performances at tennis, and how blitz chess helps him...

(spanish language)

https://www.marca.com/tenis/2022/03/07/6225c2c6e2704ed95f8b45cc.html

"P. Uno de los aspectos más desconocidos en usted es que le gusta hacer siesta y el ajedrez antes de los partidos. ¿Me lo puede explicar?

R. Así es. Me pillaron con la cámara en el Next Gen de Milán y en Río también dormía porque el descanso es importante y más en una semana tan intensa en la que llovió y se retrasaron los partidos. La recuperación era clave y las siestas antes de los partidos para mí lo son. Y el ajedrez me ayuda porque estás concentrado, la cabeza te funciona...

P. ¿En qué le ayuda concretamente el ajedrez para la práctica del tenis?

R. Me ayuda a estar más rápido mentalmente, a observar jugadas, a ver el movimiento que quieres hacer, la estrategia... A estar concentrado todo el tiempo. En el ajedrez, como el tenis, te despistas un momento y ya se revuelve la partida. En este aspecto son dos disciplinas bastante parecidas."


Thibault de Vassal    (2022-08-19 02:55:17)
poker reflection time

"the new rule with 30-day max accumulated time would end the game 30 days sooner" : Statistically, it is quite hard to evaluate IMO... so... maybe.

Anyway, I'll make that change within a few weeks if there is no strong argument against this.


Misha Allport    (2022-10-03 16:58:26)
Number of moves affect the ratng result?

If I am playing a stronger player(+600 points).do the number of moves I make in a loss affect my new rating?(i.e. do I lose fewer points being defeated in 60 moves as opposed to being beaten in 10 moves)?


Patrycja Zerowska    (2022-10-13 08:16:44)
Threefold repetition

"... or you can lose on time or resign &/or cancel your membership, of course."

Of course... And then you ask yourself why so many strong players have left your site in the past. The answer should be very clear, not only from this incident, but also from the archived forum posts, which yield plenty of indications.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-22 16:25:45)
I did not win a game since 3 years

Yet another amendment. From the previous post, we can eliminate the FICGS server evaluation and let the first player stipulate which side is playing for the win. If they assign the advantage incorrectly, this only helps their opponent, so the first player has no reason to lie. Example: First player picks the King's Bishop Gambit as the starting position (1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4) but erroneously claims that white has the advantage, so the second player has to choose between playing white for the win or black for the draw. Second player happily chooses to play black for the draw and should have no trouble holding the draw.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-25 17:10:39)
I did not win a game since 3 years

What does it even mean to have an advantage? Engine analysis has changed my perspective on this issue. From a human perspective, we can say that white has an advantage at the start of the game, and the statistics support this. At the highest levels of human chess white wins more often than black, but it's more often a draw. So white has a slight advantage.

From the perspective of correspondence chess with modern engines, the advantage is shown to be an illusion. It's just a draw. The engine evaluation at the start might be +0.15 or whatever, but if both sides are using an engine and there's no severe time constraint, it doesn't mean anything. By move 20 or so of a competently played correspondence game the engine analysis will have converged to 0.00 and it will stay there for the rest of the game.

In the final analysis, there's no such thing as a slight advantage. Every position is either a forced checkmate for one side or the other, or it's a draw. Even modern engines haven't pushed things that far, but they're strong enough to obliterate our human concept of an advantage.


Juri Eintalu    (2023-03-31 21:13:22)
RUSSIA AND BELARUS NOT SUSPENDED?

You are quoting me wrongly. And you are doing it intentionally.

Moreover, I was talking about whether FIDE and ICCF decisions were justified. My argument was that these decisions applied some important principles discriminatively, selectively.

Suddenly, you started to talk about whether the Russian invasion of Ukraine was justified. You also started to talk about war crimes.

Let me remind that the ICCF started a process of banning the Russian team just a few days after the Russian invasion began.Thus, your arguments about what happened months later might be pretty irrelevant.

Let me also remind you that you decided to talk ONLY about Russian war crimes in Ukraine. You dismissed the US war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, the war crimes committed during the Donbas civil war (both Ukraine and the separatists committed war crimes there), and, finally, you also dismissed the war crimes committed by Ukraine in the present war.

And now, before I answered to your mess, you managed to attack me personally.

My answer to your provocative questions is that if the political regime will go absolutely crazy, then I will not defend that regime against anyone. But I still hope that it will not go absolutely crazy.

Anyway, I will not discuss with you anymore, because you are systematically ignoring important relevant facts and you regularly change the context of discussion.


Thibault de Vassal    (2023-03-31 22:52:44)
RUSSIA AND BELARUS NOT SUSPENDED?

Sorry if I quoted you wrongly... Could you specify?

Yes, first you were talking about wether FIDE and ICCF decisions were justified, but our discussion went on the global case:

you said (quote):

"If country A starts a war against country B, the relevant question is whether that war is justified or unjustified, whether it is a war of aggression or, instead, the attacker has the right to do so. "

"You argue that any context should be analysed in-depth, but you fail to hint at why Russia should be punished and the US should not."

So let's separate discussions: one is about FIDE/ICCF decisions, the other one is about war & its justifications.

About ICCF, I am not aware of a process to ban the russian team just after the invasion, I'm not sure what it means as well... does this mean that the russian team should have played under a neutral banner (that could be understandable), or does this mean that the whole team (every player) was banned?

I have no problem to talk about US war crimes in these countries... if you read my post again, there is a link to a page that deals with it.

I have no problem to talk about war crimes commited by Ukraine as well. There were war crimes for sure. There are proofs of that.

Questions remain: how many, for what aim... Everything will be analyzed.

My additional questions were not provocative, these are real questions to better understand your point of view. But I did not understand your answer (or you did not answer ?!)

Feel free to continue the discussion, you're welcome.


Gregory Kohut    (2023-08-10 14:14:24)
Chess & Go in TV shows

In the tv show Ironside police consultant Robert T Ironside played chess in one episode I saw.


Juri Eintalu    (2023-11-15 21:44:51)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations

Dear Herbert Kruse

My Public Appeal is about the sports sanctions, particularly about the chess sanctions, in the context of the Ukraine/Russia war and the more recent Israel/Palestine war.

My position is that it is wrong to politicise sports and, therefore, it was wrong to impose chess sanctions on Russia and Ukraine. The chess sanctions imposed on Russia and Ukraine should be lifted.

However, if these sanctions remain in force and politicising sports is regarded as a new normal, I think similar sanctions should be imposed on all countries that have seriously violated the international conventions.

Since October 2023, Israel has committed serious war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza Strip (and elsewhere too).

Therefore, I suggest that if the chess sanctions imposed on Russia and Belarus will not be removed, then similar sanctions should be imposed on Israel.

For example, Israel should be excluded from the International Correspondence Chess Federation membership.

I explained all these points in my Public Appeal.

In your replies, you have actually not addressed my arguments presented in the Public Appeal.

First, you started to talk about the Jews in Germany. But the word "Jew(s)" appeared only once in my Public Appeal - to declare that the sanctions should be imposed on the states or the citizens of states and not based on ethnicity:

"As far as the Jews are concerned, collective punishment must not be applied to them. No one may be accused or discriminated against based on their nationality."

Finally, you started to talk about Israel's right to self-defence. Again, this distorts the content of my Public Appeal. I have nowhere and never denied Israel's right to self-defence. However, from the right to self-defence, it in no way follows that one has a right to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Unnecessarily killing a large number of unarmed civilians is a war crime, and it cannot be justified by referring to self-defence or the war crimes the other side has earlier committed.

Unfortunately, I cannot continue discussing this with you, as you have systematically ignored the content of my Public Appeal.


Thibault de Vassal    (2023-11-17 20:18:05)
Battle of Kings

Congratulations Vadrya, that is an excellent game! I like it much :) I just beat the bot for the first game, but I felt completely unsecure all the time ^^

Love it...

In my opinion, a strong engine would crush human though ;)


Vadrya Pokshtya    (2023-11-17 20:38:28)
Battle of Kings

Thanks, but you are wrong about the engine being able to crush this chess variant ;)
Knowledgeable people, programmers with whom I had the opportunity to talk about this chess variant, argued that not a single engine would be able to adequately evaluate positions in the Battle of Kings due to the colossal combinatorial complexity of the game.
Please note that the server bot plays very, very weakly. The program does not understand the concept of the game and makes a superficial assessment of the position based on material balance.
Playing against a bot is very different from playing against a human.
At the moment you can play by correspondence against other players here https://www.schemingmind.com/default.aspx
or here
https://games.dtco.ru/

Thank you again for your positive feedback!




There are 3144 results for ron in wikichess.


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


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


Daniel Barrish    (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6

Here we've reached the initial position of the famous Sicilian Dragon. For those who are interested in astronomy, its name refers to the black pawn structure d6-e7-f7-g6-h7, which has resemblance with the Dragon Constellation.
Usually White has (generally speaking, of course) two ways at his disposal:
-quiet positional play by castling short, in order to put some positional pressure thanks to his slight space advantage.
-sharp play by castling long, and simultaneous king's attack for both sides, which often leads to real bloodbaths.
============
There are 2 main ways for white to play here: The "passive" classical and minor variations and the aggresive yugoslav attack. the yugoslav has been proven much better
Contributors : Julien Coll, Daniel Barrish


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

This move has been played in more than half games recorded in Chessbase. I consider it less strong than Nc3 but GMs clearly prefer this move, probably offering good chances in a quieter game, avoiding the Nimzo-Indian defense.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%

============

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)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 d3

The Giuoco Pianissimo (Italian: "quietest game"). White aims for a slow buildup deferring d4 until it can be prepared. By avoiding an immediate confrontation in the center White prevents the early release of tension through exchanges and enters a positional maneuvering game.

============

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


Julien Coll    (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3

Here begins the Yugoslav Attack, a very rich way of fighting against the big dragon. Usually White castles queenside and launches a strong attack by pushing his g (g4) and h-pawns (h4-h5) and exchanging the dark-squared bishops (Qd2-Bh6), whereas Black has counterplay with an attack against White's long castle thanks to the c-file, manoeuvres like ...Nc6-e5-c4, pawn pushes like ...b5-b4, ...a5-a4. This kind of game is rarely annoying and very often plenty of sacrifices (ex. sacrifices of the quality in c3 (for Black) and in h5 (for White) are both typical) White should be careful with the g4-square if he plans to castle queenside quickly for an exciting game. Move order is quite important here.

============

Contributors : Julien Coll


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 c5 c3

After this "slow" move, leading to Alapin's variation, White will try to get a strong center and a good positional play.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 52%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6

This move is generally played to reach the Sicilian Taimanov or the Sicilian Kan(Paulsen).
The advantage of e6 is to keep options open for the bishop of the dark squares. But it as somes disadvantages too: The sicilian with c3 or b3 is stronger here compared to 2..d6 or 2..Nc6 because e6 limits Black's options.
============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 f5

The dutch defense.

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. As of 2005, the defence is unpopular in top-level play. The Dutch has never been one of the main lines against 1.d4, though in the past a number of top players, including Alexander Alekhine, Bent Larsen and Paul Morphy, have used it with success. Perhaps its high-water mark occurred in 1951, when both world champion Mikhail Botvinnik and his challenger, David Bronstein, played it in their championship match.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Kostis Megalios    (1400)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 f4

The Grand-Prix Attack. It offers white good chances of a strong king-side attack.
============

Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Kostis Megalios


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
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


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5

Caro-Kann Exchange Variation

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Dirk Jan Van Dijl    (1500)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Dirk Jan Van Dijl


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4

Panov-Botvinnik Attack

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6 Nf3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6 Nf3 Nd7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6 Nf3 Nd7 h5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6 Nf3 Nd7 h5 Bh7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6 Nf3 Nd7 h5 Bh7 Bd3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6 Nf3 Nd7 h5 Bh7 Bd3 Bxd3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bf5 Ng3 Bg6 h4 h6 Nf3 Nd7 h5 Bh7 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1200)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


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


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3

The Danish Gambit

============

Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3

The Half Danish

============

Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Ron Keyston


Mark Carroll    (1700)
g3 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 O-O Be7 d3 c5 Nbd2 Nc6 e4

White is going for the e5 square which will force the Knight on f6 away. By closing the center, white will have strong play on the king side, or the queen side.
============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


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

d3:

White wants to exchange the strong e4-pawn and will have a very good development. The d3-Line is known as the Budowskys-Line.


============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 c3 d5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 c3 d5 exd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Mauro Petrolo    (2552)
e4 c5 c3 d5 exd5 Qxd5


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Mauro Petrolo


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 c3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nf3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 c3 d5 f3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Peter Marriott    (1816)
g4 d5 Bg2

Grob's Gambit

White aims to tear open the centre for an early material advantage on the queenside.

Notes by Peter Marriott:

The main gambit. White threatens to play 3.c4 if black takes the g4 pawn.
============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter, Peter Marriott


Kjetil Prestesaeter    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4

Grob's Gambit Accepted

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kjetil Prestesaeter


Kjetil Prestesaeter    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4

Fritz gambit.

If black goes on the defensive, white can get some good play and has many tactical tricks. These can all be easily seen off though, and black can even counter-gambit with a much superior position.

Chessbase considers this 52% win for white

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter


Kjetil Prestesaeter    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 dxc4

Fritz gambit accepted.

A double edged move, but by no means a bad one. Once white takes the rook, black will have good positional options that is at least equality.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter


Tim Hansell    (0932)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 dxc4 Bxb7


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 e6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 e6 Qa4+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7 Nb5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7 Nb5 Rc8



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7 Nb5 Rc8 Qxa7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7 Nb5 Rb8



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7 Nb5 Rb8 Nc7+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7 Nb5 Rb8 Nc7+ Ke7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Qb3 e6 Qxb7 Nbd7 Nb5 Rb8 Nc7+ Ke7 Qxa7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4 Nf6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4 Nf6 Nf3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4 Nf6 Nf3 a6

While normally a prophylactic move such as a6 is considered to be an "amateurish" type move, it is very thematic in the Qd6 line of the Scandinavian. This move prepares Nc6 while preventing the bishop pin at b5 and also prepares for an advance of the b-pawn in the case of Bc4.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4 Nf6 Nf3 a6 Bc4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4 Nf6 Nf3 a6 Bc4 b5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5

The Albin Countergambit

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3

A bad move that often leads to the "Lasker Trap" - 4...Bb4+ 5.Bd2 dxe3 6.Bxb4?? exf2+ 7.Ke2 fxg1=N+!

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+ Ke2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+ Ke2 fxg1N+


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+ Ke2 fxg1N+ Rxg1


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+ Ke2 fxg1N+ Rxg1 Bg4+


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+ Ke2 fxg1N+ Ke1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+ Kxf2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 Bxb4 exf2+ Kxf2 Qxd1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 fxe3

While the isolated, doubled pawns look very weak and ugly, this is likely White's best move at this point.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 Nf3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 Nf3 Nc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Philip Roe    (1950)
e4 e5 f4 d5 exd5


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Philip Roe


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 f4 d5 exd5 e4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4

Danish Gambit Main Line

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Andriy Gubachov    (1700)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Andriy Gubachov


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5

The best way to "de-fang" the Danish...returning one of the pawns in order to gain the time to catch up in development.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Andriy Gubachov    (1700)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Andriy Gubachov


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6

And now returning the other pawn.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8 Bb4+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8 Bb4+ Qd2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8 Bb4+ Qd2 Bxd2+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8 Bb4+ Qd2 Bxd2+ Nxd2

Considered drawish at the top-levels, but interesting at the club level. White has a 4-2 pawn majority on the kingside, while Black has a 3-1 majority on the queenside. Also the two-sides have opposite-colored bishops.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8 Bb4+ Qd2 Bxd2+ Nxd2 c5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 exd5

This is not as good as Bxd5 as it blocks White's light-squared bishop and allows Black to catch up in development rather easily.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 exd5 Nf6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 exd5 Nf6 Nc3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 exd5 Nf6 Nc3 Bd6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4

Hennig-Schara Gambit

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qxd4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qa4+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qa4+ Bd7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qa4+ Bd7 Qxd4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qa4+ Bd7 Qxd4 Nc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qa4+ Bd7 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qa4+ Bd7 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd1 exd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qa4+ Bd7 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd1 exd5 Qxd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd1 exd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd1 exd5 Qxd5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6

Scheveningen Sicilian

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4

Keres Attack

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6 Qd2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6 Qd2 Qb6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6 Qd2 Qb6 Nb3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6 Qd2 Qb6 Nb3 a6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6 Qd2 Qb6 Nb3 a6 O-O-O



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6 Qd2 Qb6 Nb3 a6 O-O-O Bd7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 g5 hxg5 Bxg5 Nc6 Qd2 Qb6 Nb3 a6 O-O-O Bd7 h4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2

Classical Scheveningen

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7 Be3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7 Be3 O-O



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7 Be3 O-O f4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7 Be3 O-O f4 Nc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7 Be3 O-O f4 Nc6 a4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7 Be3 O-O f4 Nc6 a4 Qc7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Be7 Be3 O-O f4 Nc6 a4 Qc7 Kh1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be3

English Attack

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be3 a6 f3 b5 g4 h6 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6 O-O



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6 O-O Nf6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6 O-O Nf6 Qe2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Gregory Kohut    (1783)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6 O-O Nf6 Qe2 Be7


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Gregory Kohut


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6 O-O Nf6 Qe2 Be7 Rd1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6 O-O Nf6 Qe2 Be7 Rd1 e5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 e6 Bc4 d6 O-O Nf6 Qe2 Be7 Rd1 e5 h3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Sandor Porkolab    (2115)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3

Bg4!
============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Sandor Porkolab


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5 Bc4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5 Bc4 e6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5 Bc4 e6 Bd2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5 Bc4 e6 Bd2 c6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5 Bc4 e6 Bd2 c6 Qe2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 Nf6 Nf3 Bf5 Bc4 e6 Bd2 c6 Qe2 Bb4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 a3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 a3 Nd4


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 a3 Nd4 axb4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 a3 Nd4 axb4 Qxa1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 a3 Nd4 axb4 Qxa1 Qxa1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 e5 dxe5 Bb4 Bd2 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 a3 Nd4 axb4 Qxa1 Qxa1 Nxc2+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Nf3 Nc6 h4 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 hxg5 Nxc4 Nc3 c6 e4 Nxb2 Qd2 d5 exd5

New and very strong! (see Game 2916 : Utesch - Schuster 2006 corr. FICGS)

============

Contributors : Wolfgang Utesch, Thibault de Vassal


Max Rau-Chaplin    (1600)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4

3 d4. is the standard move in this position. Rather than attempting to hold its over-extended doubled pawn White plays for a strong center and easy development. From here there are two popular variations, 3 NxF6(main line) and the sharper portugese variation 3 BG4

============

Contributors : Max Rau-Chaplin


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6 Nxa7+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6 Nxa7+ Bd7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6 Nxa7+ Bd7 Bxd7+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6 Nxa7+ Bd7 Bxd7+ Nxd7



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6 Nxa7+ Bd7 Bxd7+ Nxd7 f4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6 Nxa7+ Bd7 Bxd7+ Nxd7 f4 Qc5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 f5 Nc3 fxe4 Nxe4 d5 Nxe5 dxe4 Nxc6 Qg5 Qe2 Nf6 Nxa7+ Bd7 Bxd7+ Nxd7 f4 Qc5 Nb5


============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6 d4 Bd6 Re1 Qh4 g3 Qh3 Re4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 Bxc6+



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 Bxc6+ bxc6



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 Bxc6+ bxc6 d4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 Bxc6+ bxc6 d4 Bxf3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 Bxc6+ bxc6 d4 Bxf3 Qxf3



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 Bxc6+ bxc6 d4 Bxf3 Qxf3 exd4



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1588)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 d6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 Bxc6+ bxc6 d4 Bxf3 Qxf3 exd4 Re1



============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Miguel Pires    (2143)
e4 e5 Bb5 c6 Ba4 Nf6 Nc3

For some of the stronger players in Portugal the best move.

============

Contributors : Miguel Pires


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Be7 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O Bd3 c6 O-O Ne4

White should not take on e4 because Black gets a strong pawn centre. Black's knight is destined for d6, from where it can defend the f5 pawn.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4

This could be White's strongest move. It may not seem obvious now, but if Black castles kingside, then White pressurises d5 with Nc3 and Qb3, which also bears down on b7 and the black king on g8.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4

Most common move at club level. Black assumes he has won a pawn after an exchange on d4. While he can sometimes be confronted with a lack of spacial allowance after e5, this isn't too bad for black.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4

Looks slightly wrong. f4 may be better.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4 Be6 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 O-O-O Re1 Qf7 Nc3

Looks wrong. Once Black plays ..c6, this knight could be stuck. Nd2 is better.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Ulrich Imbeck    (1342)
h4 g6 h5 Bg7 d4 Nf6


============

Contributors : Yugi Inving, Ulrich Imbeck
Black position their knight in the wrong place.


Sebastiano Paulesu    (1969)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Nc6 exf7+

White, certainly, can play simply Nf3 and so transpose in the lines of the Icelandic gambit.
But this move can't be wrong...

============

Contributors : Sebastiano Paulesu


Mike Hoogland    (1760)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 cxd5

White exchanges the pawn on c4 for the pawn on c6 (black should take it back with this pawn if black doesn't want to lose any influence in the centre).

As a result, Qb6 after Qb3 on the next move is no longer a strong option. Qxb6 then doubles blacks queenside pawns, leaving them and the b5 square weak. Therefore, after Qb3 black will have to find another way to defend the pawn.

After this, white will try to develop and increase presure on b7 and d5 at the same time.

============

Contributors : Mike Hoogland


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 e3


{after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5} Another way of avoiding the Indo-Benoni. Not adviced when you are a strong grandmaster playing another strong grandmaster, as this move goes into a variation of the Tarrasch (or Semi-Tarrasch) defence where Black has little trouble to equalise.

But, for you or me, this move is psychologically good as if prevents the opponent to reach the kind of position he's looking for.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 Qh5 Rg8 g3 Nd4 c3 fxe4 Bxe4 Bg4 Qxh7 Rg7 Qh6 Nf3+ Ke2 Ng5+ f3 Nxe4 fxg4 Qc8 Qe3


From the game Beliavsky-Salov, Groningen 1993. White has a minimal positional advantage.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 b4 a3 Na6 axb4 Nxb4 Nc3 d6 e4 g6


White has a strong center in return for allowing the b4-Knight an outpost. In theory the position is better for white.
============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Bg3 Qxd4 Rad1 Qb6 b3 cxb3 axb3 a6 Rd2 c5 Rd6 Qa5 e5 Nd7

From Aronian-Gustafsson, Khanty Mansiysk World Cup 2007 (Arionian played 22.Rfd1 in this position).

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Rad1 O-O Bg3 Nd7 f3 c5 dxc5 Qe7 Kh1 a6 a4 Bc6 Nd5 exd5 exd5 Be5 f4 Bg7 dxc6 Nxc5 Rd5 Ne4 Be1 Qe6 Rxh5 f5


And Black wins. Aronian-Anand, Mexico World Ch 2007
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Roger Whitman    (1971)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nf6 Qxe5 Be7 Qf4 O-O Nc3 d5 e5 Ng4



============

Contributors : Roger Whitman
The only thing Black has done "wrong" is that he could have gotten an even better game by not sacrificing a pawn.


Roger Whitman    (1971)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 d6 Qxd6 Nf7 Qc5 d3 e4 c3 Bh4 Bf4


============

Contributors : Roger Whitman

I don't know if this is best, but I'm going to keep playing it till someone proves me wrong.


Yugi Inving    (0914)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 d3 d5 e5 d4 Nb5 Qa5+ Bd2 Qxb5 Rb1 Ng4 c4 Qa6 Be2 Ngxe5 O-O Nxf3+ Bxf3 Qa3



============

I just give a queen to my opponent, but he was not so strong, so i could get the game back whit some intelligents moves.
Contributors : Yugi Inving


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f3

A move that usually means a transposition to lines arising from 6.Be3. Yet it is critical if you want to play the Dragon for two reasons:

i) many weak players are prone to play it because they -mistakenly- fear to play 6.Be3 because the apparent possibility of 6...Ng4. So you have to be ready to face this move;

ii) some strong players could play 6.f3 because they're setting a trap, as we will see. A grandmaster will easily see the point over the board. You, that presumably are not a grandmaster, should study the trap in order to not fall in it.

May I add that are two reasons because of a chess move is *critical*:

a) because it is presumably best, or at least it is good enough to atract many strong players, so the move must be studied because -due to its popularity- people will play it often;

b) because it is far from best, but you -that are not a grandmaster- could easily go astray when facing it over the board without knowing about it in advance. So, if you want to play the Dragon -in this case- you *must* to be knowledgeable about the move.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


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


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Ng4 Bb5 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6+ Bd7 Bxa8 Nxe3 fxe3 Qxa8 Qd4

It's only now that I'm ready to concede that White is better, much better in fact! Black has to choose between three terrible moves, as e7-e5 or f7-f6 spoil the -formerly bright- future of his dark colored bishop, while Rh8-g8 leaves his king in the centre forever.

(not that 12.Qd4! is the only move, 12.Nd5 Qb8 13.Qd4! is strong as well. In any case, the verdict is always the same: as horrible a blunder as 6...Ng4? looks, White gets a clear advantage *just because one tempo*, so sharp chess often is).

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nc6 Bc4 Ne5 Ne6+

Apparently strong, but...

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


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.


Kostis Megalios    (1400)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5

This move is known to be slightly worse than Bf5, but, it's been played by quite a few strong Grandmasters.
============

Contributors : Kostis Megalios


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Kh8 Ng5 Bc5+ Kh1 Qa5 Rh3 Qc7 Nxe6 Qd6 Nxf8 Qxf8 Rf1 Rf7 Qh5 Qe7

Typical Anand, this is in practice a strong move, as now 29.Bxf5 meets the sardonic 29...e4! with an unsavory pin. White could anyway enter that line, as 30.Rb3 with the idea of R3-b1 seems to be OK. In time trouble, Grischuk couldn´t possibly see that escape.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Sebastian Boehme    (2129)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 b4 Ne2 Ne8 f4 a5 f5 Bxb3

This is my personally preferred choice, although maybe 15... a4 is stronger.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 Nc6


The continuation of my game versus my friend, rated at least 1500, he is weaker then me, for now. Stronger then the anonymous expert move, who is Qf6.
============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Trond Amlie    (1300)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6



============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7

The first move of the Arkhangelsk Variation, named after the Russian city of Arkhangelsk where many of its originial practitioners hail from. This is a combative and slightly offbeat line, but has been championed by several strong Grandmasters, such as Beliavsky, Malaniuk and Mikhalchishin.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3

The line which is currently causing Arkhangelsk practitioners some problems. Black can quickly run into trouble after Bc5, so he usually plays Be7 instead, leading to less active positions. d3 also strongpoints e4, making black's bishop on b7 look less than optimally placed. The d3 line is a good way of avoiding the sharper variations which arise after Re1 or c3.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4 Bb6 Bg5

One of the main moves, the other being Be3. This pin can be extremely annoying for black, but it seems like he has found a strong antidote in this instance.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4 Bb6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 O-O

Although black's kingside pawn structure looks a little weakened, practice has shown that black gets excellent play in this position. His two bishops look strong, he has a solid foothold in the centre, and he is ready to commence active operations on the kingside with moves like Nh5.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1737)
c4 e5 g3 Nc6 Bg2 d6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1737)
c4 e5 g3 Nc6 Bg2 d6 Nc3 Be7 e4

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 Nc6 d4 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 Nf3 Nxf3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Nc3 Bc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Amlie    (1737)
c4 e5 g3 Nc6 Bg2 d6 Nc3 Be7 e4 Nf6 Nge2

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Nb3 Be7 Qf3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2106)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6 d4 Bd6 Re1 Qh4 g3 Qh3 Be3 Bg4 Qd3 Rae8 Nd2 Qh5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O Nc6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Nc3 Bc5 Na4 Qd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 c4 c6 Nf3

Transpose to wikichess #9098#

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1737)
c4 e5 g3 Nc6 Bg2 d6 Nc3 Be7 e4 Nf6 Nge2 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2106)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6 d4 Bd6 Re1 Qh4 g3 Qh3 Be3 Bg4 Qd3 Rae8 Nd2 Qh5 a4 Re6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7 Qe2 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 O-O Qd2 Nc6 Bc4 Bd7 Bb3 Rc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2 Nd7 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O Nc6 Nxc6 Qxc6 Be2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Nc3 Bc5 Na4 Qd6 Nxc5 Qxc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 e6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 d6 dxe5

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 e6 Nf3 Ne7

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 d6 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Trond Amlie    (1737)
c4 e5 g3 Nc6 Bg2 d6 Nc3 Be7 e4 Nf6 Nge2 O-O O-O Bg4 h3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 e6 Nf3 Ne7 Bg5 Qb6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 d6 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Bc4

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 e6 Nf3 Ne7 Bg5 Qb6 b3 Ng6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 e6 Nf3 Ne7 Bg5 Qb6 b3 Ng6 Nc3 Bb4

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 d6 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Bc4 f6 O-O

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 d6 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Bc4 f6 O-O Bc5 Rd1

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 e6 Nf3 Ne7 Bg5 Qb6 b3 Ng6 Nc3 Bb4 Qd2 Qa5

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 d6 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Bc4 f6 O-O Bc5 Rd1 Ke8 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 e6 Nf3 Ne7 Bg5 Qb6 b3 Ng6 Nc3 Bb4 Qd2 Qa5 O-O-O Bxc3

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 Nc6 d4 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 Nf3 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1737)
c4 e5 g3 Nc6 Bg2 d6 Nc3 Be7 e4 Nf6 Nge2 O-O O-O Bg4 h3 Bxe2 Qxe2

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2 Nd7 h4 O-O Rh3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O Nc6 Nxc6 Qxc6 Be2 Nd7 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Nc3 Bc5 Na4 Qd6 Nxc5 Qxc5 Nb5 Na6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 dxc4 d5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 dxc4 d5 Na5 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 dxc4 d5 Na5 Bxc4 Nxc4 Qa4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 dxc4 e4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ndf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Qxd4 Qxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ndf6 Ng3 Bg4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ndf6 Ng3 Bg4 c3 Qc7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Qxd4 Qxd4 Nxd4 b5 a4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ndf6 Ng3 Bg4 c3 Qc7 h3 Bxf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Qxd4 Qxd4 Nxd4 b5 a4 b4 Nd1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ndf6 Ng3 Bg4 c3 Qc7 h3 Bxf3 Qxf3 e6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 f3 dxe4 fxe4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 f3 dxe4 fxe4 e5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4 h6 g5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2 Nd7 h4 O-O Rh3 Bc5 Qg3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O Nc6 Nxc6 Qxc6 Be2 Nd7 Nd5 Ne5 Qa3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7 Qe2 Be7 O-O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O Be6 Qd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4 h6 g5 Nh5 Rg1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Be7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 f3 dxe4 fxe4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bc4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nf3 Nxe4 Qxd4 Nf6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 f3 dxe4 fxe4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bc4 Nf6 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nf3 Nxe4 Qxd4 Nf6 Bg5 Be7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 f3 dxe4 fxe4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bc4 Nf6 O-O Nbd7 e5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 f3 dxe4 fxe4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bc4 Nf6 O-O Nbd7 e5 Nd5 Bxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7 Qe2 Be7 O-O-O O-O Bb3 a6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2 Nd7 h4 O-O Rh3 Bc5 Qg3 Qf6 e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O Nc6 Nxc6 Qxc6 Be2 Nd7 Nd5 Ne5 Qa3 Rb8 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4 h6 g5 Nh5 Rg1 hxg5 Bxg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Bd6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2 Nd7 h4 O-O Rh3 Bc5 Qg3 Qf6 e5 Qg6 Qh2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O Nc6 Nxc6 Qxc6 Be2 Nd7 Nd5 Ne5 Qa3 Rb8 f4 gxf4 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3 Bd7 Bf2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4 h6 g5 Nh5 Rg1 hxg5 Bxg5 Qb6 Qd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Bd6 Nc3 d4 Ne2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nf3 Nxe4 Qxd4 Nf6 Bg5 Be7 Nc3 O-O O-O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 c5 Qe5

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Rfe1 Nc6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 c5 Qe5 Qe7 Qxe7

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 c5 Qe5 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4 h6 g5 Nh5 Rg1 hxg5 Bxg5 Qb6 Qd3 Qxb2 Nb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Be3 Be6 Nd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3 Bd7 Bf2 Nc6 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2 Nd7 h4 O-O Rh3 Bc5 Qg3 Qf6 e5 Qg6 Qh2 Be7 g4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Nf6 Qf3 Qb6 O-O-O Nc6 Nxc6 Qxc6 Be2 Nd7 Nd5 Ne5 Qa3 Rb8 f4 gxf4 Bxf4 Be6 Qg3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7 Qe2 Be7 O-O-O O-O Bb3 a6 g4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Neel Basant    (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Kb1 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek, Neel Basant


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7 Qe2 Be7 O-O-O O-O Bb3 a6 g4 Nxd4 Rxd4 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Be7 d3 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nf3 Nxe4 Qxd4 Nf6 Bg5 Be7 Nc3 O-O O-O-O h6 Bh4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Bd6 Nc3 d4 Ne2 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Be3 Be6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O h6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bf4 d5 Qe3 Be7 Be2 Nd7 h4 O-O Rh3 Bc5 Qg3 Qf6 e5 Qg6 Qh2 Be7 g4 f6 exf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Be3 Be6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Qd2 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7 Qe2 Be7 O-O-O O-O Bb3 a6 g4 Nxd4 Rxd4 Nd7 g5 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Be3 Be6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Qd2 Nd7 Na5 Qc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3 Bd7 Bf2 Nc6 O-O Ne5 Nf5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3 Bd7 Bf2 Nc6 O-O Ne5 Nf5 Bxf5 exf5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Be3 Be6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Qd2 Nd7 Na5 Qc8 Rac1 Qc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Bd6 Nc3 d4 Ne2 O-O O-O h6 Ng3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2106)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6 d4 Bd6 Re1 Qh4 g3 Qh3 Be3 Bg4 Qd3 Rae8 Nd2 Qh5 a4 Re6 Qf1 Rfe8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Be3 Qc7 Qe2 Be7 O-O-O O-O Bb3 a6 g4 Nxd4 Rxd4 Nd7 g5 b5 Rg1 Nc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Bg7 O-O Nc6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2152)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Kb1 b5 Nd5 Bxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4 h6 g5 Nh5 Rg1 hxg5 Bxg5 Qb6 Qd3 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bc1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3 Bd7 Bf2 Nc6 O-O Ne5 Nf5 Bxf5 exf5 Rc8 Bd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 Nc6 d4 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 Nf3 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nf6 Be2 Bd6

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Be7 d3 O-O O-O d6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d6 O-O Be7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Rfe1 Nc6 Ne5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Rfe1 Nc6 Ne5 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 Nc6 d4 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 Nf3 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nf6 Be2 Bd6 Nd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 Nc6 d4 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 Nf3 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nf6 Be2 Bd6 Nd2 O-O O-O Qe7

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Rfe1 Nc6 Ne5 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bd7 exd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 c5 Qe5 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nc3 d6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nf3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Rfe1 Nc6 Ne5 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bd7 exd5 exd5 Bh5 Qa3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Nd5 Bg3 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 d5 Nf3 Qa5 Qd2 c4 e4 e6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Rfe1 Nc6 Ne5 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bd7 exd5 exd5 Bh5 Qa3 Re3 g6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nf3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nc3 dxc4 Bg2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nf3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nc3 dxc4 Bg2 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nf3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nc3 dxc4 Bg2 O-O O-O Nc6 e3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Amlie    (1737)
e4 Nc6 d4 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 Nf3 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nf6 Be2 Bd6 Nd2 O-O O-O Qe7 Nc4 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Ponce    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nf3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nc3 dxc4 Bg2 O-O O-O Nc6 e3 Rb8 Nd2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Nc6 d4 d6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Nc6 d4 d6 Nc3 f5

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Nc6 d4 d6 Nc3 f5 e5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Nc6 d4 d6 Nc3 f5 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd1

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Be7 d3 O-O O-O d6 h3 Na5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d6 O-O Be7 a3 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Nc6 d4 d6 Nc3 f5 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd1 Kxd1 b6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Be7 d3 O-O O-O d6 h3 Na5 a4 Nxc4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Be7 d3 O-O O-O d6 h3 Na5 a4 Nxc4 dxc4 c6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d6 O-O Be7 a3 O-O Nc3 h6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bxd5 exd5 Ne7 Nxb5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Bg7 O-O Nc6 d4 d6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Trond Ponce    (2000)
c4 g6 g3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 c4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 Bb5 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 c4 Bxc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Bg7 O-O Nc6 d4 d6 c3 Qe7

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 c4 Bxc5 Bxc5 Nxc5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 c4 Bxc5 Bxc5 Nxc5 cxd5 exd5 Qd4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bxd5 exd5 Ne7 Nxb5 Bg7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 Bb5 Nbd7 f3 Bf5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bb4 Bd2 Nxe4 Bxb4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Bg7 O-O Nc6 d4 d6 c3 Qe7 Qb3 h6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bxd5 exd5 Ne7 Nxb5 Bg7 Nc3 e4 Bc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bxd5 exd5 Ne7 Nxb5 Bg7 Nc3 e4 Bc4 O-O Qh5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ronald Learoyd    (1515)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 Bg7 O-O Nc6 d4 d6 c3 Qe7 Qb3 h6 Re1 Nf6

============

Contributors : Ronald Learoyd


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bxd5 exd5 Ne7 Nxb5 Bg7 Nc3 e4 Bc4 O-O Qh5 Qc7 Bb3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 c4

Transpose to wikichess #9480#

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e6 g4 h6 g5 Nh5 Rg1 hxg5 Bxg5 Qb6 Qd3 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bc1 Qb4 Be3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Be3 Be6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Qd2 Nd7 Na5 Qc8 Rac1 Qc7 b4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2173)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 Be2 h5 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3 Bd7 Bf2 Nc6 O-O Ne5 Nf5 Bxf5 exf5 Rc8 Bd4 Qd7 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bxd5 exd5 Ne7 Nxb5 Bg7 Nc3 e4 Bc4 O-O Qh5 Qc7 Bb3 Bxc3 bxc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d6 O-O Be7 a3 O-O Nc3 h6 d4 exd4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bb4 Bd2 Nxe4 Bxb4 Nxb4 Bxf7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 Bb5 Nbd7 f3 Bf5 Nc3 a6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 e6 Qe2 e5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 Bb5 Nbd7 f3 Bf5 Nc3 a6 Ba4 b5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 c6 Nf3 d6 O-O Be7 a3 O-O Nc3 h6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Re8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 Bb5 Nbd7 f3 Bf5 Nc3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bb3 Nb6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7 Qc2 Bh6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7 Qc2 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 e6 Qe2 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 Bb5 Nbd7 f3 Bf5 Nc3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bb3 Nb6 Nge2 a5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7 Qc2 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Qc1 Rh7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 e6 Qe2 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 d6 d4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 h6 Be3 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7 Qc2 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Qc1 Rh7 Nxd7 Nxd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 e6 Qe2 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 d6 d4 g6 dxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7 Qc2 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Qc1 Rh7 Nxd7 Nxd7 Qe3 Qb6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7 Qc2 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Qc1 Rh7 Nxd7 Nxd7 Qe3 Qb6 O-O e5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3 Nd5 Ra7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 e6 Qe2 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 d6 d4 g6 dxe5 dxe5 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4 Bxd4 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 Nf3 Qc7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3 Nd5 Ra7 Rb3 Qxa2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Bf4 Bb7 Be2 Nbd7 Qc2 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Qc1 Rh7 Nxd7 Nxd7 Qe3 Qb6 O-O e5 Rfd1 Nf8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 e6 Qe2 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 d6 d4 g6 dxe5 dxe5 Nbd2 Bg7 Nc4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4 Bxd4 e5 Ba7 Rxc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Bg5 Bc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 d6 Nc3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 d6 Nc3 Nf6 Bd2 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3 h6 Qc2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4 Bxd4 e5 Ba7 Rxc3 bxc3 Qc7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3 Nd5 Ra7 Rb3 Qxa2 Nec3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3 Nd5 Ra7 Rb3 Qxa2 Nec3 Qa5 Bc4 Be7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3 h6 Qc2 Rc8 Rad1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 d6 Nc3 Nf6 Bd2 Be7 O-O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3 Nd5 Ra7 Rb3 Qxa2 Nec3 Qa5 Bc4 Be7 O-O Nc6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3 Nd5 Ra7 Rb3 Qxa2 Nec3 Qa5 Bc4 Be7 O-O Nc6 Nxe7 Kxe7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4 Bxd4 e5 Ba7 Rxc3 bxc3 Qc7 f3 b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 e6 Qe2 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 d6 d4 g6 dxe5 dxe5 Nbd2 Bg7 Nc4 Nf6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 d6 Nc3 Nf6 Bd2 Be7 O-O-O O-O Be2 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Bg5 Be6 Ng3 Qb6 Bxf6 Qxb2 Nge2 gxf6 Rb1 Qa3 Nd5 Ra7 Rb3 Qxa2 Nec3 Qa5 Bc4 Be7 O-O Nc6 Nxe7 Kxe7 Nd5 Bxd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 d6 Nc3 Nf6 Bd2 Be7 O-O-O O-O Be2 h6 Qg3 Kh7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3 b5 Na3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3 h6 Qc2 Rc8 Rad1 Qc7 dxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 Nf3 Qc7 a4 Bg7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3 h6 Qc2 Rc8 Rad1 Qc7 dxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Bg5 Bc5 Nf3 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O-O Re8 Bc4 d6 Nf3 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3 b5 Na3 Nxe3 fxe3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3 h6 Qc2 Rc8 Rad1 Qc7 dxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ne2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Bd2 Ng4 Qe2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Bg5 Bc5 Nf3 h6 Bh4 Qe7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4 Bxd4 e5 Ba7 Rxc3 bxc3 Qc7 f3 b6 Qxa6 Ra8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 Nf3 Qc7 a4 Bg7 Be2 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4 Kb1 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Bg5 Bc5 Nf3 h6 Bh4 Qe7 Nc3 Bb4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4 Bxd4 e5 Ba7 Rxc3 bxc3 Qc7 f3 b6 Qxa6 Ra8 Qxb6 Rxa7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Bd2 Ng4 Qe2 Nd4 Qd1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4 Kb1 O-O h4 a5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3 b5 Na3 Nxe3 fxe3 a6 dxc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4 Kb1 O-O h4 a5 Bb5 Qc7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4 Kb1 O-O h4 a5 Bb5 Qc7 Nf3 Rab8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4 Kb1 O-O h4 a5 Bb5 Qc7 Nf3 Rab8 Qd3 Ncxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2000)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 Nf3 Qc7 a4 Bg7 Be2 O-O Qd2 b6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4 Kb1 O-O h4 a5 Bb5 Qc7 Nf3 Rab8 Qd3 Ncxe5 fxe5 Bxc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3 b5 Na3 Nxe3 fxe3 a6 dxc5 Be7 Nxb5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 b5 a3 Bb7 O-O-O b4 axb4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bxb4 Kb1 O-O h4 a5 Bb5 Qc7 Nf3 Rab8 Qd3 Ncxe5 fxe5 Bxc3 Bc1 Rfc8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Qf3 g6 h3 Bg7 Be3 Bd7 O-O-O Nc6 g4 O-O Qe2 Rc8 Kb1 Nxd4 Bxd4 e5 Ba7 Rxc3 bxc3 Qc7 f3 b6 Qxa6 Ra8 Qxb6 Rxa7 Qxc7 Rxc7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Bg5 Bc5 Nf3 h6 Bh4 Qe7 Nc3 Bb4 O-O-O Bxc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3 b5 Na3 Nxe3 fxe3 a6 dxc5 Be7 Nxb5 axb5 Bxb5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 a3 Bb7 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 Be7 e4 O-O Bd3 c5 O-O Qc7 Qe2 Nd7 e5 Rac8 Be3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 a3 Bb7 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 Be7 e4 O-O Bd3 c5 O-O Qc7 Qe2 Nd7 e5 Rac8 Be3 Rfd8 Ng5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 a3 Bb7 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 Be7 e4 O-O Bd3 c5 O-O Qc7 Qe2 Nd7 e5 Rac8 Be3 Rfd8 Ng5 h6 Ne4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 a3 Bb7 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 Be7 e4 O-O Bd3 c5 O-O Qc7 Qe2 Nd7 e5 Rac8 Be3 Rfd8 Ng5 h6 Ne4 cxd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 a3 Bb7 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 Be7 e4 O-O Bd3 c5 O-O Qc7 Qe2 Nd7 e5 Rac8 Be3 Rfd8 Ng5 h6 Ne4 cxd4 cxd4 Qc6 Rfd1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 a3 Bb7 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 Be7 e4 O-O Bd3 c5 O-O Qc7 Qe2 Nd7 e5 Rac8 Be3 Rfd8 Ng5 h6 Ne4 cxd4 cxd4 Qc6 Rfd1 f5 exf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3 b5 Na3 Nxe3 fxe3 a6 dxc5 Be7 Nxb5 axb5 Bxb5 Qb7 Nd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3 h6 Qc2 Rc8 Rad1 Qc7 dxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ne2 Nh5 Nc1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Bd2 Ng4 Qe2 Nd4 Qd1 Qh4 g3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nf3 Nbd7 Nc3 e5 e4 c6 Be2 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 b5 a3 Re8 Be3 Bb7 h3 h6 Qc2 Rc8 Rad1 Qc7 dxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ne2 Nh5 Nc1 Nf4 b4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2161)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Ne7 O-O c5 c4 dxc4 Na3 Nbc6 Nxc4 Nd5 Bg5 Qd7 Rc1 h6 Be3 b5 Na3 Nxe3 fxe3 a6 dxc5 Be7 Nxb5 axb5 Bxb5 Qb7 Nd4 Be4 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 h6 e4 g5

Transpose to wikichess #17591#

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 Bb7 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 Bb7 Nbd2 bxc4 e4

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 Bb7 Nbd2 bxc4 e4 e6 dxe6

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 Bb7 Nbd2 bxc4 e4 e6 dxe6 dxe6 e5

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4 Ne6 dxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 Bb7 Nbd2 bxc4 e4 e6 dxe6 dxe6 e5 Nd5 Nxc4

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4 Ne6 dxe5 dxe5 Bd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 c3 Nf6 Be2 g6 O-O Bg7 Bb5 Nc6 d4 Bd7 Qe2

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1886)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 c3 Nf6 Be2 g6 O-O Bg7 Bb5 Nc6 d4 Bd7 Qe2 cxd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb5 dxe4 Ne5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4 Ne6 dxe5 dxe5 Bd5 c6 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb5 dxe4 Ne5 Qd6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4 Ne6 dxe5 dxe5 Bd5 c6 Nxe5 Qc7 Bxe6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 Nf3 cxd4 Nxd4 e6 g3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1886)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Bd6 O-O O-O c4 c6 Re1 Re8

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4 Ne6 dxe5 dxe5 Bd5 c6 Nxe5 Qc7 Bxe6 fxe6 Nd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1988)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qa4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb5 dxe4 Ne5 Qd6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 Nf3 cxd4 Nxd4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4 Ne6 dxe5 dxe5 Bd5 c6 Nxe5 Qc7 Bxe6 fxe6 Nd3 c5 Bf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 Nf3 cxd4 Nxd4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2112)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d6 a3 Qd7 Nc3 Nd8 d4 Ne6 dxe5 dxe5 Bd5 c6 Nxe5 Qc7 Bxe6 fxe6 Nd3 c5 Bf4 Qb6 Qf3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 Nf3 cxd4 Nxd4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 d4 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O Nb3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O Nb3 Nd7 a3 Bc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O Nb3 Nd7 a3 Bc5 Qc2 Re8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1886)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 Nf3 cxd4 Nxd4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 d4 O-O Nc6 e3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O Nb3 Nd7 a3 Bc5 Qc2 Re8 Nxc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Denis de Kerpezdron    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 O-O Nf3

============

Contributors : Denis de Kerpezdron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O Nb3 Nd7 a3 Bc5 Qc2 Re8 Nxc5 Nxc5 b4 Ne6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O Nb3 Nd7 a3 Bc5 Qc2 Re8 Nxc5 Nxc5 b4 Ne6 Bg3 Nd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O Qc7 Kb1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Denis de Kerpezdron    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 O-O Nf3 Re8 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Denis de Kerpezdron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Nc6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Qe7 e3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Be2 d6 O-O O-O Nb3 Nd7 a3 Bc5 Qc2 Re8 Nxc5 Nxc5 b4 Ne6 Bg3 Nd4 exd4 Qxe2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Denis de Kerpezdron    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 O-O Nf3 Re8 O-O-O d5 Qg5

============

Contributors : Denis de Kerpezdron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Ne5 g4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Ne5 g4 b5 g5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Ne5 g4 b5 g5 Nfd7 Nd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Denis de Kerpezdron    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Nc3 Bd6 Bc4

============

Contributors : Denis de Kerpezdron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Ne5 g4 b5 g5 Nfd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Ne5 g4 b5 g5 Nfd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Rae8 Qh2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb3 d5 exd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb3 d5 exd6 Qxd6 Na3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb3 d5 exd6 Qxd6 Na3 a6 d4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4 a6 Nf3 Nf6

Transpose to wikichess #1893#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f4 exf4 Bxf4 Nc6 Qe2 Be7 h3 O-O O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Ne5 g4 b5 g5 Nfd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Rae8 Qh2 Nc5 Nd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bg5 Nbd7 Nf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bg5 Nbd7 Nf3 h6 Bh4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5 Nf3 d6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bg5 Nbd7 Nf3 h6 Bh4 e6 a3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5 Nf3 d6 Bb5 Bd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bg5 Nbd7 Nf3 h6 Bh4 e6 a3 a6 e3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5 Nf3 d6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxd7 Qxd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5 Nf3 d6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxd7 Qxd7 d4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5 Nf3 d6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxd7 Qxd7 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5 Nf3 d6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxd7 Qxd7 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 O-O e6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 d5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 h6 Nc3 c5 Nf3 d6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxd7 Qxd7 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 O-O e6 f4 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bg5 Nbd7 Nf3 h6 Bh4 e6 a3 a6 e3 c5 Bg3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bg5 Nbd7 Nf3 h6 Bh4 e6 a3 a6 e3 c5 Bg3 Be7 Be2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Amlie    (1909)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be7 h3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 d5 cxd5 exd5 Bd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2 Nxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1909)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be7 h3 Be6 Qf3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 Bb5

Transpose to wikichess #3696#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 O-O Rc8 Be3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
b4 d5 Bb2 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
b4 d5 Bb2 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nf3 e6 b5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
b4 d5 Bb2 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nf3 e6 b5 Nbd7 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1923)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 d4 cxd4 cxd4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb5 Bd7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
b4 d5 Bb2 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nf3 e6 b5 Nbd7 Be2 Bd6 Nh4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 O-O Rc8 Be3 Qe5 Bxa7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
b4 d5 Bb2 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nf3 e6 b5 Nbd7 Be2 Bd6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 O-O Rc8 Be3 Qe5 Bxa7 Bc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
c4 c5 Nc3 e6

Transpose to wikichess #26776#

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e6 Nc3 exd5 cxd5 d6 Nf3 g6 e4 Bg7 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
b4 d5 Bb2 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nf3 e6 b5 Nbd7 Be2 Bd6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 c4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 O-O Rc8 Be3 Qe5 Bxa7 Bc5 Bxc5 Rxc5 Qb3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e6 Nc3 exd5 cxd5 d6 Nf3 g6 e4 Bg7 Be2 O-O Bf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2117)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nc6 e4 Bb7 Bg2 Qb4 Qc2 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 O-O Rc8 Be3 Qe5 Bxa7 Bc5 Bxc5 Rxc5 Qb3 Ba8 Qb4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Bc5 Nxe5 Nxe5 d4 Bd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Bc5 Nxe5 Nxe5 d4 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Bc5 Nxe5 Nxe5 d4 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 f4 Bd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Bc5 Nxe5 Nxe5 d4 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 f4 Bd6 e5 Bc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
e4 e6 b3 d5 Bb2 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Qe2 Be7 O-O-O a5 a4 b6 Nxe4 Bb7 Nxf6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 Be2 O-O a3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 d3 b5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 f6 Nh4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 f6 Nh4 Kf7 Qxc7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 f6 Nh4 Kf7 Qxc7 Rhe8 Nxg6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 dxc6 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 dxc6 h3 Bg7 d3

Transpose to wikichess #34014#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 f6 Nh4 Kf7 Qxc7 Rhe8 Nxg6 hxg6 h3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2068)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 dxc5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 f6 Nh4 Kf7 Qxc7 Rhe8 Nxg6 hxg6 h3 Rac8 Qg3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1977)
Nc3 d5 e4 d4 Nce2 e5 Ng3 Be6 Nf3 f6 Be2

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 Be2 O-O a3 Nc6 cxd5 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 Be2 O-O a3 Nc6 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Nxc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5 cxd5 Nb5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 dxc5 e6 b4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Amlie    (1977)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 Nbd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1977)
Nc3 d5 e4 d4 Nce2 e5 Ng3 Be6 Nf3 f6 Be2 Qd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 Be2 O-O a3 Nc6 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Bf5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1989)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bc5 d3 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8 Qe3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Amlie    (1977)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 Nbd7 O-O e5 Be3

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1977)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Nc6

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3 Bf5 Bf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3 Bf5 Bf4 Bxd3 Qxd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 Be2 O-O a3 Nc6 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Bf5 Re1 Rfe8

Transpose to wikichess #22715#

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 dxc5 e6 b4 a5 c3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Amlie    (1977)
Nc3 d5 e4 d4 Nce2 e5 Ng3 Be6 Nf3 f6 Be2 Qd7 O-O Nc6 Bb5

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1977)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 Nbd7 O-O e5 Be3 Re8 d5

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Trond Amlie    (1977)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Nc6 h3 a6

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8 Qe3 Bd7 f5 Qb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Amlie    (1977)
Nc3 d5 e4 d4 Nce2 e5 Ng3 Be6 Nf3 f6 Be2 Qd7 O-O Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8 Qe3 Bd7 f5 Qb6 Qe1 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3 Bf5 Bf4 Bxd3 Qxd3 Bd6 Bxd6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Amlie    (1977)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Nc6 h3 a6 Be3 g5

============

Contributors : Trond Amlie


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3 Bf5 Bf4 Bxd3 Qxd3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 Re2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8 Qe3 Bd7 f5 Qb6 Qe1 Ne4 f6 Nb4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3 Bf5 Bf4 Bxd3 Qxd3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 Re2 Rfe8 Rae1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4 Nc6 e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5 cxd5 Nb5 Bd6 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8 Qe3 Bd7 f5 Qb6 Qe1 Ne4 f6 Nb4 Bd3 Nxc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5 cxd5 Nb5 Bd6 a4 a5 Nxd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2068)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 dxc5 e6 b4 a5 c3 axb4 cxb4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8 Qe3 Bd7 f5 Qb6 Qe1 Ne4 f6 Nb4 Bd3 Nxc3 Qxc3 Ba4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5 cxd5 Nb5 Bd6 a4 a5 Nxd6 Qxd6 Qc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Be7 Qd2 O-O dxc5 Bxc5 O-O-O Qa5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Kb1 Rd8 Qe3 Bd7 f5 Qb6 Qe1 Ne4 f6 Nb4 Bd3 Nxc3 Qxc3 Ba4 b3 Nxd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5 cxd5 Nb5 Bd6 a4 a5 Nxd6 Qxd6 Qc3 Ke7 Nb1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5 cxd5 Nb5 Bd6 a4 a5 Nxd6 Qxd6 Qc3 Ke7 Nb1 Rhc8 Qd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 e5 Nf3 e4 Nfd2 Ne7 c4 Nf5 Bg3 Nxg3 hxg3 Be6 Nc3 Nd7 cxd5 cxd5 Nb5 Bd6 a4 a5 Nxd6 Qxd6 Qc3 Ke7 Nb1 Rhc8 Qd2 Kf8 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3 Bf5 Bf4 Bxd3 Qxd3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 Re2 Rfe8 Rae1 Rxe2 Qxe2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 f6 Nh4 Kf7 Qxc7 Rhe8 Nxg6 hxg6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2068)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 dxc5 e6 b4 a5 c3 axb4 cxb4 b6 Bb5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 d3 b5 Bb3 d6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 Nbd2 Nxd2 Bxd2 Bg4 c3 Qd7 Re1 O-O h3 Bf5 Bf4 Bxd3 Qxd3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 Re2 Rfe8 Rae1 Rxe2 Qxe2 h6 g3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4 Nc6 e5 Nd7 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Be7 c4 Nb4 cxd5 Nxd3 Qxd3 Qxd5 Re1 Bf5 g4 Bg6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 f6 Nh4 Kf7 Qxc7 Rhe8 Nxg6 hxg6 Bf4 Rad8 Rad1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2068)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 dxc5 e6 b4 a5 c3 axb4 cxb4 b6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 d3 b5 Bb3 d6 a4 b4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4 Nc6 e5 Nd7 Nc4 cxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 Rfd1 b4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 d3 b5 Bb3 d6 a4 b4 Nbd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 Rfd1 b4 Nd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2 Bd3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 Rfd1 b4 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2 Bd3 Qa5 O-O Rag8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4 Nc6 e5 Nd7 Nc4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndxe5 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2 Bd3 Qa5 O-O Rag8 Rfe1 Kd8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2 Bd3 Qa5 O-O Rag8 Rfe1 Kd8 Nh5 f5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2 Bd3 Qa5 O-O Rag8 Rfe1 Kd8 Nh5 f5 Nf6 Qxc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2 Bd3 Qa5 O-O Rag8 Rfe1 Kd8 Nh5 f5 Nf6 Qxc3 Re3 Qb2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 Rfd1 b4 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nf6 a3 bxa3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2068)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 exd5 Qxd5 Bxf6 Bxc3 bxc3 gxf6 Qg4 Qa5 Ne2 Bd7 Qf3 Ke7 Nf4 Nc6 Rd1 Qxa2 Bd3 Qa5 O-O Rag8 Rfe1 Kd8 Nh5 f5 Nf6 Qxc3 Re3 Qb2 Bxf5 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4 Nc6 e5 Nd7 Nc4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndxe5 Nxc6 Nxc6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4 Nc6 e5 Nd7 Nc4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndxe5 Nxc6 Nxc6 Bf4 Qxd1 Rfxd1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 dxc5 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bxc5 Nfd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 g5 exf6 gxh4 Be2 Qa5 O-O h3 Qe3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 g5 exf6 gxh4 Be2 Qa5 O-O h3 Qe3 Rg8 g3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 g5 exf6 gxh4 Be2 Qa5 O-O h3 Qe3 Rg8 g3 Rg5 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 g5 exf6 gxh4 Be2 Qa5 O-O h3 Qe3 Rg8 g3 Rg5 Ne4 Re5 Bf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 Rfd1 b4 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nf6 a3 bxa3 c4 axb2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 Rfd1 b4 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nf6 a3 bxa3 c4 axb2 Qxb2 Rb8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2092)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Kh1 b6 Be3 Bb7 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 Rfd1 b4 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nf6 a3 bxa3 c4 axb2 Qxb2 Rb8 Ba7 Ra8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2021)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 b4 Nbd2 Be7 e4 Nc6 e5 Nd7 Nc4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndxe5 Nxc6 Nxc6 Bf4 Qxd1 Rfxd1 e5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e5 f6 exf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e5 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 d4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 O-O Nxd3 Qxd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e5 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nf3 Bd6 Bb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 O-O Nxd3 Qxd3 Nf6 Re1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e5 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nf3 Bd6 Bb5 O-O Bg5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 O-O Nxd3 Qxd3 Nf6 Re1 Be7 Bf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e5 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nf3 Bd6 Bb5 O-O Bg5 Bd7 Bxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Ne4 Ne2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Ne4 Ne2 f6 Ng3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Ne4 Ne2 f6 Ng3 fxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Nb3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 e6

Transpose to wikichess #9976#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Ne4 Ne2 f6 Ng3 fxe5 dxe5 Bd7 Bd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Nb3 a5 a4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Nb3 a5 a4 Be7 Bb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1 Rad8 h3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Nb3 a5 a4 Be7 Bb5 Na7 Bd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1 Rad8 h3 g6 Nb5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1 Rad8 h3 g6 Nb5 Bf4 c4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1 Rad8 h3 g6 Nb5 Bf4 c4 Be8 g3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1 Rad8 h3 g6 Nb5 Bf4 c4 Be8 g3 a6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1 Rad8 h3 g6 Nb5 Bf4 c4 Be8 g3 a6 Nc3 Bd6 Qe3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 O-O O-O Qd3 Bd7 a3 Bd6 Rfe1 Rad8 h3 g6 Nb5 Bf4 c4 Be8 g3 a6 Nc3 Bd6 Qe3 Qg7 Rad1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Be7 e3 c6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Be7 e3 c6 Nf3 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Be7 e3 c6 Nf3 Nbd7 Rc1 O-O

Transpose to wikichess #927#

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 Qd6 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 Qg4 Ne7 dxc5 Nbc6 Qxg7 Rg8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 Qg4 Ne7 dxc5 Nbc6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qxh7 d4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 Bd3 Bb4 Bg5 dxe4 Bxe4 Qd6 O-O Bxc3 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1944)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 Qg4 Ne7 dxc5 Nbc6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qxh7 d4 a3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 dxc4 Bxc4 e6 Nf3

Transpose to wikichess #38675#

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Rc8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Rc8 Qb1 Ne8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O dxc4 Nxc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O dxc4 Nxc4 Nxc4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Rc8 Qb1 Ne8 Rd1 a6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O dxc4 Nxc4 Nxc4 Bxc4 Be4 Rac1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Rc8 Qb1 Ne8 Rd1 a6 a4 Nd6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O dxc4 Nxc4 Nxc4 Bxc4 Be4 Rac1 Bd5 Be2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Rc8 Qb1 Ne8 Rd1 a6 a4 Nd6 Bg5 f6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O dxc4 Nxc4 Nxc4 Bxc4 Be4 Rac1 Bd5 Be2 Rc8 Rxc8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Rc8 Qb1 Ne8 Rd1 a6 a4 Nd6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Qe7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O dxc4 Nxc4 Nxc4 Bxc4 Be4 Rac1 Bd5 Be2 Rc8 Rxc8 Nxc8 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
f4 b6 Nf3 Bb7 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O d6 d4 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 Nbd7 Qc2 e5 fxe5 dxe5 d5 c6 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Rc8 Qb1 Ne8 Rd1 a6 a4 Nd6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Qe7 Qa2 Rf7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2077)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 c4 Nbc6 Qa4 a6 Na3 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O dxc4 Nxc4 Nxc4 Bxc4 Be4 Rac1 Bd5 Be2 Rc8 Rxc8 Nxc8 Rc1 Ne7 Bd2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Bd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Bd7 c4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Bd7 c4 Nc6 Qd2 g6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d4 g6 Nf3 Bg7 c4

Transpose to wikichess #51249#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 e5 Nf3 a6 Nxe5 f6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Bd7 c4 Nc6 Qd2 g6 Be2 Bg7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nc3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Nd5 Na6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 e5 Nf3 a6 Nxe5 f6 Qh5 g6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Bd7 c4 Nc6 Qd2 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O Nf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Bd7 c4 Nc6 Qd2 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O Nf6 Nc3 Bg4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nc3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Nd5 Na6 Be3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 e5 Nf3 a6 Nxe5 f6 Qh5 g6 Nxg6 hxg6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 e5 Nf3 a6 Nxe5 f6 Qh5 g6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qxh8 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 e5 Nf3 a6 Nxe5 f6 Qh5 g6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qxh8 d5 Qxg8 Nd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 c3 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nc3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Nd5 Na6 Be3 Qa5 Bd2 Qc5

Transpose to wikichess #61255#

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5 g4 Ne1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 e5 Nf3 a6 Nxe5 f6 Qh5 g6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qxh8 d5 Qxg8 Nd7 Qxg6 Ke7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 e5 Nf3 a6 Nxe5 f6 Qh5 g6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qxh8 d5 Qxg8 Nd7 Qxg6 Ke7 Nc3 Ne5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5 g4 Ne1 f5 Ne2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 g3 e5 Nb3 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 g3 e5 Nb3 Be7 Bg2 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5 g4 Ne1 f5 Ne2 Qf6 Bxc6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5 g4 Ne1 f5 Ne2 Qf6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nd3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 g3 e5 Nb3 Be7 Bg2 O-O O-O Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5 g4 Ne1 f5 Ne2 Qf6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nd3 Rae8 Ne5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O a4 a5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O a4 a5 Ba3 c5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O a4 a5 Ba3 c5 c4 Ng4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O a4 a5 Ba3 c5 c4 Ng4 Bxg4 Rxg4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 Bxc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O a4 a5 Ba3 c5 c4 Ng4 Bxg4 Rxg4 dxc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 Bxc3 bxc3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O a4 a5 Ba3 c5 c4 Ng4 Bxg4 Rxg4 dxc5 Nxc5 Rad1 Rxd1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5 g4 Ne1 f5 Ne2 Qf6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nd3 Rae8 Ne5 Bc8 Re1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 d4 d5 exd5 cxd5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5 Be6 Bxf6 exf6 c5 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O g5 Bb5 g4 Ne1 f5 Ne2 Qf6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nd3 Rae8 Ne5 Bc8 Re1 Qh6 Qa4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 Nc3 d5 Qf3 d4 Nce2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 Nc3 d5 Qf3 d4 Nce2 c5 d3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 Nc3 d5 Qf3 d4 Nce2 c5 d3 Nc6 a3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 Nc3 d5 Qf3 d4 Nce2 c5 d3 Nc6 a3 Nf6 h3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 Nc3 d5 Qf3 d4 Nce2 c5 d3 Nc6 a3 Nf6 h3 e5 g4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 Nc3 d5 Qf3 d4 Nce2 c5 d3 Nc6 a3 Nf6 h3 e5 g4 Be6 Ng3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 Bxc3 bxc3 Qa5 Nd4 Qxc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4 f5 Nc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qxg7 Rg8 Qh6 Nbd7 Ne2 b6 Ng3 Bb7 Be2 Qe7 O-O O-O-O a4 a5 Ba3 c5 c4 Ng4 Bxg4 Rxg4 dxc5 Nxc5 Rad1 Rxd1 Rxd1 f5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 c3 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c6 c3 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 d4

Transpose to wikichess #23619#

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 Bxc3 bxc3 Qa5 Nd4 Qxc3 Nxc6 bxc6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4 f5 Nc3 Nf6 g3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5 c3 bxc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5 c3 bxc3 bxc3 Rb1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4 f5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Be7 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 Bxc3 bxc3 Qa5 Nd4 Qxc3 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5 c3 bxc3 bxc3 Rb1 Bxc5 dxc5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5 c3 bxc3 bxc3 Rb1 Bxc5 dxc5 Qxd1 Rxd1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5 c3 bxc3 bxc3 Rb1 Bxc5 dxc5 Qxd1 Rxd1 c2 Rc1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 Bxc3 bxc3 Qa5 Nd4 Qxc3 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd3 Qa5 Qc4 c5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5 c3 bxc3 bxc3 Rb1 Bxc5 dxc5 Qxd1 Rxd1 c2 Rc1 Nbd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 b4 Na4 Nxe4 Be5 Nf6 Nc5 c3 bxc3 bxc3 Rb1 Bxc5 dxc5 Qxd1 Rxd1 c2 Rc1 Nbd7 O-O Nxe5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2112)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 e6 O-O Be7 Rad1 O-O Rfe1 a6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 Bxc3 bxc3 Qa5 Nd4 Qxc3 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd3 Qa5 Qc4 c5 g3 Qb5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4 f5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Be7 Nf3 d6 Bg2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4 f5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Be7 Nf3 d6 Bg2 O-O b4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4 f5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Be7 Nf3 d6 Bg2 O-O b4 c6 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1974)
d3 e5 c4 f5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Be7 Nf3 d6 Bg2 O-O b4 c6 O-O Na6 b5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
b3 d5 Bb2 e6 e3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
b3 d5 Bb2 e6 e3 Nf6 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 c4 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nf3

Transpose to wikichess #15917#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
b3 d5 Bb2 e6 e3 Nf6 f4 c5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
e4 c5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd8 d4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
b3 d5 Bb2 e6 e3 Nf6 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
b3 d5 Bb2 e6 e3 Nf6 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
e4 c5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd8 d4 Nf6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4 b4 Ne4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4 b4 Ne4 Nxe4 Bxe4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4 b4 Ne4 Nxe4 Bxe4 f5 Bd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4 b4 Ne4 Nxe4 Bxe4 f5 Bd3 Qf6 e4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4 b4 Ne4 Nxe4 Bxe4 f5 Bd3 Qf6 e4 Qh6 exf5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4 b4 Ne4 Nxe4 Bxe4 f5 Bd3 Qf6 e4 Qh6 exf5 c5 h3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bd6 b3 O-O Bb2 a6 a4 b4 Ne4 Nxe4 Bxe4 f5 Bd3 Qf6 e4 Qh6 exf5 c5 h3 exf5 Bc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
e4 c5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd8 d4 Nf6 Bf4 e6 dxc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
b3 d5 Bb2 e6 e3 Nf6 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 O-O Qc7 Ne5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
b3 d5 Bb2 e6 e3 Nf6 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 O-O Qc7 Ne5 Be7 Nxd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
e4 c5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd8 d4 Nf6 Bf4 e6 dxc5 Qa5 Ne5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
e4 c5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd8 d4 Nf6 Bf4 e6 dxc5 Qa5 Ne5 Qxc5 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 Nf3

Transpose to wikichess #1990#

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 Bf4 c5 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 Bf4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 e4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 Bf4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 e4 cxd4 exd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Be7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Be7 b4 Qd6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Weronika Fraczek    (1435)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Nge2 e6 f4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Weronika Fraczek


Weronika Fraczek    (1435)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Nge2 e6 f4 Nf6 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Weronika Fraczek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 Bf4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 e4 cxd4 exd5 dxc3 dxc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 Bf4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 e4 cxd4 exd5 dxc3 dxc6 Qxd1 Rxd1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 Bf4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 e4 cxd4 exd5 dxc3 dxc6 Qxd1 Rxd1 bxc6 bxc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Weronika Fraczek    (1435)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Nge2 e6 f4 Nf6 O-O O-O Be3 Rb8

============

Contributors : Weronika Fraczek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
d4 d5 Bf4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 e4 cxd4 exd5 dxc3 dxc6 Qxd1 Rxd1 bxc6 bxc3 Nf6 Bc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (1846)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qc7 Bxf6 gxf6 Qd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Be7 b4 Qd6 b5 Qf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Be7 b4 Qd6 b5 Qf6 Nd4 Rf8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Be7 b4 Qd6 b5 Qf6 Nd4 Rf8 Bf3 d6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Be7 b4 Qd6 b5 Qf6 Nd4 Rf8 Bf3 d6 Ba3 Qf7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2067)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qe6 Ne3 Nf6 Bc4 Qe5 d4 exd3 O-O dxc2 Nxc2 Qc5 Re1 Kd8 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Be7 b4 Qd6 b5 Qf6 Nd4 Rf8 Bf3 d6 Ba3 Qf7 Rc1 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O Bh4 b4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Rb1 O-O Be2 cxd4 cxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxa2 O-O Bg4 Bg5 h6 Be3 Nc6 d5 Bxf3 gxf3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O Bh4 b4 Nb1 Nc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 b5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Rb1 O-O Be2 cxd4 cxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxa2 O-O Bg4 Bg5 h6 Be3 Nc6 d5 Bxf3 gxf3 Nd4 Bxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O Bh4 b4 Nb1 Nc5 Bxf6 gxf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Rb1 O-O Be2 cxd4 cxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxa2 O-O Bg4 Bg5 h6 Be3 Nc6 d5 Bxf3 gxf3 Nd4 Bd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O Bh4 b4 Nb1 Nc5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd2 d5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Rb1 O-O Be2 cxd4 cxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxa2 O-O Bg4 Bg5 h6 Be3 Nc6 d5 Bxf3 gxf3 Nd4 Bxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O Bh4 b4 Nb1 Nc5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd2 d5 e5 fxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Nf3 Bg7 Qb3 dxc4 Qxc4 O-O e4 Nc6 Be2 Bg4 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Rb1 O-O Be2 cxd4 cxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxa2 O-O Bg4 Bg5 h6 Be3 Nc6 d5 Bxf3 gxf3 Nd4 Bxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4 Qxe2 Kg2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O Bh4 b4 Nb1 Nc5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd2 d5 e5 fxe5 fxe5 Bg7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Bd3 Bb7 Rhe1 h6 Qh3 O-O-O Bh4 b4 Nb1 Nc5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd2 d5 e5 fxe5 fxe5 Bg7 N2f3 h5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 b5 a4 bxa4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O Bg4 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 b5 a4 bxa4 Rxa4 e6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Rb1 O-O Be2 cxd4 cxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxa2 O-O Bg4 Bg5 h6 Be3 Nc6 d5 Bxf3 gxf3 Nd4 Bd3 a5 f4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Rb1 O-O Be2 cxd4 cxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxa2 O-O Bg4 Bg5 h6 Be3 Nc6 d5 Bxf3 gxf3 Nd4 Bd3 a5 f4 Rfd8 Rxb7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O Bg4 h3 Bxf3 Bxf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 b5 a4 bxa4 Rxa4 e6 Bb5 Bd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O Bg4 h3 Bxf3 Bxf3 Nc6 Ne2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6 a4 Kf7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6 a4 Kf7 a5 c4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f4 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Bb5 Bd7 Bxd7 Nfxd7 d5 b5 Qe2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6 a4 Kf7 a5 c4 Nd4 b5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6 a4 Kf7 a5 c4 Nd4 b5 Nxe6 Kxe6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bd7 Nb1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6 a4 Kf7 a5 c4 Nd4 b5 Nxe6 Kxe6 b3 cxb3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bd7 Nb1 Qb4 Qe3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6 a4 Kf7 a5 c4 Nd4 b5 Nxe6 Kxe6 b3 cxb3 cxb3 Ne7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bd7 Nb1 Qb4 Qe3 Ne7 a3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 a3 Nb6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6 h4 h5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6 h4 h5 g4 hxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nc3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Nd5 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bd7 Nb1 Qb4 Qe3 Ne7 a3 Qa4 f5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6 h4 h5 g4 hxg4 h5 Nxh5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bd7 Nb1 Qb4 Qe3 Ne7 a3 Qa4 f5 Rc8 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nc3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Nd5 b6 Bb4 Qc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bd7 Nb1 Qb4 Qe3 Ne7 a3 Qa4 f5 Rc8 Nc3 Qc6 Rf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Nb3 Qa3 Bxf6 gxf6 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bd7 Nb1 Qb4 Qe3 Ne7 a3 Qa4 f5 Rc8 Nc3 Qc6 Rf3 Qc7 Rd1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O f6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 c5 Nb3 Qxd1 Rxd1 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nc3 Bd6 Be3 b6 a4 Kf7 a5 c4 Nd4 b5 Nxe6 Kxe6 b3 cxb3 cxb3 Ne7 Rac1 Ba3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nc3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Nd5 b6 Bb4 Qc6 Bb5 Qb7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6 h4 h5 g4 hxg4 h5 Nxh5 Rdg1 Qa5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6 h4 h5 g4 hxg4 h5 Nxh5 Rdg1 Qa5 Bh6 Bf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nc3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Nd5 b6 Bb4 Qc6 Bb5 Qb7 Qf3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6 h4 h5 g4 hxg4 h5 Nxh5 Rdg1 Qa5 Bh6 Bf6 fxg4 Bxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2001)
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 a6 h4 h5 g4 hxg4 h5 Nxh5 Rdg1 Qa5 Bh6 Bf6 fxg4 Bxg4 Bf4 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 f3 O-O Be3 c5 Nge2 Nc6 d5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 f3 O-O Be3 c5 Nge2 Nc6 d5 Ne5 Ng3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Qxe3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 a6 Bd3 Ne7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 a6 Bd3 Ne7 O-O Nbc6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Qxe3 Rxe3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Qxe3 Rxe3 Bd7 Nbd2 Rfc8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Nf3 Bg7 e3

Transpose to wikichess #74625#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Qxe3 Rxe3 Bd7 Nbd2 Rfc8 a5 Nf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 a6 Bd3 Ne7 O-O Nbc6 c3 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 g3 e5 Nde2 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 f4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Qxe3 Rxe3 Bd7 Nbd2 Rfc8 a5 Nf4 Bf1 Ne7

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 a6 Bd3 Ne7 O-O Nbc6 c3 Nxd4 cxd4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Qxe3 Rxe3 Bd7 Nbd2 Rfc8 a5 Nf4 Bf1 Ne7 g3 Nfg6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2063)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 a6 Bd3 Ne7 O-O Nbc6 c3 Nxd4 cxd4 Nc6 Be3 d5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2064)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Nf3 Bxc5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nge7 Qe2 Ng6 c3 O-O Re1 Qb6 a4 a6 Be3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Qxe3 Rxe3 Bd7 Nbd2 Rfc8 a5 Nf4 Bf1 Ne7 g3 Nfg6 Nb3 Nf5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 g3 e5 Nde2 Be6 Bg2 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Nd5 Qc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 g3 e5 Nde2 Be6 Bg2 Nbd7 a4 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Nd5 Qc5 c3 e6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 f4 b5 a3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 Nf3 Qc7 a4 b6 Qd2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Nd5 Qc5 c3 e6 cxd4 Qd6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 d4 c6 Nf3 Bf5 Bc4 Nf6

Transpose to wikichess #13780#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 Nf3 Qc7 a4 b6 Qd2 Bg7 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7 Rc1 Nf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7 Rc1 Nf6 Bf3 Re8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7 Rc1 Nf6 Bf3 Re8 Nb6 Rb8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7 Rc1 Nf6 Bf3 Re8 Nb6 Rb8 Nc4 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7 Rc1 Nf6 Bf3 Re8 Nb6 Rb8 Nc4 Bxc5 Nxe6 Rxe6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7 Rc1 Nf6 Bf3 Re8 Nb6 Rb8 Nc4 Bxc5 Nxe6 Rxe6 Bxc5 d5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be2 a6 O-O Nf6 Be3 Bb4 Na4 O-O c4 Bd6 g3 Nxe4 c5 Be7 Rc1 Nf6 Bf3 Re8 Nb6 Rb8 Nc4 Bxc5 Nxe6 Rxe6 Bxc5 d5 Bxd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8 O-O Bxf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8 O-O Bxf3 gxf3 Bd6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8 O-O Bxf3 gxf3 Bd6 f4 Qh4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8 O-O Bxf3 gxf3 Bd6 f4 Qh4 c3 g5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8 O-O Bxf3 gxf3 Bd6 f4 Qh4 c3 g5 cxd4 Qh3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Qb6 Nc3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Nd5 Qc5 c3 e6 cxd4 Qd6 Nc3 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8 O-O Bxf3 gxf3 Bd6 f4 Qh4 c3 g5 cxd4 Qh3 Re1 gxf4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Bb5 Nd4 Bc4 Bc5 Nxe5 Qe7 Nf3 d5 Bxd5 Bg4 d3 O-O-O Be3 Nxd5 Nxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Re8 O-O Bxf3 gxf3 Bd6 f4 Qh4 c3 g5 cxd4 Qh3 Re1 gxf4 Bxf4 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1927)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 c6 h3 Nbd7 f4 b5 a3 Nb6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1911)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 Nc3 h6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1911)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 Nc3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 a3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1911)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 Nc3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 a3 Nc6 e3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1911)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 Nc3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 a3 Nc6 e3 g5 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1911)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O Bg4 h3 h5 d3 Qf6 Nbd2 Bd6 Re1 Ne7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ngf6 Bd3 c5 c3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ngf6 Bd3 c5 c3 Nxe4 Bxe4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Nf3 Ngf6 Bd3 c5 c3 Nxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qd2 O-O Ra1 Nf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qd2 O-O Ra1 Nf6 Ra7 Re8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qd2 O-O Ra1 Nf6 Ra7 Re8 Bxf6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qd2 O-O Ra1 Nf6 Ra7 Re8 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qa5 Qxa5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 Nge2 Nf6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 d6 O-O g6 d4 c4 a4 Bg7 Bg5 Nd7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qd2 O-O Ra1 Nf6 Ra7 Re8 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qa5 Qxa5 Rxa5 Rb8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4 Bxf3 gxf3

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4 Bxf3 gxf3 Qxd4 Bxe7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Bxc6 dxc6 Re1 Qd6 d3 O-O Bg5 h6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4 Bxf3 gxf3 Qxd4 Bxe7 Qxa4 Bxa4

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7 Rad1 b6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7 Rad1 b6 c4 c5

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4 Bxf3 gxf3 Qxd4 Bxe7 Qxa4 Bxa4 Bxa1 Bxf8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7 Rad1 b6 c4 c5 Rfe1 Rd7

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7 Rad1 b6 c4 c5 Rfe1 Rd7 Kf1 h6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7 Rad1 b6 c4 c5 Rfe1 Rd7 Kf1 h6 h3 Kd8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7 Rad1 b6 c4 c5 Rfe1 Rd7 Kf1 h6 h3 Kd8 Ke2 Re8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2127)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Ke8 Ne4 Be6 b3 Rd8 Bb2 Be7 Rad1 b6 c4 c5 Rfe1 Rd7 Kf1 h6 h3 Kd8 Ke2 Re8 Rg1 Kc8

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Bc4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6 e5 dxe5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 O-O c3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Nc6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 O-O c3 Nbd7 Qb3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Nc6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 b6 O-O-O Bb7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 g6 d4 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6 e5 dxe5 Nxe5 O-O c3 Nbd7 Qb3 Nxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1892)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Nc6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 b6 O-O-O Bb7 Kb1 Qc7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4 Bxf3 gxf3 Qxd4 Bxe7 Qxa4 Bxa4 Bxa1 Bxf8 Kxf8 Rxa1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1 Nfd7 Rg1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3 h5 Be1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4 Bxf3 gxf3 Qxd4 Bxe7 Qxa4 Bxa4 Bxa1 Bxf8 Kxf8 Rxa1 Na6 Rc1

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Trond Ponce    (2143)
d4 d5 c4 Nf6 cxd5 g6 Qa4 c6 Nc3 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Bg5 c5 Bb5 Bg4 O-O cxd4 cxd4 Bxf3 gxf3 Qxd4 Bxe7 Qxa4 Bxa4 Bxa1 Bxf8 Kxf8 Rxa1 Na6 Rc1 b6 Rc6

============

Contributors : Trond Ponce


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1 Nfd7 Rg1 h6 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3 h5 Be1 g5 Rc1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1 Nfd7 Rg1 h6 f4 Be7 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3 h5 Be1 g5 Rc1 Ng6 c5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1 Nfd7 Rg1 h6 f4 Be7 h4 Nc4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1 Nfd7 Rg1 h6 f4 Be7 h4 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1 Nfd7 Rg1 h6 f4 Be7 h4 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g5 hxg5 hxg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 g4 Nb6 a3 Rc8 Kb1 Nfd7 Rg1 h6 f4 Be7 h4 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g5 hxg5 hxg5 Nc5 b3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1903)
c4 e5 Nc3 d6 g3 f5 d4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1903)
c4 e5 Nc3 d6 g3 f5 d4 Be7 Bg2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3 h5 Be1 g5 Rc1 Ng6 c5 Nf6 Nb5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1903)
c4 e5 Nc3 d6 g3 f5 d4 Be7 Bg2 Nf6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3 h5 Be1 g5 Rc1 Ng6 c5 Nf6 Nb5 Rf7 Qc2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1903)
c4 e5 Nc3 d6 g3 f5 d4 Be7 Bg2 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Ng5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1903)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Bb7 g4 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1903)
c4 e5 Nc3 d6 g3 f5 d4 Be7 Bg2 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Ng5 c6 Nh3

Transpose to wikichess #16251#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O Bxc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Ne4 Qxb6 axb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3 h5 Be1 g5 Rc1 Ng6 c5 Nf6 Nb5 Rf7 Qc2 Ne8 Nf2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 g4 b4 Nce2 h6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 d5 Bf4 e5 Bh2 dxe4 g5 hxg5 hxg5 Rxh2 Rxh2 exd4 Rh8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 Ne1 Nd7 Nd3 f5 Bd2 f4 f3 h5 Be1 g5 Rc1 Ng6 c5 Nf6 Nb5 Rf7 Qc2 Ne8 Nf2 g4 fxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 g4 b4 Nce2 h6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 d5 Bf4 e5 Bh2 dxe4 g5 hxg5 hxg5 Rxh2 Rxh2 exd4 Rh8 Nd5 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Ne4 Qxb6 axb6 Bf3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Ne4 Qxb6 axb6 Bf3 Bd7 Nd4 f6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Ne4 Qxb6 axb6 Bf3 Bd7 Nd4 f6 exf6 gxf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2121)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 Qa5 a3 Qb6 Be2 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Ncb5 Nxd4 Bxd4 O-O Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Ne4 Qxb6 axb6 Bf3 Bd7 Nd4 f6 exf6 gxf6 Rd1 Rac8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 a6 Bd3 c5 dxc5 Nf6 exd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 a6 Bd3 c5 dxc5 Nf6 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 Nf3 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 Nf3 Bxc5 Bxc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 a6 Bd3 c5 dxc5 Nf6 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 Bxc5 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 Nf3 Bxc5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Qb6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 a6 Bd3 c5 dxc5 Nf6 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 Bxc5 O-O O-O Nb3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 Nf3 Bxc5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qd4 Qb6 a4 Ne7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d3 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 d6 a4 Na5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d3 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1932)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d3 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 c5 Nbd2 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6 cxd6 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Qf6 Be3 Bc5

Transpose to wikichess #7711#

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6 cxd6 O-O Qa3 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6 cxd6 O-O Qa3 b5 Be2 b4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6 cxd6 O-O Qa3 b5 Be2 b4 Qg3 Nc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
d4 d5 Bg5 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Nd7 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6 cxd6 O-O Qa3 b5 Be2 b4 Qg3 Nc5 Be3 Qxd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
d4 d5 Bg5 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Nd7 Nbd2 h6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
d4 d5 Bg5 c6 e3 Qb6 Qc1 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 Nd7 Nbd2 h6 Bf4 c5 a4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Be7 c4 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Be7 c4 O-O Rc1 Rfc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Be7 c4 O-O Rc1 Rfc8 Be2 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Be7 c4 O-O Rc1 Rfc8 Be2 a5 Na1 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6 cxd6 O-O Qa3 b5 Be2 b4 Qg3 Nc5 Be3 Qxd6 Rc1 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 c6 Nc3 d5 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 dxc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Be7 c4 O-O Rc1 Rfc8 Be2 a5 Na1 a4 Nc2 Bd8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 c6 Nc3 d5 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 c6 Nc3 d5 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd6 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 Be7 c4 O-O Rc1 Rfc8 Be2 a5 Na1 a4 Nc2 Bd8 Na3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 c6 Nc3 d5 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd6 O-O O-O d4 e5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 c5 Rb8 Nxd6 Bxd6 cxd6 O-O Qa3 b5 Be2 b4 Qg3 Nc5 Be3 Qxd6 Rc1 Ne4 Qf3 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bg7 Qh5 f4 Rfd1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bg7 Qh5 f4 Rfd1 O-O c3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bg7 Qh5 f4 Rfd1 O-O c3 Rb8 Rac1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bg7 Qh5 f4 Rfd1 O-O c3 Rb8 Rac1 Qd7 Qh4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bg7 Qh5 f4 Rfd1 O-O c3 Rb8 Rac1 Qd7 Qh4 Qd8 Qxd8

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2014)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 O-O Bg7 Qh5 f4 Rfd1 O-O c3 Rb8 Rac1 Qd7 Qh4 Qd8 Qxd8 Rfxd8 Nc2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2 c6 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2 c6 Ne4 Qg6 Qb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2 c6 Ne4 Qg6 Qb3 Bc7 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2 c6 Ne4 Qg6 Qb3 Bc7 f4 a5 Rae1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2 c6 Ne4 Qg6 Qb3 Bc7 f4 a5 Rae1 Rb8 Nd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 Bb5 Qc7 Nf3 Bxc5 Bxc5 Qxc5 c4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2 c6 Ne4 Qg6 Qb3 Bc7 f4 a5 Rae1 Rb8 Nd2 Bd7 c5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2194)
Nf3 d5 c4 d4 g3 Nc6 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 O-O Bd6 e3 O-O exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 exd4 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nd2 c6 Ne4 Qg6 Qb3 Bc7 f4 a5 Rae1 Rb8 Nd2 Bd7 c5 Be6 Qc2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
g3 g5 Bg2 Bg7 d4 h6 Nc3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
g3 g5 Bg2 Bg7 d4 h6 Nc3 Nc6 d5 Ne5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Qe2 Ndf6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
g3 g5 Bg2 Bg7 d4 h6 Nc3 Nc6 d5 Ne5 Nf3 d6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Qe2 Ndf6 Bf4 Nxe4 Qxe4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Qe2 Ndf6 Bf4 Nxe4 Qxe4 Nf6 Qd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
g3 g5 Bg2 Bg7 d4 h6 Nc3 Nc6 d5 Ne5 Nf3 d6 Nxe5 Bxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Qe2 Ndf6 Bf4 Nxe4 Qxe4 Nf6 Qd3 g6 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
g3 g5 Bg2 Bg7 d4 h6 Nc3 Nc6 d5 Ne5 Nf3 d6 Nxe5 Bxe5 Qd3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
g3 g5 Bg2 Bg7 d4 h6 Nc3 Nc6 d5 Ne5 Nf3 d6 Nxe5 Bxe5 Qd3 Bd7 Be3 c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1912)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 Bb5 Qc7 Nf3 Bxc5 Bxc5 Qxc5 Qe2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1853)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 c5 dxc5 e6 Be3 Nd7 Nf3 Bxc5 Bxc5 Nxc5 Bb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Qc2 Nbd7 Nd2 a6 Rd1 Qb6 Nf1 O-O-O Ne3 h5 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Qc2 Nbd7 Nd2 a6 Rd1 Qb6 Nf1 O-O-O Ne3 h5 h3 c5 d5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Qc2 Nbd7 Nd2 a6 Rd1 Qb6 Nf1 O-O-O Ne3 h5 h3 c5 d5 exd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Qc2 Nbd7 Nd2 a6 Rd1 Qb6 Nf1 O-O-O Ne3 h5 h3 c5 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd6 Bxd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Qc2 Nbd7 Nd2 a6 Rd1 Qb6 Nf1 O-O-O Ne3 h5 h3 c5 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O O-O Qd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6 Qd2 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O O-O Qd2 Re8 Rfe1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6 Qd2 Nxd4 Bxd4 Bxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Nc4 Qd3 g6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6 Qd2 Nxd4 Bxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4 Qa5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Nd5 Qd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Nd5 Qd3 O-O e3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7 Be3 Bg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6 Qd2 Nxd4 Bxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4 Qa5 O-O-O Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6 Qd2 Nxd4 Bxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4 Qa5 O-O-O Be6 h4 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7 Be3 Bg5 Bf2 Qf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7 Be3 Bg5 Bf2 Qf6 Bc2 Qh6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Nd5 Qd3 O-O e3 Be6 a3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6 Qd2 Nxd4 Bxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4 Qa5 O-O-O Be6 h4 O-O-O Qa7 Kc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7 Be3 Bg5 Bf2 Qf6 Bc2 Qh6 h3 Be3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7 Be3 Bg5 Bf2 Qf6 Bc2 Qh6 h3 Be3 Qe2 Bxf2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6 Be2 Nb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 f3 Nbc6 Bf2 Ng6 Qd2 Nxd4 Bxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4 Qa5 O-O-O Be6 h4 O-O-O Qa7 Kc7 g3 Qc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 g5 Bg3 Nh5 Ne4 Qxa2 Rb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O O-O Qd2 Re8 Rfe1 Rc8 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1 Rc8 Rhg1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7 Be3 Bg5 Bf2 Qf6 Bc2 Qh6 h3 Be3 Qe2 Bxf2 Rxf2 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Nd5 Qd3 O-O e3 Be6 a3 Qe8 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Nc4 Qd3 g6 Qe2 Re8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6 Be2 Nb6 Rdf1 b4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1 Rc8 Rhg1 Nb6 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Nc4 Qd3 g6 Qe2 Re8 h3 Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O O-O Qd2 Re8 Rfe1 Rc8 h4 Rc7 Nc1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1 Rc8 Rhg1 Nb6 h3 d5 g4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Nd5 Qd3 O-O e3 Be6 a3 Qe8 Nbd2 Nb6 Rf2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O O-O Qd2 Re8 Rfe1 Rc8 h4 Rc7 Nc1 Qc8 Qe2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Nc4 Qd3 g6 Qe2 Re8 h3 Be6 a4 b4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1 Rc8 Rhg1 Nb6 h3 d5 g4 b4 axb4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3 Ndf6 f5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1 Rc8 Rhg1 Nb6 h3 d5 g4 b4 axb4 hxg4 hxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1 Rc8 Rhg1 Nb6 h3 d5 g4 b4 axb4 hxg4 hxg4 Bxb4 g5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bg4 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Nc4 Qd3 g6 Qe2 Re8 h3 Be6 a4 b4 cxb4 Bxb4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O O-O Qd2 Re8 Rfe1 Rc8 h4 Rc7 Nc1 Qc8 Qe2 Rc4 Nb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 Be2 Be7 Kb1 Rc8 Rhg1 Nb6 h3 d5 g4 b4 axb4 hxg4 hxg4 Bxb4 g5 Nh5 Nb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Nbd7 Bg5 Be7 a4 b6 Bg2 Bb7 O-O O-O Qd2 Re8 Rfe1 Rc8 h4 Rc7 Nc1 Qc8 Qe2 Rc4 Nb3 Qc7 Nd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Nd5 Qd3 O-O e3 Be6 a3 Qe8 Nbd2 Nb6 Rf2 Rd8 Raf1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Nb6 b3 Be7 Bb2 f6 d4 e4 Ne1 f5 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Nd5 Qd3 O-O e3 Be6 a3 Qe8 Nbd2 Nb6 Rf2 Rd8 Raf1 Qh5 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3 Ndf6 f5 g5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 Ne4 Qb4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 Ne4 Qb4 a6 Nd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 Ne4 Qb4 a6 Nd6 Nxd6 Qxd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 Ne4 Qb4 a6 Nd6 Nxd6 Qxd6 exd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Bb7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 Ne4 Qb4 a6 Nd6 Nxd6 Qxd6 exd4 Nxd4 Qf6 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 Bd6 g4 h6 Rg1 e5 cxd5 cxd5 g5 hxg5 Nb5 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 Ne4 Qb4 a6 Nd6 Nxd6 Qxd6 exd4 Nxd4 Qf6 Qxd5 Ne5 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3 Ndf6 f5 g5 cxd5 Qd6 Nf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 Be7 Bd3 O-O O-O a6 Nc3 f5 f3 Nd7 Be3 Bg5 Bf2 Qf6 Bc2 Qh6 h3 Be3 Qe2 Bxf2 Rxf2 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Bb7 Nc3 f5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3 Ndf6 f5 g5 cxd5 Qd6 Nf4 gxf4 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 c4 Bg7 g3 O-O Bg2 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3 Ndf6 f5 g5 cxd5 Qd6 Nf4 gxf4 Ne4 Qxd5 Rxf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6 Be2 Nb6 Rdf1 b4 Nd1 Na4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 c4 Bg7 g3 O-O Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Bb7 Nc3 f5 Qc2 Qf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3 Ndf6 f5 g5 cxd5 Qd6 Nf4 gxf4 Ne4 Qxd5 Rxf4 Nxe4 Qxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 c4 Bg7 g3 O-O Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 O-O Nb6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Bb7 Nc3 f5 Qc2 Qf6 g4 fxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6 Be2 Nb6 Rdf1 b4 Nd1 Na4 Ng5 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
d4 d5 c4 c6 e3 Nf6 Bd3 e5 Ne2 Bd6 dxe5 Bxe5 O-O Bxh2 Kxh2 Ng4 Kg3 h5 f4 Nd7 Nbc3 h4 Kh3 Ndf6 f5 g5 cxd5 Qd6 Nf4 gxf4 Ne4 Qxd5 Rxf4 Nxe4 Qxg4 Nf6 Qe2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 c4 Bg7 g3 O-O Bg2 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 O-O Nb6 Nc3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6 fxe6 Ne2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6 fxe6 Ne2 d5 Ng3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6 fxe6 Ne2 d5 Ng3 Nd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Bb7 Nc3 f5 Qc2 Qf6 g4 fxg4 h3 Qh4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6 Be2 Nb6 Rdf1 b4 Nd1 Na4 Ng5 Rb8 Bh5 g6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Bb7 Nc3 f5 Qc2 Qf6 g4 fxg4 h3 Qh4 O-O-O Bc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6 Be2 Nb6 Rdf1 b4 Nd1 Na4 Ng5 Rb8 Bh5 g6 Bg4 Qa5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6 fxe6 Ne2 d5 Ng3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 h4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6 fxe6 Ne2 d5 Ng3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 h4 Rc8 h5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6 fxe6 Ne2 d5 Ng3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 h4 Rc8 h5 g5 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Nc3 e5 d3 Nge7 Bc4 O-O a4 h6 Re1 d6 Bd2 Kh7 h3 Be6 Bxe6 fxe6 Ne2 d5 Ng3 Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 h4 Rc8 h5 g5 Rc1 Nc6 Qg4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2227)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 Kb1 b5 f5 c4 fxe6 fxe6 Be2 Nb6 Rdf1 b4 Nd1 Na4 Ng5 Rb8 Bh5 g6 Bg4 Qa5 Qf2 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 c4 a6 Qa4 Nd7 Be3 b6 Bg5 f6 Bd2 Bb7 Nc3 f5 Qc2 Qf6 g4 fxg4 h3 Qh4 O-O-O Bc8 Be2 gxh3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 a5 b5 Nd7 e3

Transpose to wikichess #54216#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 b5 e4 Bb7 Bd3 Nf6 Qe2 c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 b5 e4 Bb7 Bd3 Nf6 Qe2 c5 c3 a6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 b5 e4 Bb7 Bd3 Nf6 Qe2 c5 c3 a6 Nf3 e6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 b5 e4 Bb7 Bd3 Nf6 Qe2 c5 c3 a6 Nf3 e6 O-O Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 b5 e4 Bb7 Bd3 Nf6 Qe2 c5 c3 a6 Nf3 e6 O-O Be7 dxc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1904)
d4 b5 e4 Bb7 Bd3 Nf6 Qe2 c5 c3 a6 Nf3 e6 O-O Be7 dxc5 Bxc5 a4 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 g4 b4 Nce2 h6 O-O-O Qc7 Qxb4 d5 Qc3 Qxc3 Nxc3 e5 Nc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 g4 b4 Nce2 h6 O-O-O Qc7 Qxb4 d5 Qc3 Qxc3 Nxc3 e5 Nc6 d4 Na4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Qg6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 g4 b4 Nce2 h6 O-O-O Qc7 Qxb4 d5 Qc3 Qxc3 Nxc3 e5 Nc6 d4 Na4 dxe3 Nb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Ba6 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3 e4 Be2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Qg6 b3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Ba6 O-O b4 Na4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 g4 b4 Nce2 h6 O-O-O Qc7 Qxb4 d5 Qc3 Qxc3 Nxc3 e5 Nc6 d4 Na4 dxe3 Nb6 Bb7 Nxa8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Qg6 b3 Bd7 f4 exf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 Qd2 Nbd7 g4 b4 Nce2 h6 O-O-O Qc7 Qxb4 d5 Qc3 Qxc3 Nxc3 e5 Nc6 d4 Na4 dxe3 Nb6 Bb7 Nxa8 Bxa8 Na5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Qg6 b3 Bd7 f4 exf4 Rxf4 Bh3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Qg6 b3 Bd7 f4 exf4 Rxf4 Bh3 Bg4 Bxg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Qg6 b3 Bd7 f4 exf4 Rxf4 Bh3 Bg4 Bxg4 Rxg4 Qe6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3 e4 Be2 Nfd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e5 Nb5 d6 N1c3 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Nf6 c4 b4 Nxf6 Qxf6 Nc2 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Qg6 b3 Bd7 f4 exf4 Rxf4 Bh3 Bg4 Bxg4 Rxg4 Qe6 Bb2 Bf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6 Bxh6 gxh6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 Be7 Bc2 d4 Nb3 d3 Bb1 Nxb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 Be7 Bc2 d4 Nb3 d3 Bb1 Nxb3 axb3 Bf5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3 e4 Be2 Nfd7 O-O Ne5 Bh5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 Be7 Bc2 d4 Nb3 d3 Bb1 Nxb3 axb3 Bf5 Be3 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6 Bxh6 gxh6 Qxh6 Bg7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 Be7 Bc2 d4 Nb3 d3 Bb1 Nxb3 axb3 Bf5 Be3 O-O Nd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3 e4 Be2 Nfd7 O-O Ne5 Bh5 Qd7 f3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6 Bxh6 gxh6 Qxh6 Bg7 Qh7 Kf8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6 Bxh6 gxh6 Qxh6 Bg7 Qh7 Kf8 h5 Qf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 Be7 Bc2 d4 Nb3 d3 Bb1 Nxb3 axb3 Bf5 Be3 O-O Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 c5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6 Bxh6 gxh6 Qxh6 Bg7 Qh7 Kf8 h5 Qf6 h6 Bh8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 Be7 Bc2 d4 Nb3 d3 Bb1 Nxb3 axb3 Bf5 Be3 O-O Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 c5 Bxd3 cxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 Be7 Bc2 d4 Nb3 d3 Bb1 Nxb3 axb3 Bf5 Be3 O-O Nd4 Nxd4 cxd4 c5 Bxd3 cxd4 Bxd4 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3 e4 Be2 Nfd7 O-O Ne5 Bh5 Qd7 f3 exf3 Nxf3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3 e4 Be2 Nfd7 O-O Ne5 Bh5 Qd7 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Na6 Qe2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6 Bxh6 gxh6 Qxh6 Bg7 Qh7 Kf8 h5 Qf6 h6 Bh8 Ng5 Bg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2031)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O h3 e5 d5 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 gxf5 Nh4 Nf6 Bg5 Qe8 Bd3 e4 Be2 Nfd7 O-O Ne5 Bh5 Qd7 f3 exf3 Nxf3 Na6 Qe2 f4 gxf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2304)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Re8 O-O-O Nc6 Bd3 Bf6 Kb1 Rb8 h4 h6 Bxh6 gxh6 Qxh6 Bg7 Qh7 Kf8 h5 Qf6 h6 Bh8 Ng5 Bg4 Rde1 Nb4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1937)
c4 Nf6 g3 c6 Bg2 d5 Nf3 dxc4 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1937)
c4 Nf6 g3 c6 Bg2 d5 Nf3 dxc4 O-O Nbd7 Na3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1937)
c4 Nf6 g3 c6 Bg2 d5 Nf3 dxc4 O-O Nbd7 Na3 Nb6 Qc2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1937)
c4 Nf6 g3 c6 Bg2 d5 Nf3 dxc4 O-O Nbd7 Na3 Nb6 Qc2 Qd5 Ne1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1937)
c4 Nf6 g3 c6 Bg2 d5 Nf3 dxc4 O-O Nbd7 Na3 Nb6 Qc2 Qd5 Ne1 Qd4 e3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1937)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O Bg4 Be3 Nc6 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1937)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Nf3 Bg7 Be2 O-O O-O Bg4 Be3 Nc6 h3 Bxf3 Bxf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Nc3 Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7 Ne4 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7 Ne4 b6 Ng3 h5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7 Ne4 b6 Rac1 h6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7 Ne4 b6 Rac1 h6 Ng3 h5

Transpose to wikichess #129992#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7 Ne4 b6 Ng3 h5 Rac1 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7 Ne4 b6 Ng3 h5 Rac1 h4 Ne4 Rh5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2338)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Rd1 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Be7 Ne4 b6 Ng3 h5 Rac1 h4 Ne4 Rh5 Bf4 Bd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Bb4 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Bd3 Ndf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Bd3 Ndf6 Ng5 Qd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Bb4 h3 Nf6 Bb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Bd3 Ndf6 Ng5 Qd5 N1f3 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Bb4 h3 Nf6 Bb5 O-O Bxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Bb4 h3 Nf6 Bb5 O-O Bxc6 bxc6 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 Be2 Nf6 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 Be2 Nf6 e5 Ne4 a3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 h6 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Nb4 Be2 Nf6 e5 Ne4 a3 Nxc3 bxc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Bd3 Ndf6 Ng5 Qd5 N1f3 h6 c4 Qa5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1922)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Bd3 Ndf6 Ng5 Qd5 N1f3 h6 c4 Qa5 Bd2 Qc7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5 Kb1 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4 Rc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4 Rc8 c3 Bh7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4 Rc8 c3 Bh7 fxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4 Rc8 c3 Bh7 fxe5 dxe5 d6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Bb4 Bg2 O-O O-O d6 d3 h6 Na4 a5 b3 Re8 Bb2 Bg4 h3 Bf5 e3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4 Rc8 c3 Bh7 fxe5 dxe5 d6 Bg5 Bf2 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 O-O Nbd7 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4 Rc8 c3 Bh7 fxe5 dxe5 d6 Bg5 Bf2 O-O a4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5 Kb1 O-O b3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5 Kb1 O-O b3 Nd7 Na4 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 Nc2 Ne7 h4 Bh6 a4 bxa4 Bc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 Nc2 Ne7 h4 Bh6 a4 bxa4 Bc4 O-O Rxa4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5 Kb1 O-O b3 Nd7 Na4 a5 Qe2 Ra8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5 Kb1 O-O b3 Nd7 Na4 a5 Qe2 Ra8 h4 Ba6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 Nc2 Ne7 h4 Bh6 a4 bxa4 Bc4 O-O Rxa4 a5 Nce3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5 Kb1 O-O b3 Nd7 Na4 a5 Qe2 Ra8 h4 Ba6 Qf3 Bb5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 Nc2 Ne7 h4 Bh6 a4 bxa4 Bc4 O-O Rxa4 a5 Nce3 Bd7 Nxe7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Qd2 Rb8 O-O-O d5 Kb1 O-O b3 Nd7 Na4 a5 Qe2 Ra8 h4 Ba6 Qf3 Bb5 exd5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 Nc2 Ne7 h4 Bh6 a4 bxa4 Bc4 O-O Rxa4 a5 Nce3 Bd7 Nxe7 Qxe7 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
b4 e6 a3 Nf6 e3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
b4 e6 a3 Nf6 e3 Be7 c4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
b4 e6 a3 Nf6 e3 Be7 c4 b6 d4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
b4 e6 a3 Nf6 e3 Be7 c4 b6 d4 c5 bxc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 a5 Qc2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
b4 e6 a3 Nf6 e3 Be7 c4 b6 d4 c5 bxc5 bxc5 d5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
b4 e6 a3 Nf6 e3 Be7 c4 b6 d4 c5 bxc5 bxc5 d5 exd5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
b4 e6 a3 Nf6 e3 Be7 c4 b6 d4 c5 bxc5 bxc5 d5 exd5 cxd5 d6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 Nc6 Qd2 g6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5 a5 Na4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5 a5 Na4 Ba6 c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8 Re1 c5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 a5 Qc2 Qb6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 a5 Qc2 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 e6 a3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 Nc6 Qd2 g6 Bxf6 exf6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (1993)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 Nc6 Qd2 g6 Bxf6 exf6 O-O-O Nxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8 Re1 c5 Bd2 Bc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 e6 a3 d5 e3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 e6 a3 d5 e3 c5 b3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 Nge2 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 e6 a3 d5 e3 c5 b3 Nc6 Bb2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5 a5 Na4 Ba6 c4 Nb6 Bd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8 Re1 c5 Bd2 Bc8 h3 Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Nc3 Qc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5 a5 Na4 Ba6 c4 Nb6 Bd2 Nxa4 bxa4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qe2 Nd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 h3 Be6 Nc3 Qc4 Qxc4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 a5 Qc2 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 Bf5 b3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8 Re1 c5 Bd2 Bc8 h3 Be6 Nf1 h6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 Nge2 Nc6 a3 Bxc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 e6 a3 d5 e3 c5 b3 Nc6 Bb2 d4 exd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5 a5 Na4 Ba6 c4 Nb6 Bd2 Nxa4 bxa4 Rb8 Rab1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 a5 Qc2 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 Bf5 b3 Rfc8 Rac1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8 Re1 c5 Bd2 Bc8 h3 Be6 Nf1 h6 Ng3 Qd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5 a5 Na4 Ba6 c4 Nb6 Bd2 Nxa4 bxa4 Rb8 Rab1 Qc7 Bc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8 Re1 c5 Bd2 Bc8 h3 Be6 Nf1 h6 Ng3 Qd7 Bxe6 fxe6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2312)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 e6 Bxc6 bxc6 b3 d5 d3 Nf6 O-O Be7 Qe2 Nd7 Re1 O-O Nc3 Re8 Bf4 Bb7 e5 a5 Na4 Ba6 c4 Nb6 Bd2 Nxa4 bxa4 Rb8 Rab1 Qc7 Bc3 Red8 Red1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 Nge2 Nc6 a3 Bxc3 Nxc3 dxe4

Transpose to wikichess #48621#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 a5 Qc2 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 Bf5 b3 Rfc8 Rac1 h6 Bd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 e6 a3 d5 e3 c5 b3 Nc6 Bb2 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1936)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 e6 a3 d5 e3 c5 b3 Nc6 Bb2 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 d3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 d3 Bg7

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 d3 Bg7 g3 c6

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 c3 Nf6 Re1 O-O h3 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 d4 d5 e5 Ne4 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 a5 Qc2 Qb6 Nc3 Nxc3 Qxc3 Bf5 b3 Rfc8 Rac1 h6 Bd2 g5 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
e4 e5 Nf3 d6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Qf6 Nc3 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
e4 e5 Nf3 d6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Qf6 Nc3 Qxd4 Nxd4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 d3 Bg7 g3 c6 Nc3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3 Be7 Nc3 d6 a4 Na5 Ba2 b4 Ne2 O-O Ng3 Rb8 Re1 c5 Bd2 Bc8 h3 Be6 Nf1 h6 Ng3 Qd7 Bxe6 fxe6 Be3 Bd8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 d3 Bg7 g3 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e4 dxe4

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 d3 Bg7 g3 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 d3 Bg7 g3 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1 Kxd1 O-O

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 d3 Bg7 g3 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1 Kxd1 O-O e5 Bg4

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Qc7 Bf4

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Aaron Hanson    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Qc7 Bf4 e5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Aaron Hanson


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5 a3 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5 a3 Rb8 b4 Na4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5 a3 Rb8 b4 Na4 Nxa4 bxa4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5 a3 Rb8 b4 Na4 Nxa4 bxa4 Rd3 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bf5 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Bxc2 Qxc2 Nc4 Nd2 c5 Nxc4 dxc4 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Qd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5 a3 Rb8 b4 Na4 Nxa4 bxa4 Rd3 Nc4 Bc5 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5 a3 Rb8 b4 Na4 Nxa4 bxa4 Rd3 Nc4 Bc5 a5 Bxf8 Rxf8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2205)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Qb6 O-O-O Qc7 h4 b5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qf2 Na5 a3 Rb8 b4 Na4 Nxa4 bxa4 Rd3 Nc4 Bc5 a5 Bxf8 Rxf8 Qc5 Qb7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bf5 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Bxc2 Qxc2 Nc4 a4 c6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bf5 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Bxc2 Qxc2 Nc4 a4 c6 Nd2 c5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bf5 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Bxc2 Qxc2 Nc4 a4 c6 Nd2 c5 dxc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 d4 exd4 e5 Ne4 cxd4 Bf5 Nc3 Nxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bc2 Bxc2 Qxc2 Nc4 a4 c6 Nd2 c5 dxc5 Bxc5 Nxc4 dxc4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4 d6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4 d6 Bg5 e5 c3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4 d6 Bg5 e5 c3 Bf5 Nfd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4 d6 Bg5 e5 c3 Bf5 Nfd2 Qd7 Nxf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O Nb6 d3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4 Bxe6 Nxe6

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4 Bxe6 Nxe6 cxd4 Ncxd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Nf3 Bc5 e3 Nc6 Be2 O-O O-O Ngxe5 Nc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4 Bxe6 Nxe6 cxd4 Ncxd4 a4 Bb4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4 Bxe6 Nxe6 cxd4 Ncxd4 a4 Bb4 axb5 Nxb5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4 d6 Bg5 e5 c3 Bf5 Nfd2 Qd7 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4 Bxe6 Nxe6 cxd4 Ncxd4 a4 Bb4 axb5 Nxb5 Qa4 Bxd2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4 d6 Bg5 e5 c3 Bf5 Nfd2 Qd7 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Rxf6 Ne4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d6 Nc3 g6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O Nb6 d3 Bd7 a4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O Nb6 d3 Bd7 a4 d4 exd4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2241)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 d3 Nf6 Nc3 O-O e5 Ng4 Bxc6 bxc6 Re1 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Qe2 e6 Ne4 d6 Bg5 e5 c3 Bf5 Nfd2 Qd7 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Rxf6 Ne4 Rf7 b3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O Nb6 d3 Bd7 a4 d4 exd4 Qxb4 Ba3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O Nb6 d3 Bd7 a4 d4 exd4 Qxb4 Ba3 Qxa4 Qxa4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O Nb6 d3 Bd7 a4 d4 exd4 Qxb4 Ba3 Qxa4 Qxa4 Bxa4 dxe5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
b4 e5 a3 d5 Bb2 Bd6 Nf3 Qe7 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nc3 Nf6 Nb5 Nbd7 Nxd6 Qxd6 e3 O-O Be2 Re8 O-O Nb6 d3 Bd7 a4 d4 exd4 Qxb4 Ba3 Qxa4 Qxa4 Bxa4 dxe5 Bc6 g3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 f5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 e4 Bg7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4 Bxe6 Nxe6 cxd4 Ncxd4 a4 Bb4 axb5 Nxb5 Qa4 Bxd2 Rd1 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2058)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 b5 Bb3 d5 dxe5 Be6 Nbd2 Nc5 c3 d4 Bxe6 Nxe6 cxd4 Ncxd4 a4 Bb4 axb5 Nxb5 Qa4 Bxd2 Rd1 O-O Bxd2 c5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 f5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 e4 Bg7 Bg3 d6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 f5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 e4 Bg7 Bg3 d6 exf5 Bxf5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 f5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 e4 Bg7 Bg3 d6 exf5 Bxf5 Nc3 e6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 f5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 e4 Bg7 Bg3 d6 exf5 Bxf5 Nc3 e6 Qh5 Kd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1881)
d4 f5 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 e4 Bg7 Bg3 d6 exf5 Bxf5 Nc3 e6 Qh5 Kd7 O-O-O Ne7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1866)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Be3 Qf6 c3 Nge7 g3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1866)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Be3 Qf6 c3 Nge7 g3 d5 Bg2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1866)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Be3 Qf6 c3 Nge7 g3 d5 Bg2 dxe4 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
c4 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 a3 Nc6 b3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 a3 Nc6 b3 Nf6 Bb2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Be2 Nf6 Na3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 a3 Nc6 b3 Nf6 Bb2 Nxe4 Bd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Be2 Nf6 Na3 e6 Nc4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Be2 Nf6 Na3 e6 Nc4 Qd8 d4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 a3 Nc6 b3 Nf6 Bb2 Nxe4 Bd3 Nf6 Ng5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 a3 Nc6 b3 Nf6 Bb2 Nxe4 Bd3 Nf6 Ng5 d5 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Be2 Nf6 Na3 e6 Nc4 Qd8 d4 Nc6 Nfe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1810)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 a3 Nc6 b3 Nf6 Bb2 Nxe4 Bd3 Nf6 Ng5 d5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nxf7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e3 e5 c3 d5 Qb3

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e3 e5 c3 d5 Qb3 Nf6 Bb5

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e3 e5 c3 d5 Qb3 Nf6 Bb5 c6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 h6

Transpose to wikichess #53187#

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5 c3 Nc6 Nf3 Bd7 dxc5

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e3 e5 c3 d5 Qb3 Nf6 Bb5 c6 Bd3 Bd6 c4

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e3 e5 c3 d5 Qb3 Nf6 Bb5 c6 Bd3 Bd6 c4 O-O Nf3

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5 c3 Nc6 Nf3 Bd7 dxc5 Bxc5 Na3

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d4 exd4 e5 d5 Bb5 Ne4 Nxd4 Bc5 Bxc6 bxc6

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e3 e5 c3 d5 Qb3 Nf6 Bb5 c6 Bd3 Bd6 c4 O-O Nf3 e4 cxd5

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e3 e5 c3 d5 Qb3 Nf6 Bb5 c6 Bd3 Bd6 c4 O-O Nf3 e4 cxd5 cxd5 Ng5

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d4 exd4 e5 d5 Bb5 Ne4 Nxd4 Bc5 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Ba6

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 Nf6 e5 Ne4

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nf6

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nf6 Nbd2 c4

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nf6 Nbd2 c4 Bc2 Be7

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nc6 O-O Nf6 Nbd2 c4 Bc2 Be7 Re1 O-O

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
c4 g5 d4 f6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
e4 e6 b3 d5 Bb2 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Qe2 Be7 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 dxe4

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
e4 e6 b3 d5 Bb2 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Qe2 Be7 Nxe4 O-O Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e5 Nc3 d6 e4 g6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e5 Nc3 d6 e4 g6 Bd3 Bg7 Nge2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
e4 e6 b3 d5 Bb2 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Qe2 Be7 Nxe4 O-O Nf3 b6 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e5 Nc3 d6 e4 g6 Bd3 Bg7 Nge2 O-O Ng3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
e4 e6 b3 d5 Bb2 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Qe2 Be7 Nxe4 O-O Nf3 b6 O-O-O Bb7 Nxf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e5 Nc3 d6 e4 g6 Bd3 Bg7 Nge2 O-O Ng3 Na6 a3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
c4 e5 Nc3 a6 Nf3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1779)
c4 e5 Nc3 a6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Shaun Cronwright    (1800)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Qd2 Be7 dxc5

============

Contributors : Shaun Cronwright


Jesus Gerona    (1816)
e4 e6 Bc4 d5 exd5

============

Contributors : Jesus Gerona


Gregory Maron    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e6 Nc3 d6 e4 exd5

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e6 Nc3 d6 e4 exd5 exd5 Be7

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e6 Nc3 d6 e4 exd5 exd5 Be7 Bd3 Ng4

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e6 Nc3 d6 e4 exd5 exd5 Be7 Bd3 Ng4 Bf4 O-O

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 e6 Nc3 d6 e4 exd5 exd5 Be7 Bd3 Ng4 Bf4 O-O Nf3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5 e3 g6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 a6 Nxc6 bxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 a6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bd3 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Nxc6 Qf6 Qf3 bxc6 Nd2 d6 Nb3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 a6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bd3 d5 O-O Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 a6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bd3 d5 O-O Nf6 Re1 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 Nxc6 Qf6 Qf3 bxc6 Nd2 d6 Nb3 Bb6 a4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O Nf5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O Nf5 d4 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O Nf5 d4 O-O c4 c6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O Nf5 d4 O-O c4 c6 Nc3 e6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 Nh6 Nf3 d5 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O Nf5 d4 O-O c4 c6 Nc3 e6 g4 Nd6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Bd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 Bg5 Qe7 f3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O O-O d3 c5 Qe1 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Bd6 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Bd6 O-O O-O c4 d4

Transpose to wikichess #58842#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 Bg5 Qe7 f3 O-O Bb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 e6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 Bg5 Qe7 f3 O-O Bb5 Bxd4 Bxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O O-O d3 c5 Qe1 Nc6 Qh4 b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 e6 Bg2 f5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O O-O d3 c5 Qe1 Nc6 Qh4 b6 Ne5 Bb7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d6 Qb3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 h6 Nf3 g5 e4 gxf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d6 Qb3 Qe7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 h6 Nf3 g5 e4 gxf4 d4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 h6 Nf3 g5 e4 gxf4 d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d6 Qb3 Qe7 Nc3 c6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 h6 Nf3 g5 e4 gxf4 d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 e5 Nh5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d6 Qb3 Qe7 Nc3 c6 Nf3 Nd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 h6 Nf3 g5 e4 gxf4 d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 e5 Nh5 Nh4 Ng7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 h6 Nf3 g5 e4 gxf4 d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 e5 Nh5 Nh4 Ng7 Bxf4 Ne6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1791)
f4 h6 Nf3 g5 e4 gxf4 d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 e5 Nh5 Nh4 Ng7 Bxf4 Ne6 Be3 c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nc3 Nbd7 e4 e5 Nge2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nc3 Nbd7 e4 e5 Nge2 Be7 f3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nc3 Nbd7 e4 e5 Nge2 Be7 f3 O-O Be3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6 Qc2 Qe7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
c4 Nf6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 Nc3 O-O e4 d6 Nge2 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nc3 Nbd7 e4 e5 Nge2 Be7 f3 O-O Be3 c6 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
d4 Nf6 c4 d6 Nc3 Nbd7 e4 e5 Nge2 Be7 f3 O-O Be3 c6 d5 cxd5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
c4 Nf6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 Nc3 O-O e4 d6 Nge2 e5 O-O Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6 Qc2 Qe7 Rd1 Rfd8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 d3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Nb6 Bg2

Transpose to wikichess #132566#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 O-O Bc5 Re1 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
c4 Nf6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 Nc3 O-O e4 d6 Nge2 e5 O-O Nc6 d3 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 O-O Bc5 Re1 O-O Nxe5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Qd2 h5 O-O-O b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 O-O Bc5 Re1 O-O Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Qd2 h5 O-O-O b6 Nf3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1822)
c4 Nf6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 Nc3 O-O e4 d6 Nge2 e5 O-O Nc6 d3 Be6 h3 Qc8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Qd2 h5 O-O-O b6 Nf3 Bb7 Bb5 Kf8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1850)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Qd2 h5 O-O-O b6 Nf3 Bb7 Bb5 Kf8 Ng5 a6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2 Ng6 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2 Ng6 Rc1 Nf4 Re1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2 Ng6 Rc1 Nf4 Re1 Rg8 Bf1

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2 Ng6 Rc1 Nf4 Re1 Rg8 Bf1 g4 hxg4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2 Ng6 Rc1 Nf4 Re1 Rg8 Bf1 g4 hxg4 Nxg4 Nxg4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6 Qc2 Qe7 Rd1 Rfd8 Nf1 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6 Qc2 Qe7 Rd1 Rfd8 Nf1 a5 Bd2 Qa7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2 Ng6 Rc1 Nf4 Re1 Rg8 Bf1 g4 hxg4 Nxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 Qd2

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nd5

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nd5 Nxd5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Ron Oortwijn    (2084)
Nf3 d6 d4 c6 c3 Nd7 e4 e5 h3 h6 Bd3 Qc7 O-O Ngf6 c4 Be7 Nc3 a6 Be3 g5 d5 Nf8 Nh2 Ng6 Rc1 Nf4 Re1 Rg8 Bf1 g4 hxg4 Nxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 Qd2 c5 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Ron Oortwijn


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6 Qc2 Qe7 Rd1 Rfd8 Nf1 a5 Bd2 Qa7 Ng5 Bg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Gregory Maron    (2022)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nd5 Nxd5 cxd5 O-O Bg2

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nd5 Nxd5 cxd5 O-O Bg2 d6 e3

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nd5 Nxd5 cxd5 O-O Bg2 d6 e3 Bf5 a3

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 g3 Bb4 Nd5 Nxd5 cxd5 O-O Bg2 d6 e3 Bf5 a3 Ba5 Ne2

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6 e3 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 h6

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 h6 Rac1 Qe7

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 h6 Rac1 Qe7 a3 a5

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6 Qc2 Qe7 Rd1 Rfd8 Nf1 a5 Bd2 Qa7 Ng5 Bg4 f3 Bc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 h6 Rac1 Qe7 a3 a5 Nh4 g6

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 h4 Bh6 Nc2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 h4 Bh6 Nc2 O-O a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 O-O e4 d6 Bd3 exd5 cxd5 a6 Nge2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 h4 Bh6 Nc2 O-O a4 bxa4 Rxa4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 h6 Rac1 Qe7 a3 a5 Nh4 g6 Bh3 Rad8

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Qd2 Bg7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Bg5 h4 Bh6 Nc2 O-O a4 bxa4 Rxa4 a5 Bc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 O-O e4 d6 Bd3 exd5 cxd5 a6 Nge2 Nbd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 O-O e4 d6 Bd3 exd5 cxd5 a6 Nge2 Nbd7 O-O Ne5 Bc2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Qd2 Bg7 O-O-O Nbd7

Transpose to wikichess #40026#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 O-O e4 d6 Bd3 exd5 cxd5 a6 Nge2 Nbd7 O-O Ne5 Bc2 b5 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 O-O e4 d6 Bd3 exd5 cxd5 a6 Nge2 Nbd7 O-O Ne5 Bc2 b5 f4 Ng6 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 d3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 b4 Ne7 Nbd2 O-O c4 c6 e4 dxe4 dxe4 b6 Rb1 Ng6 Qc2 Qe7 Rd1 Rfd8 Nf1 a5 Bd2 Qa7 Ng5 Bg4 f3 Bc8 Nh3 h5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Gregory Maron    (2022)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 Bb7 Bg2 Bb4 Bd2 Bxd2 Qxd2 O-O O-O d5 cxd5 exd5 Nc3 Re8 Rfd1 c6 e3 Nbd7 Qc2 h6 Rac1 Qe7 a3 a5 Nh4 g6 Bh3 Rad8 Nf3 Kg7

============

Contributors : Gregory Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2315)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 O-O e4 d6 Bd3 exd5 cxd5 a6 Nge2 Nbd7 O-O Ne5 Bc2 b5 f4 Ng6 h3 Re8 a3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 g3 c5 Bg2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 Ne2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 Ne2 Nf6 O-O

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 Ne2 Nf6 O-O Be7 d4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 Ne2 Nf6 O-O Be7 d4 cxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (1910)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 Ne2 Nf6 O-O Be7 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 O-O c4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (1910)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (1910)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4 Be6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 Ne2 Nf6 O-O Be7 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 O-O c4 Qb6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (1910)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4 Be6 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1910)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 a6 a4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4 Be6 Be2 h5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (1910)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4 Be6 Be2 h5 Nxd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4 Be6 Be2 h5 Nxd7 Qxd7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (1910)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4 Be6 Be2 h5 Nxd7 Qxd7 g5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Nf6 Nbd2 Bf5 Ne5 Nbd7 g4 Be6 Be2 h5 Nxd7 Qxd7 g5 Ne4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2 Bd5 Nxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2 Bd5 Nxd5 cxd5 Ng5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2 Bd5 Nxd5 cxd5 Ng5 Qd7 Bd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2 Bd5 Nxd5 cxd5 Ng5 Qd7 Bd2 Rab8 f4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 Bf5 Nbd2 e6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Be3 dxe4 Nc3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2 Bd5 Nxd5 cxd5 Ng5 Qd7 Bd2 Rab8 f4 f5 Qf2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 Bf5 Nbd2 e6 Ne5 h6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 Bf5 Nbd2 e6 Ne5 h6 Bd3 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Be3 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 a3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Be3 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 a3 Be7 f3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 Bf5 Nbd2 e6 Ne5 h6 Bd3 Nbd7 O-O Bd6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2 Bd5 Nxd5 cxd5 Ng5 Qd7 Bd2 Rab8 f4 f5 Qf2 Bh6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Be3 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 a3 Be7 f3 Nd5 Qd2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 Bf5 Nbd2 e6 Ne5 h6 Bd3 Nbd7 O-O Bd6 f4 c5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 Bf5 Nbd2 e6 Ne5 h6 Bd3 Nbd7 O-O Bd6 f4 c5 Bxf5 exf5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2274)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nf6 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 O-O d3 Ne8 e5 Nc7 h3 Be6 Nc3 b6 Qe2 Bd5 Nxd5 cxd5 Ng5 Qd7 Bd2 Rab8 f4 f5 Qf2 Bh6 Nf3 Ne6 Qh4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Be3 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 a3 Be7 f3 Nd5 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1900)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Be3 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 a3 Be7 f3 Nd5 Qd2 Nc6 O-O-O O-O Nxe4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 c6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 c6 O-O Nh6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 Bc5 Nc3 O-O e3 Nc6

Transpose to wikichess #13490#

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 g6 e4 c5 d3

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 c6 O-O Nh6 Nc3 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 g6 e4 c5 d3 Bg7 Nf3

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 g6 e4 c5 d3 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Qc2

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 Be3 Nbd7 O-O

Transpose to wikichess #41111#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 g6 e4 c5 d3 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Qc2 Nc6 a3

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 g6 e4 c5 d3 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Qc2 Nc6 a3 Nf6 h3

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Ne7 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd5 Bc4 Be7 O-O O-O Ne5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 g6 e4 c5 d3 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Qc2 Nc6 a3 Nf6 h3 Nd7 Bd2

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Leo Caldrone    (1700)
c4 g6 e4 c5 d3 Bg7 Nf3 d6 Qc2 Nc6 a3 Nf6 h3 Nd7 Bd2 O-O Nc3

============

Contributors : Leo Caldrone


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 Nh6 O-O c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 Nh6 O-O c5 Nc3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 Nh6 O-O c5 Nc3 Nc6 d3 d4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 Nh6 O-O c5 Nc3 Nc6 d3 d4 Ne4 b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 Nh6 O-O c5 Nc3 Nc6 d3 d4 Ne4 b6 c3 Rb8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 c6 O-O Nh6 Nc3 O-O d4 Nf5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 c6 O-O Nh6 Nc3 O-O d4 Nf5 e3 Nd6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1971)
f4 d5 Nf3 g6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 c6 O-O Nh6 Nc3 O-O d4 Nf5 e3 Nd6 b3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1935)
d4 g6 Nf3 Bg7 e3 d6

Transpose to wikichess #148247#

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6 a3 cxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6 a3 cxd4 exd4 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6 a3 cxd4 exd4 d5 Nf3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6 a3 cxd4 exd4 d5 Nf3 Bd7 Qd2 Qxb2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6 a3 cxd4 exd4 d5 Nf3 Bd7 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qxa3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6 a3 cxd4 exd4 d5 Nf3 Bd7 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qxa3 Rb3 Qa1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
d4 Nf6 Bf4 c5 e3 Qb6 Nc3 a6 a3 cxd4 exd4 d5 Nf3 Bd7 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qxa3 Rb3 Qa1 Rb1 Qa3

Transpose to wikichess #177174#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe6 Bb5 c6 Ba4 Qg6 Qe2 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Qf4 Bxg5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Qf4 Bxg5 Nxg5 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Qf4 Bxg5 Nxg5 O-O Rhe1 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Qf4 Bxg5 Nxg5 O-O Rhe1 d5 f3 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Nb6 Nc3 Qe6 Qe4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O Bb2 Re8 f4 f6 O-O-O fxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Nb6 Nc3 Qe6 Qe4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O Bb2 Re8 f4 f6 O-O-O fxe5 c5 Bxf1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe6 Bb5 c6 Ba4 Qg6 Qe2 Be7 Bb3 Nh6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Qf4 Bxg5 Nxg5 O-O Rhe1 d5 f3 h6 Nxe6 fxe6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 Nc6 Qd2 Be6 O-O-O Qd7 Kb1 Bf6 Bg5 Qe7 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Qf4 Bxg5 Nxg5 O-O Rhe1 d5 f3 h6 Nxe6 fxe6 Qe3 Rae8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe6 Bb5 c6 Ba4 Qg6 Qe2 Be7 Bb3 Nh6 d3 f6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Nb6 Nc3 Qe6 Qe4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O Bb2 Re8 f4 f6 O-O-O fxe5 c5 Bxf1 cxb6 Ba6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Nb6 Nc3 Qe6 Qe4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O Bb2 Re8 f4 f6 O-O-O fxe5 c5 Bxf1 cxb6 Ba6 Qa4 Kb7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Nb6 Nc3 Qe6 Qe4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O Bb2 Re8 f4 f6 O-O-O fxe5 c5 Bxf1 cxb6 Ba6 Qa4 Kb7 bxc7 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2083)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Nb6 Nc3 Qe6 Qe4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O Bb2 Re8 f4 f6 O-O-O fxe5 c5 Bxf1 cxb6 Ba6 Qa4 Kb7 bxc7 d5 fxe5 Bc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2005)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Nbd2 c5 O-O Be7

Transpose to wikichess #143252#

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5 exd5 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 c3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 c3 Nc6 Rg1 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 c3 Nc6 Rg1 O-O-O Be5 Rhg8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 c3 Nc6 Rg1 O-O-O Be5 Rhg8 Bxf6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 c3 Nc6 Rg1 O-O-O Be5 Rhg8 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qe2 Bg5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 Bd3 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 h5 e4 d6 Nec4 h4 Bf4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 c3 Nc6 Rg1 O-O-O Be5 Rhg8 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qe2 Bg5 Be4 Bxd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5 Bg5 dxe4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5 Bg5 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5 Bg5 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1 Rexd1 Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5 Bg5 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1 Rexd1 Be6 Ne3 Bxe3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4 Bb6 Qg3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4 Bb6 Qg3 fxe5 fxe5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5 Bg5 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1 Rexd1 Be6 Ne3 Bxe3 Bxe3 Rfb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4 Bb6 Qg3 fxe5 fxe5 Rxf1 Kxf1

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5 Bg5 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1 Rexd1 Be6 Ne3 Bxe3 Bxe3 Rfb8 b4 Rd8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Nbd2 d6 c3 O-O h3 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 a5 O-O a4 Re1 Bb6 Nf1 d5 Bg5 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1 Rexd1 Be6 Ne3 Bxe3 Bxe3 Rfb8 b4 Rd8 Rxd8 Rxd8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4 Bb6 Qg3 fxe5 fxe5 Rxf1 Kxf1 Qc7 Bf4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4 Bb6 Qg3 fxe5 fxe5 Rxf1 Kxf1 Qc7 Bf4 Nf8 h4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4 Bb6 Qg3 fxe5 fxe5 Rxf1 Kxf1 Qc7 Bf4 Nf8 h4 Bd7 a4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2005)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Bd3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 Nc3 c5 f4 Nc6 Nf3 Nxd4 Nxd4 cxd4 Ne2 Bc5 O-O O-O Qe1 f6 b4 Bb6 Qg3 fxe5 fxe5 Rxf1 Kxf1 Qc7 Bf4 Nf8 h4 Bd7 a4 a5 bxa5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qd3 Bg6 Qd1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3 Bh6 Bxh6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Be2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qd3 Bg6 Qd1 Nc6 Bxg6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qd3 Bg6 Qd1 Nc6 Bxg6 hxg6 Re1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qd3 Bg6 Qd1 Nc6 Bxg6 hxg6 Re1 Re8 Rxe8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qd3 Bg6 Qd1 Nc6 Bxg6 hxg6 Re1 Re8 Rxe8 Qxe8 c5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Be2 Rh8 a3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 Bd3 c4 Bc2 Bd6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nf6 O-O O-O c4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qd3 Bg6 Qd1 Nc6 Bxg6 hxg6 Re1 Re8 Rxe8 Qxe8 c5 Bf8 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Be2 Rh8 a3 Qb6 Na4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Be2 Rh8 a3 Qb6 Na4 Qa7 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4 Ba7 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4 Ba7 h3 Qe7 a4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Be2 Rh8 a3 Qb6 Na4 Qa7 O-O Rc8 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4 Ba7 h3 Qe7 a4 dxc4 Nxc4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 Be3 Be6 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nbd7 c4 g6 Nc3 Bh6 Bxh6 Rxh6 Be2 Rh8 a3 Qb6 Na4 Qa7 O-O Rc8 Nc3 Kf8 Re1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4 Ba7 h3 Qe7 a4 dxc4 Nxc4 b5 Bg5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4 Ba7 h3 Qe7 a4 dxc4 Nxc4 b5 Bg5 Bxf2 Kh2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4 Ba7 h3 Qe7 a4 dxc4 Nxc4 b5 Bg5 Bxf2 Kh2 Qf7 axb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2163)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nc6 Ngf3 Nf6 e5 Nd7 Bd3 f6 Bb5 fxe5 dxe5 Be7 O-O O-O Re1 a6 Bf1 Bc5 c4 Ba7 h3 Qe7 a4 dxc4 Nxc4 b5 Bg5 Bxf2 Kh2 Qf7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2450)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Ba4 d6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2450)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 Bc5 Ba4 d6 c3 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8 a4 Qc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8 a4 Qc7 Rc1 e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8 a4 Qc7 Rc1 e5 Bxf6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8 a4 Qc7 Rc1 e5 Bxf6 Bxf6 d5 Nb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8 a4 Qc7 Rc1 e5 Bxf6 Bxf6 d5 Nb8 e4 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8 a4 Qc7 Rc1 e5 Bxf6 Bxf6 d5 Nb8 e4 Nd7 b4 Kg7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2368)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 b6 Bg5 Bb7 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 O-O c5 Nbd2 O-O c3 d6 Re1 Nc6 a3 a6 h3 h6 Bh4 Re8 a4 Qc7 Rc1 e5 Bxf6 Bxf6 d5 Nb8 e4 Nd7 b4 Kg7 b5 c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8 Nge4 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Kb1 b5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nb6 Bxb6 Qxb6 Na5 Rc8 Bd3 b4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Kb1 b5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nb6 Bxb6 Qxb6 Na5 Rc8 Bd3 b4 Nc4 Qc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8 Nge4 Be6 Rad1 Rd8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Kb1 b5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nb6 Bxb6 Qxb6 Na5 Rc8 Bd3 b4 Nc4 Qc5 Ne3 a5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8 Nge4 Be6 Rad1 Rd8 Rxd8 Kxd8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8 Nge4 Be6 Rad1 Rd8 Rxd8 Kxd8 Rd1 Ke8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8 Nge4 Be6 Rad1 Rd8 Rxd8 Kxd8 Rd1 Ke8 Be3 a5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Kb1 b5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nb6 Bxb6 Qxb6 Na5 Rc8 Bd3 b4 Nc4 Qc5 Ne3 a5 Qe2 Kf8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8 Nge4 Be6 Rad1 Rd8 Rxd8 Kxd8 Rd1 Ke8 Be3 a5 b3 Ng6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2172)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 Be7 Bf4 Nh4 Ng5 Ke8 Nge4 Be6 Rad1 Rd8 Rxd8 Kxd8 Rd1 Ke8 Be3 a5 b3 Ng6 f4 h5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 d6 c3 Be7 O-O O-O Nbd2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O a6 e4 c5 d5 Qc7 dxe6 fxe6 Bc2 Bd6 Ng5 Nf8 f4 O-O-O Qe2 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 d6 c3 Be7 O-O O-O Nbd2 a6 Ba4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O a6 e4 c5 d5 Qc7 dxe6 fxe6 Bc2 Bd6 Ng5 Nf8 f4 O-O-O Qe2 h6 Nf3 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O a6 e4 c5 d5 Qc7 dxe6 fxe6 Bc2 Bd6 Ng5 Nf8 f4 O-O-O Qe2 h6 Nf3 Bxf4 e5 Bxf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1 a6 Nd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e3 Nbd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 b5 Bd3 Bb7 O-O a6 e4 c5 d5 Qc7 dxe6 fxe6 Bc2 Bd6 Ng5 Nf8 f4 O-O-O Qe2 h6 Nf3 Bxf4 e5 Bxf3 Qxf3 Bxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1 a6 Nd4 Qb6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1 a6 Nd4 Qb6 Nxc6 Qxc6 b3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3 Nxc3 Bxc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 d6 c3 Be7 O-O O-O Nbd2 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3 Nxc3 Bxc3 Be6 b4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1 a6 Nd4 Qb6 Nxc6 Qxc6 b3 b5 Nd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 d3 d6 c3 Be7 O-O O-O Nbd2 a6 Ba4 b5 Bc2 d5 h3

Transpose to wikichess #105397#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3 Nxc3 Bxc3 Be6 b4 Bb6 Nh5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3 Nxc3 Bxc3 Be6 b4 Bb6 Nh5 f6 Nf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1 a6 Nd4 Qb6 Nxc6 Qxc6 b3 b5 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3 Nxc3 Bxc3 Be6 b4 Bb6 Nh5 f6 Nf4 Bf7 Qg4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3 Nxc3 Bxc3 Be6 b4 Bb6 Nh5 f6 Nf4 Bf7 Qg4 Qd6 h4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1 a6 Nd4 Qb6 Nxc6 Qxc6 b3 b5 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Qc7 Qd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Bc5 Nf5 O-O e3 d5 cxd5 Nb4 Ng3 Nfxd5 a3 Nd3 Bxd3 exd3 Nc3 Nxc3 Bxc3 Be6 b4 Bb6 Nh5 f6 Nf4 Bf7 Qg4 Qd6 h4 Rad8 h5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2151)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Bxc6 Bxc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 O-O Qd2 Rc8 Rb1 a6 Nd4 Qb6 Nxc6 Qxc6 b3 b5 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Qc7 Qd3 bxc4 bxc4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2153)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Nf3 Qa5 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2153)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Nf3 Qa5 Nbd2 Qa6 c4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Qc2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Qc2 b6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Qc2 b6 Nc3 Bb7 Bd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Qc2 b6 Nc3 Bb7 Bd3 Bd6 Bb2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4 Nbd7 Nxf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4 Nbd7 Nxf6 Qxf6 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 b3 Nbd7 Qc2 b6 Nc3 Bb7 Bd3 Bd6 Bb2 O-O O-O

Transpose to wikichess #187392#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4 Nbd7 Nxf6 Qxf6 e5 Qf5 Bf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4 Nbd7 Nxf6 Qxf6 e5 Qf5 Bf3 O-O-O Qe2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4 Nbd7 Nxf6 Qxf6 e5 Qf5 Bf3 O-O-O Qe2 Nb6 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4 Nbd7 Nxf6 Qxf6 e5 Qf5 Bf3 O-O-O Qe2 Nb6 O-O-O Be7 Ne4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 h4 g4 Ne5 Rg8 Nxg4 Nbd7 Nxf6 Qxf6 e5 Qf5 Bf3 O-O-O Qe2 Nb6 O-O-O Be7 Ne4 Nd5 Nd6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5 O-O Bd6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5 O-O Bd6 Nd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5 O-O Bd6 Nd2 O-O Ne4 Bb8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5 O-O Bd6 Nd2 O-O Ne4 Bb8 Nexc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6 Qf3 Rb8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5 O-O Bd6 Nd2 O-O Ne4 Bb8 Nexc5 Nxc5 Bxc5 e4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6 Qf3 Rb8 Qg3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6 Qf3 Rb8 Qg3 Bb7 Bh6 Ne8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5 O-O Bd6 Nd2 O-O Ne4 Bb8 Nexc5 Nxc5 Bxc5 e4 Bxf8 Qxf8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6 Qf3 Rb8 Qg3 Bb7 Bh6 Ne8 Bb3 Rc8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6 Qf3 Rb8 Qg3 Bb7 Bh6 Ne8 Bb3 Rc8 Be3 Nd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6 Qf3 Rb8 Qg3 Bb7 Bh6 Ne8 Bb3 Rc8 Be3 Nd5 Rac1 Nxe3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6 d5 Nb8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 Nf6 c4 a6 Nc3 c5 d5 b5 e4 b4 Na4 d6 Bd3 e5 f4 Nbd7 Nf3 exf4 Bxf4 Nh5 Be3 g6 e5 dxe5 O-O Bd6 Nd2 O-O Ne4 Bb8 Nexc5 Nxc5 Bxc5 e4 Bxf8 Qxf8 Bxe4 Qd6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2181)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 b6 Qf3 Rb8 Qg3 Bb7 Bh6 Ne8 Bb3 Rc8 Be3 Nd5 Rac1 Nxe3 Qxe3 Bg5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6 d5 Nb8 c4 c6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6 h5 Nf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6 d5 Nb8 c4 c6 b3 Qc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 c5 Be3 Bg4 Qd2 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6 h5 Nf6 h6 Bh8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6 d5 Nb8 c4 c6 b3 Qc7 Nf1 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6 h5 Nf6 h6 Bh8 Nh2 Nh5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6 h5 Nf6 h6 Bh8 Nh2 Nh5 axb6 axb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6 d5 Nb8 c4 c6 b3 Qc7 Nf1 Nbd7 Be3 Rec8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Be2 b6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2014)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 Bf4 Bf5 e3 e6 c4 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Nf3 O-O Be2 b6 h4 Bb7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2014)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 Bf4 Bf5 e3 e6 c4 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 Qb3 Qc7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2014)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 Bf4 Bf5 e3 e6 c4 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 Qb3 Qc7 Nc3 h6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2014)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 Bf4 Bf5 e3 e6 c4 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 Qb3 Qc7 Nc3 h6 Rc1 Ne7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6 d5 Nb8 c4 c6 b3 Qc7 Nf1 Nbd7 Be3 Rec8 Rc1 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6 h5 Nf6 h6 Bh8 Nh2 Nh5 axb6 axb6 Qf3 Nf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Bb7 d4 Re8 Nbd2 Bf8 Bc2 g6 d5 Nb8 c4 c6 b3 Qc7 Nf1 Nbd7 Be3 Rec8 Rc1 a5 g4 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6 h5 Nf6 h6 Bh8 Nh2 Nh5 axb6 axb6 Qf3 Nf4 Ra4 Ne6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Nf6 a4 Nd7 a5 e5 Bg5 Qc7 Be3 O-O Nbd2 Rb8 h4 b6 h5 Nf6 h6 Bh8 Nh2 Nh5 axb6 axb6 Qf3 Nf4 Ra4 Ne6 Rfa1 Nd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Paul Maron    (2014)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 a3 b5 Bd3

Transpose to wikichess #142236#

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2000)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Nxc6 dxc6 Bf1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2000)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Nxc6 dxc6 Bf1 Nf5 c3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2180)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 e6 e3 Bb4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2180)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 e6 e3 Bb4 Nge2 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2180)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 e6 e3 Bb4 Nge2 O-O a3 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be3 a6 Qf3 b6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2180)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 e6 e3 Bb4 Nge2 O-O a3 Be7 Ng1 c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2180)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 e6 e3 Bb4 Nge2 O-O a3 Be7 Ng1 c5 Nf3 Nh5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2180)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 e6 e3 Bb4 Nge2 O-O a3 Be7 Ng1 c5 Nf3 Nh5 dxc5 Nxf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Be3 a6 Qf3 b6 Nxc6 Qxc6 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7 e4 c6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7 e4 c6 Nf4 Bh6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7 e4 c6 Nf4 Bh6 Kb1 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7 e4 c6 Nf4 Bh6 Kb1 O-O g3 Re8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7 e4 c6 Nf4 Bh6 Kb1 O-O g3 Re8 Bd3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7 e4 c6 Nf4 Bh6 Kb1 O-O g3 Re8 Bd3 Nd7 Rde1 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nf3 Qxe4 Be3 Nd5 Qd2 Nxe3 fxe3 Qe7 Nc3 g6 Nd5 Qd8 O-O-O Bg7 e4 c6 Nf4 Bh6 Kb1 O-O g3 Re8 Bd3 Nd7 Rde1 Nf6 Qf2 Qa5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4 e5 d5 Bb5 Ne4 cxd4 Bb6 Be3 O-O Nc3

Transpose to wikichess #98024#

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7 O-O b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7 O-O b6 Rfc1 c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7 O-O b6 Rfc1 c5 dxc5 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7 O-O b6 Rfc1 c5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qb4 Nxd3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3 Bxe3 Qb4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3 Bxe3 Qb4 Bd2 Qe7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7 O-O b6 Rfc1 c5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qb4 Nxd3 cxd3 Kg8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7 O-O b6 Rfc1 c5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qb4 Nxd3 cxd3 Kg8 Nd4 Kh7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5 Rhe1 Bf8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Be3 Ne4 Qg4 Kf8 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nxc3 Bd3 Nc6 Nf3 Na4 Rb1 Ne7 O-O b6 Rfc1 c5 dxc5 Nxc5 Qb4 Nxd3 cxd3 Kg8 Nd4 Kh7 Rc3 Nf5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5 Rhe1 Bf8 Kb1 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5 Rhe1 Bf8 Kb1 Be6 c4 a6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5 Rhe1 Bf8 Kb1 Be6 c4 a6 a4 Qc7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5 Rhe1 Bf8 Kb1 Be6 c4 a6 a4 Qc7 Qc3 b5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5 Rhe1 Bf8 Kb1 Be6 c4 a6 a4 Qc7 Qc3 b5 cxb5 Nd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 a5 Ba7 Bb2 Nf6 Bxd4 Nxe4 Bxa7 Qxd1 Rxd1 Rxa7 Ne5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nc3 Nxc3 dxc3 Be7 Be3 O-O Qd2 Nd7 O-O-O Re8 h4 Nf6 Bd3 h6 Bf4 c5 Rhe1 Bf8 Kb1 Be6 c4 a6 a4 Qc7 Qc3 b5 cxb5 Nd5 Qd2 axb5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 a5 Ba7 Bb2 Nf6 Bxd4 Nxe4 Bxa7 Qxd1 Rxd1 Rxa7 Ne5 Bd5 Re1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3 Bxe3 Qb4 Bd2 Qe7 Be2 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 Nf6 e5 Nd5 Bxc4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 Be3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3 Bxe3 Qb4 Bd2 Qe7 Be2 O-O O-O Be6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 Be3 Be7 Nd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 a5 Ba7 Bb2 Nf6 Bxd4 Nxe4 Bxa7 Qxd1 Rxd1 Rxa7 Ne5 Bd5 Re1 f6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 Bc5 Nf3 d6 c3 Bb6 fxe5 dxe5 Na3 Nf6

Transpose to wikichess #123393#

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 d6 Bc4 h6 h4 Nf6 Nc3 Be7 d4 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3 Bxe3 Qb4 Bd2 Qe7 Be2 O-O O-O Be6 Re1 Qd6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2141)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 a5 Ba7 Bb2 Nf6 Bxd4 Nxe4 Bxa7 Qxd1 Rxd1 Rxa7 Ne5 Bd5 Re1 f6 Nd2 fxe5 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 d6 Bc4 h6 h4 Nf6 Nc3 Be7 d4 O-O Bxf4 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1 Qh6 Ne2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1 Qh6 Ne2 Be3 Qe1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O Na3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1 Qh6 Ne2 Be3 Qe1 Rae8 Bxe3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 d6 Bc4 h6 h4 Nf6 Nc3 Be7 d4 O-O Bxf4 Nbd7 e5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O Na3 Nf6 Nc4 Be6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 d4 d6 Qe2 dxe5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O Na3 Nf6 Nc4 Be6 Ne3 d5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1 Qh6 Ne2 Be3 Qe1 Rae8 Bxe3 Rxe3 Kg1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O Na3 Nf6 Nc4 Be6 Ne3 d5 g4 Na5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O Na3 Nf6 Nc4 Be6 Ne3 d5 g4 Na5 Bd3 Nc4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O Na3 Nf6 Nc4 Be6 Ne3 d5 g4 Na5 Bd3 Nc4 Nf5 Bxf5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 d4 d6 Qe2 dxe5 Nxe5 Qh4 Kd1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Qe7 d4 d6 Nxg4 Qxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Qxe7 Bxe7 Nf2 Nc6 c3 Bf5 Bxf4 O-O-O Na3 Nf6 Nc4 Be6 Ne3 d5 g4 Na5 Bd3 Nc4 Nf5 Bxf5 Bxf5 Kb8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1 Qh6 Ne2 Be3 Qe1 Rae8 Bxe3 Rxe3 Kg1 Rfe8 Rf2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 d4 d6 Qe2 dxe5 Nxe5 Qh4 Kd1 Be7 Nc3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 d6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 h6

Transpose to wikichess #186051#

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1 Qh6 Ne2 Be3 Qe1 Rae8 Bxe3 Rxe3 Kg1 Rfe8 Rf2 Nf6 h3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Bc4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 O-O O-O Nc3 Bf5 d3 Nc6 a3 Qf6 Qd2 Bc5 Kh1 Qh6 Ne2 Be3 Qe1 Rae8 Bxe3 Rxe3 Kg1 Rfe8 Rf2 Nf6 h3 Bxh3 gxh3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3 Bxe3 Qb4 Bd2 Qe7 Be2 O-O O-O Be6 Re1 Qd6 a3 Rfe8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2037)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c5 cxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc6 dxc5 d4 Na4 Bxc5 Nxc5 Qa5 Bd2 Qxc5 Rc1 Qb6 e3 Nf6 Bc4 dxe3 Bxe3 Qb4 Bd2 Qe7 Be2 O-O O-O Be6 Re1 Qd6 a3 Rfe8 Be3 Qxd1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2058)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 h5 g3 Be6 Bg2 b5 Be3 Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 f4 Nd7 O-O

Transpose to wikichess #133821#

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 e5 Bb5 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Qd3 g6 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 e5 Bb5 Nc6 Qd3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 e5 Bb5 Nc6 Qd3 Nf6 Nc3 a6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Qd3 g6 O-O Bg7 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 e5 Bb5 Nc6 Qd3 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bc4 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 e5 Bb5 Nc6 Qd3 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bc4 Be7 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Qd3 g6 O-O Bg7 h3 Nf6 c4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Qd3 g6 O-O Bg7 h3 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Bb5 Bd7 Qd3 g6 O-O Bg7 h3 Nf6 c4 O-O Nc3 a6 Bxc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7 d5 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7 d5 O-O Qd2 g6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7 d5 O-O Qd2 g6 Rac1 cxd5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7 d5 O-O Qd2 g6 Rac1 cxd5 cxd5 Qd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7 d5 O-O Qd2 g6 Rac1 cxd5 cxd5 Qd7 Ng3 Rfc8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7 d5 O-O Qd2 g6 Rac1 cxd5 cxd5 Qd7 Ng3 Rfc8 Nf5 h5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Kb1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Kb1 Rc8 Rc1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 e4 Bc5 Be2 d6 d3 Nc6 Nf3 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Be3 c6 Bxd4 Bxd4 Ne2 Bb6 d4 Qe7 d5 O-O Qd2 g6 Rac1 cxd5 cxd5 Qd7 Ng3 Rfc8 Nf5 h5 Qh6 Ne8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Kb1 Rc8 Rc1 O-O Na5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Rc8 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Rc8 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Kb1 Rc8 Rc1 O-O Na5 Nc5 Rg1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Rc8 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bxd5 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Kb1 Rc8 Rc1 O-O Na5 Nc5 Rg1 Qd7 Nb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 Be7 cxd5 exd5 Bf4 c6 e3 Bf5 g4 Be6 h4 Nd7 Qb3 Nb6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 cxd4 Nxd4 Be7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 cxd4 Nxd4 Be7 Be2 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Kb1 Rc8 Rc1 O-O Na5 Nc5 Rg1 Qd7 Nb3 Nxb3 axb3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Rc8 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Qxa5 c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Rc8 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Qxa5 c4 Nf4 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Be7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Kb1 Rc8 Rc1 O-O Na5 Nc5 Rg1 Qd7 Nb3 Nxb3 axb3 a5 g4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5 e4 N5b6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5 e4 N5b6 Be3 Be7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5 e4 N5b6 Be3 Be7 d5 exd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5 e4 N5b6 Be3 Be7 d5 exd5 exd5 Nxc4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5 e4 N5b6 Be3 Be7 d5 exd5 exd5 Nxc4 Bxc4 Qb6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5 e4 N5b6 Be3 Be7 d5 exd5 exd5 Nxc4 Bxc4 Qb6 Qc2 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 g4 Bg6 Ne5 e6 Nd2 Nbd7 h4 dxc4 Nxg6 hxg6 g5 Nd5 Nxc4 c5 e4 N5b6 Be3 Be7 d5 exd5 exd5 Nxc4 Bxc4 Qb6 Qc2 O-O-O O-O-O Bd6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2020)
d4 f5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bd3 b6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d3 Nc6 d4

Transpose to wikichess #119634#

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2534)
Nf3 c5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 Nxc3 bxc3 g6 Rb1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4 Be2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4 Be2 Bb7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4 Be2 Bb7 Bf3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (1951)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 cxb5 a6 bxa6 e6 Nc3 exd5 Nxd5 Be7 Nxe7 Qxe7 Nf3 Bxa6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4 Be2 Bb7 Bf3 Rfe8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (2020)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4 Be2 Bb7 Bf3 Rfe8 Rfe1

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (1951)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 h3 O-O Be3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2094)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 exd5 Qxd5 Ngf3 cxd4 Bc4 Qd6 O-O Nf6 Nb3 Nc6 Nbxd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Be7 b3 O-O Bb2 Qf4 Qe2 Bc5 Rad1 b6 g3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4 Be2 Bb7 Bf3 Rfe8 Rfe1 f5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6 Bd2 Rfe8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6 Bd2 Rfe8 Qxb6 axb6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6 Bd2 Rfe8 Qxb6 axb6 b4 Bd6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6 Bd2 Rfe8 Qxb6 axb6 b4 Bd6 Rc1 Bd7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6 Bd2 Rfe8 Qxb6 axb6 b4 Bd6 Rc1 Bd7 a4 Ne4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6 Bd2 Rfe8 Qxb6 axb6 b4 Bd6 Rc1 Bd7 a4 Ne4 Be1 h6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2085)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 h4 d5 Nf3 c5 cxd5 exd5 g3 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bg2 Bc5 e3 Bg4 Qb3 Nc6 O-O O-O Nxc6 bxc6 Bd2 Rfe8 Qxb6 axb6 b4 Bd6 Rc1 Bd7 a4 Ne4 Be1 h6 Ra2 Ra7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 cxd5 cxd5 Qb3 Bc8

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 cxd5 cxd5 Qb3 Bc8 Bd3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 cxd5 cxd5 Qb3 Bc8 Bd3 Nc6 f4 g6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nc3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 cxd5 cxd5 Qb3 Bc8 Bd3 Nc6 f4 g6 Nf3 Bg7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 g4 O-O gxf3 Qxf3 Qf6 d3 Nc6 Bxf7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 g4 O-O gxf3 Qxf3 Qf6 d3 Nc6 Bxf7 Qxf7 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Bb7 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Nc3 d5 Ne5 c6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2000)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Bb7 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Nc3 d5 Ne5 c6 e4 dxc4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2027)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 Bc4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2 Nf4 d4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2 Nf4 d4 Nd3 Re3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2 Nf4 d4 Nd3 Re3 Nxc1 Qxc1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2 Nf4 d4 Nd3 Re3 Nxc1 Qxc1 exd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2 Nf4 d4 Nd3 Re3 Nxc1 Qxc1 exd4 cxd4 Qd7 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2 Nf4 d4 Nd3 Re3 Nxc1 Qxc1 exd4 cxd4 Qd7 Ne5 Nxe5 Rxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 d3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Nbd2 Nf4 d4 Nd3 Re3 Nxc1 Qxc1 exd4 cxd4 Qd7 Ne5 Nxe5 Rxe5 Bg6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Bc4 Nf6

Transpose to wikichess #10323#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e3 e5 d3 d5 Nf3 Bd6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e3 e5 d3 d5 Nf3 Bd6 Be2 c5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e3 e5 d3 d5 Nf3 Bd6 Be2 c5 c4 d4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e3 e5 d3 d5 Nf3 Bd6 Be2 c5 c4 d4 Nbd2 Nc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nf3 Nc6 Bf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e3 e5 d3 d5 Nf3 Bd6 Be2 c5 c4 d4 Nbd2 Nc6 Ne4 Be7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e3 e5 d3 d5 Nf3 Bd6 Be2 c5 c4 d4 Nbd2 Nc6 Ne4 Be7 Ng3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 f3 c5 d5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3 Nd7 e3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3 Nd7 e3 a5 Nb1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
e3 e5 d3 d5 Nf3 Bd6 Be2 c5 c4 d4 Nbd2 Nc6 Ne4 Be7 Ng3 Nf6 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3 Nd7 e3 a5 Nb1 Ba6 Re1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 f3 c5 d5 e6 c4

Transpose to wikichess #79204#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3 Nd7 e3 a5 Nb1 Ba6 Re1 c6 f3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 e3 Nf6 Be2 g6

Transpose to wikichess #12973#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3 Nd7 e3 a5 Nb1 Ba6 Re1 c6 f3 Ng5 Nd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 b4 Bg7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3 Nd7 e3 a5 Nb1 Ba6 Re1 c6 f3 Ng5 Nd2 Nf6 Qc2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 b4 Bg7 Bb2 O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 b4 Bg7 Bb2 O-O Be2 Qd6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 b4 Bg7 Bb2 O-O Be2 Qd6 a3 a5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 b4 Bg7 Bb2 O-O Be2 Qd6 a3 a5 O-O axb4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2055)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 g6 b4 Bg7 Bb2 O-O Be2 Qd6 a3 a5 O-O axb4 Be5 Qb6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2011)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Nbd2 d5 Bg2 Bd6 O-O O-O b3 Bb7 Bb2 Ne4 Ne5 Qe7 Rc1 f5 Nd3 Nd7 e3 a5 Nb1 Ba6 Re1 c6 f3 Ng5 Nd2 Nf6 Qc2 Qe8 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 h4 d5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 h4 d5 h5 Bg7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 h4 d5 h5 Bg7 hxg6 hxg6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 h4 d5 h5 Bg7 hxg6 hxg6 Rxh8 Bxh8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 h4 d5 h5 Bg7 hxg6 hxg6 Rxh8 Bxh8 Nf3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 h4 d5 h5 Bg7 hxg6 hxg6 Rxh8 Bxh8 Nf3 Nc6 Qb3 e6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 Ngf3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Bb5 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 Ngf3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 Ngf3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Be7 dxc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 c5 Ngf3 Nc6 exd5 exd5 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Be7 dxc5 Bxc5 Re1 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2008)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 f5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 g6 d4 Nf6 e5 Nh5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 g6 d4 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Nf3 d6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 g6 d4 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 g6 d4 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nc6 c3 dxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 g6 d4 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nc6 c3 dxe5 Qb3 e6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2116)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 g3 d5 Bg2 h5 h3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 g6 d4 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nc6 c3 dxe5 Qb3 e6 dxe5 a6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 cxd4 Nxd4 d5 Nc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 g6 d4 Nf6 e5 Nh5 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nc6 c3 dxe5 Qb3 e6 dxe5 a6 Qc2 Bg7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 d6 e4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 cxd4 Nxd4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2116)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 g3 d5 Bg2 h5 h3 h4 g4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2116)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 g3 d5 Bg2 h5 h3 h4 g4 f5 e3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 cxd4 Nxd4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 g3 c5 Bg2 cxd4 Nxd4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O Nc6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2116)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 g3 d5 Bg2 h5 h3 h4 g4 f5 e3 fxg4 hxg4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 d3 Bc5 c3 d6 O-O a5 Nbd2

Transpose to wikichess #145567#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Nd4 Bg2 Nxf3 Bxf3 Bb4 Qb3 Bc5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Nd4 Bg2 Nxf3 Bxf3 Bb4 Qb3 Bc5 O-O c6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2116)
b3 e5 Bb2 Nc6 g3 d5 Bg2 h5 h3 h4 g4 f5 e3 fxg4 hxg4 Nf6 f3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (1993)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Nd4 Bg2 Nxf3 Bxf3 Bb4 Qb3 Bc5 O-O c6 e3 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Veronika Andreeva    (1900)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 d6 Nc3 Na5

============

Contributors : Veronika Andreeva


Keith Armstrong    (2080)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Ne8 c4 Bf6 Re1 d5 cxd5 Qxd5 Be3 Be6 Nc3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Veronika Andreeva    (1900)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 d6 Nc3 Na5 Bb3 Nxb3

============

Contributors : Veronika Andreeva


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d4 cxd4 cxd4 Bb7 Na3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d4 cxd4 cxd4 Bb7 Na3 c5 dxc5

Transpose to wikichess #206274#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Veronika Andreeva    (1900)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 d6 Nc3 Na5 Bb3 Nxb3 axb3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Veronika Andreeva


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3 g5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4 a6 Na3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 Nb5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3 g5 Bxc5 h5 d4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2036)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Nf3 Bd6 d4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2036)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Nf3 Bd6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2036)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bf4 a6 e3 Bg4 h3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 Nb5 f5 a4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4 O-O Be3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2036)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bf4 a6 e3 Bg4 h3 Bxf3 Qxf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2036)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Nf3 Bd6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bg4 Be2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 Nb5 f5 a4 Nf6 bxa5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4 O-O Be3 Rab8 Qe2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3 g5 Bxc5 h5 d4 g4 Nh2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3 g5 Bxc5 h5 d4 g4 Nh2 d6 exd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4 O-O Be3 Rab8 Qe2 b5 axb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 Nb5 f5 a4 Nf6 bxa5 Qxa5 Ba3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 Nb5 f5 a4 Nf6 bxa5 Qxa5 Ba3 Qxa4 Qd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4 O-O Be3 Rab8 Qe2 b5 axb6 axb6 Ra6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4 O-O Be3 Rab8 Qe2 b5 axb6 axb6 Ra6 Bxc4 dxc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3 g5 Bxc5 h5 d4 g4 Nh2 d6 exd6 Nxd6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4 O-O Be3 Rab8 Qe2 b5 axb6 axb6 Ra6 Bxc4 dxc4 Nd6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 b4 a6 Na3 a5 c3 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 Nb5 f5 a4 Nf6 bxa5 Qxa5 Ba3 Qxa4 Qd3 Qb3 Bxd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3 g5 Bxc5 h5 d4 g4 Nh2 d6 exd6 Nxd6 Nd2 Rf6 h4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 Bxc6 bxc6 O-O Bg7 Re1 Nh6 c3 O-O h3 f5 e5 Nf7 d3 Rb8 b3 e6 Ba3 g5 Bxc5 h5 d4 g4 Nh2 d6 exd6 Nxd6 Nd2 Rf6 h4 Nb7 Ba3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 a4 Qe7 Na3 Nh6 Nc4 f6 a5 Nf7 d3 Be6 Ra4 O-O Be3 Rab8 Qe2 b5 axb6 axb6 Ra6 Bxc4 dxc4 Nd6 Nd2 f5 f3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4 a6 Na3 f5 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 h6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6 Rfe1 Bd7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 h6 Bxc4 e6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 h6 Bxc4 e6 Nf3 a6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5 Bxf4 Nxb3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6 Rfe1 Bd7 h4 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5 Bxf4 Nxb3 axb3 exf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4 a6 Na3 f5 Nc4 f4 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 h6 Bxc4 e6 Nf3 a6 O-O c6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5 Bxf4 Nxb3 axb3 exf4 d4 f5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6 Rfe1 Bd7 h4 O-O-O c3 Ngxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 h6 Bxc4 e6 Nf3 a6 O-O c6 Nc3 b5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6 Ne5 exf7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6 Rfe1 Bd7 h4 O-O-O c3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5 Bxf4 Nxb3 axb3 exf4 d4 f5 Nc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6 Rfe1 Bd7 h4 O-O-O c3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 Qxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6 Rfe1 Bd7 h4 O-O-O c3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 Qxe5 Bf4 f5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4 a6 Na3 f5 Nc4 f4 a5 e4 Nd2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6 Ne5 exf7 Rxf7 Bf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5 Bxf4 Nxb3 axb3 exf4 d4 f5 Nc5 Bxc5 dxc5 Qxd1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 cxd4 Bd3 Qa5 Rb1 Qxc3 Bd2 Qc7 Nf3 Ng6 O-O Nc6 Rfe1 Bd7 h4 O-O-O c3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 Qxe5 Bf4 f5 Qg3 Qf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 h6 Bxc4 e6 Nf3 a6 O-O c6 Nc3 b5 Bb3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5 Bxf4 Nxb3 axb3 exf4 d4 f5 Nc5 Bxc5 dxc5 Qxd1 Rexd1 Bxf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4 a6 Na3 f5 Nc4 f4 a5 e4 Nd2 Nf6 Ra3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O h3 Bb7 d3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nbd2 Nf4 Ne4 Na5 Bxf4 Nxb3 axb3 exf4 d4 f5 Nc5 Bxc5 dxc5 Qxd1 Rexd1 Bxf3 gxf3 Rf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6 Qd7 Bg5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 h6 Bxc4 e6 Nf3 a6 O-O c6 Nc3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 d5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6 Qd7 Bg5 Bxc6 Qc2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6 Ne5 exf7 Rxf7 Bf4 Be6 cxb5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6 Qd7 Bg5 Bxc6 Qc2 Be4 Qd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4 a6 Na3 f5 Nc4 f4 a5 e4 Nd2 Nf6 Ra3 Qd7 Nc4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2529)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Nb8 a4 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Nd7 b4 a6 Na3 f5 Nc4 f4 a5 e4 Nd2 Nf6 Ra3 Qd7 Nc4 Qf5 Nb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6 Ne5 exf7 Rxf7 Bf4 Be6 cxb5 Nh5 Bxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6 Qd7 Bg5 Bxc6 Qc2 Be4 Qd2 Nh5 f3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6 Ne5 exf7 Rxf7 Bf4 Be6 cxb5 Nh5 Bxe5 dxe5 Nd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6 Qd7 Bg5 Bxc6 Qc2 Be4 Qd2 Nh5 f3 Bb7 g4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6 Qd7 Bg5 Bxc6 Qc2 Be4 Qd2 Nh5 f3 Bb7 g4 Ng3 Rg1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 h4 Ba6 Qa4 Bb7 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6 Qd7 Bg5 Bxc6 Qc2 Be4 Qd2 Nh5 f3 Bb7 g4 Ng3 Rg1 Nxf1 Kxf1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6 Ne5 exf7 Rxf7 Bf4 Be6 cxb5 Nh5 Bxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 a6 O-O Nf6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 Nh5 Be3 Be7 Rfd1 Bd7 Nd4 g6 Nxc6 Bxc6 Bh6 Bg5 Bxg5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 a6 O-O Nf6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 Nh5 Be3 Be7 Rfd1 Bd7 Nd4 g6 Nxc6 Bxc6 Bh6 Bg5 Bxg5 Qxg5 Rxd6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 a6 O-O Nf6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 Nh5 Be3 Be7 Rfd1 Bd7 Nd4 g6 Nxc6 Bxc6 Bh6 Bg5 Bxg5 Qxg5 Rxd6 Ke7 Rad1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 a6 O-O Nf6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 Nh5 Be3 Be7 Rfd1 Bd7 Nd4 g6 Nxc6 Bxc6 Bh6 Bg5 Bxg5 Qxg5 Rxd6 Ke7 Rad1 Rhd8 Rxd8

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 a6 O-O Nf6 Bf4 e6 Qe2 Nh5 Be3 Be7 Rfd1 Bd7 Nd4 g6 Nxc6 Bxc6 Bh6 Bg5 Bxg5 Qxg5 Rxd6 Ke7 Rad1 Rhd8 Rxd8 Rxd8 Rxd8

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c6 e4 dxe4 Nxe4 Bb4 Bd2 Qxd4 Bxb4 Qxe4 Be2 Na6 Ba5 b6 Qd6 Bd7 Bc3 f6 Nf3 Nh6 Rd1 Rd8 Qa3 Bc8 Nd2 Qf4 Bh5 Nf7 O-O c5 Qa4 Ke7 Rfe1 Ng5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 f3 c5 d5 b5 e4 d6 a3 Ba5 Bd2 a6 b4 Bb6 Bd3 O-O Nge2 Nbd7 dxe6 Ne5 exf7 Rxf7 Bf4 Be6 cxb5 Nh5 Bxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 c4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2 c5 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2 c5 Bxf6 gxf6 dxc5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2 c5 Bxf6 gxf6 dxc5 Rc8 Rd1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2 c5 Bxf6 gxf6 dxc5 Rc8 Rd1 Rxc5 Qe4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2 c5 Bxf6 gxf6 dxc5 Rc8 Rd1 Rxc5 Qe4 Qc7 Qxa8

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2 c5 Bxf6 gxf6 dxc5 Rc8 Rd1 Rxc5 Qe4 Qc7 Qxa8 Bb7 Qxa7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 d5 a3 Bxc3 Qxc3 dxc4 Qxc4 b6 Bg5 Ba6 Qa4 h6 Bh4 Qd7 Qc2 c5 Bxf6 gxf6 dxc5 Rc8 Rd1 Rxc5 Qe4 Qc7 Qxa8 Bb7 Qxa7 Ra5 Qxa5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2145)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 h6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 d6 g3 Be6 Bg2 Qd7 O-O Bg4 Qc2 Bh3 Nh4 Bxg2 Nxg2 Nh7 Rb1 b6 f4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2145)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 h6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 d6 g3 Be6 Bg2 Qd7 O-O Bg4 Qc2 Bh3 Nh4 Bxg2 Nxg2 Nh7 Rb1 b6 f4 exf4 gxf4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2145)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 h6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 d6 g3 Be6 Bg2 Qd7 O-O Bg4 Qc2 Bh3 Nh4 Bxg2 Nxg2 Nh7 Rb1 b6 f4 exf4 gxf4 O-O-O f5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2145)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 h6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 d6 g3 Be6 Bg2 Qd7 O-O Bg4 Qc2 Bh3 Nh4 Bxg2 Nxg2 Nh7 Rb1 b6 f4 exf4 gxf4 O-O-O f5 g6 Kh1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2145)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 h6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 d6 g3 Be6 Bg2 Qd7 O-O Bg4 Qc2 Bh3 Nh4 Bxg2 Nxg2 Nh7 Rb1 b6 f4 exf4 gxf4 O-O-O f5 g6 Kh1 gxf5 Rxf5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 e3 Nxd4 exd4 Qf6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 e3 Nxd4 exd4 Qf6 Nc3 Qxd4 Be2

Transpose to wikichess #158877#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bd5 Bxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Bxg5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Bb4 Nc3 Bxc3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
d4 Nf6 c4 e5 dxe5 Ng4 Bf4 Bb4 Nc3 Bxc3 bxc3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Bxg5 hxg5 Qe7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4 e5 d5 Bb5 Ne4 cxd4 Bb6 Nc3 O-O Be3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 f6 exf6 Qxf6 Be2 Bg6 Qb3 Qe6 O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Bxg5 hxg5 Qe7 Rad1 Rfe8

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5 c3 Nc6 Nf3 Qb6 a3 Nh6 b4 cxd4 cxd4 Nf5 Bb2 Bd7 g4 Nfe7 Nc3 h5 Na4 Qd8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Bxg5 hxg5 Qe7 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Qe6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Bxg5 hxg5 Qe7 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Qe6 b3 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4 e5 d5 Bb5 Ne4 cxd4 Bb6 Nc3 O-O Be3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 f6 exf6 Qxf6 Be2 Bg6 Qb3 Qe6 O-O Na5 Qb4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 Bg5 g6 d6 Bg7 e4 Nc6 Nc3 b4 Nd5 exd6 Bc4 Bb7 O-O O-O h4 Na5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bd5 Bxd5 Qxd5 Bxg5 hxg5 Qe7 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Qe6 b3 Qxd5 Rxd5 Re6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2197)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4 e5 d5 Bb5 Ne4 cxd4 Bb6 Nc3 O-O Be3 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Qc2 Nxc3 bxc3 f6 exf6 Qxf6 Be2 Bg6 Qb3 Qe6 O-O Na5 Qb4 Nc4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5 c3 Nc6 Nf3 Qb6 a3 Nh6 b4 cxd4 cxd4 Nf5 Bb2 Bd7 g4 Nfe7 Nc3 h5 Na4 Qd8 g5 Ng6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4 Bg4 Qa4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4 Bg4 Qa4 O-O Nc3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4 Bg4 Qa4 O-O Nc3 Re8 O-O

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 g6 O-O Bg7 e4 e5 d5 Nb6 Qb3 Bg4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 d4 cxd4 cxd4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb5 Bd7 Nc3 dxe5 dxe5 g6 O-O Bg7 Qe2 O-O Rd1 Qc7 a4 Nxe5 Bxd7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4 Bg4 Qa4 O-O Nc3 Re8 O-O a6 Rfe1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 d4 cxd4 cxd4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb5 Bd7 Nc3 dxe5 dxe5 g6 O-O Bg7 Qe2 O-O Rd1 Qc7 a4 Nxe5 Bxd7 Nxf3 Qxf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4 Bg4 Qa4 O-O Nc3 Re8 O-O a6 Rfe1 b5 Qc2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3 Be7 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 g6 O-O Bg7 e4 e5 d5 Nb6 Qb3 Bg4 Be2 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4 Bg4 Qa4 O-O Nc3 Re8 O-O a6 Rfe1 b5 Qc2 Rc8 h3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
g3 d5 Bg2 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 c5 Nb3 c4 Nd4 Bc5 c3 Nc6 d3 cxd3 exd3 Nf6 dxe4 dxe4 Be3 Bxd4 cxd4 Bg4 Qa4 O-O Nc3 Re8 O-O a6 Rfe1 b5 Qc2 Rc8 h3 Bh5 Qd2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4 Nxd4 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 d4 cxd4 cxd4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb5 Bd7 Nc3 dxe5 dxe5 g6 O-O Bg7 Qe2 O-O Rd1 Qc7 a4 Nxe5 Bxd7 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nxd7 Nd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4 Nxd4 Nxd4 dxc4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3 Be7 Rc1 c4 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4 Nxd4 Nxd4 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd5 Qe2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2 h6 Bh4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4 Nxd4 Nxd4 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd5 Qe2 Bxc4 Rxc4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4 Nxd4 Nxd4 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd5 Qe2 Bxc4 Rxc4 Rxc4 Qxc4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4 Nxd4 Nxd4 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd5 Qe2 Bxc4 Rxc4 Rxc4 Qxc4 Nd5 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3 Be7 Rc1 c4 Bg5 Qd7 g3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2 cxd4 O-O

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3 e6 Be2 c5 Be3 cxd4 Nxd4 Ne7 Nd2 Nbc6 N2f3 Be4 O-O a6 Rc1 Rc8 c4 Nxd4 Nxd4 dxc4 Bxc4 Bd5 Qe2 Bxc4 Rxc4 Rxc4 Qxc4 Nd5 Rc1 Be7 Qc8

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2 cxd4 O-O d3 Qe3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 g6 O-O Bg7 e4 e5 d5 Nb6 Qb3 Bg4 Be2 O-O Rfe1 Rfd8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2 cxd4 O-O d3 Qe3 Qa3 cxd5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3 Be7 Rc1 c4 Bg5 Qd7 g3 cxb3 axb3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 d4 cxd4 cxd4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb5 Bd7 Nc3 dxe5 dxe5 g6 O-O Bg7 Qe2 O-O Rd1 Qc7 a4 Nxe5 Bxd7 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nxd7 Nd5 Qe5 Bf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3 Be7 Rc1 c4 Bg5 Qd7 g3 cxb3 axb3 Nf5 Nxf5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5 Bf2 Qg5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 g6 O-O Bg7 e4 e5 d5 Nb6 Qb3 Bg4 Be2 O-O Rfe1 Rfd8 Rad1 Bxf3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3 Be7 Rc1 c4 Bg5 Qd7 g3 cxb3 axb3 Nf5 Nxf5 Bxf5 Bxe7

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5 Nxg3 fxg3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Be3 Be6 Bf3

Transpose to wikichess #44846#

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5 Bf2 Qg5 Be4 O-O

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5 Nxg3 fxg3 cxd5 Ne2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5 Bf2 Qg5 Be4 O-O Qc1 Qxc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2155)
e4 c5 c3 Nf6 e5 Nd5 d4 cxd4 cxd4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nb6 Bb5 Bd7 Nc3 dxe5 dxe5 g6 O-O Bg7 Qe2 O-O Rd1 Qc7 a4 Nxe5 Bxd7 Nxf3 Qxf3 Nxd7 Nd5 Qe5 Bf4 Qxb2 Rab1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nd2 e6 Ngf3 c5 Bb5 Nd7 O-O a6 Bxd7 Qxd7 Nh4 Nh6 Ndf3 Be4 Be3 Qb5 b3 Be7 Rc1 c4 Bg5 Qd7 g3 cxb3 axb3 Nf5 Nxf5 Bxf5 Bxe7 Qxe7 c4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5 Bf2 Qg5 Be4 O-O Qc1 Qxc1 Rxc1 Nxc3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5 Nxg3 fxg3 cxd5 Ne2 Nf6 g4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5 Bf2 Qg5 Be4 O-O Qc1 Qxc1 Rxc1 Nxc3 bxc3 Rad8

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2 h6 Bh4 Bd6 Bg3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5 Bf2 Qg5 Be4 O-O Qc1 Qxc1 Rxc1 Nxc3 bxc3 Rad8 Kd2 Rd7

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5 Nxg3 fxg3 cxd5 Ne2 Nf6 g4 Re6 g5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5 Nxg3 fxg3 cxd5 Ne2 Nf6 g4 Re6 g5 Ne8 Nf4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Nd4 Bg2 Nxf3 Bxf3 Bb4 Qb3 Bc5 O-O c6 d3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 g6 O-O Bg7 e4 e5 d5 Nb6 Qb3 Bg4 Be2 O-O Rfe1 Rfd8 Rad1 Bxf3 Bxf3 Bf8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2 h6 Bh4 Bd6 Bg3 Bxg3 hxg3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5 Nxg3 fxg3 cxd5 Ne2 Nf6 g4 Re6 g5 Ne8 Nf4 Rc6 h4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
c3 e5 d4 e4 Bf4 d5 e3 c6 c4 Bb4 Nd2 Ne7 Rc1 O-O a3 Bxd2 Qxd2 Nd7 h3 Re8 Bg3 Nf5 cxd5 Nxg3 fxg3 cxd5 Ne2 Nf6 g4 Re6 g5 Ne8 Nf4 Rc6 h4 Rxc1 Qxc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2 h6 Bh4 Bd6 Bg3 Bxg3 hxg3 d6 c3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4 Bg4 f3 Bd7 c4 c6 Nc3 cxd5 cxd5 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Bd3 Nc6 Nge2 Bb4 a3 Ba5 Be3 Nd5 Bf2 Qg5 Be4 O-O Qc1 Qxc1 Rxc1 Nxc3 bxc3 Rad8 Kd2 Rd7 Rb1 g6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 g6 O-O Bg7 e4 e5 d5 Nb6 Qb3 Bg4 Be2 O-O Rfe1 Rfd8 Rad1 Bxf3 Bxf3 Bf8 a4 Rab8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2010)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 g6 O-O Bg7 e4 e5 d5 Nb6 Qb3 Bg4 Be2 O-O Rfe1 Rfd8 Rad1 Bxf3 Bxf3 Bf8 a4 Rab8 Rd2 h5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2 cxd4 O-O d3 Qe3 Qa3 cxd5 Nxd5 Qe4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2 cxd4 O-O d3 Qe3 Qa3 cxd5 Nxd5 Qe4 Qa6 Nc4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2 h6 Bh4 Bd6 Bg3 Bxg3 hxg3 d6 c3 O-O f4

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2 cxd4 O-O d3 Qe3 Qa3 cxd5 Nxd5 Qe4 Qa6 Nc4 Bc5 Rxd3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 Bf4 Rxe1 Qxe1 Bxd4 Bxd6 cxd6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4 h5 Bd3 Bxd3 Qxd3 e6 Bg5 Qb6 Nd2 c5 c4 Qxb2 Rd1 Nc6 Ngf3 Nb4 Qe2 cxd4 O-O d3 Qe3 Qa3 cxd5 Nxd5 Qe4 Qa6 Nc4 Bc5 Rxd3 Nge7 Bxe7

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 Bf4 Rxe1 Qxe1 Bxd4 Bxd6 cxd6 Nc3 Be5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2 h6 Bh4 Bd6 Bg3 Bxg3 hxg3 d6 c3 O-O f4 Bd7 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 Bf4 Rxe1 Qxe1 Bxd4 Bxd6 cxd6 Nc3 Be5 Rd1 b6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2204)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Bb5 Nd4 Nf3 a6 Bd3 e6 O-O Nc6 Be2 Nd4 d3 Ne7 Bg5 Qc7 Nxd4 cxd4 Nb1 Nc6 Nd2 h6 Bh4 Bd6 Bg3 Bxg3 hxg3 d6 c3 O-O f4 Bd7 Rc1 Qb6 Kh2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 Bf4 Rxe1 Qxe1 Bxd4 Bxd6 cxd6 Nc3 Be5 Rd1 b6 Qe4 Rb8

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 Bf4 Rxe1 Qxe1 Bxd4 Bxd6 cxd6 Nc3 Be5 Rd1 b6 Qe4 Rb8 Nd5 Bb7

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 Bf4 Rxe1 Qxe1 Bxd4 Bxd6 cxd6 Nc3 Be5 Rd1 b6 Qe4 Rb8 Nd5 Bb7 c3 g6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2207)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 Bf4 Rxe1 Qxe1 Bxd4 Bxd6 cxd6 Nc3 Be5 Rd1 b6 Qe4 Rb8 Nd5 Bb7 c3 g6 g3 a6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2026)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 Nc3 b5 Bb3 Bc5 d3 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 d6 a3 Bc5 b4 Bb6 Be3 O-O Be2 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Na4 Nxf3 Qxf3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 Rxf5 Nc3 Nf6 Rae1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e4 Bb4 d3 d6 a3 Bc5 b4 Bb6 Be3 O-O Be2 Bg4 O-O Bxf3 Bxf3 Nd4 Na4 Nxf3 Qxf3 Bxe3 Qxe3 Nh5 g3 f5 exf5 Rxf5 Nc3 Nf6 Rae1 Qe8 f3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2026)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 Nc3 b5 Bb3 Bc5 d3 h6 Nd5 d6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2026)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 Nc3 b5 Bb3 Bc5 d3 h6 Nd5 d6 c3 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Be2 Be7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be2 e5 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Be2 Be7 Qd3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be2 e5 O-O Bxd6 c3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nf3 Nxe4 d4 Bg4 h3 Bh5 Be2 Be7 Qd3 Nf6 Qb5 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be2 e5 O-O Bxd6 c3 O-O Nbd2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Nf3 Nc6 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 c3 Rxe1 Qxe1 Ne8 Bf4 d5 Nd2 Bf5 Qe3 c6 Re1 h6 Nf3 Nd6

Transpose to wikichess #219263#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Nf3 Nc6 Ne5 Nxe5 fxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Bxe6 Nf3 Nc6 Ne5 Nxe5 fxe5 Qd4 exf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndb4 Nxc6 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nxc6 Nc3 Bd7 Be3 g6 Rc1 Bg7 h4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 f5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Be2 b6

Transpose to wikichess #148259#

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Qc7 Be3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Qc7 Be3 Nf6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndb4 Nxc6 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nxc6 Nc3 Bd7 Be3 g6 Rc1 Bg7 h4 h5 Ke1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndb4 Nxc6 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nxc6 Nc3 Bd7 Be3 g6 Rc1 Bg7 h4 h5 Ke1 Rc8 f4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndb4 Nxc6 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nxc6 Nc3 Bd7 Be3 g6 Rc1 Bg7 h4 h5 Ke1 Rc8 f4 b6 Kf2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndb4 Nxc6 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nxc6 Nc3 Bd7 Be3 g6 Rc1 Bg7 h4 h5 Ke1 Rc8 f4 b6 Kf2 Nd4 Bb7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndb4 Nxc6 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nxc6 Nc3 Bd7 Be3 g6 Rc1 Bg7 h4 h5 Ke1 Rc8 f4 b6 Kf2 Nd4 Bb7 Rc7 Bg2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Ndb4 Nxc6 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nxc6 Nc3 Bd7 Be3 g6 Rc1 Bg7 h4 h5 Ke1 Rc8 f4 b6 Kf2 Nd4 Bb7 Rc7 Bg2 Nf5 Nd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1 Bd7 a5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1 Bd7 a5 Rac8 Nd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1 Bd7 a5 Rac8 Nd2 exf4 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1 Bd7 a5 Rac8 Nd2 exf4 Bxf4 Be6 h3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1 Bd7 a5 Rac8 Nd2 exf4 Bxf4 Be6 h3 Nxd3 cxd3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1 Bd7 a5 Rac8 Nd2 exf4 Bxf4 Be6 h3 Nxd3 cxd3 Qc5 Ra4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3 cxd5 d3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3 cxd5 d3 Nc6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3 cxd5 d3 Nc6 Bg5 Nxd4 Rd1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3 cxd5 d3 Nc6 Bg5 Nxd4 Rd1 Nc2 Kd2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (1975)
e4 e6 Nc3 d5 Bb5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 d5 Nf3 Bg4 Ne5 h5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1975)
e4 e6 Nc3 d5 Bb5 c6 Bd3

Transpose to wikichess #156746#

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 d5 Nf3 Bg4 Ne5 h5 c4 f6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3 cxd5 d3 Nc6 Bg5 Nxd4 Rd1 Nc2 Kd2 Nb4 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 d5 Nf3 Bg4 Ne5 h5 c4 f6 Ng6 Rh7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 d5 Nf3 Bg4 Ne5 h5 c4 f6 Ng6 Rh7 cxd5 Qxd5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3 cxd5 d3 Nc6 Bg5 Nxd4 Rd1 Nc2 Kd2 Nb4 Bxf6 gxf6 dxe4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 d5 Nf3 Bg4 Ne5 h5 c4 f6 Ng6 Rh7 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f4 e5 Nf3 Nbd7 a4 Qc7 Bd3 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O Nc5 Kh1 Bd7 a5 Rac8 Nd2 exf4 Bxf4 Be6 h3 Nxd3 cxd3 Qc5 Ra4 d5 Nb3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Nbd7 Bc4 Be7 Qd2 Nc5 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O-O Bd7 Rhe1 Rc8 Kb1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Nbd7 Bc4 Be7 Qd2 Nc5 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O-O Bd7 Rhe1 Rc8 Kb1 O-O Ba2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 d5 Nf3 Bg4 Ne5 h5 c4 f6 Ng6 Rh7 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxe2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Nbd7 Bc4 Be7 Qd2 Nc5 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O-O Bd7 Rhe1 Rc8 Kb1 O-O Ba2 Rfd8 Re3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (1975)
d4 d5 Nf3 Bg4 Ne5 h5 c4 f6 Ng6 Rh7 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxe2 Qxg8 Kd7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Nbd7 Bc4 Be7 Qd2 Nc5 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O-O Bd7 Rhe1 Rc8 Kb1 O-O Ba2 Rfd8 Re3 Bc6 Qf2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Nbd7 Bc4 Be7 Qd2 Nc5 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O-O Bd7 Rhe1 Rc8 Kb1 O-O Ba2 Rfd8 Re3 Bc6 Qf2 Na4 Nxa4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Nbd7 Bc4 Be7 Qd2 Nc5 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O-O Bd7 Rhe1 Rc8 Kb1 O-O Ba2 Rfd8 Re3 Bc6 Qf2 Na4 Nxa4 Bxa4 Re2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2 Nf6 e5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2 Nf6 e5 Ng4 d4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2 Nf6 e5 Ng4 d4 Nxe3 Nxe3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O e5 Rd8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
c4 e5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 c6 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Qb6 e3 d5 Nc3 Bg4 Qb3 Bc5 h3 Bd7 cxd5 Bxd4 exd4 Qxb3 axb3 cxd5 d3 Nc6 Bg5 Nxd4 Rd1 Nc2 Kd2 Nb4 Bxf6 gxf6 dxe4 dxe4 Bxe4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O e5 Rd8 f4 Nb6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2 Nf6 e5 Ng4 d4 Nxe3 Nxe3 bxc3 bxc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 c3 Rxe1 Qxe1 Ne8 Bf4 d5 Nd2 Nd6 Nf3 c6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Nb6 Kb1 Nbxd5 Bg5 Be7 g3 Nb6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 h4 g4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O e5 Rd8 f4 Nb6 Nxb6 axb6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2 Nf6 e5 Ng4 d4 Nxe3 Nxe3 bxc3 bxc3 cxd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O e5 Rd8 f4 Nb6 Nxb6 axb6 a3 b5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2 Nf6 e5 Ng4 d4 Nxe3 Nxe3 bxc3 bxc3 cxd4 cxd4 O-O Rfd1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 O-O-O Nb6 Kb1 Nbxd5 Bg5 Be7 g3 Nb6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd6 h4 g4 Na4 Bc4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 c3 Rxe1 Qxe1 Ne8 Bf4 d5 Nd2 Nd6 Nf3 c6 a4 a5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O e5 Rd8 f4 Nb6 Nxb6 axb6 a3 b5 Qd2 Bf8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3 Qxe2 Bxe2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O e5 Rd8 f4 Nb6 Nxb6 axb6 a3 b5 Qd2 Bf8 Ne4 c5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 c3 Rxe1 Qxe1 Ne8 Bf4 d5 Nd2 Nd6 Nf3 c6 a4 a5 h3 Bf5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3 Qxe2 Bxe2 Bb4 Bd2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 e3 Nd7 Be2 g6 O-O Qe7 e4 dxc4 Nd2 Bg7 Nxc4 O-O e5 Rd8 f4 Nb6 Nxb6 axb6 a3 b5 Qd2 Bf8 Ne4 c5 Nf6 Kh8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3 Qxe2 Bxe2 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 c3 Rxe1 Qxe1 Ne8 Bf4 d5 Nd2 Nd6 Nf3 c6 a4 a5 h3 Bf5 Qd1 Qd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2222)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 d3 d6 Be3 Rb8 Qd2 b5 Nge2 Nd4 O-O b4 Nd1 a5 c3 Nxe2 Qxe2 Nf6 e5 Ng4 d4 Nxe3 Nxe3 bxc3 bxc3 cxd4 cxd4 O-O Rfd1 Be6 Rac1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3 Qxe2 Bxe2 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O Rae8 Rfe1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2509)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 Re1 Nd6 Nxe5 Be7 Bf1 Nxe5 Rxe5 O-O d4 Bf6 Re1 Re8 c3 Rxe1 Qxe1 Ne8 Bf4 d5 Nd2 Nd6 Nf3 c6 a4 a5 h3 Bf5 Qd1 Qd7 Qb3 Be4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3 Qxe2 Bxe2 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O Rae8 Rfe1 d5 Be3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3 Qxe2 Bxe2 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O Rae8 Rfe1 d5 Be3 Bxc4 Bxc4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O e4 d5 e5 Ne4 Bd3 c5 Nf3 cxd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bf4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 O-O g5 cxd5 Bxc3 bxc3 exd5 Be3 Nxe5 f3 Nc5 Bf5 f6 Kg2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2196)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 h4 a5 c4 Ba6 g3 f6 exf6 Nxf6 Nc3 Qxe2 Bxe2 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O Rae8 Rfe1 d5 Be3 Bxc4 Bxc4 dxc4 a3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Nbxd5 Bg5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Nbxd5 Bg5 O-O Qxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Nbxd5 Bg5 O-O Qxd5 Qxa5 Qxd6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 Nb6 Na5 Nbxd5 Bg5 O-O Qxd5 Qxa5 Qxd6 Rad8 Bd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O e4 d5 e5 Ne4 Bd3 c5 Nf3 cxd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bf4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 O-O g5 cxd5 Bxc3 bxc3 exd5 Be3 Nxe5 f3 Nc5 Bf5 f6 Kg2 Qf7 h4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 d6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g3 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 Be2 Nc6 O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bg4 h3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g3 Be7 Bg2 O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bg4 h3 Bxf3 Bxf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 c5 d5 b5 dxe6 fxe6 cxb5 d5 Nc3 Nbd7 e4 d4 Na4 Bb7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 e3 c5 Be2 Nc6 O-O Bg4 h3 Bxf3 Bxf3 cxd4 exd4

Transpose to wikichess #166658#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g3 Be7 Bg2 O-O Nf3 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 c5 d5 exd5 cxd5 Bb7 Bg2 Nxd5 O-O Be7 Rd1 Nc6 Qf5 Nf6 e4 g6 Qf4 O-O e5 Nh5 Qg4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4 Qh4 g3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 c5 d5 exd5 cxd5 Bb7 Bg2 Nxd5 O-O Be7 Rd1 Nc6 Qf5 Nf6 e4 g6 Qf4 O-O e5 Nh5 Qg4 d5 exd6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g3 Be7 Bg2 O-O Nf3 Nc6 d5 Na5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 Be2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 c5 d5 exd5 cxd5 Bb7 Bg2 Nxd5 O-O Be7 Rd1 Nc6 Qf5 Nf6 e4 g6 Qf4 O-O e5 Nh5 Qg4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 c5 d5 exd5 cxd5 Bb7 Bg2 Nxd5 O-O Be7 Rd1 Nc6 Qf5 Nf6 e4 g6 Qf4 O-O e5 Nh5 Qg4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 Nc3 Qb8 Bh6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 Be2 Qf5 Bxg4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Ba6 Qc2 c5 d5 exd5 cxd5 Bb7 Bg2 Nxd5 O-O Be7 Rd1 Nc6 Qf5 Nf6 e4 g6 Qf4 O-O e5 Nh5 Qg4 d5 exd6 Bxd6 Nc3 Qb8 Bh6 Re8 Nd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 Be2 Qf5 Bxg4 Qxg4 Bb2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 Be2 Qf5 Bxg4 Qxg4 Bb2 c6 h3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O Kc2 fxg6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 Be2 Qf5 Bxg4 Qxg4 Bb2 c6 h3 Qf3 Rg1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O Kc2 fxg6 Rae1 Bf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g3 Be7 Bg2 O-O Nf3 Nc6 d5 Na5 b3 b6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 e3 Bb4 Qc2 Bxc3 Qxc3 Qe7 a3 d5 d4 e4 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Ng4 cxd5 O-O b4 Qh4 g3 Qh5 Be2 Qf5 Bxg4 Qxg4 Bb2 c6 h3 Qf3 Rg1 cxd5 e6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd7 cxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd7 cxd5 Bxd5 Bxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O Kc2 fxg6 Rae1 Bf6 b4 g5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 f5 c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 g3 Be7 Bg2 O-O Nf3 Nc6 d5 Na5 b3 b6 O-O Bb4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd7 cxd5 Bxd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 c6 Nf3 Bb4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 c6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd7 cxd5 Bxd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc5 Nd4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O Kc2 fxg6 Rae1 Bf6 b4 g5 a4 g4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 c6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Nbd7 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O Kc2 fxg6 Rae1 Bf6 b4 g5 a4 g4 Nd2 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 c6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Nbd7 O-O O-O Qc2 Qe7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd7 cxd5 Bxd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc5 Nd4 Qd7 Qc2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O Kc2 fxg6 Rae1 Bf6 b4 g5 a4 g4 Nd2 Ne5 Be2 h5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Bf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 c6 Nf3 Bb4 Nbd2 Nbd7 O-O O-O Qc2 Qe7 e4 dxe4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be7 O-O O-O Bf3 Be6 Be3

Transpose to wikichess #44846#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd7 cxd5 Bxd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc5 Nd4 Qd7 Qc2 f6 b4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
Nf3 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 h4 Bg7 e4 Nxc3 dxc3 Qxd1 Kxd1 Nd7 h5 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Be3 h6 hxg6 O-O-O Kc2 fxg6 Rae1 Bf6 b4 g5 a4 g4 Nd2 Ne5 Be2 h5 f4 gxf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2242)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 a3 Be7 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd7 cxd5 Bxd5 Bxd5 exd5 Nf3 Nc5 Nd4 Qd7 Qc2 f6 b4 fxe5 bxc5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 b4 Ne2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 b4 Ne2 Bb7 Ned4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 Nf5 Bxf5 exf5 Nbc6 Nd5 e6 fxe6 fxe6 Ne3 Qa5 c3 Nf3 gxf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 b4 Ne2 Bb7 Ned4 Bh6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 Nf5 Bxf5 exf5 Nbc6 Nd5 e6 fxe6 fxe6 Ne3 Qa5 c3 Nf3 gxf3 Bxc3 bxc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O b6 Rad1 O-O Kh1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 b4 Ne2 Bb7 Ned4 Bh6 Bd3 d5 Nxc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O b6 Rad1 O-O Kh1 Re8 g4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 Ng4 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 Bg7 h3 Ne5 Nf5 Bxf5 exf5 Nbc6 Nd5 e6 fxe6 fxe6 Ne3 Qa5 c3 Nf3 gxf3 Bxc3 bxc3 Qxc3 Qd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 b4 Ne2 Bb7 Ned4 Bh6 Bd3 d5 Nxc6 Bxf4 Qxb4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 b4 Ne2 Bb7 Ned4 Bh6 Bd3 d5 Nxc6 Bxf4 Qxb4 Bxc6 exd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Nc6 Bxf6 gxf6 Nb3 Qc7 O-O-O b5 Kb1 b4 Ne2 Bb7 Ned4 Bh6 Bd3 d5 Nxc6 Bxf4 Qxb4 Bxc6 exd5 Bxd5 Rhe1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4 Nxe4 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Be7 c3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Be7 c3 O-O Nc5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Be7 c3 O-O Nc5 Qb6 b4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Be7 c3 O-O Nc5 Qb6 b4 Rfd8 Qe2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Be7 c3 O-O Nc5 Qb6 b4 Rfd8 Qe2 Bxc5 Bxc5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 Nf6 dxc5 Nxe4 cxd6 Nc6 Be3 e5 Bd3 Nf6 Nc3 Bxd6 O-O h6 Nd2 Bg4 f3 Be6 Nde4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Be7 c3 O-O Nc5 Qb6 b4 Rfd8 Qe2 Bxc5 Bxc5 Qc7 Rfd1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O b6 Rad1 O-O Kh1 Re8 g4 hxg4 fxg4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O b6 Rad1 O-O Kh1 Re8 g4 hxg4 fxg4 Ne4 Qb4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3 Nc5 Qb5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3 Nc5 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2249)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 g6 Be2 Bg7 O-O b6 Rad1 O-O Kh1 Re8 g4 hxg4 fxg4 Ne4 Qb4 Nec5 Qe1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3 Nc5 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5 Bd7 Nec3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3 Nc5 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5 Bd7 Nec3 Rfd8 Rfd1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3 Nc5 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5 Bd7 Nec3 Rfd8 Rfd1 Ne8 Be2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3 Nc5 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5 Bd7 Nec3 Rfd8 Rfd1 Ne8 Be2 Ne6 Bg3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 Bf4 Bg7 e3 c5 dxc5 Qa5 Rc1 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O Nge2 Qxc5 Qb3 Qa5 O-O Nbd7 h3 Nc5 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5 Bd7 Nec3 Rfd8 Rfd1 Ne8 Be2 Ne6 Bg3 a6 Na3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qe2 Qc7 O-O-O b5 a3 Bb7 g4 Be7 Bh4 b4 axb4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be2 e5 Nb3 Be6 Qd3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3 Nb6 b3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3 Nb6 b3 O-O g5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3 Nb6 b3 O-O g5 Ne8 h4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3 Nb6 b3 O-O g5 Ne8 h4 Qc7 Nd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 f6 gxf6 Bxf6 Na5 Qe8 Kb1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3 Nb6 b3 O-O g5 Ne8 h4 Qc7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 f6 gxf6 Bxf6 Na5 Qe8 Kb1 Kh8 Nc6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3 Nb6 b3 O-O g5 Ne8 h4 Qc7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bg4 f3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5 Nd5 Bxd5 exd5 f6 gxf6 Bxf6 Na5 Qe8 Kb1 Kh8 Nc6 Bd8 Nxd8

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e5 Nde2 Be6 g4 Nbd7 Be3 Rc8 Bg2 Be7 Qd2 b5 Ng3 Nb6 b3 O-O g5 Ne8 h4 Qc7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bg4 f3 Bd7 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qe2 Qc7 O-O-O b5 a3 Bb7 g4 Be7 Bh4 b4 axb4 a5 b5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qe2 Qc7 O-O-O b5 a3 Bb7 g4 Be7 Bh4 b4 axb4 a5 b5 a4 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qe2 Qc7 O-O-O b5 a3 Bb7 g4 Be7 Bh4 b4 axb4 a5 b5 a4 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qc4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 c5 dxc5 Na6 g3 Nxc5 Bg2 Nce4 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Qc7 Nd4 d5 cxd5 exd5 Bf4 Qc5 Be5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 c5 dxc5 Na6 g3 Nxc5 Bg2 Nce4 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Qc7 Nd4 d5 cxd5 exd5 Bf4 Qc5 Be5 Re8 Nb3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qe2 Qc7 O-O-O b5 a3 Bb7 g4 Be7 Bh4 b4 axb4 a5 b5 a4 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qc4 Nc5 g5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qe2 Qc7 O-O-O b5 a3 Bb7 g4 Be7 Bh4 b4 axb4 a5 b5 a4 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qc4 Nc5 g5 Be7 h4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 c5 dxc5 Na6 g3 Nxc5 Bg2 Nce4 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Qc7 Nd4 d5 cxd5 exd5 Bf4 Qc5 Be5 Re8 Nb3 Qc6 Bd4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2255)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Nbd7 Qe2 Qc7 O-O-O b5 a3 Bb7 g4 Be7 Bh4 b4 axb4 a5 b5 a4 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qc4 Nc5 g5 Be7 h4 O-O Kb1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 c5 dxc5 Na6 g3 Nxc5 Bg2 Nce4 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Qc7 Nd4 d5 cxd5 exd5 Bf4 Qc5 Be5 Re8 Nb3 Qc6 Bd4 Bf5 Qb2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 c5 dxc5 Na6 g3 Nxc5 Bg2 Nce4 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Qc7 Nd4 d5 cxd5 exd5 Bf4 Qc5 Be5 Re8 Nb3 Qc6 Bd4 Bf5 Qb2 a6 a4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2211)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 Qc2 O-O Nf3 c5 dxc5 Na6 g3 Nxc5 Bg2 Nce4 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Qc7 Nd4 d5 cxd5 exd5 Bf4 Qc5 Be5 Re8 Nb3 Qc6 Bd4 Bf5 Qb2 a6 a4 Rac8 e3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 d3 e6 f4 b4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 d3 e6 f4 b4 Nce2 f5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 d3 e6 f4 b4 Nce2 f5 Nf3 fxe4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 c5 Nc3 a6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 d3 e6 f4 b4 Nce2 f5 Nf3 fxe4 Nd2 exd3

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bd7 Nf3 Bc6 Bd3 Nd7 O-O Ngf6 Neg5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Bd7 Nf3 Bc6 Bd3 Nd7 O-O Ngf6 Neg5 Bd6 Re1

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1 Kc8 Bb2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1 Kc8 Bb2 Be6 Nd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1 Kc8 Bb2 Be6 Nd5 g5 c4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1 Kc8 Bb2 Be6 Nd5 g5 c4 b6 g4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1 Kc8 Bb2 Be6 Nd5 g5 c4 b6 g4 Ne7 Kh2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1 Kc8 Bb2 Be6 Nd5 g5 c4 b6 g4 Ne7 Kh2 Ng6 Kg3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Bd7 h3 h6 b3 c5 Rd1 Kc8 Bb2 Be6 Nd5 g5 c4 b6 g4 Ne7 Kh2 Ng6 Kg3 Be7 Nd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 c5 c4 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 Nc3 Nc6 Bg2

Transpose to wikichess #184730#

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5 c3 Nc6 Nf3 Bd7 dxc5 Bxc5 b4 Bb6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5 c3 Nc6 Nf3 Bd7 dxc5 Bxc5 b4 Bb6 b5 Na5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1965)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5 c3 Nc6 Nf3 Bd7 dxc5 Bxc5 b4 Bb6 b5 Na5 Bd3 Ne7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5 Qc7 Kf2

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5 Qc7 Kf2 fxe5 fxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5 Bb5 Nd7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5 Bb5 Nd7 Bg5 a6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5 Qc7 Kf2 fxe5 fxe5 Ndxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1976)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O d5 Ne5 Bd6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (1976)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O d5 Ne5 Bd6 f4 c5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5 Qc7 Kf2 fxe5 fxe5 Ndxe5 dxe5 Nxe5 Kg1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5 Bb5 Nd7 Bg5 a6 Bd3 Bg8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (1976)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O d5 Ne5 Bd6 f4 c5 c3 O-O

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5 Bb5 Nd7 Bg5 a6 Bd3 Bg8 Qe2 Qc7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5 Qc7 Kf2 fxe5 fxe5 Ndxe5 dxe5 Nxe5 Kg1 Ng4 h6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Paul Maron    (1976)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O d5 Ne5 Bd6 f4 c5 c3 O-O Nd2 Ne4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8 Nd3 Bxd2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5 Bb5 Nd7 Bg5 a6 Bd3 Bg8 Qe2 Qc7 Bxe7 Kxe7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8 Nd3 Bxd2 Bxd2 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5 Bb5 Nd7 Bg5 a6 Bd3 Bg8 Qe2 Qc7 Bxe7 Kxe7 O-O-O Kd8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8 Nd3 Bxd2 Bxd2 Nxe4 Rac1 Nxc5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5 Qc7 Kf2 fxe5 fxe5 Ndxe5 dxe5 Nxe5 Kg1 Ng4 h6 Rf7 Bg5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4 Bxe4 dxe4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8 Nd3 Bxd2 Bxd2 Nxe4 Rac1 Nxc5 Nxc5 Bxg2

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8 Nd3 Bxd2 Bxd2 Nxe4 Rac1 Nxc5 Nxc5 Bxg2 Kxg2 bxc5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 f4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Be3 a6 Ne2 Qb6 Qc1 Be7 h4 O-O c3 f6 h5 Qc7 Kf2 fxe5 fxe5 Ndxe5 dxe5 Nxe5 Kg1 Ng4 h6 Rf7 Bg5 Bd6 Rh4

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8 Nd3 Bxd2 Bxd2 Nxe4 Rac1 Nxc5 Nxc5 Bxg2 Kxg2 bxc5 Qxc5 Qb7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 b4 Ne2 Ne8 f4 a5 f5 a4 fxe6 axb3 exf7 Rxf7 cxb3 Rxa2 Ng3 Rxf1

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nc3 e6 g4 Bg6 Nge2 c5 h4 h5 Nf4 Bh7 Nxh5 cxd4 Nb5 Nc6 Nxd4 Nge7 c3 Nxe5 Bb5 Nd7 Bg5 a6 Bd3 Bg8 Qe2 Qc7 Bxe7 Kxe7 O-O-O Kd8 Kb1 Kc8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
Nf3 e6 g3 f5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 d5 Bg2 Bb4 Nd2 O-O Ngf3 b6 O-O Bb7 Ne5 a5 Qc2 c5 cxd5 Bxd5 e4 Bb7 dxc5 Qc8 Nd3 Bxd2 Bxd2 Nxe4 Rac1 Nxc5 Nxc5 Bxg2 Kxg2 bxc5 Qxc5 Qb7 Kh3 h6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4 Bxe4 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4 Bxe4 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qe2 g5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
Nf3 e6 g3 f5 Bg2 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6 gxf6 Nd2

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6 gxf6 Nd2 Kd7 a3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4 Bxe4 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qe2 g5 O-O Qe7

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 e5 Bc4 Be7 d3 d6 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4 Bxe4 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qe2 g5 O-O Qe7 Kg2 O-O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6 gxf6 Nd2 Kd7 a3 Rc7 g3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 Nbd2 Nf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
Nf3 e6 g3 f5 Bg2 Be7 c4 Nf6

Transpose to wikichess #145256#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6 gxf6 Nd2 Kd7 a3 Rc7 g3 Rhc8 Nb3

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4 Bxe4 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qe2 g5 O-O Qe7 Kg2 O-O-O b4 e5

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6 gxf6 Nd2 Kd7 a3 Rc7 g3 Rhc8 Nb3 Kd8 Kf1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Ronnie Tabudlong    (2242)
d4 d5 c4 c6 cxd5 cxd5 Bf4 Nc6 e3 Nf6 Bb5 Bg4 Nf3 Rc8 O-O Bxf3 Qxf3 e6 Rc1 Bd6 Bg5 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6 gxf6 Nd2 Kd7 a3 Rc7 g3 Rhc8 Nb3 Kd8 Kf1 Ne7 Ke1

============

Contributors : Ronnie Tabudlong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1 Rc8 O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 Nbd2 Nf6 a4 a6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1 Rc8 O-O O-O a3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 Nbd2 Nf6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6

Transpose to wikichess #232212#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7 Nc3 Qb6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6 O-O Bg7 Re1 e5 Bxc6 dxc6 d3 Qe7 Nbd2 Nf6 Nc4 Nd7 a4

Transpose to wikichess #221382#

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7 Nc3 Qb6 e4 Be7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7 Rd1 Qc7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6 Nd3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7 Nc3 Qb6 e4 Be7 Bg5 h6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7 Bf4 Be8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 Bb4 Nc3 exd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bxc4 Ngf6 f3 O-O Be2 Ne5 O-O Qe7 Bg5 Bxc3 bxc3 c5 Nb3 Rd8 Qc1 h6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2263)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 d5 Bd3 b6 O-O c5

Transpose to wikichess #168119#

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2044)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Bd2 Nbd7 g3 Be7 b3 Bb4 Bg2 Bxc3 Bxc3 Ne4 Bxe4 dxe4 Qg4 Nf6 Qe2 g5 O-O Qe7 Kg2 O-O-O b4 e5 h3 Qe6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1 Rc8 O-O O-O a3 Rfe8 Rfe1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7 Nc3 Qb6 e4 Be7 Bg5 h6 Bh4 b4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7 Rd1 Qc7 Nd2 Nb4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7 Bf4 Be8 Bb3 Rc8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6 Nd3 Nd7 Nf3 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 Bb4 Nc3 exd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bxc4 Ngf6 f3 O-O Be2 Ne5 O-O Qe7 Bg5 Bxc3 bxc3 c5 Nb3 Rd8 Qc1 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7 Rd1 Qc7 Nd2 Nb4 Qc3 f5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6 Nd3 Nd7 Nf3 O-O a5 Ba7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 Bb4 Nc3 exd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bxc4 Ngf6 f3 O-O Be2 Ne5 O-O Qe7 Bg5 Bxc3 bxc3 c5 Nb3 Rd8 Qc1 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nxc5 b6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7 Bf4 Be8 Bb3 Rc8 Rac1 Bc6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7 Rd1 Qc7 Nd2 Nb4 Qc3 f5 Nc4 O-O

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1 a6 Bd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7 Nc3 Qb6 e4 Be7 Bg5 h6 Bh4 b4 Nd1 g5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7 Rd1 Qc7 Nd2 Nb4 Qc3 f5 Nc4 O-O a3 Nd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6 Nd3 Nd7 Nf3 O-O a5 Ba7 Qc2 Bg4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 Bb4 Nc3 exd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bxc4 Ngf6 f3 O-O Be2 Ne5 O-O Qe7 Bg5 Bxc3 bxc3 c5 Nb3 Rd8 Qc1 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nxc5 b6 Nb3 Nd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7 Nc3 Qb6 e4 Be7 Bg5 h6 Bh4 b4 Nd1 g5 Bg3 g4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 Bb4 Nc3 exd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bxc4 Ngf6 f3 O-O Be2 Ne5 O-O Qe7 Bg5 Bxc3 bxc3 c5 Nb3 Rd8 Qc1 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nxc5 b6 Nb3 Nd3 Bxd3 Rxd3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1 Rc8 O-O O-O a3 Rfe8 Rfe1 Qe7 Ne5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 Bb3 b5 a4 Bb7 axb5 axb5 Rxa8 Bxa8 Qe2 c4 Bc2 Nbd7 Nc3 Qb6 e4 Be7 Bg5 h6 Bh4 b4 Nd1 g5 Bg3 g4 Ne5 Qxd4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7 Rd1 Qc7 Nd2 Nb4 Qc3 f5 Nc4 O-O a3 Nd5 Qe1 Rad8

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1 a6 Bd3 O-O-O Nf3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6 Nd3 Nd7 Nf3 O-O a5 Ba7 Qc2 Bg4 Nfe1 Qe7

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 Bb4 Nc3 exd4 Nxd4 Nd7 Bxc4 Ngf6 f3 O-O Be2 Ne5 O-O Qe7 Bg5 Bxc3 bxc3 c5 Nb3 Rd8 Qc1 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Nxc5 b6 Nb3 Nd3 Bxd3 Rxd3 Nd4 Ba6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3 Bd6 Bxd6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1 Rc8 O-O O-O a3 Rfe8 Rfe1 Qe7 Ne5 a6 f4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 cxd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1 Rc8 O-O O-O a3 Rfe8 Rfe1 Qe7 Ne5 a6 f4 c5 Kh1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 cxd5 Bxd5 Nd4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
c3 e5 h3 d5 d4 exd4 cxd4 Bd6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 c6 Bg5 Nbd7 e3 Qc7 Bd3 h6 Bxf6 Nxf6 Qc2 Be6 Rc1 Rc8 O-O O-O a3 Rfe8 Rfe1 Qe7 Ne5 a6 f4 c5 Kh1 Rc7 g4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 cxd5 Bxd5 Nd4 h6 Qb1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 b3 Nbd7 Bb2 Be7 Be2 b6 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nd5 Qc2 Bb7 Rd1 Qc7 Nd2 Nb4 Qc3 f5 Nc4 O-O a3 Nd5 Qe1 Rad8 h3 b5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1 a6 Bd3 O-O-O Nf3 Rhe8 Rhe1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7 Bf4 Be8 Bb3 Rc8 Rac1 Bc6 Bg5 Bd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6 Nd3 Nd7 Nf3 O-O a5 Ba7 Qc2 Bg4 Nfe1 Qe7 f3 Be6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 cxd5 Bxd5 Nd4 h6 Qb1 Nc5 b4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3 b5 h4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7 Bf4 Be8 Bb3 Rc8 Rac1 Bc6 Bg5 Bd5 Nxd5 Nfxd5

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1 a6 Bd3 O-O-O Nf3 Rhe8 Rhe1 Bc5 Re2

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 e4 e5 Nf3 exd4 Bxc4 Nc6 O-O Be6 Bb5 Bc5 b4 Bb6 a4 a6 Bxc6 bxc6 Nbd2 Nf6 Ne5 Qd6 Nd3 Nd7 Nf3 O-O a5 Ba7 Qc2 Bg4 Nfe1 Qe7 f3 Be6 Qxc6 Qd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 cxd5 Bxd5 Nd4 h6 Qb1 Nc5 b4 Nce4 Nxe4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7 Bf4 Be8 Bb3 Rc8 Rac1 Bc6 Bg5 Bd5 Nxd5 Nfxd5 Bd2 Rxc1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2263)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bf4 c5 e3 e6 Nbd2 Be7 dxc5 O-O Be2 Bxc5 c4 Nbd7 O-O b6 h3 Bb7 Bh2 Qe7 a3 Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 cxd5 Bxd5 Nd4 h6 Qb1 Nc5 b4 Nce4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Rc1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1 a6 Bd3 O-O-O Nf3 Rhe8 Rhe1 Bc5 Re2 Qc7 Rde1

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nf3 Nf6 e3 e6 Bxc4 c5 O-O a6 a4 Nc6 Qe2 cxd4 Rd1 Be7 exd4 O-O Nc3 Nb4 Ne5 Bd7 Bf4 Be8 Bb3 Rc8 Rac1 Bc6 Bg5 Bd5 Nxd5 Nfxd5 Bd2 Rxc1 Rxc1 Bd6

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1 a6 Bd3 O-O-O Nf3 Rhe8 Rhe1 Bc5 Re2 Qc7 Rde1 Nh5 g3

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3 b5 h4 b4 Ne2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3 b5 h4 b4 Ne2 e5 g5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3 b5 h4 b4 Ne2 e5 g5 exf4 Nxf4

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Mariusz Maciej Broniek    (2444)
e4 c5 Nc3 d6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qd2 Nf6 b3 e6 Bb2 d5 exd5 exd5 O-O-O Be6 a3 Bd6 Kb1 Qe7 Qc1 a6 Bd3 O-O-O Nf3 Rhe8 Rhe1 Bc5 Re2 Qc7 Rde1 Nh5 g3 h6 Na4

============

Contributors : Mariusz Maciej Broniek


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3 b5 h4 b4 Ne2 e5 g5 exf4 Nxf4 hxg5 Nxg5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3 b5 h4 b4 Ne2 e5 g5 exf4 Nxf4 hxg5 Nxg5 Nce5 Nd5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2244)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 h3 e6 g4 h6 Bg2 Be7 Be3 Nc6 f4 Nd7 O-O O-O Nf3 b5 h4 b4 Ne2 e5 g5 exf4 Nxf4 hxg5 Nxg5 Nce5 Nd5 Nf6 Nxf6

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 d6 Nc3 Nf6 f3 Be7 Be3 Be6

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Guy Cesbron    (2021)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4 d6 Nc3 Nf6 f3 Be7 Be3 Be6 O-O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1 Be7 d6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 d5 Bd3 dxc4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1 Be7 d6 cxd6 Nxd4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1 Be7 d6 cxd6 Nxd4 O-O Nf5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1 Be7 d6 cxd6 Nxd4 O-O Nf5 Re8 Qe3

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 d5 Bd3 dxc4 Bxc4 c5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1 Be7 d6 cxd6 Nxd4 O-O Nf5 Re8 Qe3 d5 Qg5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1 Be7 d6 cxd6 Nxd4 O-O Nf5 Re8 Qe3 d5 Qg5 g6 Nh6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4 fxe4 e5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Guy Cesbron    (2015)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 a4 Rc8

============

Contributors : Guy Cesbron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 d4 exd4 Nd5 Nb4 Bc4 Nbxd5 exd5 Bb4 Kf1 Bc5 Qe1 Be7 d6 cxd6 Nxd4 O-O Nf5 Re8 Qe3 d5 Qg5 g6 Nh6 Kg7 Nf5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4 fxe4 e5 c5 bxc5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4 fxe4 e5 c5 bxc5 dxe5 dxe5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4 fxe4 e5 c5 bxc5 dxe5 dxe5 Nf3 Qd6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4 fxe4 e5 c5 bxc5 dxe5 dxe5 Nf3 Qd6 Ba3 Kh8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4 fxe4 e5 c5 bxc5 dxe5 dxe5 Nf3 Qd6 Ba3 Kh8 Bc4 a5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 O-O Nf3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 O-O Bxc3 bxc3 Ne4 Ne1 f5 f3 Nf6 Qe2 d6 e4 fxe4 fxe4 e5 c5 bxc5 dxe5 dxe5 Nf3 Qd6 Ba3 Kh8 Bc4 a5 Rab1 Ba6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Be7 h3 h5 Bf4

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Nxe4 d4 Nd6 Bxc6 dxc6 dxe5 Nf5 Qxd8 Kxd8 Nc3 Be7 h3 h5 Bf4 Be6 Rad1

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Bd2 Nb6

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6 e3 Bf5 Nbd2 Nf6

Transpose to wikichess #170242#

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O Nbd7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O Nbd7 Re1 e5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Bd2 Nb6 Rad1 Rfe8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O Nbd7 Re1 e5 c3 Re8

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Bd2 Nb6 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Rad8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O Nbd7 Re1 e5 c3 Re8 h3 h5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Keith Armstrong    (2314)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Na5 Be7 Be2 Bh4 g3 Bf6 Nxb7

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Bd2 Nb6 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Rad8 Bc1 Bf8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Keith Armstrong    (2314)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Na5 Be7 Be2 Bh4 g3 Bf6 Nxb7 Qb8 Na5

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Bd2 Nb6 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Rad8 Bc1 Bf8 a3 Qc8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Keith Armstrong    (2314)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Na5 Be7 Be2 Bh4 g3 Bf6 Nxb7 Qb8 Na5 Qxb2 Kf2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Bd2 Nb6 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Rad8 Bc1 Bf8 a3 Qc8 Re2 Qc7

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Antonis Chronopoulos    (2265)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qb3 Qc7 g3 Nbd7 cxd5 exd5 Bg2 Be7 O-O O-O Bd2 Nb6 Rad1 Rfe8 Rfe1 Rad8 Bc1 Bf8 a3 Qc8 Re2 Qc7 Qc2 Qc8

============

Contributors : Antonis Chronopoulos


Keith Armstrong    (2314)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Na5 Be7 Be2 Bh4 g3 Bf6 Nxb7 Qb8 Na5 Qxb2 Kf2 Qxc2 Qxc2

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Keith Armstrong    (2314)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 h5 Qd2 Nbd7 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bf5 Na5 Be7 Be2 Bh4 g3 Bf6 Nxb7 Qb8 Na5 Qxb2 Kf2 Qxc2 Qxc2 Bxc2 Rac1

============

Contributors : Keith Armstrong


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5 Bg5 Qc7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
e4 e6 Nf3 d5 Be2

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5 Bg5 Qc7 d5 Nc5

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5 Bg5 Qc7 d5 Nc5 Qc2 Nd4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5 Bg5 Qc7 d5 Nc5 Qc2 Nd4 Nxd4 exd4

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5 Bg5 Qc7 d5 Nc5 Qc2 Nd4 Nxd4 exd4 Rac1 b6

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5 Bg5 Qc7 d5 Nc5 Qc2 Nd4 Nxd4 exd4 Rac1 b6 f3 Bd7

============

Contributors : Paul Maron


Paul Maron    (2008)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 g6 Nbd2 Bg7 e4 d6 Bd3 O-O O-O c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nc6 a3 Nd7 Nb3 a5 Be3 a4 Nbd2 e5 Bg5 Qc7 d5 Nc5 Qc2 Nd4 Nxd4 exd4 Rac1 b6 f3 Bd7 Be7 Rfc8

============

Contributors : Paul Maron






FICGS : ron ,   Wikipedia : ron ,   Dmoz : ron ,   Google : ron ,   Yahoo : ron




There are two classes of men; those who are content to yield to circumstances and who play whist; those who aim to control circumstances, and who play Chess. (Mortimer Collins)

All I want to do, ever, is just play Chess. (Bobby Fischer)

The tactician knows what to do when there is something to do; whereas the strategian knows what to do when there is nothing to do. (Gerald Abrahams)




Back to FICGS , Wikichess





[Chess forum] [Rating lists] [Countries] [Chess openings] [Legal informations] [Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]