Home
Information
Login
Register
Waiting lists
Membership
Hall of fame
Tournaments
Best game
Wikichess
Rating list
Problems
Forum
Links
Help
About
| Install FICGS apps | |
| play chess online |  |
|
Game result (chess) J. Domingo, 2053 D. Ward, 2121 1/2-1/2 See game 144684 |
Hot news Discussions Files search Social network
There are 68 results for Lacrosse Marc in the games.
Game_296 Game_297 Game_298 Game_299 Game_300 Game_301 Game_2391 Game_2397 Game_2398 Game_2399 Game_2400 Game_2401 Game_4565 Game_4555 Game_4564 Game_4550 Game_4559 Game_4562 Game_12847 Game_12854 Game_12860 Game_12865 Game_12869 Game_12872 Game_12875 Game_12876 Game_17796 Game_17797 Game_17798 Game_17799 Game_17800 Game_17801 Game_17901 Game_17907 Game_17908 Game_17909 Game_17910 Game_17911 Game_18071 Game_18072 Game_18073 Game_18074 Game_18075 Game_18076 Game_22680 Game_22681 Game_22682 Game_22683 Game_22684 Game_22685 Game_22686 Game_22687 Game_28327 Game_28328 Game_28329 Game_28330 Game_28331 Game_28332 Game_28333 Game_28334 Game_37011 Game_37012 Game_37015 Game_37016 Game_37010 Game_37014 Game_37013 Game_37017
There are 0 results for Lacrosse Bernard in the games.
There are at least 100 results for Lacrosse in the forum.
Philip Roe (2010-01-08 05:09:47)
Marc Lacrosse memorial
Thank you, Rodolfo!
Marc did indeed put enormous effort into this labor of love. I do wonder what his plans were.
I see that there are a lot of ICC games which were presumably speed games of some sort, and perhaps need to be taken with a grain of salt. Anyhow, it doesn't seem that I have made any blunders yet.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-01-05 14:28:50)
Marc Lacrosse on Basman Sale defence
Thanks a lot Rodolfo! I've uploaded it at FICGS here :
http://www.ficgs.com/directory_databases.html
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2010-01-05 09:40:32)
Marc Lacrosse memorial
Hi every buddy, I placed the files somewhere in this site:
http://rodolfo_3.tripod.com/
Maybe later I will put them in something like rapidshare.
Cherries
Rodolfo
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-07 16:55:30)
Bernard Lacrosse
I would like to warmly welcome Bernard Lacrosse, brother of Marc and past President of the Belgian Chess Federation, who probably saw our bottle in the sea and the numerous messages in other chess forums...
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-02 14:21:48)
Marc Lacrosse memorial
Dear chessfriends, the waiting list for the next chess thematic tournament is open, this thematic #100 will be named the Marc Lacrosse memorial in honor of our lost chessfriend, we will play one of his favorite openings, the Basman Sale sicilian : 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5
Best wishes,
Thibault
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 (2009-11-19 11:08:27)
Chess programming wikispace
Someone updated the chessprogramming wikispace for Marc & reminds us that he was also an opening book author for the chess engine Fruit (by Fabien Letouzey).
chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Marc+Lacrosse
Wayne Lowrance (2009-11-18 04:21:26)
Mark Lacrosse
Very saddened by this news, so young and a very fine gentleman. FICGS will miss him
Wayne
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-17 20:59:43)
Anand vs. Lacrosse
Yes, the event was related on many well known websites :
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007/04/anand-scored-17-wins-1-loss-and-1-draw.html
http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/2007/04/anand-simul-and-interview.htm
http://www.indianchessfed.org/News/2007/April/Anandwins17gamesincharitysimul.asp
William Taylor (2009-11-17 20:44:08)
Terrible news
I remember him beating Anand in a simul on the ICC (he was the only one who won). The game can be seen here (in a posted comment, which also confirms his death): http://www.chessgames.com/player/marc_lacrosse.html
I didn't know him personally, but it's a great loss for the whole of FICGS.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-17 18:44:19)
Marc Lacrosse vs. Eros Riccio
His match with Eros Riccio is canceled of course. We will remember him here by his fantastic & original games, with an outstanding rating of 2557... He lost only one beautiful game to Marius Zubac at FICGS in 2007 :
http://www.ficgs.com/game_12869.html
More games by Marc :
http://www.chessgames.com/player/marc_lacrosse.html
We'll miss him.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-17 18:35:09)
Shocking news..... Marc Lacrosse is dead
I just discovered the news when searching the web, as I had no answer from Marc by any way.....
http://www.enaos.net/P1230.aspx?IdPer=129725&IdAN=70997
Marc Lacrosse is dead in Profondeville on august 13, 2009. He was aged of 48. I have very few doubts, he is the Marc Lacrosse we played and enjoyed with... The dates & informations match.
My thoughts go to his family of course, that's appalling :(
Hannes Rada (2009-11-04 22:21:02)
Knockout Final 05
Lacrosse - Riccio
Marc Lacrosse:
Last connection : 2009 August 11
I am afraid, we won't see so many moves here .... :-(
Marc Lacrosse (2009-07-03 09:47:02)
My chess site ...
... has been rejuvenated and I intend to add content more regularly.
Address is still http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info
I hope computer chess and correspondence chess fans will find some interesting info there.
There is a linked blog where comments and suggestions are welcome.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2009-06-19 23:24:59)
FICGS commented on rybkachess
Quite a few comments regarding FICGS and correspondence chess opening preparation in this recent thread on rybkachess forum :
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?pid=165142;msg=ReplyPost
Your opinion ?
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2009-06-10 11:08:12)
Garvin : I do not agree
"For the rapid games, I think the issue is the 1 move per game increment. Perhaps having the time control as 20 days plus 3 days per move would be easier for people to manage and it guarantees that a player will have at least three days per move."
This is simply turning "rapid" games into standard ones !
If you feel that the one-day increment is too short then do enroll in standard tournaments
For what regards myself I already stated that I prefer a small number of fast games over a larger number of slower ones (this is even the reason why I more than once declined to play in advanced wch tournaments that were supposed to begin simultaneousy with other competitions I am in).
Just my two cents.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2009-05-02 11:36:33)
To Wayne
Winning because of opponent withdrawal does not deserve any congratulation ...
It is a real pity.
Moreover in my case the most probable outcome would have been a (close) victory for my opponent.
Marc
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-01 20:57:25)
Applying FICGS rules
I just had a deeper look at the 12 games and I applied FICGS rules only (just like in the match Lacrosse-Ghysens).
According to me, Xavier has an advantage in game 28302, it is not so clear in game 28305 but IMO this game should be rated also. As a result, 4 games will be rated in this match, Xavier's future rating is now 2577.
Marc Lacrosse (2009-05-01 00:02:15)
Rating or not
I just happened to be in the same situation in a wch semifinal against Dirk Ghysens : for some personal reason my opponent decided to withdraw.
All games were far beyond the 10th move.
Thibault decided that only two of the eight games should be kept for rating.
I do not understand why his decision seems to be completely different in the present case a few weeks later.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-04-12 18:49:01)
Olympiads in a previous discussion
Hi William, this has been discussed already but it's always a good idea to try to bring new arguments. In my opinion FICGS still has to grow before to envisage it anyway, but first of all you may read the previous discussion and particularly Marc Lacrosse's point :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=294
Marc Lacrosse (2009-03-18 10:48:07)
Yes but ...
Interesting idea but there could be a negative side effect : we could see an increase of the number of players leaving or silently withdrawing which is one of the most annoying aspects of correspondence chess IMHO.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2009-03-17 13:02:10)
Anand vs computer
Back in 1998 Anand was the first top player to lose a match (5-3) against a PC program (Rebel 10).
Rebel played on a PC equipped with an AMD K6 450 Mhz processor (something similar to present-day smartphones!)
The match consisted of four blitz games, two rapid ones and two slow games. It is noticeable that Anand still managed to win 1.5/2 the slow games part of the match. And if I remember correctly Anand's win in the final game was a brilliant one, one of the last convincing human wins against modern programs.
Marc Lacrosse (2009-03-15 18:39:01)
OK : better than nothing
A good idea I think. Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2009-03-15 15:35:28)
a problem with tournament scheduling.
This is the third time I find myself enrolled in a tournament at a completeley inapproppriated time with regard to my professional duties and leisure time possibilities.
Thibault, you should do something. At least when a tournament start has been delayed for months (or more) like this one please do send a mail or message to all players announcing the date of beginning and asking for confirmation of their participation.
For what regards myself and this wch-4 round-robin final I am in the complete impossibility to free the required amount of time by now : so I regret but I have no other choice than announcing my forfeit for all these games. Please do take my name off.
By the way I won't enroll in any other championship qualifications as long as there are no better rules regarding scheduling and announcements of tournaments start date
It's completely unacceptable to stay without any news for months and then to suddenly discover that you have a new set of games running.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2009-03-09 16:19:53)
Unserious openings in serious games!
"Sometimes I would like to experiment with some more or less unserious openings"
For what regards myself I do it all the time in rated games !
For example in my wch-05 semifinal match against D. Ghysens I am busy trying the Hampe-Algaier gambit (not a real success so far) and a Alekhine-Chatard one (much more promising) ... :)
So no need for special unrated tournaments for experimenting IMHO ...
Marc
PS you should have a look : this match will win the price for the most excentric openings in high-level correspondence chess (well I hope so).
Marc Lacrosse (2009-01-12 21:12:03)
to Tom Smith
"...back to my original concern, that being engines are actually allowed, IE cheating is allowed".
I cannot understand your point.
Cheating is when one infringes the rules in a disguised manner.
Where is there cheating here as computer (and books, and databases, and anything...) help is explicitly allowed and encouraged in the site rules?
OK I do understand that you do not _like_ this kind of play.
But then the answer is simple : go away, go on these many sites where computer use is actually forbidden and where there are a lot of cheaters!
Here is a place without cheaters.
Marc
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2009-01-09 08:31:05)
Why?
What is the purpose of this challenge? Do you accept Thibault conditions in the post above this one? and who you will proof the engine is playing alone with book and you are not leading it as Marc Lacrosse pointed?
Marc Lacrosse (2009-01-06 21:54:35)
Too much time lost lately I fear
I do not see anything interesting in these developments : there are better dedicated sites for this kind of things
Isn't it just a way to try expanding general traffic and thus advertising income?
If this is the aim, I do agree to some point: You have offered to us all a very nice tool for free and I will allways be very glad if you can earn something significant from your site's activity
But I fear that you are more and more busy in money-making trials than in core site improvements (chess and go).
This could well lead to a problem as it led one day or another many another site that followed the very same path...
If you do not care enough with improving the core of your site people will leave as soon as another one offers more appealing features partly built on what you were first to offer.
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
Marc Lacrosse (2009-01-05 23:17:16)
First flaw is in the book
There are many published lines crushing perfect15.
I am not sure that sedat already corrected all the known ones for the coming perfect16.
Either you publish your ctg at the beginning of the games or you cannot affirm that you run a "modified" perfect15 without providing proofs that you are not playing yourself during the opening phase
So i fear it's a flawed challenge
Apart from this I suppose that any player among top-50 here is ready to play against a pure R3. If we were not ready to accept this, then this would mean that correspondence chess has come to its end.
Marc
i must admit that in case your opponent plays postman chess with his engines, times have become tougher for those who try to demonstrate something, and much tougher since rybka 3 appeared. But so far there are still players who keep achieving 70% against opponents who probably all use top engines ...
Marc Lacrosse (2008-12-15 12:26:29)
You are abused by a mediocre clone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_(chess)
The machine described there relies on a 64 PCs cluster, each PC being equipped with specially designed FPGA hardware cards for chess processing.
So there is no sense in asking "do you use the hydra engine?" : the hydra engine proper won't run on anything else than its dedicated hardware.
At the time Hydra had just beaten a few GMs, there appeared a so-called Hydra engine in dubious sites. This was soon proven to be a mere clone of the Fruit engine, completely unrelated with the true Hydra machine.
This is what you may still find on sites like the TommyThomas one.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-12-01 08:45:01)
To Andrew
"(...)why Caire plays exactly the same variation of the Marshall in all 4 white games????? - against a higher rated opponent it makes no match sense at all. I suppose your not going to lose games on time playing the same variation:)"
Hi Andrew in my FICGS__CHESS__WCH_QUARTER_FINAL_3__000005 playing the exact same variation in my four black games was the key to win the match: all four were drawn whereas I managed to win 3.5/4 in my four white games (with four variations of one of these silly sideline sicilians you seem not to praise too much).
... what is the optimal strategy for these matches remains to be determined. The "all-draws-favors-higher-rating" rule is very interesting. I like it very much.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-10-30 20:29:24)
To Don : better "fast" correspondence
If you wish a faster but still really "correspondence" play I would recommend the following : 7d + 1d/move with a maximal time capital of 7 days (anything over 7 days is cut off).
No vacation allowed during course of the game (or vacation pause not working for these precise games so that you may take leave for other kind of competitions but still need to play in these ones).
I am ready to play any kind of test games/tournaments at this timing.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-08-24 10:02:03)
I fully agree with Wolfgang
"In summary Thibault does a very good job and we all have to be thankful to him for all his work on this site."
I could not say it better.
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.
Normajean Yates (2008-08-21 11:15:31)
that is quite convincing!
Marc Lacrosse - thanks for quoting that ... though a good algorithm shouldnt have trouble but with heavily nested variations, many of then terminating 0-1 .. it would complicate algorithms. Programmers' time is expensive ...
I am convinced now that allowing O-O and O-O-O is a good decision - then yacc and lex can do most of the parsing etc.
[btw it should be simple to write a program to convert simple algebaraic (by simple I mean nested variations are treated as comments and left untouched) to simple descriptive and vice versa, in the formal case without redundancy in descriptive output. [again lex-yacc (or whatever latest tools have superceded them) can do most of the work]. So it is surprising I couldn't find any such free open-source utility on the internet -- (and I am too lazy now to write simplest code any more - written more than enough for a lifetime ;) )
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
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 (2008-08-03 12:46:18)
Round Robin qualification
Thibault looking at the WCC rules for Round Robin tournaments. It says: "If necessary, a player could be invited to complete a group or to replace a forfeiting player." This must be how Marc Lacrosse came to be in the Round Robin final for 02 as he was not in any stage 1 or stage 2 tournaments for 02. With 5 qualifiers from stage 2 and a stage 1 M winner a 7th player was needed. How did you decide which player to leave out of stage 1 M 02 and put directly in the RR final? Presumably not TER as both Brunsteins and Marius had higher TER's. This is not a problem for 03 as there will be 4 stage 2 qualifiers and 1 stage 1 M winner. Just curious:)
Marc Lacrosse (2008-07-28 15:59:14)
I see ...
Hi Thibault
OK I see : you were happy (as I am) with four draws in one single well-prepared line as Black but went on missing the qualification as your four white games were also drawn (and Farit's rating was superior to yours).
Maybe I will suffer the same fate ...
But as i have to win at least one game I feel this is easier to achieve with white ...
As white I am busy varying the positions a little and trying to play more actively ...
We will see...
By the way I think that the rule according which the highest rating is qualified in case of eight draws is really a significant advantage ...
... but i agree that we need a way to adjudicate drawn matches.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-07-27 19:36:41)
The specifics of match play ...
Tanks to FICGS championships interesting formula I just entered Wch 005 in a quarter final 8-games match (against GM Balabaev).
This is the first time I have to play several simultaneous games against the same opponent in correspondence play.
There are interesting questions related to this unusual kind of tournament.
First of all, what kind of opening(s) should you play, and more precisely is it better to vary or to go for the same opening in several games?
Having had a look at my opponents former games I had prepared quite a few options.
As Black I decided to rely on my favorite Bc5 sicilian defence
Four identical games developped and very soon it appeared that these games should be decisive for the whole match
For long I was afraid that my opponent could come with some decisive prepared analysis leading to a 4-0 lead ...
But the opposite happened and all four games ended (draw by position repetition) before I had left my opening prep, after less than one month of play.
Thus I am left with four games where I am white
A considerable advantage IMHO ...
On this precise topic I wonder what is the opinion of top players here : is it better to be the one who vary early or should you go along your favorite analysis as long as your opponent won't diverge himself in case of match play
I have never read anything on this topic anywhere ...
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-07-05 19:36:23)
Qualification information ?
Because i did not realise that I had qualified for two WCh tournaments I recently enrolled for a third one and had three tournaments beginning almost simultaneously in january, which proved to be too much for me.
And now the deadline for the next Wch (005)is approaching and it just seems that i will win WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_M_01__000004.
So I am hesitating : when will Wch-004 next stage begin ?
I do not wish anymore to have more than one tournament starting almost at the same time.
More generally speaking, I wish I could get the following infos permanently updated on my "My messages" page :
* I enrolled for a tournament of type X on date Y. Presently there are already Z players enrolled for this tournament.
* I registered for championship X on date Y. this is supposed to start on date Z.
* In tournament Wch-X my present result ensures (or leaves the possibility open) that I will be qualified for next stage tournament that is supposed to begin on date Y.
Your opinion ?
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-06-20 08:04:12)
Why ?
One of my opponents rated 2300+ continues to play even though there is an announced forced checkmate in eleven moves (no possible miracle : any engine finds the mate).
His game has been completely lost for weeks but the road to mate is long in this minor pieces ending.
Is it correct?
OK this does not infringe any rule but in OTB play this would be considered very bad manner.
Does it happen frequently here?
what is your opinion?
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-06-17 07:55:59)
Conditionals ?
I know that this has been discussed before...
But I still feel that possible use of conditional moves would be a nice improvement here.
Nothing mandatory : simply the possibility to tell your opponent : "If you play this move my answer is that one". I cannot see how it could hurt in any way but I feel that it may help soften (and fasten) the play in situations like forced suites, exchanges and so on.
Your opinion ?
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-06-12 00:03:48)
Example
GM Suat Atalik never played a single game here and did not connect once since early 2006.
Keeping him in a rating list is not correct
Marc Lacrosse (2008-06-11 23:54:23)
Strange rating ...
Having a look at the rating list I see that Ryszard Kasperek has a 2544 rating and the FICGS FEM title.
I just wonder how he got the FEM title as he did never play a single game on FICGS ?
He has been rated 14 times with the same original 2544 elo without a single game played here
Strange ...
IMHO people who register here with a high foreign rating and do not play a single game in more than one year should be banned.
I cannot even imagine how they could be granted a FICGS title
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-06-04 23:50:50)
Why so few top players in Wch 5 ?
In the present "active" players rating list there are 38 players with a 2300+ rating.
So far only three of them registered for the soon to begin 5th "world championship".
I just wonder why ...
Marc
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
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
Marc Lacrosse (2008-05-03 23:12:54)
How fast ...
My main computer is a Q6600 quad running at 3.650 Ghz for overnight tournaments/ analyses (I had it running faster but not stable for long runs).
Marc
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
Marc Lacrosse (2008-04-28 23:12:00)
Is it a joke ?
" In correspondence chess i let my computer think 0-1 min "
In correspondence chess I never let my computer(s) think less than several hours on one move.
I also analyse on my own with computer use for at least 30-60 minutes per move.
I also prepare openings for at least one hour per day _everyday_ even when I have no game at all running in the opening phase.
I built one of my computers specially for chess, an overclocked quad with efficient watercooling.
I will go for an eight-processors one in the very next months.
My main weakness is that I like playing unorthodox openings
So it's a bit difficult to go higher than 2400 elo here ...
So if you let your computer go 0-1 min per move we probably do not play the same game ...
But I cannot imagine your pleasure when playing a move that has been decided by a "0-1 minute" engine analysis.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2008-04-28 08:06:12)
Eros Riccio won 8th Freestyle !
Eros Riccio (as "Ultima") won 8th Freestyle !
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=3894
Congratulations !
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-12-19 12:14:58)
corrected
"This extra high performance is a result about forfeiting of the two both best rating participants of the tournament."
Right.
Still 2550 if you consider his 4.5/6 against 2357
Not that bad ...
Marc Lacrosse (2007-12-18 18:33:50)
High level performance
Marius Zubac just won tournament FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_M_01__000003 with an impressive 2631 performance (6.5/8 and no loss in a 2378 tournament)
On his way to victory he cruelly refuted a knight-for-three-pawns sac that I tried in our encounter. Nice job!
Congratulations for this fine performance.
... we need more high level tournaments ...
Marc
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
Marc Lacrosse (2007-11-01 22:56:53)
??
"if this is not ok for you, I can remove you from the list."
I never enrolled for this tournament and I am not on the list ...
I just had a look as I was searching for a possible new tournament with higher ratings ...
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-11-01 15:56:06)
Tournament categories
In the list of players having enrolled for tournament Rapid M 000009 there are two players with 2174 and 2147 elo points.
The tournament is supposed to be reserved for 2200+ players
Is this OK ?
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-08-31 22:19:17)
Wayne Lowrance won one for FICGS !
He did it !
First full point for FICGS !
Go FICGS, go !
Marc Lacrosse (2007-08-28 15:34:45)
Belgium
Here IGM Alexandre Dguebadze won the national ch in july 2007.
Garvin Gray (2007-08-13 17:24:49)
confused
Dare I ask, where has this pig reference come from? It is not contained in Marc Lacrosse's first post, nor in the next three posts.
The first mention of the term pig is by Sergei Ivanov.
I cannot work out how it is related to the situation Marc Lacrosse raises.
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
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.
Marc Lacrosse (2007-06-30 20:08:06)
Montviel
:-)
Marc Lacrosse (2007-06-19 18:28:48)
May I join ?
If my modest rating is enough, I surely would be glad to join such a high-level rapid tournament. Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-06-04 19:05:48)
Any ideas for the next round ? :)
Aronian (not clear)
Bareev !
Rublevsky
Gelfand
Hehe !
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-06-04 19:02:31)
... during the first days of july
... then I will most probably join !
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-06-02 21:21:35)
When is it due to begin ?
Is there a precise date for the beginning of the 3rd championship ?
Marc Lacrosse (2007-06-02 11:17:26)
Wch older qualification
I once qualified in WCH preliminary by winning tournament FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_20__000001 .
I then could not enroll for stage 2 due to personal reasons.
May I go directly to stage 2 of a subsequent cycle or do I have to go through qualifications at new ?
Thanks.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-05-22 22:22:35)
Any 2200+ for a rapid double round ?
I also suggest maximum 50 days accumulated time for this tournament.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-05-22 22:20:20)
Any 2200+ for a rapid double round ?
Hi all, hi Thibault
Would you agree for a five players rated double round robin tournament at rapid timing (30 days + 1 day per move) if four other 2200+ players declare in this thread that they are ready to join ?
I am ready to play...
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-05-12 17:02:41)
Basman-Sale defence
The Basman-Sale defence has now its site here :
http://users.skynet.be/mlcc/chessbazaar/basmansale/index.html
Comments are welcome.
Marc
PS. The BS is 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 !?
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-30 07:44:25)
hmm
... who is that guy ?
:-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-29 23:48:55)
Google searches
Statistics are always instructive, often funny :)
Recently, a few new "magic" keywords appeared to attract Googlers on FICGS website... After 'Yahoo mail problems' and a bunch of other funny ones, it seems a new chess star is born on Google :) .. "Marc Lacrosse" or "Marc Lacrosse Anand ICC" appear many times a day... Another funny one "Rybka 2.3.1 free download" or "Rybka download free" : Dear friends, Rybka is not free for download here, I'm sorry ;)
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-23 09:43:40)
prize/award ?
Not at all, and this is normal : it was a charity action intended to raise funds for handicapped children in India.
My main reward was quite a few congratulations and a also some bitter accusations regarding computer cheating by myself ...
These are not easy to answer ...
How can I prove that I did not use computers ?
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-23 00:51:39)
some infos
Anand won 17, drew one and lost one.
I have put the game on my website with light comments at :
http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-22 12:58:58)
win against Anand :-)
No I don't play serious chess over the board any more (last serious games were something like ten years ago)
But here I was very well prepared and I have considerable experience with the unusual opening I played, both from blitzes and from my correspondence preparation.
I just counted : there are more than 4900 lines of personal analysis in my Basman sicilian files ;-)
I was just lucky to get the opportunity to play this line...
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-22 11:59:10)
win against Anand :-)
Yesterday world number one Vishy Anand played a 90-minute simul against 19 opponents on ICC to raise funds for his favorite charity in India.
I had bought a seat and intended to play an unorthodox opening if possible.
I happened to be lucky enough to get the opportunity to play my favorite Basman-Sale sicilian defence...
... and I won !
In the very next days I will publish the game with a few comments on my site at chessbazaar.mlweb.info
This is the most beautiful day of my chess life :-)
Marc
the game :
[Event "ICC 90 5 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.04.21"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Anand"]
[Black "Bluesette"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2786"]
[BlackElo "2155"]
[Opening "Sicilian defense"]
[ECO "B41"]
[NIC "SI.41"]
[Time "12:04:06"]
[TimeControl "5400+5"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Nb3 Bb6 6. Nc3 Ne7 7. Bf4 d5 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. Nxd5 exd5 10. Bb5+ Nc6 11. O-O O-O 12. c3 Bf5 13. Qd2 a6 14. Bxc6 bxc6 15. Be3 Bc7 16. Bf4 Bb6 17. Rfe1 Qf6 18. Be5 Qg6 19. Qf4 Be4 20. Qg3 Rfe8 21. Bd4 Bc7 22. Qxg6 Bxg6 23. Nc5 a5 24. b3 Bf5 25. f3 h5 26. g3 f6 27. Kf2 Kf7 28. Na4 g5 29. Rxe8 Rxe8 30. Bb6 Bxb6+ 31. Nxb6 Rb8 32. Na4 Rb5 33. Rd1 Be6 34. Ke3 c5 35. Kd2 c4 36. bxc4 dxc4 37. Kc1 Rf5 38. Rf1 Re5 39. Rf2 Re3 40. f4 gxf4 41. Rxf4 Re1+ 42. Kb2 Re2+ 43. Ka3 Rxh2 44. Nc5 Bg4 45. Ne4 f5 46. Rf2 Rxf2 47. Nxf2 Kf6 48. Ka4 Kg5 49. Kxa5 f4 50. gxf4+ Kxf4 {White resigns}
0-1
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-09 23:43:22)
Thematic tournaments suggestion
A small and hopefully interesting suggestion :
When we go to the list of running and/or finished thematic tournaments we just see "tournament 001", tournament 002" and so on.
It would be nice to have the start position (as a PGN line) immediately under each tournament title so as to see at a glance which opening was played.
Marc
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-09 16:16:41)
GM vs. chess engines database
Someone mentioned "Marc Lacrosse´s database" in a Rybka forum's thread, I did not find it with Google, but I found this interesting Man vs. Machine database, 2837 GM vs. engine games on ICC so far, on Marc's website : Chessbazaar (link was on this forum :))
http://users.skynet.be/mlcc/chessbazaar/gmvscompsicc2006.html
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-01 23:03:52)
... ceux du Loiret aussi ...
... d'ailleurs!
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-01 23:02:57)
Calimero
... et d'ailleurs pourquoi n'ai-je pas accès au chat français ?
... je les aime bien, moi, les joueurs de go du sud-morbihan ...
:-))))
Marc Lacrosse (2007-04-01 21:44:34)
Quel intérêt ?
Une petite franchouillerie pour rester entre soi ?
Pourquoi se priver du plaisir de pouvoir communiquer au delà des limites de la francophonie ?
L'apport d'un forum c'est justement d'avoir le plus large éventail de sensibilités
Et pourquoi pas un espace réservé aux joueurs de go du sud-morbihan ?
Marc Lacrosse (2007-03-30 07:29:57)
why isn't it correspondence ?
"This is no more correspondence chess IMO"
Why so ?
I prefer few games where moves come quickly : I can keep them all in mind and I analyse them almost everyday
That's already the way I actually play : see the state of my clock at the end of my games :-)
At the opposite for what regards myself I feel terribly uncomfortable if I have more than 10-12 games running simultaneously and slowly: when I get a move it's like being in a new game because I cannot remind my former analyses (well they are written down but this is not the same)
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 ?
Marc Lacrosse (2007-03-29 19:00:16)
Double RR tournaments ?
Seven players in a tournament is a good number
A larger number would lead to longer waiting time before a tournament actually begins.
But with such a small number of players being white or black against a given opponent may be decisive for tournament win.
So my suggestion : double round robin tournaments with a smaller number of players (five ?).
At five players, completing the full list of players is faster than for a seven-players single RR one and everybody plays 8 games with the advantage that no colour advantage/disadvantage exists against any opponent.
Your opinion ?
Marc Lacrosse (2007-03-29 06:26:52)
good new rule !
I agree with Don on the fact that silent withdrawal is much more worrying.
Maybe the rule could be split in two parts:
one rule against any silent withdrawal
one rule against general forfeit in a tournament
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 ...
Marc Lacrosse (2007-03-28 15:16:58)
Droppers kill the fun !
... And this tournament (M 007)is now finished with two additional aborted games through dropping out...
I congratulate the well-deserved winner of the tournament (Karsten Fyhn)
I am sure he must be a little frustrated like I am : both his final game and mine were very interesting ones for which we both got the full point through dropping-out of our opponents ...
This is not funny at all !
I hate analysing a game for months and seeing it aborted because my opponent withdraws without resigning and lets his clock runs for months without a single word of explanation
I suppose i cannot ask for banning such impolite persons ...
But one thing is clear for me : I don't wish to enroll any more in tournaments with droppers.
So for what regards myself either Thibault creates a new kind of tournaments into which former droppers are not allowed to suscribe or I stop playing here
A very disappointed player ...
Marc Lacrosse (2007-03-20 11:50:17)
Droppers ...
Too many droppers in my running tournament (M007)
This is not funny ...
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-03-20 11:47:28)
Nice game and nice site!
Blokus seems really interesting indeed.
And the site with good online play features is very well done.
I can even play from behind my corporate firewall :-)
It will be difficult to resist ...
:-))))
Marc
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 ...
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-18 15:19:22)
:-)
If I am the Marc you are referring too, why not ...
Don't be fooled : I like human chess too (I was in the 2050-2100 range for years OTB a long long time ago).
Although I doubt I would like it much I suppose I could still play decent correspondence games without comp assistance ...
And be sure : if I went to enter a non-computer event I would follow the rules !
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-16 10:11:57)
A suggestion
a simple suggestion : add two column to the rating list :
- one with the number of finished games on FICGS
-one with the number of running games
Your opinion ?
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-15 22:55:30)
Why such a shouting ?
@Benjamin Aldag
"The discussion is not about to change something. It is about to build a new feature here"
You are completely illogical.
Evidently you may play without computer as you wish here.
You may also try to find other members who prefer to play this way and register together with them in a tournament.
So what you wish to do is already possible. But what you request is not that.
You request to play here against opponents for whom computer use will be forbidden.
This is simply not the rule here. It's even one of the fundamental originalities of this site.
The rules of the site are that everything is allowed
If you and friends of yours manage to play without computers this is up to you
But asking for special rules supposes that you intend to request that Thibault or someone will check that YOUR rule is enforced.
IMHO this is purely not working. You won't find any organisation that wil be able to ensure that no player cheats regarding this kind of rule.
So let me repeat (and it is MY RIGHT not to agree with your opinions) : if you find opponents with which you have an agreement for playing without comps here this is perfectly fine for everybody and it's up to you to see wether you are happy with the way your partners do or do not respect the agreement.
If you wish to change radically the rules so as to have tournaments where something like a police dept will check that no comp is used than GO AWAY and simply do register in one of the numerous sites where these rules do exist and where almost everybody cheats.
By the way : no need for shouting to tell what you wish.
Shouting will not make your opinions more valuable in any way.
Marc
Benjamin Aldag (2007-02-15 12:30:33)
YOU FLAME !
@ Marc Lacrosse
The discussion is not about to change something. It is about to build a new feature here. It would be kewl to see a little (c) in the profiles of computerusers.
Please dont flame here about 'what is allowed and whats not allowed' !!!
IT IS ALLOWED TO USE A COMPUTER-ASSISTENCE !!!! AND THIS IS OK FOR ME !!!! AND IT IS ALlOWED TO PLAY WITHOUT COMPUTER-ASSISTENCE !!!! IS THIS LOUD ENOUGH ???
I play here at FICGS and why should i play at playchess.de ??? I want to play CC-Chess HERE ! So please dont tell me, where i can play without computer-assistence. I can play without computer-assistence here TOO !
yk
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-14 19:09:12)
To Nicola
But there are already _many_ other web-chess organisations with forbidden computer use:
- our friends at itsyourturn.com
- the letsplaychess server
- http://www.playchess.de/
...
The last one has a very good interface and is also free.
Servers with computer use allowed are at the opposite very few.
So why should Thibault change a feature which is specific here for something which is already available everywhere else ?
Moreover, having played for long at playchess.de where both kinds of play exist (with or without computer help) I can tell you that there was there a surprinsingly large number of players cheating in the non-computer section instead of playing with their computers in the computer-allowed one, and this was at the origin pf permanent discussions and flame wars on their forum.
For what regards myself I do not wish that FICGS would go the same way.
Marc
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-12 09:16:02)
nothing proved, nothing disproved
This video just shows a nervous man touching his face, moving, going outside.
I do not like Danailov at all but this is very far from being a proof of anything
Marc Lacrosse (2007-02-09 18:29:27)
and next ...
and next ...
....Teddy bears tournaments !
(some allowed to take a human advisor on their knees)
:-)
Benjamin Aldag (2007-02-04 22:26:09)
To Marc Lacrosse
Hey guy, come down !
I just say, it makes more fun to play without computer-assistence.
I play here, because i will never reach the level of computerplayers and my opponents are in 99% free of computer-assistence. I dont want to be a slave of my computer and in my opinion is this the right way.
I know 9 people here with an official rating between 1500 and 1600 ELO(DWZ) and here they have a rating between 2200 and 2300. :-D<br
You say, with only computermoves you will never reach the highest level here and i can say - YOU ARE RIGHT !
Players with a FIDE ELO 2200 and higher will have here a rating over 2600 and they will not only play computermoves. But i play chess for two years and have an official FIDE rating of 1822 and believe me, it makes no sense for me to play with computer-assistence.
yk
There are 2 results for Lacrosse in wikichess.
Marc Lacrosse (2233)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5
The Basman-Sale sicilian.
If white plays Nb3, Black intends to go for some original play with Bb6, Ne7 and often f5.
If Be3, than Qb6 with pressure along the a7-g1 diagonal. Some lines lead to extremely confuse highly tactical positions.
Originally played by british IM Michael Basman in the seventies and eighties. More recently IM Srdjan Sale has been the main exponent of the variation with some fair results including a win against the then young Peter Leko.
============
Contributors : Marc Lacrosse
[Chess forum]
[Rating lists]
[Countries]
[Chess openings]
[Legal informations]
[Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]
Social network : create your photo albums, discuss with your friends...
Hot news & buzz : discover the latest news and buzz on the internet...
Discussions : questions and answers, forums on almost everything...
Seo forums : search engines optimisation forums, web directory...
Play the strongest international correspondence chess players !
|
Gueci, Alberto (ITA) [member # 185] Correspondence chess : 2580 FEM Ranked # 6 in the rating list. Rating history : No change this year. Go : 1367 Advanced chess : 2153 I'm 59 years old and i live in Palermo (Sicily). I'm quite weak on the board so I'm engines dependent ;-) This member has no profile in the social network. |
 | Correspondence chess World championship Play chess games Go (weiqi, baduk) Advanced chess Play big chess Chess trainer apk Rated tournaments Poker texas hold'em Fischer random chess |  |