LI - Search

   		Free Internet Chess Games Server

Install FICGS apps
play chess online


Game result  (chess)


S. Ligon, 2321
M. LaDuke, 2326

1/2-1/2

See game 152178




 Hot news
 Discussions
 Files search
 Social network



SmartGo

                                          
Search


Here are 0 results for Li Doublest in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Hua in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Jie in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Hao Xuan in the games.


Here are 66 results for Li Michael in the games.


Game_47591   Game_47590   Game_47589   Game_47588   Game_47587   Game_47581   Game_43463   Game_43461   Game_43459   Game_43456   Game_43452   Game_43447   Game_42596   Game_42595   Game_42592   Game_42589   Game_42585   Game_42580   Game_41578   Game_41577   Game_41576   Game_41575   Game_41570   Game_41565   Game_41494   Game_41492   Game_41490   Game_41487   Game_41483   Game_41478   Game_40922   Game_40921   Game_40920   Game_40916   Game_40912   Game_40907   Game_39977   Game_39976   Game_39975   Game_39974   Game_39973   Game_39967   Game_39064   Game_39063   Game_39060   Game_39057   Game_39053   Game_39048   Game_38088   Game_38086   Game_38084   Game_38081   Game_38077   Game_38072   Game_34047   Game_34046   Game_34045   Game_34041   Game_34037   Game_34032   Game_34028   Game_34027   Game_34024   Game_34021   Game_34017   Game_34012  


Here are 0 results for Li Ekkavit in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Yuan in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Dan in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Zekun in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Aaron in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Kevin in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Blossom in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Xhen in the games.


Here are 0 results for Li Ruizi in the games.


Here are 6 results for Li Yingli in the games.


Game_124167   Game_124166   Game_124165   Game_124161   Game_124157   Game_124152  




There are at least 100 results for Li in the forum.


George Jempty    (2026-06-06 20:57:59)
Next thematic tournament

we all have suggested great options there are 3 people (including me) in the 1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 tourney right now, let's fill that section up and ask Thib to change the opening line.


Paul Guralivu    (2026-06-06 18:16:18)
Cheating / Forfeiting

@Ulises Pineda: there is not vacation...

"they" take those vacations often, just for 24-48 h...

when they don't take those vacations, they just let the clock go close to ZERO and then take vacations for 24-48 h AND then make the move!

Plus: Mach Jiri is part of the "situation".

and I believe Koudela Arthur is part of the situation also.

guess what: in the WCH... Mach Jiri, Pechova Hana and Koudela Arthur are in the SAME group -- playing each other!


Ulises Pineda    (2026-06-01 03:15:35)
Cheating / Forfeiting

Let me play devil's advocate here: It makes sense that all these players take a vacation at the same time if they're from the same family, presumably the family goes together on vacation and are expected to come back together as well.

What shouldn't be allowed is if they play each other and let the game run out of time to give the win to one of them, that's not random, but I haven't seen that happening, anyway.


George Jempty    (2026-05-31 13:18:33)
Cheating / Forfeiting

Thib, you said you'd look into LAST OCTOBER. In the meantime, Paul Guralivu has provided even more evidence as outlined above. I think you have everything you need to make a decision, without me emailing you. Thanks though.


George Jempty    (2026-05-28 12:40:02)
Next thematic tournament

Glad somebody else likes the idea of 1.b4 c6, but Thib needs to change the line for the thematic tournaments right after a section fills up. Another line I'd like to suggest is the Schallop defense in the KGA: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Nf6


George Jempty    (2026-05-28 12:36:54)
Berlin Defense

I used to play the Deferred Schliemann. I used to steer for a line in which the analog without 3...a6 had been played as Black by Lasker, a line involving ...Bd6. I tried it in a US Correspondence championship qualifying round in the 90s but didn't play accurately at all in the opening after that, this was a no-engines tournament (well it was the 90s anyway). But the game score made it's way into chessbase, and a Norwegian IM drew GM Sax with the line in 2005. So I was influencing theory way before the centaur/correspondence era ;) Also, in any case, I've been drawn to ...f5 lines for quite a while, I used to play the Latvian when I was a teenager, but now I've settled on the Modern Steinitz, with it's possibility for the Siesta, but I think overall is more sound than other lines involving ...f5, but still with plenty of winning chances; e.g. the Noah's Ark trap. As Black I play for a win, as White I try not to lose LOL


Ulises Pineda    (2026-05-28 09:48:28)
Berlin Defense

Oh, I didn't know, it's the Jaenisch Gambit, perfect!


Ulises Pineda    (2026-05-28 09:30:16)
Berlin Defense

OTB I like the Schliemann Defense against the Spanish, after 3...f5 black is completely fine and there's no winning line for white, but there are two other things. First, you can feel it in the air, Ruy Lopez players have spent a great deal of time studying it and they want to prove their superior knowledge aiming for lines where they win if black plays a small inaccuracy, which happens often and that's why they like playing it.

You take that away which is a psychological victory.

Second, they have two options, either they play fast and will most likely abandon the advantage because white needs accurate play to keep her edge, or they will sit to think on the best continuation, but after the position settles down it's equal and you come up with a huge advantage on the clock.

My favorite line is when you have your queen on d4 and they play Nxg6 because they're used to positions where capturing back allows white's queen to capture the rook on h8, only to find out they can't do that because it's protected by the queen! So they have to play Qxg6+ but after covering or moving the king black is already better!

It's as if I saw the Spanish die before my eyes like that, even if my wins are mostly on the clock, it has forced players to avoid playing it against me, because it's easier to go into some g3 and Bb2 stuff and beat me from there than figuring out how to play against 3...f5.

My only lament is its name, it would be so cool if it was the Schliemann Gambit, or Schliemann Counter-Attack or something that gives it justice.


George Jempty    (2026-05-27 22:26:57)
Berlin Defense

As it turns out, the Siesta is just as drawish as the Berlin (Capablanca knew it was sound all along), but WAY more fun, especially OTB, with winning chances for both sides, but I like Black


Wilhelm Schuett    (2026-05-27 16:45:31)
Next thematic tournament

1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 e5 3.f4 is a possibility


Garvin Gray    (2026-05-20 05:01:42)
Call referee about game ...

Well. In the two cases mentioned above, it seems that both Herbert and I believe that there was at least a need to reply and a decision to be made.

And in our opinion, the worst decision was to 'go silent'.

If we take a similar situation in otb chess, and I imagine the same would be for go as well.

In an otb chess tournament, a player has an issue in their game, stops the clock and either raises their hand or comes over to the arbiters table to get their attention.

The arbiter would then come to the board and issue a ruling. Yes, sometimes their ruling would be to take no action, but at least the player knows that the arbiter has heard their asking for a ruling and the game proceeds.

In the two cases shown above, it seems that Herbert and I believe that we has occurred is that you have not even bothered to attend to our issue at all.

And that has left us dis-satisfied to the point where we are now having to raise it as a forum topic for everyone else to see.


Ulises Pineda    (2026-05-15 07:17:39)
PGN

Once you have downloaded the PGN double click it, you will be asked if you want to search the web or choose a program to open it, pick the later. Search for something like Notepad and select it and click OK. Once opened, you'll see some text, you can select this text and copy it, and then paste it to chess lab or another program.

A PGN is just text that contains the chess moves of the game, so, instead of doing all this, you can copy them from the page directly, some programs like Chess Openings Wizard are pedantic and will not accept that you paste the moves, for those you have to copy also the part on the top of the moves, the one that starts with "[Event ", that is, the game pages are already showing PGNs you can copy, because they're just text files with that extension, you'd only download them to access them offline or to store them in a personal game archive.


Ulises Pineda    (2026-05-13 10:25:32)
Berlin Defense

What else is there to play, though? If black tries to play the Berlin and you try to avoid it, it would have been best to avoid it with the Italian. The Italian remains a landmine to this day, with Stockfish at Depth 30 showing a white advantage and Depth 40 switching to a black one, in some positions, I'd be happy to play the Italian and become black instead of being white in the Berlin!

Against lower rated opposition, the Berlin is a nightmare, it's as if they have found a way to force a draw against you, but you're supposed to try to win as Black to prove your superior playing strength.

This all makes me want to abandon 1.e4 entirely, but I haven't found a convincing line for 1.d4 (to me the Ragozin is d4's Berlin), though I have the most wins with Nf3, I think, against creative players (those that avoid mainlines for fun) 1.e4 remains the best option, they will not defend with the Berlin.

It's a thing about not playing the board, but the opponent, one that wants to win as black will not play the Berlin, and then the Ruy Lopez is the best option.


Garvin Gray    (2026-05-12 05:10:48)
Call referee about game ...

I have also used call referee previously and not received a response. So the issue is not us emailing you. It is using call referee and not getting a reply


Thibault de Vassal    (2026-05-11 23:38:32)
Berlin Defense

Yes, #12 #104 & #105


Wilhelm Schuett    (2026-05-03 03:40:36)
Berlin Defense

Did we had Berlin Defence or the Berlin Wall as a thematic tournament?


Thomas Cranshoff    (2026-04-16 15:43:46)
PGN

yes,and If I do, i have it. but how to put it in a program like chess lab for example


Thibault de Vassal    (2026-04-16 13:51:22)
PGN

In example this one:

https://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=149787

Do you see the (download) link at the bottom of the page?


Paul Guralivu    (2026-04-16 10:51:02)
Cheating / Forfeiting

Pretty SUSPECT that 4 players, atleast 1 not part of the family,

take vacation AT 4 AM (in the MORNING!)... minutes or seconds from one-an-other!


Paul Guralivu    (2026-04-16 10:46:43)
Cheating / Forfeiting

Matej Pech ... is in vacation until 2026 April 17 4:19:39


Paul Guralivu    (2026-04-16 10:26:37)
Cheating / Forfeiting

you should add to analysis:

Jiri Mach ... is in vacation until 2026 April 17 4:18:57


Paul Guralivu    (2026-04-16 10:15:06)
Cheating / Forfeiting

"Pech/Pechova, I'm looking at you"

this might actually be true:
Stepan Pech ... is in vacation until 2026 April 17 4:20:21

Hana Pechova ... is in vacation until 2026 April 17 4:21:1

Taking vacation in the morning, 40 sec difference.

Trully, someone needs to look close at it!


George Jempty    (2026-04-15 13:53:53)
Is rating just a number on this site?

Hello, I'd not responded earlier because I'd taken 45 days leave to begin the year, largely because of frustration around these very sorts of things. Even the 2300+ players do not enter 2200+ tournaments. It's not even because I want to keep drawing 2300+ players to inch my rating up, it's because I want the competition, to enrich my opening repertoire. Enriching my repertoire is the only reason I'm around here anymore, but not for long, not now that I've settled on 1.d4 and 2.g3


Paul Guralivu    (2026-04-03 08:40:09)
Is rating just a number on this site?

In terms of Tournament Rating range:

what can be done... like in IECG/LSS create 2 tiers of tournaments...

the current one where we have 2200-2600

and create another system: 2200 - 2400
2500-2600

(same for all the other categories)

Best regards,
Paul G.


Thibault de Vassal    (2026-03-13 23:17:02)
Post-tickets FICGS

The long answer:

FICGS story is a quite simple & classic one, the reasons why it's declining are quite obvious, and unfortunately the solutions aren't. A bit of story:

1. Luckily, FICGS.com was created when there were a demand, just after IECG stopped... It grew very quickly, and I was in a rush to code it (FICGS was the very first dynamic website I ran from A to Z), there were ideas from everywhere. FICGS.com was the shortest domain name available, but not a so good one. Quite hard to remember, hard to tell, not clear for search engines (unlike chess.com which is a perfect one). Maybe it was a mistake to choose it, I can't tell. Either it meant "Free Internet Chess Games Server" or "Free Internet Correspondence Games Server", so I added another game, Go (Weiqi), to FICGS, which is a quite heavy decision: After that, FICGS is not only a chess server anymore.

2. A few years after, there are several thousands players (a few hundreds active). The number of new players slowly decreases month after month but a few sponsors come. Obviously, the way I coded FICGS made it more and more difficult to fully update from a PHP version to another one, or to change it in deep. Even now, I'm not sure to regret it though cause I couldn't have done it differently, so it is what it is. At this time, chess.com was less interesting than FICGS (my taste), but success is already here thanks to a perfect marketing formula: best domain name & pay for options. On the contrary, I chose to keep FICGS completely free.

3. Chess engines explode, correspondence chess continues its evolution (human's thinking decreases in moves decision), finally I add another game that is in a hype: poker texas holdem. New sponsors come, I still play correspondence chess myself but now I play another game even more: Google. FICGS also extends this way and it works in some ways. At its peak, FICGS is about the 32,000th most visited website worldwide. But the number of players continues to decrease, Android & phones started to change the landscape already. Chess.com released its app and added probably its best feature: a quick Stockfish analysis with evaluation & explanation for each move (which is excellent for blitz games but quite a non-sense for a correspondence chess website).

4. The number of players suddenly declines very quickly, I react by creating FICGS apps for Android, a dozen apps... On some apps, you can play against the machine, virtual opponents, chess 960, blindfold & so on. But the way to maintain it is not easy at all for many reasons, but the main one is that Google (Playstore) constantly change technical things & rules. After a few years, I even have to completely remake it, losing what was acquired. And some apps still fail to re-appear at Playstore, that's why I just made the APK files available to direct download. But these applications confirm something clear: blitz is more fun and attracts much more players. Changing rating ranges for correspondence chess tournaments or championships formats won't be a solution for this.

5. FICGS is now 20 years old! Internet completely changed over the years but it survived longer than Messenger, Skype & many other great services. If you look at many websites, new versions of their modern interfaces are often worst (bugs or options) than previous ones. FICGS was never perfect, maybe even clear, but at least it remained coherent. Now Google (just like all major services) is mainly governed by AI, sponsors left - that does not change anything, FICGS will continue to run. I created other websites, but none so far successfully helped in a way or another to solve the problem we encounter here: how to increase the number of correspondence chess, Go or poker players again? If FICGS becomes a pure correspondence chess site again with a brand new interface, I'm quite sure that wouldn't change anything or almost. I might be wrong of course, but according to me, this is a deep problem, connected to society evolutions, computers, phones, our attention, time, even health & so on... In my personal case, I wish to play correspondence chess again, but still cannot find the time to do it. Finally I have no idea what internet will look like within 5 years, but FICGS will be there. Maybe an AI will find a solution soon ^^ Meanwhile, I received many ideas to improve FICGS and I have to thank you very much for this. Few ideas were released for reasons I explained here (but new ones are always wecome), I hope you'll better understand it by reading this.


Have good games & take care!


Scott Ligon    (2026-03-01 19:25:51)
Next thematic tournament

It does look like black is skating on thin ice in this line. These are exactly the kind of lines that might still be interesting to play in the Stockfish era, where solid openings are trivially drawn. One side or the other needs to have misplayed the opening enough to be almost losing, or possibly losing already, but in a position where this isn't clear.


Stanislas Gounant    (2026-02-27 22:12:08)
Next thematic tournament

I amused myself by looking at the most frequently played lines at the top level, stopping at the first six moves. Then I used Stockfish to evaluate the resulting positions. I was surprised to find that Stockfish rated a Benoni line +0.91 at 40 half-moves deep. I suppose there must be a lot of theory surrounding this line, but with a rating of +0.91, there's certainly enough to work with. Here's the line in question (sorry for the Google translation):
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6


Thibault de Vassal    (2026-02-27 15:19:43)
Post-tickets FICGS

Now 3 players in the rapid M, 2 in the rapid A... but the main point remains, it takes too long to fill waiting lists.

The short answer to "What have you done?" may be: FICGS did not evolve these last 10 years. But I'm not sure it's so simple. I'll write the long answer soon.


Garvin Gray    (2026-02-22 07:45:14)
Is rating just a number on this site?

There are two types of tickets.

The first kind is when you win a lower class/rapid event and that qualifies you to enter the next higher rated event, but you have to wait until five players above the rating cut off have already entered.

This system was introduced to get tournaments started as each tournament would sit for months waiting for seven players who had ratings above the rating cut off to enter.

And then Thibault has extended the system to pay to enter, where you need to be 50 points lower than the rating cut off.

As has been said previously, one of the biggest issues is not either of these concepts, it is the difference in the rating bands for entering a tournament.

When a tournament is 2200 to 2600, no one who is rated 2500 is going to enter that event when 4 players who are rated between 2200 and 2300 have already entered.

I have already proposed a solution to this, but once again Thibault will not embrace change and we are stuck with what we have.

And I am going to say this directly. Those who are playing on here are growing increasing frustrated and how it is being run.

From TER, to rating bands, to tickets and many other issues, nothing changes.

And I think quite a few of us are reaching the point of walking away. I certainly am.

There is no point continuing on when the site owner will not change anything anymore. The only option left is to leave.


Ulises Pineda    (2026-02-21 04:35:44)
Is rating just a number on this site?

It became just a number after tickets were introduced.

I could easily have been 2400 if tickets were promoted from the beginning and I bought them whenever it was possible, even though I would have been playing at the same level.

For rating to matter you can't just let players play in the next tier, there's the strong 2400 players that got there beating others on their tiers or lower, but now there'll be 2400 players that bought tickets and drew their games of that tier, making it be just a number.


Ulises Pineda    (2026-02-21 04:30:18)
Post-tickets FICGS

Nobody has joined the FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_M__000182 waiting list or the FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_A__000321 waiting list. Everything feels emptier and the guy that has bought the most tickets on the site is going to let all his games run out of time...

What have you done?


Thibault de Vassal    (2026-01-31 22:56:08)
Poker ELO

Hello Yeturu & very sorry, for some reason I completely overlooked that post.

Of course I agree that ELO is not ideal for poker, I quickly changed some parameters to make it a bit more stable.

There are many many ways to do it different & probably better, particularly when not only H2H is played, but the idea was to do it looking like chess, so this is just a choice among many others.

Reaching elo 2000 with constant all-in does not shock me much as players under this rating probably do not play as many as hands (it takes time & many games to gain points)...


Thibault de Vassal    (2026-01-29 02:00:04)
Too many groups for tourneys

Changing rating bands is not a big effort (at all), but it would ruin coherence of each category... and we should change it again if the number of players evolve again. That's quite like suddenly playing best of 2 and only 1 serve at Roland Garros. Why tennis does not evolve (while it is seriously concurrenced by Padel) more? Quite the same reasons IMHO.

Well, FICGS is not Roland Garros... of course, but I already made too many mistakes that ruined coherence there and there, with not so good consequences.


A. T. S. Broekhuizen    (2026-01-27 18:14:57)
following the knock out stage of wch 28

Hmm this would be the right number. But I believe there is still a knock out phase coming, following this final group phase:

https://ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__WCH_ROUND_ROBIN_FINAL__000028.html

I would suppose this has also a number 28. Does this check out?


Thibault de Vassal    (2026-01-27 13:55:04)
following the knock out stage of wch 28

You mean this one?

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_KNOCKOUT_FINAL__000028

Just click Tournaments, then:

FICGS__CHESS__WCH_KNOCKOUT_FINAL


Scott Ligon    (2026-01-22 23:22:11)
no engines

In the Special Tournaments section there is a No Engines Tournament, looks like anyone can join the waiting list.


Garvin Gray    (2025-12-10 02:03:16)
An indication for draw offers

Sorry, deja vu again.

ICCF already handles this topic.

A player can only offer one draw every ten moves in a game, unless their opponent offers a draw in return.

I have suggested this to Thibault previously and whilst he was receptive, it was not implemented.

This solution would stop repetitive draw offers, either intentional or accidental (and accidental can happen with no equal sign applied to a draw offer in the notation) and also everyone would know when they last offered a draw in each game.


Garvin Gray    (2025-12-10 01:59:32)
Too many groups for tourneys

I am not being harsh on Thibault at all. I am just stating a fact in regards to these discussions. For there to be progress, the site owner has to be willing to embrace the suggestions.

Without this, the conversations are just that.

I guess I am just burnt out and scarred. Having been through too many of these same discussions over the many, many years and they all end up in the same place. The rubbish bin.

And it does not have to be this way. It is true that Thibault does run this site on his own, but he could appoint three moderators or other such people to handle these decisions.


George Jempty    (2025-12-10 00:40:04)
Too many groups for tourneys

So from the sidebar there are only 30 active players rated 2306 and above. Something clearly needs to be done. My idea of one group 2300+ might work as might additonally allow 2250+ players in under certain conditions. Maybe there could also be a 2400+ for those elite players who would prefer to play other such elite plaers.


Garvin Gray    (2025-12-09 18:40:17)
Too many groups for tourneys

The issue is not so much with rating bands, it is difference in ratings of the groups.

400 points in the groups is ridiculous. A 2500 player is not going to be the first to join a group when they know that a 2150 can also join that same group.

But once again, just like a lot of issues on this site, I have brought these issues to Thibault attention, some changes have been made, but the main issue of what you see now still remains.

Just like the rest of the issues that have been discussed, if Thibault does not agree, discussing the issue is a waste of your time.


George Jempty    (2025-12-06 22:24:08)
Next thematic tournament

no i want something relevant to theory and is somewhat likely to be encountered OTB


Wilhelm Schuett    (2025-12-06 20:21:52)
Next thematic tournament

Would you like 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Qe2 too?


George Jempty    (2025-12-04 21:54:41)
Too many groups for tourneys

Yeah I'm a little biased too. I'm probably headed to 2250+ in the next couple of cycles and therefore too might be able to get a ticket into the 2300 tourneys, though I highly doubt I'll ever reach 2300.


Scott Ligon    (2025-12-04 18:31:57)
Too many groups for tourneys

I agree, though I may be biased. My rating has never been high enough to get into the 2400+ tourneys, and currently isn't high enough for 2350+, unless maybe I could get a ticket once it fills up most of the way, or however that works. Seems like there just aren't enough active players at those rating levels. Interestingly, I noticed that two of the four players currently signed up for the 2400+ Rapid have never played a game on this site.

I wonder if there were more players a long time ago when the current tournament structures were set up, so those tourneys were getting filled regularly. But over the past few years the fields have thinned.


George Jempty    (2025-12-02 14:11:33)
An indication for draw offers

I sometimes make draw offers up to 3 at a time, once or twice a month.

Sometimes they decline OFC, and it's hard to keep track. Some sort of indication would be appreciated.

Perhaps it could be as simple as inserting {draw offer: declined} into the PGN


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-28 04:17:09)
New Tie Break System

Sorry, but I don't really want to participate in these discussions.

I have been through them before, even to the point of full on arguments with Thibault.

And also as National Delegate for Australia at ICCF, I have been involved in so many proposals on this topic that I have had enough of these discussions.

ICCF already has a set system and this is because it has been hashed out by all the ND's and the ICCF executive board over a number of years.

I see no point in trying to re-invent the wheel.

Talk of using different points for black wins or other criteria have also been debated in ICCF proposals and been defeated as they are unfair in the group as the player could get the win through an ETL.

And player mass resigning games without punishment is a topic that has recently been complained about on here again.

See why I don't want to discuss this topic. I have been going over these topics for almost two decades.

I am done


George Jempty    (2025-11-26 13:19:19)
New Tie Break System

I still like my idea of using it based on performance rating FIRST, I don't see how it gives the lowest entrant an advantage if the tournament ends in a tie between all players.

But lets say two players tie, and one of them has a higher performance rating because they beat a stronger player than the other, that ALSO does not give an advantage to the lower rated player that I can see. Rather, that player must have beaten a higher rated player than the other in order to have a higher performance rating. So if the higher rated player beat a higher rated player rated player than the lower rated player did, the higher rated player would advance.

Perhaps Garvin can weigh in a little more specifically about how being lower rated gives an advantage. But, under his idea, my proposed order would be, 1) Number of wins, 2) performance rating, 3) Sonnen-berger, etc.


Yeturu Aahlad    (2025-11-25 23:27:25)
Poker ELO

Proposal: re-examine Poker ELO

Why? ELO is a heuristic designed for full information games involving no element of chance. In that space, it has stood the test of time. For games incorporating an element of chance, such as Poker, it is not ideal. As a data point, my evidence from FICGS is that a Poker player who goes all-in on every hand converges to an ELO of slightly over 2000. My last observation is from a long time ago, and one of these players (the much better one) has abandoned this strategy since then. There are many earnest players who deserve to out-rank such a simplistic strategy but don't.

Action: This subject has been studied, and the emerging recommendation is a simple change to the heuristic for games which incorporate elements of chance.

Research: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZXdehn029SaV6a5mxsn7WAMsxYNZPGHzZHKiBbeaxrw/edit?usp=sharing


George Jempty    (2025-11-20 22:23:26)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I guess I "opened a can of worms" by exercising the rule regarding the ability to enter a higher rated group. But in my case specifically, my future rating is now over 2200, so I personally believe there has been NO HARM DONE. But I intend to continue to use this rule, for instance to enter >=2300 tourneys, if/when I get to 2250, there are already five entrants, and I pay the requisite e-points. I didn't outsmart anybody, I just found the necessary rule at https://ficgs.com/membership.html#tickets. A button or some other mechanism however would be a great idea


Thibault de Vassal    (2025-11-19 16:17:50)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Hi all,

Garvin & Ulises points are very good actually... I never thought about a button or something to remind that rule in the waiting lists.

I'll do it right now...


Bahadir Ozen    (2025-11-19 08:46:16)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Mr. Ulises Pineda,

Of course, you're valuable. The time you spend, your actions, and your interaction enrich both me, the players, and the site. Thank you for your efforts.

It's clear that each site has its own infrastructure and process. Yes, we play on a different site, and there can be conditional moves there. But FICGS's games also go to the Corr Database, and they're respected. We can say it's a proven platform.

You're right about the ticket issue being annoying. In that case, the paying player has a slightly greater advantage.

I agree with you in the long run, but the person who keeps the site "usable" also puts in the effort. Perhaps a different update on this rule will be forthcoming.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-19 06:45:16)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I'm contributing with my moves and participation in the platform, I also don't ask for money to the site owner to see my moves or to start new games, because it goes both ways, without players like me participating, the site would die, if someone gets a very sour taste in their mouth that they stop participating, it's the beginning of the end.
The players are needed, is the site needed? We're already playing a game in another place, Ozen, I see you making conditional moves over there that you can't send here, so what's the advantage of playing over here instead of playing over there?
At the end of the day, I come here because of the players I can face here, that only play at FICGS, so it's the only way. If they happen to leave because of some circumstances, then the site becomes pointless.
FICGS is its players.
FICGS needs the players more than the players need FICGS.
Gratitude goes both ways, I don't feel appreciated because the site's owner hasn't even replied here, because I'm just another useless player and if I left someone else would come to replace me, perhaps someone that buys tickets.
If I'm not valuable, if my games and move contributions are meaningless perhaps I should stop creating new games around here, there's other places that are completely free, have more features, and don't let players pay to get in higher rated tiers.


Bahadir Ozen    (2025-11-18 13:32:10)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Mr. Ulises Pineda,

I read what you wrote. I understand and agree with you. However, you're missing a crucial point.

The FICGS website doesn't charge any fees for entering tournaments like the ICCF or other sites. And we know that the world is currently dominated by a capitalist system. Mr. Thibault's efforts shouldn't be discounted here. As correspondence chess players, our numbers are small, anyway.

There's a lot of effort involved, and you can contribute through e-points or donations.

At the end of the day, think about it this way: FICGS offers a free marathon service, and we're debating whether it should be 20 or 40 km...


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-18 10:33:59)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I demand a button that buys a ticket automatically when a player is elegible for playing a higher rated tournament and the Epoints to pay it are available, because right now, I have no idea how to do such a feat, in that case, Jempty outsmarted us all, unironically.
Not that my demands have any weight, I think people's lives have gotten better since they ignored me, and perhaps it'd be better for everyone if these rules remained hidden and nobody ever used them again (except Jempty would continue to play a tier up when able), but it's worth a try.
I don't have a bad taste but this has caused me physical pain in the lower back part of my head, is it stressful?
It's nothing personal against George, it's just that climbing the rating ladder is one of the most difficult tasks one can do in life, so when one sees a 2400 player, one respects them, because of all the time and effort they had to put to get there, which, for all players below that tier is immeasurable, if we could measure it we could have that rating too.
But someone getting there by buying tickets that allowed them to face higher rated opposition and take shortcuts to avoid dealing with lower rated players does cheapen the meaning of the number.
I guess it's all about the money, pay to win iff someone buys the Epoints for this reason, and holds a higher rating to skip a tier (note I said iff, not if, not accusing anybody of doing that.)
It's like buying a car instead of running the marathon, and the rating doesn't actually reflect chess skill anymore.


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-18 02:55:42)
Clarification of Rating Groups

It is really annoying when the site owner does not bother to clarify this issue and instead leaves it to the players to have to dig through the rules themselves to sort out this issue.

Tickets for a higher class tournament :

However, when you win a rated tournament (only after that you receive an email specifying it or when the tournaments list shows your name as winner or co-winner of the tournament) or if your rating is at most 50 points below the low rating limit of the next class tournament's waiting list, it is now possible to buy a ticket for the next class tournament's waiting list (for example if you win a chess class A tournament, you may ask for a ticket for the next class M tournament) for 10 Epoints if the following conditions are filled : 1) No more than 2 players obtained the best score in the tournament. There's no winner otherwise. 2) The player's TER must not be more than 200 points below the low rating limit of the tournament's waiting list. 3) At most 2 players may buy a ticket to enter the same waiting list. 4) Five players at least must have entered the tournament's waiting list already so that you can buy a ticket for this tournament. 5) The possibility to buy a ticket is valid after the official end of the tournament [when the tournaments list shows winners, not leaders of the tournament]. 6) As the price for any ticket is 10 Epoints, the player's account must be credited of at least 10 Epoints.


George Jempty    (2025-11-17 23:52:51)
Russian flag replaced

Exactly, that was merely "anecotal evidence" of one Ukranian happy becoming Russian. IMO and most of the non-Russian world, INVADING the Ukraine was utterly reprehensible, as is the Israel INDISPUTABLY committing genocide in the Ukraine, AND the USA sinking ships and killing people WITH NO DUE CAUSE in the Carribean. I'd happily change my flag to somewhere I'm from, does Long Island have a flag? Because I may be from the United States, but I am NOT from North America ;)


George Jempty    (2025-11-17 23:47:07)
Clarification of Rating Groups

There is no favoritism in my case, the rule ALSO states if your rating is within 50 points of the higher group, that waiting list has at least 5 entries already, and you pay 10 epoints, you can enter. Perhaps those last qualifications have been amended since last time knew of the rule? I've just brought up my ratings to defend against that I'm making a mockery of this rule. So no favoritism, no mockery, and I'm done with this discussion altogether,


Clodomiro Ortiz    (2025-11-13 14:14:35)
retire from waiting list tournament

waiting list tournament chess rapid GM 00022...please Thibault,, i had an accident recenty and i need on account of a medical condition to retire from any physical and mental stress for at least 3 months ahead,,,please if possible and retire from this event


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-12 20:26:59)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

Yeah, I couldn't do anything against your Paris Defence, frankly, I've fared better against 3...Bc5 or 3...Nf6, still can't believe 3...d6 and 5...Nb8 held that well, but it was interesting while remaining solid.


Bahadir Ozen    (2025-11-12 20:21:12)
Increasing the Number of Games in Progre

Hello,

Thank you. I love FICGS and would like to play more matches at once. But overall, if this system works, there's nothing to be done. Thank you.

Regards
Bahadir


George Jempty    (2025-11-12 16:06:48)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

I guess for me it's kind of personal because I played the Budapest on and off for decades, even beat an IM with it in a simul, but eventually became convinced it was borderline unsound. I think you can get interesting games without playing *too* unsoundly, for instance as Black I play the Siesta


Thibault de Vassal    (2025-11-12 15:16:04)
Increasing the Number of Games in Progre

Hello Bahadir and Ulises,

That's an old debate... unfortunately I had to add this rule to protect other players from these too numerous unfinished games. Penalizing was not really useful as most of forfeiting players do not come back again. It works fine since that time, even if it can be a bit frustrating. In my opinion this is a good & efficient rule.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-11 23:02:26)
Increasing the Number of Games in Progre

What about penalizing players that forfeit too many matches by disallowing them to start new games for a month, or something like that? Other kind of penalties would be problematic because they'd depend on how many games are already running, but a time out for forfeiting games seems reasonable.


Bahadir Ozen    (2025-11-11 10:46:11)
Increasing the Number of Games in Progre

Hello,

First of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Thibault for his efforts. We can play regularly for free. FICGS and LSS are my favorite correspondence chess sites.

Is there a possibility of increasing the maximum number of matches from 50 in the future? For example, 200 matches at a time.

Players who forfeit too many matches will be penalized; perhaps such a system could be implemented. I'm just curious; is it possible?

Regards
Bahadir


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-10 17:23:03)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Yeah, I'd just want the same chances since I'm at 2274 and would like to join tournaments a tier up, but I don't see any "pay 10 E-points to join". I could claim that I've drawn +2300 players many times and "worthy of" being with the higher ups, or whatever it takes, but the purpose would be defeated if I get to face the same people I'm facing now because the +2300 tournaments would be full of 2250+ rated players.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-10 17:16:18)
Russian flag replaced

It's very interesting that the only message here from people actually involved is from an Ukranian that was happy becoming Russian. There's always two sides of the story, it's unfortunate almost nobody speaks Russian and we only get to hear the "English speaking world" narrative of the events where the side to take is clear, and you never get to know about the critical events happening there because they are only shown in a language nobody reads.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-10 17:06:10)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

Because the optimal defenses by black are so boring! And they don't offer any counter-play, specially against lower-rated opponents that could easily draw as white with those. In uncommon variations they have to think, and that's the only chance they slip.
There's also the aspect of overconfidence, chess engines have gotten so strong one thinks they can defend anything. That was a mistake I made last time I played a Benoni and lost, I thought I played the strongest defense, who knows if my opponent could also have defeated someone else in the same line, but it was a problem of evaluation, not depth, the engine was showing 1.0 scores for positions that were lost, and they were so complicated I couldn't keep up. Near the end my opponent wasn't even playing the moves I predicted and cut the game like a knife through butter.
But I'll always rather lose a game like that than playing the same boring defense that draws against anything but it's a snore fest, apparently I could just play moves from 300 million nodes blindly and draw anyway.
So I continue to play dubious lines and appreciate opponents that deviate from the norm to spice things up, I could easily be over 2300 at the cost of boring games, but I'll be getting there soon anyway and finally find out how people on that tier play against me, since I've never been able to join tournaments of that caliber.


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-10 05:48:20)
Clarification of Rating Groups

George:

As I stated in my original post:

The policy as I have known it has been that a player must win a lower division, and then can only enter the higher division when the field has gotten to the last two entries.

Has this policy changed?

Your reply would fit if the player had won the lower division and was then trying to enter the higher division.

This is the rule I was quoting.

Your justifications about where your rating sits, or where your rating maybe in the future does not matter. Many players can show this pattern.

I certain have and have been stuck just below a rating cut off and when I have attempted to enter a higher division when there are two spots left open, I have been told no as I not won a lower division.

Therefore, this is why I am seeking a clarification from Thibault.

And it is only Thibault that I want a public answer from.

Either the rule has changed and it should be told to everyone, or an exception has been made for you, which is then clearly wrong as that is favouritism.

I have been told no in the past.

So, which is it Thibault?


George Jempty    (2025-11-08 12:11:03)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Hello Garvin Gray, there is a similar rule if you are within 50 points of the floor of the next higher group, and "the field has gotten to the last two entries", and you pay 10 e-points.

I think this policy helps fill up hard to fill groups, like standard-M. Nobody has joined the new/empty rating list for that group in the meantime.

On a personal note, my future rating just since the last update earlier this week, has even gone up over 20 points and now stands at 2199, AND I have a clearly winning position (+3.0 per SF 17) against a 2300.

IMO I am clearly worthy of standard-M, and am not making a mockery of anything.


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-04 16:15:02)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I have just seen the chat bar exchange where George Jempty has said:

You can play up if you are within 50 points, and now I am in and my account has been debited e points.

Where has this rule come from?

On countless occasions I have enquired about being able to enter a higher division than my rating when I have just been under the rating cutoff, and been told no.

The policy as I have known it has been that a player must win a lower division, and then can only enter the higher division when the field has gotten to the last two entries.

Has this policy changed?

If it has, then it would have helped to have it publicised, but also I would spoken against the changed as it makes a mockery of any rating divisions.

If this is the case, might as well call 2200 - 2600, 2150 - 2600


George Jempty    (2025-11-04 14:25:26)
Russian flag replaced

It's not a matter of being a "political expert". It's just a matter of knowing your history. "Between May 3 and 12, 1916, the British military executed 15 leaders of the Easter Rising for their roles in the rebellion" .... "The swift and public executions, conducted during the First World War, generated significant public outrage and sympathy for the rebel cause in Ireland. What was initially a mixed public reaction to the Rising turned into widespread support". And that was for killing 15 people, so my educated guess is there will eventually be retribution for Israel indisputably (again, not an opinion, or me being a "political expert") KILLING TENS OF THOUSAND OF PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS.


George Jempty    (2025-11-04 14:06:45)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

Yes, Dutch is OK, but 2.Nh3!? is a challenge, and I've won at least one game on this server with that. But the Benoni and Budapest are significantly worse IMO. Like I say a 2300-player tried the Budapest against me and I have something like a +2.5 advantage (according to SF17) at move 23. Yes, he was not at all careful and definitely made a couple of very bad decisions. Interestingly, I see the average ELO he face is 1900, so I think his rating is really inflated and he doesn't do so well against stronger players, whereas I'm currently at 2175, and the average ELO I face is 2100. I try to "play up" for the strongest competition, rather than "play down" to pump up my rating.


Yeturu Aahlad    (2025-11-03 22:57:20)
go game 146698

Near the bottom of your screen for this game, you will see the link "call referee"


Ilmars Cirulis    (2025-10-31 13:37:01)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

Dutch is okay (very playable, imo) and interesting. :)


Scott Ligon    (2025-10-31 12:46:50)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

To make things just slightly interesting. There's no challenge at all in holding the draw with black while playing a standard opening. Modern engines make it trivially easy. But in the Budapest or the Albin Countergambit or Alekhine's Defense, I'm pretty sure black can still hold the draw, but you have to be careful.


Bogoljub Teverovski    (2025-10-31 10:59:57)
Russian flag replaced

I see a lot of political experts here. My preference is to avoid playing russians either with their bloody flag or without it.


Scott Ligon    (2025-10-31 00:49:54)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

I don't know if you're talking about the Budapest in the context of correspondence games, but it's playable for black, just barely. I don't think it loses by force. I have played it several times on this site.


George Jempty    (2025-10-30 10:33:39)
Russian flag replaced

@Garvin, you can be anti-Isreal and NOT be anti-semitic. Do you think killling tens of thousands of innocent Palestinians is going to decrease future terrorism? Isreal's actions are giving rise to future generations of terrorists.


Wilhelm Schuett    (2025-10-27 20:17:32)
go game 146698

In https://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=146698&flip=1 my opponent don't resign. I think all his stones are dead.


Thibault de Vassal    (2025-10-27 18:41:02)
Russian flag replaced

I don't intend to remake the whole debate here or anywhere else... I have other things to do. But in brief, IMO:

1. The situation was complex before oct.8
2. Hamas (terrorist org) started it.
3. More than 75% (!) of Gaza buildings were destroyed.
4. How many people killed, how many terrorists?
5. What are the limits of acceptability?

It seems possible to commit war crimes and/or a genocide after being attacked, right?

There can be absolutely no link between estimating that Israel commits a genocide and proving antisemitism, right?

There are other wars in the world, that's right (of different natures).

I'm not in a hurry to take any action... it will take time yet.


Garvin Gray    (2025-10-27 14:15:04)
Russian flag replaced

Before you take any action, you should actually check your facts regarding Israel. I really hate discussing this topic, but since now the site owner is considering taking similar against those who display the Israel flag as those who were from Russia and Belarus, it is extremely important to remember how we got here in both situations.

With Russia and Belarus, it was because they started a war of aggression on another correspondence chess federation.

And all sporting bodies took swift action against them in suspending their Federations and preventing their teams from competing, and players from competing and their own flag.

With the situation between Hamas/Hezbollah and Isreal, it was Hamas that was the aggressor. There was no war on July 6, 2023 and Gaza was in a state of peace. But then Hamas attacked Isreal, chopping the heads of babies and taking hostages and raping Israeli women hostages.

What did you expect the Isreali Government to do in response? Sit back and let a terrorist organisation keep the hostages and are you saying that Isreal does not have a right to defend itself?

It is quite disgusting that there are wars all over the world at the moment, about 20 at the moment, but it is only when Jews defend themselves that people feel the need to virtue signal their sense of outrage.

The correct word for them is anti-semites. We used to say 'Never again' after the Holocaust, but it now seem perfectly acceptable to support a terrorist organisation when it attacks Israel and Israel responds by trying to eliminate the threat once and for all.

And it should also be noted as we saw over a week ago. A sixth peace offer was made and Hamas responded like all the others. With more aggression.

Decide to take action against Israel on this site and you prove your antisemitism.


Yeturu Aahlad    (2025-10-22 18:54:42)
DNS failure last week

Thibault, I was fearing the worst. Although I'm an atheist, I was praying for your safety. To help me avoid future trips to the temple, may I ask for a favor? Please keep a mailing list you can use even if your service provider is unavailable. Now, if I see 3 days of outage and receive no email notification,I will return to the temple.


A. T. S. Broekhuizen    (2025-10-08 11:44:36)
Next thematic tournament

In the Leningrad 5.d5 is indeed suboptimal, but the lichess engine prefers 5.Nf3. After 5.e3 black has a combination with 5...Qa5 6.Ne2 Ne4 7.Qd3 cxd4 8.exd4 Nxf2 9.Kxf2 Qxg5


George Jempty    (2025-10-08 01:13:49)
Russian flag replaced

Like the Israeli plan? That country is commiting genocide.


George Jempty    (2025-10-07 17:15:16)
Next thematic tournament

Yeah probably too tame for correspondence, interestingly I do intend to play 4.f3 for the most part, but I came up with the 4.Bf4 idea when investgating the Leningrad variation. After 4.Bg5 c5 now 5.d5?! which had been the standard is considered sub-optimal by the engine which prefers 5.e3, and after 5...h6, I concluded that White didn't have to play 6.Bxf6 or 6.Bh4, which is when I started investigating 4.Bf4. I actually may start playing this in FIDE tournaments where I will probably be much lower rated, exactly to get into such a tame line


George Jempty    (2025-10-05 14:58:16)
Cheating / Forfeiting

@Unlise Pineda, I do not think those situations are random. Because last one month, at least once, I had 3 or 4 games by "different" players, that have been doing so (letting their time run down to around one day or less) when I got all of their moves within 5 or 10 minutes of one another, very strange.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-08-05 01:14:13)
Cheating / Forfeiting

I've seen many games recently where the games are lost on time in equal positions, by players that let their clock run until they have 0 days and then play from the increment. But they seem random, so not sure.


Scott Ligon    (2025-07-08 12:59:43)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

You might still find a winning line as the game progresses. But if you think you have better things to do with your time than trying to refute these strategies, I won't disagree. And you're right, if you refute 17.1 @ 50 million nodes, I'll just double the node count next time.

The whole point of the exercise from my point of view is to find an unbeatable deterministic strategy, keeping node count to a minimum. With Stockfish 17.1, 20 million nodes didn't get the job done and 50 million might, I just don't know yet. Either way, I'm confident that unbeatable configurations exist, and I don't think they're far off if I haven't found one already.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-07-08 07:43:23)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

I thought it was clever of me to retire scripts on demand, but I realized I've been a fool after spending the last week being unable to find a win against the 50 million question and wondering what would I achieve after finding such a line, raising it to 100 million? 200 million?

I stand corrected and the other opponents have it right, I finally get why they don't even bother, so I'm retiring from finding lines that refute the nodes, and it's my first time since this all started where I'll be playing my moves without a winning line on my hand.


Scott Ligon    (2025-07-05 18:11:53)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

For anyone looking for a quick draw with black against the 17.1 @ 50 million nodes strategy, I recommend the following line:

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 Ng4 7. Bc1 Nf6

A repeat of the position after move 5, and since white's strategy is deterministic it is going to keep repeating. So as long as I'm on the 17.1 @ 50 million nodes strategy, play this line as black and you'll get a draw.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-06-22 13:45:25)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

Harsh words? I took that as a compliment. Getting some credit was a life changer.

I forgot to explain the joke I made when I played 62.Ba3 and said "That must be a new record"; in all our previous games I played into a position where the script was about to play a losing move you had to avoid, in this game I did it twice.


Scott Ligon    (2025-06-14 02:43:46)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

While analyzing the game I'm currently playing as black against Pineda, I found a winning line for white against Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes. It follows the first 41 moves of that game, and white made a different 42nd move. Which may also lead to a winning line for all I know, but I will just post the one I found. At the end of this line Stockfish found mate in 23.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 d6 6. O-O a6 7. a4 O-O 8. b4 Ba7 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Nbd2 Be6 11. Bxe6 fxe6 12. Nf1 Ng6 13. h3 h6 14. N1h2 Qe8 15. Ra2 a5 16. b5 Bc5 17. Bd2 Rd8 18. Qb3 Qf7 19. g3 d5 20. Kg2 b6 21. Bc1 Bd6 22. Rae2 Bc5 23. Rc2 Rde8 24. Ra2 Bd6 25. Ba3 Rc8 26. c4 Kh7 27. Raa1 Kg8 28. Bb2 c6 29. Rac1 Bb4 30. Re2 d4 31. h4 Qc7 32. bxc6 Bc5 33. Rg1 Rf7 34. Qd1 Qxc6 35. Bc1 Rcf8 36. Rf1 Qd6 37. Rd2 Qc7 38. Ra2 Bb4 39. Rc2 Qb7 40. Rb2 Qd7 41. Bd2 Bc5 42. Qe2 Qc6 43. Rbb1 Nd7 44. h5 Nh8 45. Rb5 Bd6 46. Qd1 Qc7 47. Nh4 Nc5 48. Ng6 Nxg6 49. hxg6 Rf6 50. Qh5 Nxd3 51. Ng4 Qc6 52. Kg1 Qxe4 53. Nxf6+ Rxf6 54. Rxb6 Bf8 55. f3 Qe2 56. Qh2 Qxh2+ 57. Kxh2 e4 58. Bxa5 e3 59. Kg2 Ne5 60. c5 Rxg6 61. c6 Bd6 62. Bb4 Bc7 63. f4 e2 64. Rb1 Bxb6 65. fxe5 d3 66. a5 Rg4 67. Be1 Bxa5 68. Bxa5 Rc4 69. Rb6 Rc5 70. Bb4 Rc4 71. Kf2 Kf7 72. Rb7+ Ke8 73. Re7+ Kd8 74. c7+ Rxc7 75. Rxc7 Kxc7 76. Ke3 Kc6 77. Kxd3 e1=Q 78. Bxe1 Kd5 79. Bc3 Kc5 80. Ke4

Therefore I will be retiring the Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes strategy. For future games I will be using Stockfish 17.1 @ 50 million nodes.


Scott Ligon    (2025-05-05 18:48:23)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

For future games I will be using Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes.


Scott Ligon    (2025-05-01 04:14:23)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

After the harsh words of my previous post, I must now give Pineda some credit. He did exactly what he said he was going to do against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes so now I can't use that strategy in any of my future games, it is retired. Since none of my opponents in the games I have running now with this strategy are playing the same opening that Pineda used (the Italian Game), I can post a winning line for white immediately. Our game followed the first 43 moves of this line, and as black I had to deviate from this strategy on move 43 to avoid certain defeat. So here is a winning line for white against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes. At the end of the line, Stockfish found mate in 22.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 a6 6. O-O d6 7. a4 O-O 8. b4 Ba7 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Nbd2 Be6 11. Bxe6 fxe6 12. Ra2 Ng6 13. h3 Qe8 14. Nf1 h6 15. N1h2 a5 16. b5 Bc5 17. Bd2 Rd8 18. Qb3 Qf7 19. g3 d5 20. Kg2 b6 21. Bc1 Rc8 22. exd5 Nxd5 23. h4 Bd6 24. h5 Nge7 25. Nxe5 Qxh5 26. Nef3 c5 27. c4 Nb4 28. Rd2 Ng6 29. Qd1 Nf4+ 30. Kh1 Rcd8 31. Re3 Qh3 32. Ne1 Ng6 33. Qe2 Ne7 34. Nf3 Bxg3 35. fxg3 Nf5 36. Qf2 Nxg3+ 37. Kg1 Nf5 38. Bb2 Rf7 39. Bc3 Nxe3 40. Qxe3 Qg3+ 41. Kh1 Qh3 42. Qe4 Qf5 43. Qxf5 exf5 44. Ne5 Rf6 45. Nhf3 g5 46. d4 cxd4 47. Rxd4 Rfd6 48. Rxd6 Rxd6 49. Bxb4 Rd1+ 50. Kg2 axb4 51. c5 b3 52. Nc4 bxc5 53. b6 g4 54. b7 gxf3+ 55. Kxf3


Scott Ligon    (2025-04-24 16:36:24)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

Yeah you found a line that beat the 10 million node strategy which I hadn't analyzed. Congratulations! I'm not interested in arguing with you about the next strategy I choose to play. You might find a winning line against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes, or maybe I'll find it first, or somebody else will. Or maybe nobody will find it because it doesn't exist (this is the possibility you completely discount). I've got nothing more to say to you and I can't imagine how many stupid fights you probably pick with people for no good reason in your day to day life, but your attitude is hilarious.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-04-24 16:20:25)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

I'm going to find a winning line against it, and then I'm going to find a win against your next step, and then I'm going to find another one against the next one, so skipping steps are a way to save time.

Remember I never made a move in our games until I had found the line, I only played it out, I'm still surprised you haven't dedicated the time to find it as if you were your own opponent, unless I'm the only person in the world that knows how to find such lines.

By using Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million of nodes you would get it retired by me already, I don't understand why you'd want me to retire 10 million or 15 million first, because this has never been about the number of nodes, this is about telling me how you're going to pick your moves so I can find a line that would make your method make a game losing blunder.

Remember you sent me a message thinking 10 million nodes would play just fine right before I made a move that would make it blunder, what I don't know is why didn't you see the move before I played it, or from the distance, and that it surprised you, have people really forgotten how to analyze games? If you build a big tree of moves and replies to them, it's going to contain a line that beats Stockfish at fixed nodes, it'll take me about 24 hours to find the one against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes, and about 48 hours to find one against Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes, the difference is we'll save the amount of games we have to face each other.


Scott Ligon    (2025-04-23 15:21:53)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

My goal is to find the minimal setting where Stockfish can't be beaten, or close to the minimal setting anyway. The title of the thread shows my point of view on this issue. I think currently available versions of Stockfish with relatively modest computing power are already good enough to be unbeatable, regardless of how much money an opponent is being offered or how many supercomputers and grandmasters they have at their disposal when devising a strategy. From the starting position of a game of chess, it simply isn't that hard for modern engines to hold the draw with black. The draw rate on this very site is evidence.

I could make the task easier by generating a small opening book to keep Stockfish out of trouble in the opening, so in the case of Stockfish 17 @ 15 million nodes it might be good enough to simply dictate that it play e5 in response to e4 (I don't know if that specific example is true but it might be - I never found any trouble spots for that strategy with black outside of the Sicilian). But I want to do this with no opening book and also no access to endgame tablebases, just the engine's recommendation using a set number of nodes for the search. The settings I've tried so far fell short, but I think they weren't far off, so I'm taking only small steps forward. Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes seems like a good next step to me. If somebody finds a winning line against it, then I'll take the next step, either increasing the node count or if enough time has passed I'll move on to the next version of Stockfish.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-04-23 14:49:42)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

I'll request that if you ever play against me, jump at least to Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes, because a doubling of nodes is some 50 elo boost to the model, so a lot of games can be saved by increasing the nodes, as finding a winning line against such a thing isn't more difficult in reality, it just takes more time, so I guess those people don't think winning a game is worth the extra time used, or maybe they really don't know how, but if someone offered a million dollars for the line I'm sure they'd sit down and find it.
It's a matter of strength, someone with Stockfish 20 could find the line with a relative ease, and I don't think it'll play a perfect game already either, the blind spots just switch places.


Scott Ligon    (2025-04-23 02:27:39)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

At this point all of my games are safely past the point where they could transpose into the winning line I found against the Stockfish 17 @ 15 million nodes strategy, so I will post it now. At the end of the line Stockfish found mate in 15 for white.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 h6 8. Bh4 Be7 9. Qf3 Nbd7 10. O-O-O Qc7 11. Bd3 g5 12. fxg5 Ne5 13. Qe2 Nfg4 14. Bg3 hxg5 15. Kb1 b5 16. Rdf1 Bb7 17. a3 Nf6 18. Nf3 Nh5 19. Bxe5 dxe5 20. g3 f6 21. Na2 Bc6 22. Nc1 b4 23. axb4 Bxb4 24. c3 Be7 25. Nd2 a5 26. Bc4 Bd7 27. Rfg1 Kf7 28. Rg2 Rag8 29. Nd3 Bc5 30. Rd1 Ba7 31. Qg4 Ke7 32. Bb3 a4 33. Ba2 Ng7 34. Nc4 Be8 35. Qe2 a3 36. Nxa3 Ba4 37. Rf1 Bc6 38. Qg4 Rd8 39. Bc4 Be8 40. Qf3 Rf8 41. g4 Bg6 42. b3 Bb8 43. h4 gxh4 44. Kb2 Ne8 45. g5 f5 46. Qh3 Qc6 47. Re2 Ng7 48. Qxh4 f4 49. Nb4 Qb6 50. Bb5 Rh8 51. Nc6+ Qxc6 52. Qxh8 Qxc3+ 53. Kxc3 Rxh8 54. Rd2 Rc8+ 55. Kb2 Kf7 56. Rfd1 Bxe4 57. Rd8 Rxd8 58. Rxd8 Kg6 59. Rxb8 Kxg5 60. Nc4 Nf5 61. Nxe5 Nd6 62. Rb6 Kf6 63. Rxd6 Kxe5 64. Rd7 Bg2 65. Kc3 Be4 66. b4 Ba8 67. Bc4 f3 68. b5


Scott Ligon    (2025-04-22 16:09:34)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

I have found a line for white that defeats the 15 million node strategy, so it's time for another strategy upgrade. Due to games in progress I won't specify the line now except to say that once again, it's in the Sicilian defense. Of course there may be other lines as well but one is enough.

Rather than up the node count, I will be moving on to Stockfish 17.1. Conveniently for my purposes, Stockfish 17.1 prefers to meet 1 e4 with e5 at all settings I have checked (1 million to 15 million nodes in 1 million node increments). So for now, my plan is to play Stockfish 17.1 at 10 million nodes in all upcoming games, while sticking with the strategy I started with in currently running games. Of course if I find a winning line for white against 17.1 @ 10 million I will update this.




There are 100 results for Li in wikichess.


Karel Zmolil    (1930)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 d4 Bg4 Be2

Transpose to wikichess #71744#

============

Contributors : Karel Zmolil


Eliecer Cruz Ramirez    (2201)
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 h3 c6 Qe3

Transpose to wikichess #145149#

============

Contributors : Eliecer Cruz Ramirez











 		 
 
Support to all people under attack    




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 !


Ortiz, Clodomiro     (DOM)        [member # 9683]

Correspondence chess : 2438       FSM

Ranked  #  61   in the rating list.

Rating history :  No change this year.



Advanced chess :   2350      




This member has no profile in the social network.




FICGS Go server, weiqi baduk banner facebook      
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

       FICGS correspondence chess banner facebook