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) S. Ligon, 2321 M. LaDuke, 2326 1/2-1/2 See game 152178 |
Hot news Discussions Files search Social network
Here are 100 results for Stephen Zack in the games.
Game_117472 Game_117471 Game_117469 Game_117466 Game_117462 Game_117457 Game_112579 Game_112578 Game_112576 Game_112573 Game_112569 Game_112564 Game_106446 Game_106444 Game_106442 Game_106439 Game_106435 Game_106430 Game_103052 Game_103051 Game_103050 Game_103046 Game_103042 Game_103037 Game_103031 Game_103024 Game_101937 Game_101936 Game_101935 Game_101934 Game_101929 Game_101924 Game_101823 Game_101822 Game_101821 Game_101820 Game_101819 Game_101818 Game_101723 Game_101722 Game_101721 Game_101720 Game_101715 Game_101710 Game_101388 Game_101387 Game_101385 Game_101382 Game_101378 Game_101373 Game_100716 Game_100715 Game_100714 Game_100713 Game_100712 Game_100711 Game_75113 Game_75112 Game_75111 Game_75110 Game_75109 Game_75103 Game_19704 Game_19703 Game_19702 Game_19701 Game_19696 Game_19691 Game_19622 Game_19621 Game_19620 Game_19616 Game_19612 Game_19607 Game_19423 Game_19422 Game_19421 Game_19420 Game_19415 Game_19410 Game_19323 Game_19322 Game_19319 Game_19316 Game_19312 Game_19307 Game_19281 Game_19280 Game_19277 Game_19274 Game_19270 Game_19265 Game_19111 Game_19110 Game_19109 Game_19105 Game_19101 Game_19096 Game_19090 Game_19089
There are at least 100 results for Stephen in the forum.
Zack Stephen (2018-10-30 13:14:19)
World Championship Tie-breaks
agree with William, eros can draw these matches with his eyes closed at this point, he can easily be champion for the foreseeable future unless a format change is made.
Some other ideas for consideration: Force specific opening thematics in the final (ie each has to play black/white of a kings gambit, or other speculative openings
Don't provide the +1 day for each move. Make the games a set amount of time say 45 days for 60 moves
Make each side play BIG, random, or other variants as tie breaker until a winner is determined
Zack Stephen (2018-01-28 01:00:23)
FICGS Android APP beta version
Hi
Yes the "remember me" is checked, and the username/password is filled in, however I still have to press login. Other apps can skip this step if the credentials are already filled in.
Also would love to set the first scree to be the "my games" screen by default, instead of the home page.
Lastely you have to scroll to the bottom of the page to find links to the forum, and other pages. can you add navigation at the top of the page?
Zack Stephen (2018-01-26 12:06:04)
FICGS Android APP beta version
I dont understand, where do I set that option to stay logged into the app and not need to constantly log in? I don't see it as an option under 'my account'
Zack Stephen (2018-01-26 02:57:33)
FICGS Android APP beta version
I find that I have to frequently login to the site both via the browser and via your new app. Am I the only one who experiences this? This site should not require logins via the app.
Zack Stephen (2018-01-13 12:34:41)
1st King Supertournament
I tend to agree with christoph. The reason to play on this site is because the use of engines is allowed.
Zack Stephen (2018-01-06 13:08:56)
Next Ficgs World Championship Tournament
Is it too late to join the World Championship tournament? If not when will the first round begin?
Thibault de Vassal (2011-11-13 19:52:28)
List ordered by rating
Here is, but as usual the new ratings (january 2012) will be taken in account...
Erwin Thiering 2515
Michael Bergmann 2475
Xavier Pichelin 2454
Thibault de Vassal 2449
Herbert Kruse 2436
Pavel Háse 2332
Ljubomir Tsenkov 2314
Rubén Cómes 2300
Wayne Lowrance 2266
Dariusz Fraczek 2261
Ramil Germanes 2255
Miroslav Gazi 2255
Alexander Blinchevsky 2253
Michael Sharland 2251
Sergey Kokoryukin 2251
Andrey Razumikhin 2250
Valery Nemchenko 2245
Lubos Fric 2241
Kevin D. Plant 2237
Christoph Schroeder 2236
Viktor Shishkin 2234
Slobodan Ilic 2218
Dmitri Mamrukov 2211
Vitaly Rudenko 2203
Alvin Alcala 2203
Carlos Sánchez 2203
Garvin Gray 2200
Scott Nichols 2189
Peter Unger 2181
Martin Zeman 2181
Christian Koch 2167
Stephen Hamby 2163
John Schutte 2136
David Evans 2132
Nelson Bernal Varela 2130
Darren DiAlfonso 2123
Ardiantez Polkwitzauer 2123
Thomas Dineen 2118
Peter W. Anderson 2112
Steve Lim 2110
Yu Ming Hoe 2100
Arkadiusz Wosch 2093
Djordje Kasabasic 2093
Luis Flores 2084
Daniel Parmet 2083
Lalit Kapoor 2080
Erik L. van Dijk 2074
Bernd Wolf 2072
Jose Lopez 2071
Sergey Uzdin 2064
Rodolfo d Ettorre 2064
Janos Helmer 2063
Om Prakash 2053
Mykola Simashkevitch 2043
Alexis Duenas 2037
Ireneusz Kasznia 2036
Mihail Larsky 2028
Joop Simmelink 2026
Pan Hardfeldt 2020
Henri Muller 2000
Jaroslav senior Pech 2000
Jaroslaw Gibas 2000
Bogoljub Teverovski 1997
Willy De Waele 1996
Fernando Vasquez 1992
Jose Moreira 1979
Andrew Endean 1975
Henri-Louis Muller 1972
Jose Maria Velasco 1972
Jordi Domingo 1969
Janeen Walden 1958
Andy Richard 1956
Roberto Migliorini 1949
Erika van Dijk 1943
Daniel Reboredo 1938
Coco Maceda 1938
Michael Rogers 1933
Aleksandr Aksenov 1927
Mariusz Maciej Broniek 1923
Robert Wilhelm 1901
Kieran Moore 1900
John Dyson 1889
Catalin Nita 1888
Daniel Jabot 1878
Johanes Suhardjo 1875
Mikhail Ruzin 1871
Benjamin Block 1863
Ilmar Ambos 1859
Vyacheslav Shchelykalin 1859
Jan Peter Lommler 1844
Stanislas Gounant 1840
Mircea Hrubaru 1838
Sasha Lipsits 1833
Nilson Pereira 1833
Aleksey Payzansky 1804
Jai Prakash Singh 1800
Fredi Brumec 1800
Gleen Duran 1800
Josef Strohmeier 1800
Ryszard Sternik 1776
Stepan Pech 1767
Dieter Faust 1764
Dmitriy Malish 1760
Dimitrios Ropokis 1743
Hasan Kirali 1715
Eddit Moreul 1700
Behzad Shahmiri 1700
Jaimie Wilson 1684
Dinesh Bhandarkar 1682
Philip Roe 1667
Olli Ylönen 1660
Graham Cridland 1655
Juan Alvar 1653
Jeremy Banta 1644
Luís Gonzaga Grego 1643
Pablo Siciliano 1623
Mariusz Jandula 1600
Sergey Biryukov 1598
Alejandro Canovas 1589
Jimmy Huggins 1577
Matthew O Brien 1575
Pablo Ruano 1565
Khaled Toutaoui 1528
Stanimir Denchev 1505
Leo Malagar 1500
Richard Hendricks 1479
Eric Price 1469
Antonio Pereira 1456
Angelo Piantadosi 1420
Simon Huxtable 1388
Peter Krakovsky 1326
Marc-Antoine Leurette 1243
Jorge Orden 1204
Hana Pechova 1204
Jorma Häkkinen 1192
Des Jefferis 1186
Deon Whittaker 1111
Matej Pech 1074
Jiri Mach 1022
Cédric Cavaillé 1003
Jay Melquiades 0909
Jaroslav Pech 0697
Mircea Hrubaru (2010-04-25 13:51:18)
Anand vs. Topalov, world championship
We must credit our mate Dmitry Domanov for the 16...Qd6!? move (1/2-1/2 Stephenson, Andrew (2256) - Domanov, Dmitry (2202) / FICGS__CHESS__WCH_ROUND_ROBIN_FINAL__000003 (1), FICGS 2008 and 0-1 Agustin, Santos (2010) - Domanov, Dmitry (2181) / FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_09__000006 (1), FICGS 2009).
Andrew Stephenson (2009-01-01 20:02:58)
Vacation - "Each january 1st, ......
the server sets the number of days to 30 for all players." Not so far! Thibault does it happen at the end of January 1st?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-06 21:51:23)
Reaching a peak
My gut feeling is that rating improvements will tail off and we will not see any program crack 3400. I dont know the sales figures but looking for example at New In chess analysis by Carlsen he seems to use only Rybka and perhaps this program is becoming completely dominant among GM's. Perhaps the biggest impact will be hardware improvements allowing faster deeper analysis. This will mean fewer points missed and quicker conclusions as the time needed for the program to dig into the position shortens. You can still see examples of theoretical analysis in recent New in Chess Year books where misjudgements have been made because they needed to keep the program running a bit longer to see the evaluation flip but I think this will decrease ........
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-03 05:33:42)
Mix the yoghurt...
..with coffee and get double the effect although I suppose the heat will kill the bacteria :):)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-02 16:21:04)
Drugs in chess
I have read views of players who claimed that there are prescription drugs (eg modafinil) that enhance concentration and thus performance in chess tournaments - significant improvement but not dramatic. However even small improvements could prove extremely useful at the top levels. Of course no one would ever admit it but I assume if there is some effectiveness then some top players will definitely be taking them. Drug testing at the higher levels is quite reasonable if chess is seeking olympic status.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-01 22:09:55)
15...a5!?
I dont know of any games but when I was following the game and before 15 ...Rae8 I started investigating this move and the more I looked at it the more I liked it - its a very annoying move for white at just the right moment. However Wolfgangs approach seemed to work I just would not have had the courage to enter those endgames
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-01 15:37:40)
cant argue...
..with your results Marc. However the current champion won FICGS with exactly the strategy I favour and exactly the opposite to your strategy. So thats powerful evidence in favour of the varying openings approach. Well done on winning your match - lets see how far you get with your strategy. As for these side line sicilians I never called them silly Marc your being over sensitive. I thought that it was easy to equalise against them and get a draw at cc. I still believe that and proved it in our game. However I do think your opponent (as black) was playing ambitiously to win! Now thats a different story .....
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-01 15:34:03)
cant argue...
..with your results Marc. However the current champion won FICGS with exactly the strategy I favour and exactly the opposite to your strategy. So thats powerful evidence in favour of the varying openings approach. Well done on winning your match - lets see how far you get with your strategy. As for these side line sicilians I never called them silly Marc your being over sensitive. I thought that it was easy to equalise against them and get a draw at cc. I still believe that and proved it in our game. However I do think your opponent (as black) was playing ambitiously to win! Now thats a different story .....
Andrew Stephenson (2008-12-01 08:15:20)
Marshall to win..
At cc no real chance for a black win but not easy for white to get much chance either. Although I dont know if many cc players want to go through the extended end game suffering Wolfgang seems to enjoy :)15...a5!? looks like a simpler less masochistic way to get the draw rather than Wolfgangs 15...Rae8 Still 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:):)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-11-03 10:47:42)
Free style cup games...
...are not linked to wikichess which is a shame because there are some very important theoretical games there!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-14 22:01:56)
exchange slav
Difficult to know what Kramnik was up to in this game. 8 Qb3 has been regarded as pretty harmless and is not much played at GM level - he must have had some new idea - apparently 15 Qxb7 is new but black was always going to get the pawn back. After 6 months preperation and 3 full time seconds a bit strange! I am sure Anand will go full power for the point tomorrow - I still cannot quite believe that Kramnik will play the Petroff he avoided it against Kasparov and I am sure he will avoid it in this match also.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-06 21:15:21)
complete results
Here's the link for the complete results http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=181 Iy seems smartgo did not compete.....
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-05 23:03:12)
The Many Faces of Go
...is the name of the program that just won the Go section in the Beijing International Computer Games Association tournament. It won all 12 games which included beating the 2nd place program MoGo. In the 9 x 9 Go competition Many Faces also triumphed winning 15 out of 18 games but was beaten by MoGo who took 3rd after a playoff with the program Leela. the chess of course was won by Rybka
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-05 21:50:02)
Sorry
..I must have misunderstood I thought if games were forfeit on time in matches even after 10 moves they were not rated only rated if the games were better ie the foreited party was clearly worse?? So in the case of a an 8 games match 11 moves completed all lost on time in dead equal positions there would be no rating effect ie no price paid?? In a tournament game they would be these losses would be rated. I thought your proposal was to rate the losses in matches up to a max of 2 games ONLY if it was 10+ moves AND the position was clearly better.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-05 20:04:28)
Slight amendment
Thibault thinking about your point that "as it is possible to win elo points this way (loss on time in equal or winning position) in round-robin tournaments, it should be possible in 8 games matches too" I suggest the follwoing "Rating changes will occur, in 2 player matches, for losses on time (whatever the reason) within the following constraints: the game(s) is at least 10 moves, only 1 time loss game will be rated unless there is a game where the winner is clearly better in which case a maximum of 2 games may be rated" My idea is that if someone forefeits all their games on move 11 in a match there should be 1 game rated (as in a tournament) so there is a price to pay but not too distorting. If in the 8 games say 5 are level and 3 (or 2 or 1) are clearly advantageous then 2 games could be rated. Alternatively just give 1 rated game as a max irrespective of advantage or not (ie just the first loss) provided it at least 10 moves. I am thinking of 2 situations a 6-0 result over 10 moves dead equal positions there should be some rating penalty (like tournaments) On the other hand soemone could let the clock run out in 6 games just before being mated in each game to avoid heavy rating penalty they should take a 2 game hit.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-04 14:01:29)
12 games
Of course the match is 12 games dont know why I said 8??
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-03 22:42:17)
Psychology
I give an edge to Kramnik not in terms of chess ability or strength but he seems stronger psychologically more able to take the pressure. On the other hand the match is a bit short 8 games which I think is good for Anand. Finally Anand is favourite in the tie break games. For me the key opening questions are: Whats kramniks e4 defence? my bet is at least 1 outing for the Marshall which Anand has performed badly against and the Caro Kahn (which Kramnik has hardly ever played) and no Petroff at all! I think Anand will stick with his semi slav. After his problem in the Leko match Anand will not be able to surprise Kramnik with 1 d4! My prediction: either 1 win and the rest drawn for Kramnik in the classical games or an Anand win in the rapid tie breaks.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-03 09:06:04)
Rules
I think you are right Thibault ie amend the rule as you suggest. However maybe change the wording put EXCEPT instead of BUT ("except games where an advantage is obvious")otherwise the english is difficult to understand (but so much better than my french!!)In this case though perhaps Marius is not going to play anymore moves at all in which case it could be classified as silent withdrawal?? At the level he is at it he surely does not need the time to get the positions the fact is that Marius (probably because he has got lot of games/commitments elsewhere) is not playing much at all in FICGS - looks like he will forfeit in the Round Robin final for example.... The existing rules make a distinction between matches and other tournaments. if you follow the other posters then it seems that they are saying that you should not have the rule for silent withdrawals or even losses under 10 moves?? So I vote for the extension proposed by Thibault it seems logical to me for matches - they are not primarily about rating. The idea is that it is too distorting to have a rating that shows a 6-0 win over a similer high level opponent when they just stopped playing and it has nothing much to do with relative playing strength. On the other hand Thibault it will give you a cool rating!! :) Both view points are valid - its true time is a part of the game - but rules involve compromise and the proposed amendment just extends the principle already there........
Thibault de Vassal (2008-10-02 11:50:49)
Game 16370, towards a new rule ?
What do you think about this case :
http://www.ficgs.com/game_16370.html
Last move : Qe4+ 2008 September 30 19:57:40
White clock - 94 days 18:34:55 (58 days 08:20:25)
Black clock - 0 day 01:19:54
[Event "FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_A__000032"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2007.11.30"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Koch,Christian"]
[Black "Stephenson,Andrew"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "2140"]
[BlackElo "2104"]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.h3 Be7 9.Qf3 O-O 10.O-O-O b5 11.g4 b4 12.Nd5 Nxd5 13.exd5 Bc8 14.Kb1 Nd7 15.Qe2 Bb7 16.f4 Qc7 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Qf2 Bd8 19.Bg2 a5 20.Nd4 a4 21.Rhe1 a3 22.b3 Ra5 23.Nf5 g6 24.Nh6+ Kg7 25.Qf4 Bxd5 26.Bxd5 Rxd5 27.Qxb4 Qc6 28.Rxd5 Qxd5 29.Qf4 f6 30.Bc1 Qc5 31.Rd1 Ba5 32.Qe4 Rc8 33.c4 Bb4 34.h4 Qc6 35.Rd5 Re8 36.Qf4 Bc5 37.Bd2 Qb7 38.Bc3 Bb4 39.g5 f5 40.Qd2 Bxc3 41.Qxc3 Kf8 42.Kc1 Qb6 43.c5 Qc6 44.Rxd6 Qh1+ 45.Kc2 Qe4+ 46.Kc1 Qh1+ 47.Kc2 Qe4+ 48.*
So here player Black has good chances to lose the game on time, even if the best thing player White can do is to draw the game. In my opinion, "in general" player Black should play his next move, unless an analysis prove that the game is a forced draw - according to the rules, http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#adjudications - and eventually the result will be corrected after the game, but I'd like to know what other players think about this situation in general...
Thanks for helping to build strong rules.
Iouri Basiliev (2008-09-25 11:58:00)
Andrew Stephenson
Hey Andrew, why You don't playing in the match black or white? For me 4.d4 is the best whites move. Developing, space, defence - all in one :)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-09-24 16:03:18)
Latvian meatballs
With best play black gets into an ending and trys to grovel his way to a draw a pawn down. The main line runs: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6 e3 c6 7.d3 exd3 8.Bxd3 d5 9.O-O I think any deviations from this by black give an even worse game At this point Black can try 9...Bc5 then 10 b4! Bd6 (10..Bxc4 11 Ncxd5 is crushing)11 Re1 Ne7 12 Nexd5 cxd5 13 Nb5 Bxb4 (0-0 14 Nxd6) 14 Bd2 0-0 15 Bxb4 and the d5 pawn will drop leaving white as usual a pawn up for nothing 9...Bd6 10 Re1 Ne7 11 Nexd5 cxd5 12 Nb5 0-0 13 Nxd6 Qxf2+ 14 Kh1 Nbc6 (14 ..Bg4 15 Qd2 Qh4 16 b4 is great for white)15 Rf1 Bg4 16 Bxh7+ Kh8 17 Rxf2 Bxd1 18 Be3 d4 19 Rxf8+ Rxf8 20 Bg1 Kxh7 21 Rxd1 leaving the usual technically lost ending for black!!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-24 11:52:22)
separate criticism from suggestion
Whatever decisions Thibault made are past and I never doubted his good intentions. However I made a suggestion for the future which is in itelf not a criticism but a response to his invitation to comment on his proposed rule ammendments. I suggested a system for adding to numbers based on the best losers (those tied for 1st place, those placed 2nd etc) and if necessary to rank the best losers by tournament entry rating so if there were 2 slots to be filled and 3 persons who tied for first place in the groups (ie they were 2nd in their group because of lower TER than the winner) the top 2 by TER would qualify. I would also like to suggest an Ajuducations process 1) having indicative finish dates in WCC 2)if the Tournament director feels a game needs to be adjuducated (ie finish date reached)requesting both players to submit their views with analysis 3)having an adjudication commitee who will agree on the result within a set time period. These are just thoughts for possible improvement perhaps they are unnecessary. Anyway they are not intended as criticism scathing or otherwise!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-23 17:59:14)
still a mystery
I know understand that you had decided (I dont know when??) that you would not allow 5 person round robin finals. So you were going to "invite" two players to make up the numbers in WCC 3 final. Nobody knew this only you. Second you are reserving the right to invite anyone according to make up the numbers according to your own preferences . It may be some all of those who tied for 1st place or you may choose to invite some other highly rated players who did not enter the tournament. Nobody knows! Firstly lets reduce the "invitations" as follows: 1) WCC tournaments will be made of at least 7 players. 2) Any shortfall will be made up of the best losers from the previous stage 3)Best losers will be selected from those who tied for place in a group in the previous stage ranked by tournament entry rating and /or from those who came 2nd ranked by tournament entry rating. Under these rules everone knows where they stand and its transparent fair and consistent with existing rules.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-23 09:07:33)
Wasted time
I understand the point about 5 players being a small group but I used up my holidays trying to beat Janos what would have happened if the game was a draw who would have been invited?? Janos twice offered a draw and frankly the only reason I did not accept was because I followed the rules and believed I needed to win to qualify for the final. How were you going to determine who to invite?? You knew that this situation was going to arise from the moment stage 2 started as there were only 4 groups and 1 M group there could only be 5 winners. Not only that but when I raised the issue of Marcs earlier partcipiation in round robin final I actually stated that this time as we will have 5 winners then the sitaution would not arise the group is complete so no invitations arise and in your reply you agreed I do not see why it is too late please comply with the rules as you have no right to invite other players in the rules do not allow it. Saying the administrators decision is final is saying you can suddenly change any rule at any time for any reason. I now face 6 opponents instead of 4 without any vacation time.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-22 23:19:03)
cant count
I realise there are 7 players in the round robin final ie 2 extra tied players. My point remains why 7 rather than 5? Why did I have to spend that time trying to beat Janos when I could go through on a tie?
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.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-19 17:17:59)
Adjudications
Hi Benjamin I am not sure what you mean by help people without asking. The rules refer to adjudications as follows: "11. 5. Adjudications In some cases, the game continues but the result is obvious." At the end of 11.5 is states: "There are no time limit for games else but the clocks, but it may be announced that certain multi-stages tournaments will have one. At the end of this time limit, a referee committee will adjudicate games." Obviously it was bit worrying without warning to have an announcement saying hey seems like a draw I am going to adjudicate. A draw would mean that I would not win the tournament - a win means I win the tournament so its an important game. But as I am certain the game is won and can demonstrate this I am not concerned - I have no idea what Janos thinks. I dont think this is the best way to handle this but this is where we are - I am just glad it happened after Janos played 63...Kxf4 which was the losing move. We are only about 12 moves away from 6 man table base wins in almost all cases. Please post any anlysis about the position you would like as Thibault has asked for comment
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-19 12:21:49)
Correction
In the analysis given below in "Its a win" under a) I omitted the move 86 Ra6 for white. It should read "85 Ra6 Bc7+ 86 Kxd4 with Table base win" and not "85 Bc7+ Kxd4 with Table base win"
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-19 07:33:54)
my own fault!
Ok Thibault! My good news for Mark meant I was winning so I was reducing the burden of his games - he wouldnt qualify so he has less games !! :)hence the title on my post. I think I should have been a bit more specific!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-19 02:16:39)
Its a win !!!!
You must be joking!! Thibault its a definite win it will be over in a few moves!! If anyone thinks black can survive please suggest some moves. The key to the win is that the best black can do is reach the position in a) below with Bishop and 2 pawns v R and 1 pawn. White wins becuse his king has access to e4, the Bishop is restricted by his pawns on a7 and e5 and most importantly his passed a pawn is not advanced. It has been completely lost since move 63 ...Kxf4 Janos should have taken with the pawn 63..exf4 would have allowed him to reach a table base draw. On 66 Kd3 I had the win completely worked out and have been replying instantly since then. Adjudicating this is a draw is just plain wrong. Anyone who spends time on this position will see the win I have outlined and that there is no defence. The winning method is to force an exchange of rooks by Rc4-g4 with mating threats against the Black king - black cannot allow this and must play Rd4 allowing exchange of a pair rooks when the resulting R+P v B+P+P is won. Before playing Rc4 white checks with the other rook to cut off the f file. The only way to avoid the rook exchange is to allow the white King access to e4 - at the moment the black rook cuts off d3 and the bishop if it goes to b6 will cut off e3. If the king gets to e4 either the e5 pawn drops or the king gets to d5 and e6 either result is fatal Here are the main lines: a) 72..Bb6 73 Rg8+ Kf5 (73..Kh5 74 Rc1 Rd4 75 Rh1+ wins the rook) 74 Rf8+ Kg5 75 Rc4! Rd4 (see below a1 for 75..Bd4)76 Rxd4! exd4 77 Kd3 (This ending is completely won the white king penetrates through e4, the black bishop is useless - remove pawn at d4 and its a table base win) Here are the main lines 77... Bc5 78 Rc8 Bb6 79 Ke4 Kf6 80 f4 Kf7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Kf7 83 Ke5 a5 84 Rc6 Bd8 85 Bc7+ Kxd4 Table base win Or 77 ...Kg6 78 Ke4 Kg7 79 Rc8 Kf6 80 f4 (if the pawn on d4 falls eg 80 ..Ba5 81 Kxd4 its a table base win) Ke7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Ke7 (82 ..d3 83 Rc6+ Kg5 84 Rg6+ and Kxd3 = TB win) 83 Ke5 Kf7 84 Rb2 d3 85 f6 with a simple win a1)..75..Bd4 (instead of Rd4) 76 Kd3 Ba1+ 77 Ke4 Ra5 78 Rg8+ Kf6 79 Rc6+ Kf7 80 Rgc8 Ra4+ 81 Rc4 Rxc4+ (black cannot avoid exchanging) 82 Rxc4+ and this ending like the one above is completely won. eg 82... Ke6 (82...a5 83 Rc5 a4 84 Ra5 x a4 = TB win) 83 Rc6+ Kd7 84 Kd5 Bd4 85 Rh6 a5 (any Bishop moves loses a pawn = TB win) 86 Rh7+ Kd8 87 f4 x e5 = TB win b) If the Bishop does not go to b6 the white king gets via e3 to e4 and then penetrates through the white squares d5 and e6 and its over. Sample lines: b1) 72 ..Kf4/f5 73 Rf8+ Kg6 74 Ke3 Rd1 75 Ke4 Re1+ 76 Kd5 Be7 77 Re8 Bf6 78 Ke6 e4 79 Rc5+ and the bishop is lost b2) 72..Ba5 73 Ke3 Rb5 74 Rg8+ Kf5 75 Rf8+ Kg5 76 Ke4 Rb4+ 77 Kxe5 with a simple win b3)72 ..Rd7 73 Rxe5+ (take a pair of rooks off = TB win) Kf4 74 Rcc5 Rg7 75 Re4+ Kg3 76 Rc1 Bb6 77 Rh1 a5 78 Rhh4 - Reg4+ exchanges rooks = TB win
Thibault de Vassal (2008-08-18 22:48:39)
Game 18078
The round robin final (in the 3rd cycle) must start... time to adjudicate this nice game (Stephenson vs. Helmer), but we may discuss it as rules allow it.
At a first sight, the game looks like a draw, does anyone have another theory ?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-18 16:06:16)
translation
I will have a go off the top of my head at giving a sense of the interview in english (I dont know the phrase tonitruand but I am guessing it means dynamic!)?: Hi Xavier and first of all congratulations on your success in the candidates final match against IM (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Peru] You had to avoid drawing all the games and finally you succeded with the black pieces. How did that happen? Xavier: Hi thank you. Its true that if all the games had been drawn then under the rules Figlio would have won whereas if the match was drawn but with a win and loss I would win. Because of this I had to take risks and attack. It was with Black that I did this because I thought that Gino would play safely to be sure of a draw. - Tell us how you approched the match and how the different phases of the game went x: Its quite simple, I was not the favorite I have 200 ELO less on FICGS and Gino is an IM on ICCF with a 2480 rating. I did not think I could survive 8 games at once - in a single game anything is possible but 8 games .... it was a big challenge for me! In the openings I chose 4 different moves 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nf3 Gino chose 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nc3 I was surpised by 1 Nc3 because I was expecting dynamic openings and it was then that I decided I must take some risks with black. I kept most of the games balanced with a draw in hand and concentrated on 2 games 1 white and 1 black to get a result. In the end I got 3 wins which seemed an impossibility given the quality of the games Gino had played on this site to reach the final. - you have not lost any games in the championship and you have fantastic statistics 78% against an average elo of about 2200. What is your secret? x: My secret? I havent any secret and if I did I would not say because I would not win anymore! I think I have been a bit lucky because in the the Round Robin final there were 3 of us on the same score and I went through under the rules because of my rating. As for my statistics I was helped by mistakes by opponents who allowed me to win some drawn games. - What do you think of the system for the FICGS championship (round robin and knock out matches)and what changes would you make? x: Very good question. The matches are a bit too fast for me - 1 day per move when there are hours of analysis needed to exploit a complicated position its difficult when you have several games running Particularly if you are working. Perhaps that is why my opponents have made errors or failed to exploit my mistakes. But this time limit has an advantage over ICCF where it is 5 days per move the games here are 5 times quicker! Having 8 game matches is an excellent idea and obliging the favorite to draw all the games and the challenger to get a at least 1 victory is very well thought out. The change that I would suggest is to have 15 days extra starting time that is 45 days at the start instead of 30 and also the possibilty to take holidays for tournaments for example take 7 days for championship games and to be able to play big chess go or another chess tournament during the holiday. To be able to choose the start of a holiday in advance would also be good. - Why do you like cc and how does it compare to blitz and normal chess? x: I prefer cc because of the time factor. Classical chess is often played at the week end at a fixed time and you have to travel to the tournament. The advantage for me at cc is that I can connect at any time to play a move which allows me for example to have meals with the family at the weekend. Late night moves for example are not possible at classical chess. - You limited the number of your games on the site to a reasonable amount throughout the championship. Do you think nonetheless that cc is addictive? Does it affect your daily life? x: Yes! Limiting the number of my games is essential to try to have games of quality not quantity. Having a lot of games going at the same time is something very difficult to handle. It is perhaps the key to my victory against Figlio - I looked at his games - he had not less than 80 games going on at ICCF this must have affected the amount of time he could spend analysing his 8 games at FICGS. The effects on daily life are felt by the family because the reality is if I spend more time analysing the games I spend less time with the family. Thats difficult for me. But when the results come I dont regret it! - What do you think of the role of chess engines (Rybka Fritz etc)in cc. What are for you the important skills of a cc player - to supplement the machine? x: Chess engines are used in cc by 95% of players. You have to adapt yourself and know how to use the engines. To play just the best move of Rybka 3 Fritz 12 or Hiracs 12 without thinking leads to a draw if your opponent does the same or to a loss if your opponent is thinking. You have to choose bewteen 4 or 5 moves with a similer evaluation from the engine during a game and sometimes the best move is not among these. - You play Big chess. Interest or curiosity? What do you think of this strange version of chess? X : Curiosity and amusement and I think Rrybka 3 cannot yet play Big Chess! This version is new and I did not know it and the inventor has done a good job! By the way I would like to ask is it possible to castle at Big Chess? [No its not possible] - Finally the question that everyone is asking particularly Francois and Wolfgang who are contesting the 2nd candidates final. Do think you will be able to defend your title next year? :) x: Definitely I will defend the title I would like to know if possible the date and time limits for the match. I wish Francois and Wolfgang a great match! I would also like to express my appreciation for this tournament which has been well organised! - the match should start in the first week in January next year the time limit will be 30 days plus 1 day per move. Thank you for your answers and once again congratulations on a great performance. x: Thank you. Cheers. Best wishes to everyone and good games!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-16 22:10:38)
Burden of games!
" and if I am not wrong I am not far from winning WCH-03-stage2-group02 (possibly ex aequo with you)..." I think I might have some good news for you Marc :)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-15 18:00:45)
Nunn "refutation"
Here is a summary of the analysis after e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 d4!: a.) 4…fxe4 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.Qh5+ Ke7 b.) 4…Nxd5 5.dxe5 d6 (5…Qe7 6.Qd4 and White is a pawn up, threatening Nc3-d5 – Nunn) 6.Bf4! “Black's position flat out sucks!” c.) 4…Nf6 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.e5 with a clear extra pawn. d.) 4…Qh4!? 5.Nf3 Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Black's Queen is exposed eg 6…Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 with advantage 8…0-0? loses to 9.Bc4+. e) 4...Qe7 is not analysed. 5 Nc3! (5 Nxc6 Qxe4+ 6 Be2 Qxc6 7 0-0 d5 8 Nc3 Kf7! and blacks not too bad) 5...fxe4 (5...Nxe5 6 Nb5!)6 Nb5 Kd8 7 Bf4 Nxe5 (7..Nf6 8 Nxc7!) 8 dxe5 and black cant develop eg Nh6 9 e6!d6 10 Qd5! In line a) 4..fxe4 5 Nxc6 Black can try bxc6!?(instead of dxc6)6 Qh5+ Ke7 planning to play Kf7 and d5. This might be the best try and although I white is better the positions are a bit unclear. After 4..fxe4 white also has 5 Bc4 d5 6 Bb5 Qd6 (6..Ne7 7 0-0 is strong) 7 c4 a6 when white will probably get the e pawn but black gets the bishop pair. So I am not now sure its a refutation!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-15 05:01:18)
Registered
This is registered not active members?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-14 20:31:38)
FICGS
The best is a) as it describes the games played on the server. Bigchess can be seen as a chess variant and if "games" is supposed to cover just this and go it seems an exaggeration. However if Poker is to be included then b) would win my vote.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-13 19:51:51)
Very cool
I joined the random design club - its awesome as they say in Hollywood. I like the chess player images in the wall paper.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-12 21:32:49)
No novelty
F Perez-Cruz v F Acosta 1994 correspondence Massow Memorial (1-0 32) 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 Qh5+ g6 5 Nxg6 Nf6 6 Qh3 hxg6 7 Qxh8 Qe7 8 Nc3! The game continued with Nb4 9 d4?! (9 d3 looks like an easy win) Nxe4 10 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 11 Be3 Kf7?! (had to play 11..f4 12 Bd3 Nxd3 [12 ..Qxg2 13 Qe5+ Be7 13 Be4] 13 cxd3 Qxg2 14 Rf1 d6 when he can fight on) 12 Bd3 Nxd3 13 cxd3 with a won position. If I faced this Nc6 line I would play after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 d4! (John Nunn's refutation) this squelches all blacks hopes for play. What now for black? 4..Nf6 5 Nxc6 dxc6 6 e5 which looks like a pawn odds game. I dont know.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-12 08:54:10)
Latvian
I dont think black has anything better than 8...fxe maybe 9...d5 is better. But Whites 8 Nc3 seems a very good strong simple move. Its strange that it has not been analysed because the position has been looked at by Nunn and Watson - but that was in the pre Rybka era. Now 3...Nc6 looks too risky at cc. So 3 Nxe5 Qf6 is the best chance. Game 18479 (ongoing) is perhaps the most that black can hope for - for some people not much fun but for latvian fans survival is a triumph!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-10 07:58:24)
Fischers move
White has chosen 12 g3 - in all 4 games - a slightly unusual move order - but I expect black to head down the main "highway" where very few deviations have been seen on the white side. 4 wins or 4 draws? The next 3/4 moves will determine the nature of the game - very interesting!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-10 07:45:29)
Mogo
So mogo gets to put down 9 stones to start with but I dont know whether he moved first or second - it sounds like he moved first and there was no Komi. Anyway its a big handicap but the breakthrough appears to be that the win was achieved on a 19x19 board in a "long" game (1 hour) Kim didnt use so much of his time but said more time spent would not have made any difference prononcing Mogo invincible at 9 stones and very difficult with 8 stones. The programmers were excited because they said 1 year ago they needed 18 stones now 9 and maybe a year to lose the other 9! If they can maintain this rate of improvement then they are suggesting that in a few years mogo could be the strongest go player in the world. Interestingly there is a reversal here with chess: programs being stronger against humans the shorter the game (ie blitz) but Mogo did better with more time! I guess this is about the time Mogo needs to assess the long term consequences of each move.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-09 21:55:37)
Mogo
Did the human have a handicap in the 1 hour game? Does the player moving 2nd generally get some points/stones to compensate between equally rated players?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-09 21:49:23)
Marshall Fest
I guess so Thibault. Kasparov never accepted the Marshall - always anti marshall. Still couple of high level white wins recently and Aronian opted for the Berlin the other day....
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-09 03:35:42)
Pins and swords
"The pin is mightier than the sword" is apparently a quote from Fred Reinfield being a play on pen is mightier than the sword etc. The addition "but the fork is mightier thn the pin" might just be something someone on chess.com made up!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-08 20:05:20)
Marshall fest
We have 4 marshall gambits in Caire Utesch match....
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-07 16:00:12)
Longest game
I just wondered whats the longest game game ever played on FICGS - in terms of moves? Potentially it could be very long as the 50 move draw rule does not apply automaticaaly on this site.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-05 09:14:08)
Not Gloria
Yur quote about if men could get pregnant is Florynce R Kennedy - not Gloria Steinem. Steinem was quoting Kennedy
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-03 21:50:22)
Will try to help!
Hi Marc We were talking about WCH 2 which is history now as the round robin final for which you received a direct entry was won by Francois Caire (equal with Alberto Gueci). As far as WCH 3 is concerned I will do my best to reduce your burden of games by winning my last game:)) But this could be difficult as Janos has other ideas!
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:)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-30 11:03:31)
Databases
Thibault I believe FICGS games do not get into any of the databases (mega corr etc) Is there any way to get these games in? I have seen some tremendous novelties in FICGS that I have not found anywhere else. It seems this knowledge is hidden ....
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-28 01:03:35)
Sometimes
I mean I always get logged off just the time varies
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-27 22:36:38)
Not much
Sometimes very quick 1 or 2 minutes!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-27 22:35:25)
Like chess
Yes of course like posting something connected with chess! You are right:)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-27 19:03:50)
:)
Surely you can track down who said these quotes Normajean? I will give you a clue she is an american professor: "Today, the ideal male is the gay man,and the ideal female is the worker female, the woman who can work in a coal mine just like all the other men." Such is the brave new world of the politically correct!
Normajean Yates (2008-07-27 16:17:50)
question to Andrew Stephenson
Andrew Stephenson you seem to know a lot about this person that you keep quoting. Perhaps you even happen to know said person's *name*, supposing said person has one? :D
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-27 16:04:37)
Logged off
Thibault is there anyway to prevent being auto logged off and sent to the ticker tape message screen?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-26 21:42:52)
The lady rocks
Normajean the lady who said that is a feminist lesbian (not martha):) "By midlife and early old age, as the hormones of both genders change, women are in total, despotic control of their marriages." "women's goodwill is crucial for preserving the male ego, which requires, alas, daily maintenance" "It is woman's destiny to rule men. Not to insult them, demean them, or stereotype them as oppressors" "Women are in league with each other, a secret conspiracy of hearts and pheromones"
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-26 13:30:44)
Good quotes
"Leaving sex to the feminists is like letting your dog vacation at the taxidermist." "If civilization had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts." "There is no female Mozart because there is no female Jack the Ripper" - hmmm And finally a self evident truth: "Woman is the dominant sex. Men have to do all sorts of stuff to prove that they are worthy of woman's attention." Obviously all these quotes are from a woman :) How do you like them apples??
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-21 16:00:32)
cc sites
Sites like ICCF and IECG seem to be like FICGS - very few women members. Chess.com is not just an exclusive cc site and has a lot more varied chess content - not just cc. Perhaps thats part of the reason. However some sites like chessbase are cringeingly sexist - never missing an opportunity to show pics of the "pretty girls" together with 1950's style comments.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-18 17:30:07)
Normajean
Norma is a popular girls name and is of latin origin (meaning norm or standard)has no connection with Norman.(north man) Jean is popular as a boys and girls name. (John , Joanna etc) Normajean as a single name is completely unknown and not just uncommon or rare. It is like someone deciding to write their name as Susanmary. On the other hand in some places its quite common (more often for females) to be called by their first 2 names: eg Sue Ellen, Mary Pat Mary Jo etc Of course in many jursidictions (UK for example) a person can opt to change their legal name to virtually anything they fancy Simonpeterandrew for example.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-18 16:41:13)
Apology
[moderated ;)]. Right now I am off to listen to some Johnny Cash songs. He is very popular in Mauritius. Not a lot of people know that.
Normajean Yates (2008-07-18 15:08:00)
you missed the penguin
normajean: penguin, mumble's mother, in the film Happy Feet. Played by (voice) Nicole Kidman
Mr Stephenson might want to include that on wikipedia.
Normajean Yates (2008-07-18 14:55:32)
to Andrew Stephenson & Thibault
Andrew Stephenson,
Normajean Yates IS my real name. Is Andrew Stephenson yours? from *mauritius*? doesnt sound mauritian to me ... doesnt that place have a - you know - reputation for you-know-what?
I'll stop this as soon as you do. Or Thibault steps in. I think i smell early signs of harassment.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-18 04:57:18)
Good question
Good question on the name change - at the same time I thought at FICGS you are supposed to use your real name?? Normajean??
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-18 04:55:03)
Mirror mirror on the wall
To put Thibaults explanation another way: the person doing the mirroring aleays plays his moves after the other other person. So after a while you can see who is the real player and who is the reflection. Thibault has a system of rules that are very open and liberal but there are limits. For example at FICGS it is allowed to discuss a game that is not yet finished!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-16 21:19:41)
Pre decision
What does the phrase pre decision mean?
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-07-16 17:36:57)
@Stephenson: I'm waiting for you ...
... on my level about 2.500! ;-)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-15 22:46:50)
@ Rybka ELO 3000
Yes - I agree I think Rybka has about ELO 3000 :))
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-07-15 17:51:16)
@Stephenson: ELO 3000
When I've read your comments I'm thinking, you must have ELO 3000!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-14 21:41:51)
hmmm
I remember you previously posted about this game having, after many hours, found a problem like win. It sesm that this was wrong! I guess that 89 ...Be7 followed by g5 holds the draw and white just got the order of moves mixed up and played g5 first. It happens.... On the other hand 25 ..Bd3 seems unecessarily risky while 25 ...Ra5 looks fine for black. Still you kept up the pressure and often you make your own luck :))
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-13 22:57:05)
ok
Good point Dirk I had not realised that about 2400+ tournaments nor Thibaults point about E F and G tournaments :) You may well be right Garvin - cant remember!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-13 11:51:17)
Withdrawal WCH-2--3-00004
My apologies to the other participants in this stage 2 which has just started but I have to withdraw. Due to business and personal commitments I cannot sustain the rapid time limit so I have decided to resign all the games to try to minimise inconvenience. I had actually forgotten about this otherwise I would have informed Thibault before hand
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-12 22:52:44)
rating categories
Its a purely cosmetic change but perhaps it would be better to adjust the rating categories to: 2200-2400, 2000-2200 etc because thats what they effectively are. Nobody with a 2400+ rating wil join the current 2200-2600 category - they would join the list for 2400-2800. It seems pointless to have the overlap.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-12 22:45:22)
standard categories
Its a purely cosmetic change but perhaps it would be better to adjust the rating categories to: 2200-2400, 2000-2200 etc because thats what they effectively are. Nobody with a 2400+ rating wil join the current 2200-2600 category - they would join the list for 2400-2800. It seems pointless to have the overlap.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-09 22:18:10)
Derrida
Strongly advise against reading anything by the chap although I did enjoy his defense to being caught with a big bag of dope in prague - it was planted on him when he visited Franz Kafka's grave - hmmm yeah ok.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-07-04 05:40:40)
open games
I recommend you start with 1 e4 and follow up with lines that involve an early d4 eg 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 and now 2 ...Nc6 3 d4 or 2..Nf6 3 d4
Andrew Stephenson (2008-06-20 20:45:46)
Why
Playing on in a completely lost position is to get to the next rating adjustment. Particularly when the loss would take them below a threshold - in this case 2300. Your opponent will probably resign on July 1st. Nice game by the way although I didnt like 6 ..Bxf3 (why give up the bishop?)I think 6..Bh5 then e6-d5 and black is fine. 12 Rc1 was a great move! A few moves later and black is suddenly in big trouble
Andrew Stephenson (2008-06-17 09:43:26)
Conditionals
Yes good idea. IMO no need to trial it though could be limited to rapid tournament where time saving is perhaps more important
Andrew Stephenson (2008-06-10 18:09:02)
No apology necessary
You have nothing to apologise for Wayne your comments were reasonable. It is up to Thibault to enforce the policy and to stop this kind of thing happening. To have this happen every time different opinions are expressed is very damaging for the site. I respect everyone on this site whatever their grading and whether they agree or disagree with me. If someone cannot control their language and become abusive they should not be allowed to post on the forum - its that simple.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-06-10 15:31:45)
Comments
Sorry I see Ilmars comment has been deleted
Andrew Stephenson (2008-06-10 15:28:32)
Comments
I give up Ilmars - why?
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-16 18:32:40)
ELO ELO
"I was talking about updating the database with current theory and critical lines. " So what are you doing if not examining the latest games played and what better source is there than TWIC? How do you examine these if not downloading and filtering out the openings you are interested in by high rated players? Anything else is going to be taking other peoples selections eg New In chess opening surveys or subscribing to a chess opening service. Even then the best way of keeping a database up to date is with TWIC.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-16 18:19:42)
Beating FM's
If you have beaten more than 1 FM in a classical time control ie not rapid or blitz or bullet that is good on the other hand in short time controls it doesn't mean much at all I agree. Its tough to improve or learn about chess from blitz or bullet unless you go over the game ie for opening accuracy or tactical shots missed and make notes.
Jason Repa (2008-05-16 00:23:32)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
Geez Stephenson, I thought you were done stalking and harassing me and had found something else to amuse your little mind with. Something shiny and metallic perhaps? But here you are continuing your trollish ways.
Actually, what this thread is REALLY about, is a pathetic little character who doesn't handle losing at chess very well. As was stated before, it's pretty sad that you don't have any chess games of your own worthy of publication or discussion, so you post one of mine and continue to rant, and rant, and rant about nonsense. I already BEAT YOU in chess. Quite easily, in fact. Could there be anything more ridiculous than a guy who loses at chess criticizing the play of the victor?
Normally when someone obsesses over me like this it's a female doing the obsessing. But hey, each to their own.
And yeah, it's pretty obvious you're someone with a lot of time on your hands. Nice of you to share that with us. But you only speak for yourself in that regard. Even with all your free time I was still able to beat you easily when we played chess.
Just look at this latest drivel you're posting. You go on and on and on about why I shouldn't have lost a chess game I played a year ago like this is some life and death event for you. It's really not a big deal to me. So why is MY game such a big deal to you? If you're trying to make an argument that I'm such a terrible correspondence chess player based on this game, why did I beat you so easily when you and I played? I'm also higher rated than you as well. If you're going to harass me with one of my losing games, at least have enough intelligence and imagination to vary the game once in awhile. You have 5 more to choose from.
Sorry but I've never met anyone clued out enough to put DOWN LOAD and DATA BASE before. This isn’t a minor spelling mistake or typo. This is a surprising lack of education. What’s next, “COMP -UTER”? A chess player should especially be familiar with the word DATABASE. But as I said earlier, some people mindlessly trust machines, and don't have the capacity to think for themselves. People like that like to brag about their meticulous spelling, because even a chromosome-deficient inebriate can figure out how to use spelling software. Most of us couldn't be bothered, because we realize that spelling is not important when making casual internet forum posts.
And no, Stephenson, the "point" about ELO is not dead. It's your ability to learn and understand simple concepts that appears quite dead here. This has nothing to do with me not "agreeing" with you. This has to do with objective fact. An ELO rating could be talking about GO, Backgammon, or other games, that FIDE has absolutely nothing to do with, in addition to national rating organizations. You were wrong. End of story. Continuing to defend your ignorance of the meaning of ELO is just making it all the more obvious what it is you are to everyone reading this. Again, Stephenson, LOOK IT UP.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 23:36:07)
IECG
Hi Hannes Your right Hectors Benoni didn't draw blood but I guess its playable. Actually I dont like to play against it as it provokes a crisis very early on and the hard work starts quickly! On FICGS I think queen side openings are preferred by the top players eg WCH knockout matches - the exception is Peter Schuster who seems to play e4 a lot and is successful with it. Thanks for telling me about Van Osteroom's e4 preference I am keen to see what he plays against c6! - I mean the classical variation. Sorry I dont know too much about the IECG server.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 23:14:37)
Books and databases
This thread is really about how reliance on books and lack of research can get someone into trouble ie a lost position after 13 moves in a main line opening - even with plenty of time and powerful chess engines available. Actually its not even necessary to own an up to date database to avoid this - the resources are freely available to anyone with an internet connection. The point about ELO is dead I think referring to ELO points is associated with FIDE ratings irrespective of the fact that most national rating systems use ELO's methodology. Mr Repa does not agree - thats it. "but when I'm dealing with who says down load and data base ..." I don't read anything into the omission of the word "someone" here nor the numerous spelling mistakes that have cropped up. Incidentally the book I referred to with analysis of the dodgy siscilain variation is called Experts V the Sicilian with different chapters by various GM's and IM's including a chapter on the pin variation about which one reviewer says: "we get no less than 12 pages on the “silly” Pin Variation, and in the end Aagaard seems unable to prove a certain advantage!" Whatever the truth about that variation its highly risky and not recommended for cc!
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 10:11:02)
Benoni
Hi Garvin No f4 occurred in just 1 game but Hector played the sequence Nf6 and e6. This year Topalov, Aronian Malakhov and Gashimov have all allowed f4 in the Benoni but it only happened in the Gashimov game. Top GM games seem to have a bias towards Sicilians Slavs and Semi slavs. Is it true that the Ruy Lopez is not so popular at top cc? It is extremely popular at GM level perhaps this reflects a bias at cc at the top level for Queenside openings. It certainly seems a lot easier to get a draw against e4 at cc.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-15 04:10:11)
Openings
Hi Hannes I think the Modern Benoni is playable but needs a lot of work. Hector Walsh 16th on the IECG list (2497) used it in the IECG Cup 2002 final (just ended!) with games that started in 2006. He played it 3 times including the critical line 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5 4 d5 exd5 5 cxd5 d6 6 e4 g6 7 f4 etc and got 3 draws against opposition of 2150, 2300 and 2400.
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 21:36:18)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
What a <1500 player like yourself "has always taken" is meaningless. What is objectively true and factual is what counts. As has been explained to you repeatedly, elo is not exclusive to FIDE ratings, not even to chess in fact. Are you beginning to understand or still confused?
Also, there is no simple (deduct x) formula to get a FIDE equivalent. Sometimes a national rating is worth more than a FIDE rating. There are various factors to consider.
There is no "magic" about a FIDE rating. You just need to play in FIDE rated events. I've beaten many FIDE rated players otb, including FMs. It's really no big deal.
I never said 2000 was some sort of "high rating", so don't start with the lies again Stephenson. But compared to a guy like you who is rated under 1500, I'm like a more evolved being. Is that why you're so frustrated to the point of stalking me as you're doing? Is it a combination of that and the fact that I CRUSHED you in chess? When are you going to get over that? When are you going to stop whining and crying?
Why don't we play fact to face otb chess, if you have lots of Euro to throw around as you're claiming. Fly to Canada and I'll play you a match for 5000 euro. First to win 6 games or something like that. I'd probably have to spot you 5/6 just to make the match somewhat competitive.
I never challenged you to bullet chess, my <1500 rated acquaintance, but that would be the only other way to play human mind vs human mind chess. I'm certainly not about to fly to the third world country you live in, just to beat some "C" class chess player in person.
Let's take a little tally here. I've already beaten you at correspondence chess, and you've made it clear you want no part of playing chess at time controls that doesn't allow you to consult your program, so I've effectively won that as well. What is left? Arm wrestling? I kinda like my chances there too!
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 21:16:02)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0
No, as I just explained to you in the way a small child should be able to understand, elo is not exclusive to FIDE ratings. Not even exclusive to chess in fact. I realized you weren't overly intelligent when we played chess and I crushed you, but this is ridiculous. This has been explained to you already. Do some research and see for yourself.
I normally don't go after someone for grammar, but when I'm dealing with who says down load and data base, I ask myself who's wiping the drool from their chin.
I'm not about to do any serious chess analysis with you. I don't give free chess lessons. Post whatever you like. It won't change the fact that I CRUSHED you in chess. Fair and square.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 16:00:22)
ELO
Well like I stated elsewhere talking of ELO points I take to refer to FIDE rating not national ratings irrespective of the underlying methodology used to calculate the national rating. I guess we will have to agree to differ on that one. Sorry I cannot respond to the grammer stuff - its against the rules. On the game we played check out the available database games and that may give you an answer. Like I said in another post the line I believe is the refutation is not what you played - I will put up the analysis when I have more time. At the risk of repeating myself I still dont understand why you cannot find a 2001 game or what sort of databases you are looking at but I guess we have reached a dead end there too.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 15:47:39)
Mr cfc
Frankly I have alway taken someone saying they have an ELO rating to refer to having a FIDE rating and not a national rating I understand that you need to deduct about 35 points from sub 2200 ratings to get a FIDE equivalent. Well I have never met anyone before who thought that FIDE 2000 was such a high rating I dont mean that in a bad way I am just surprised that you think this is high. As for beating me at chess I thought this was not real chess? Well like I said there is a sense in having it both ways. Look we could easily organise a money match at cc say for Euro 1000 6, 8, 10 games whatever you want, rapid time limit you can have white in every game and I can give you 3 to 1 odds. You win 1 game you get Euro 3000 you fail to win a game I get Euro 1000. All you have to do is win a game you can even lose all the other games. Well like I said it does not prove anything - its a research competition. I dont want to hustle you but you have been making a lot of statements so if you are interested ....... But please dont challenge me to bullet games on playchess......
Jason Repa (2008-05-13 15:25:34)
Elo rating system
I trust I didn't use any "biggie" words you were unable to comprehend Stephenson. Hopefully you now understand your error and realize that the elo system is not only peculiar to FIDE chess ratings, but indeed used by many chess organizations, as well as other games.
There are 100 results for Stephen in wikichess.
Stephen Cade (2297)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 g3 Bf5 Bg2 e6
Transpose to wikichess #228342#
============
Contributors : Stephen Cade
Stephen Cade (2314)
d4 g6 Nf3 Bg7 g3 Nf6
Transpose to wikichess #9796#
============
Contributors : Stephen Cade
Stephen Cade (2314)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 g3 c5 Bg2 cxd4 O-O e6
Transpose to wikichess #83867#
============
Contributors : Stephen Cade
Stephen Hilton (1700)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd8 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 e6 O-O Nf6 d3 Be7 Ng5
Transpose to wikichess #192125#
============
Contributors : Stephen Hilton
Stephen Hilton (1700)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 e6 Bf4 h6
Transpose to wikichess #9709#
============
Contributors : Stephen Hilton
[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 !
|
Simal Moreira, Leonardo (BRA) [member # 10062] Correspondence chess : 2374 Ranked # 107 in the rating list. Rating history : 2326 2361 2358 2360 2374 2374 2374 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 |  |