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) B. Ozen, 2269 N. Wilson, 2121 1/2-1/2 See game 152323 |
Hot news Discussions Files search Social network
Here are 51 results for von Erichsen in the games.
Game_54701 Game_54700 Game_54699 Game_54698 Game_54697 Game_47580 Game_47579 Game_47578 Game_47577 Game_47576 Game_37009 Game_37008 Game_37007 Game_37006 Game_37005 Game_29795 Game_29794 Game_29793 Game_29792 Game_29791 Game_22805 Game_22804 Game_22803 Game_22802 Game_22801 Game_13038 Game_13037 Game_13036 Game_13035 Game_13034 Game_13033 Game_13032 Game_13031 Game_10897 Game_10896 Game_10893 Game_10890 Game_10886 Game_10881 Game_7888 Game_7887 Game_7886 Game_7885 Game_7880 Game_7875 Game_5384 Game_5383 Game_5381 Game_5378 Game_5374 Game_5369
Here are 12 results for von Erichsen in the games.
Game_30105 Game_30104 Game_30103 Game_30102 Game_30101 Game_30095 Game_21692 Game_21691 Game_21690 Game_21689 Game_21684 Game_21679
There are at least 46 results for von Erichsen in the forum.
Thibault de Vassal (2012-05-09 01:46:02)
Xiao Tong on his win in 6th FICGS Go WCH
Xiao Tong, winner of the 6th FICGS Go championship, kindly accepted to answer a few questions, here is the first part:
FICGS - Hello Xiao, congratulations once again for winning this nice match. Svante Carl von Erichsen was FICGS champion from the start of the site, after winning 5 championships. What did you think about his play & yours in these games?
Xiao Tong - Mr. Svante Carl von Erichsen is the strongest player I have met on this site. The games are so tough. In the middle of this match I thought I would lose in at least two games. At last I am lucky to have a 4-1 winning.
FICGS - Would you like to tell us a few words about you (where you live, other games you play, Go servers you play on...) so that we know you better?
Xiao Tong - I live in China but when I started to play Go on this site I was visiting France. In China when we play Go face to face, generally it takes 2 or 3 hours. But when we play on the ineternet, we always choose 30sec/move. I always play on TYGEM site, which is a China/Korea cooperated site. Before playing we need to install a client software. You can visit this address http://www.tygembaduk.com
FICGS - Unfortunately you are one of the rare chinese players at FICGS, but obviously they do very well. We all know many chinese Go champions names, could you tell us your opinion on the state of Go in China and in the world nowadays?
Xiao Tong - The past 10 years can be called Korea decade. They won more world championships than Chinese players, because before 1990 few Chinese children studied Go. But when China won several matches between China and Japan in late 1980s, more and more children started to study and play go. And then these millions of Go children grew up. Now Chinese players can get more world champions than Korea. I think besides the several world champions there are 30 young players in China who may win world championships in the future. They aged from 16-25.
FICGS - The best Go engines would now reach a level of 4 or 5 dan, is computer Go something that helps in such a correspondence Go championship according to you (and without revealing your secrets of course)? Do you think it is becoming a danger as it is for chess?
Xiao Tong - I don’t think computer Go engines can do anything. They are too weak.
FICGS - Do you watch other games played by your opponents before starting your games? Do you think that preparation is really important like it is in Correspondence chess?
Xiao Tong - I don’t take much time to analyze my opponents. But I will watch their games to get a first evaluation. World champions need to prepare before the game, because preparation can save their time in game. For me, preparation mean nothing.
FICGS - This FICGS Go championship is still young, what did you think about it? Would you change something, any rule, to improve it?
Xiao Tong - 1, Encourage players to play live games. One game can be finished in 2 hours when they play at 30sec/move. The more they play, the higher the site level will be. 2, when the world champion match is live on net, encourage player watch the games through your site. Let the watcher can bet on the live games. It will be more funny.
Many thanks to Xiao for these instructive answers, to be continued...
Don Groves (2011-03-24 21:35:58)
5th Go WCH, analysis by SC. von Erichsen
Many thanks from me also! Your analyses of the games is very valuable for study.
Wilhelm Schuett (2011-03-24 17:59:43)
5th Go WCH, analysis by SC. von Erichsen
Thanks Svante!
Thibault de Vassal (2011-03-24 15:36:57)
5th Go WCH, analysis by SC. von Erichsen
Svante Carl von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion... for the 5th time! After his win in the match that opposed him to Olivier Drouot, here are his analysis on the games:
_______________________
- Congratulations for this 5th win in the FICGS Go championship! By seeing the score you give less and less chances to your opponents who seem stronger each time though... Several games may look quite mysterious to weaker players. What happened during these games?
- Svante Carl von Erichsen:
Hi!
I do not have the impression that my opponents have less and less
chances. I also make many mistakes, and was in a clearly bad position
in at least one game. Olivier made many very unusual moves in the
opening, which were difficult to handle in a calm manner.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47578
In game 3 (47578), this is apparent at move 18. White has gone for a
very centre-oriented game, while Black has made more direct profit.
It is difficult to say who got the better deal. Move 18 itself is
very unusual, and I am not sure whether the result was satisfactory
for me. I think that moves 41 and 43 were important, as stabilizing
the group in the centre takes priority when the centre is dominated by
White like this. At move 53, it is clear that Black needs to stabilize
the top group, but D18 seems more important in retrospect. Move 62 is
a bit odd---I think that living with S16 instead would be better. I
think that Black got a territorial advantage here. Since White got
additional central strength, Black turned to make his central group
safe again, which should be enough to win now. White 94 tries to
shake up things again, but getting separated on the lower side makes
it very hard for him.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47580
In game 5 (47580), Olivier chose a very unusual move again at move 8.
I think that the outcome until move 17 favours Black, however. At
move 36, it looks like Black will have to live in the corner, but the
white enclosure does have its holes. Alas, White's response to the
forcing move at P10 was a severe blunder, as Black can take back the
right side. Move 55 was big, but I had not anticipated that the fight
after move 56 would be so hard for me. I think that after move 93,
White put too much emphasis on hollowing out what once seemed like
prospective black territory. The ponnuki in the centre was worth much
more than what White made on the second line. With that strength,
reducing the white framework on the left was no question. I think
that White then tried too hard in the centre.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47576
Game 1 (47576) was characterized by a big fight starting from the
joseki in the lower right corner. I guess that a stronger player
could point out several mistakes by both sides. It resulted in a big
exchange, where quite some aji remained in both positions. Move 90 is
an unusual idea, it would be more normal to extend on the side. 91
and 95 were intended as forcing moves to give some support to the top
side. I think that Black has good prospects after move 99 and
especially after 113. White started an interesting invasion on the
left then, which was however stopped by the blunder at 138.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47579
Game 4 (47579) again featured some unusual moves in the opening,
namely moves 7 and 9. I think that immediately plunging through at 10
was not good. It was quite difficult for me to keep territorial
balance afterwards. I think that my invasion at the top was
premature, but it seemed like I could not keep up without it. The
attack at L13 was severe. I got lucky that Black kept back a bit, so
that I could get the cut at E7, which was more important than the six
stones around N13. It would have been possible to save them at move
98, but at the cost of letting Black break through L10. Sacrificing
them allowed me to cement the centre to put me comfortably ahead. L9
was then the start of a desperate attempt to reduce the centre. I was
quite sure that I could capture it, even though simply connecting
would most likely have been enough. I then made a big blunder again
with move 130 (I had to double hane), allowing a game-deciding ko.
Black had a lot of threats against the lower right corner, and I think
that this exchange would have put him ahead. However, he thought he
had an internal threat at D10, which I think was not one, as there was
no additional eye in the centre yet.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47577
In game 2 (47577), he got me in the opening with another of his
experiments (move 7). I think that I could have been satisfied if I
simply played the keima to P2 at move 14. However, I activated the
central stone instead, which led to Black getting solid positions on
both sides, while I lived small in the corner and struggled in the
centre. I then succeeded in making him overconcentrated on the lower
side, but at the expense of a quite large corner and not making many
points myself. Move 80 tries to stir things up more. I think that if
Black had secured O13 with move 97, the game would have been over.
However, things only began to look good for White after move 127,
which had to be played at R8 (it is sente against the middle group
then, so Black can live with S5). It is still not over, however, as
White has two weak groups to take care of. The lower side group can
live locally with a ko at G1, but the other group has to struggle---it
would be nice to find a clean sacrifice plan here, because it is hard
for the two groups not to compete for eye space. This was the last
game to end, and my opponent seems to have chosen to resign all when
he did not see a way to win the overall match anymore.
All in all, these were very interesting games where I think I learnt a
lot. I wish to thank my opponent, who played very well.
Thanks!
Svante
Thibault de Vassal (2010-09-17 00:29:38)
Svante Carl von Erichsen on Go WCH #4
As you probably read in the news, Svante Carl von Erichsen won the 4th FICGS Go WCH, beating his challenger Huayong Yang 3-2, Svante Carl wins the Go championship for the 4th time in a row!
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000004
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match & computer Go:
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, congratulations once again for winning this match against a surprising challenger who started here a few months ago with a 10 kyu rank, Huayong Yang, now rated 2438 after scoring 2 points in your 5 games match (which is a great achievement for sure). What did you think about his play & yours in these games?
Svante Carl - I think that he greatly underestimated his rank initially. As far as I know, he had not played for a long time and believed that his ability had therefore deteriorated. I do not think that you can drop more than one or at most two stones, though -- it is like cycling or swimming, you never unlearn it. I had the impression that we were quite evenly matched in summa, but our strengths are in different aspects of the game; I cannot really put my finger on the difference, though.
FICGS - After a previous win, you said that you spend a quite long time to analyze, which probably helps you to reach a higher level than 2 dan (your EGF rating) compared to OTB play... It looks obvious to me that correspondence chess moves generally ask for much more time than Go moves at a high level but I may be wrong, how much time did you spend on your longest analysis during the match? Do you remember for which move?
Svante Carl - I usually spend at least a few minutes on each move, except when the continuation is obvious. I often use more, and if I do not find a satisfactory move then, I will even postpone the move to another day, so that I can sleep over it and let my subconcious work on it.
FICGS - Do you watch other games played by your future opponent before starting your match? Do you think that this is really important in preparation like it can be in Correspondence chess?
Svante Carl - I sometimes glance over the games in the championship qualification tournament, but I do not try to prepare this way. I do not think that such preparation has any value in Go, especially in correspondence Go, since you have time during the game to do deep analysis. I usually try to take each game out of standard fuseki patterns pretty quickly, anyway. Of course, I know that my opponents in these title matches are always very tough and demand my utmost respect.
FICGS - Do you still follow the recent developments in computer Go? What do you think about the latest Go engines? How much time do we have yet before the best Go players are caught by computers according to you?
Svante Carl - I have the impression that the currently most promising technology (Monte Carlo/UCT) has the potential to achieve a rank of about 2 or 3 dan (EGF/KGS). I think that the next fundamentally new idea or breakthrough might add 2 stones, to get to 4 or 5 dan. I do not have any idea where it might go from that, but I think that it gets always harder.
What I would find interesting is having more intermediate board sizes. The best bots are almost on par with the best professionals on 9x9 now. I would propose to try to achieve a similar level on 11x11, then 13x13, then 15x15 etc.. Regarding 9x9, I think that the currently predominant komi of 7.5 points is too big, and that this has a negative impact on the experiments because the bots do not play in a balanced environment. It might be worthwhile to introduce the Taiwan rule (last move compensation) to get more fine-grained scores.
FICGS - What programs did you use this year to analyze? (just trying, of course it may be part of your secrets ;))
Svante Carl - It is not a secret. I just use an editor, usually EidoGo or CGoban3, to visualize the variations I imagine.
FICGS - Finally, what thoughts would you like to share on your 5 games, that could help us not to miss the best times or to help us to understand the most complex moves...
Svante Carl - I cannot give a detailed commentary, but I can try to summarize my impressions.
I think that Game 5 was quite balanced until move 21, but I think that the white invasion was a bit ambitious then. Of course, White did not need to die there, but after moves 32-33 I think that Black had a good result anyway (move 32 should go out faster in my opinion; note how E14 helps Black in enclosing White).
In Game 3, I think things got quite difficult for White in the lower left, but I let him take the initiative by backing off at move 35 (I should have simply closed off F10 then). White gained control of the centre as a result, and in the large endgame, I lost too many points there.
In Game 4, I fell behind in the opening through some slow moves (there was some discussion on the Life-in-19x19 forum about this, see the link in the comments of that game). In the endgame, Black then lost some points in the centre, so that I was a bit ahead when the game timed out.
In Game 1, I made some bad decisions on the left side, and never managed to turn things around. I think I was behind by about 5 points in the end.
In Game 2, I think that Black should not have ignored move 24. After I got quite some territory from my moyo and also reduced his top side, I could play it safe.
I look forward to the games with Olivier Drouot that recently started, but I also hope that Yang Huayong will re-enter the championship cycle.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-07-15 14:39:03)
How to link?
How would I link to a FICGS game or tournament from the outside? It seems that nothing works without login.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-03-31 19:42:53)
Poker dealing algorithm
"..., but of course if I reveal it, I'll have to change at least some parameters of the algorithm for the next games."
I don't get this. There is a well known algorithm for shuffling cards, the Fischer-Yates-shuffle. All you need is an unbiased random number generator. There is no need for secrecy.
If you use anything else, it is most likely wrong.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-03-13 11:26:41)
Poker Min Bid
Yes, we agree there; the situation I was describing is the only in which only a single chip would be transferred to the pot. Minimum bet is always a big blind. Minimum raise is always the size of the previous bet of the betting round.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-03-13 00:09:43)
Poker Min Bid
Actually, since this is heads-up, one player is always small blind, the other big blind. If the small blind is 1, and the big blind 2, that means that this amount is already in the pot when the players get their hole cards. It is then still the first betting round, so the small blind can then "complete" for 1 (so that his bet in this betting round is now 2), or raise to at least double the big blind. See No-Limit Rules: http://www.pokerlistings.com/texas-holdem-betting-rules
Strategically, the bets should always be seen in relation to the current potsize. This follows from the calculation of odds and outs. It cannot be said that you should at least always bet potsize.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-03-10 20:59:12)
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-02-21 02:51:44)
Learning Go
Recently, someone asked how to learn Go, or who would teach Go, on the side bar chat. The question and my answer has been removed from there, so I'll post some hints here.
First, to learn the rules, I would recommend "The Interactive Way to Go" at http://playgo.to/iwtg/en
To learn playing, play as much as possible, first on small boards (9x9), then going to bigger ones (13x13, 19x19) when you feel that you can keep track of the game there. Play with proper handicaps to keep the game even and improve your feeling for the board.
Teaching can take the form of simple game reviews, where the stronger player analyzes a single game and shows the weakest points and how to correct them; the "Go Teaching Ladder" organizes a lot of such reviews (http://gtl.xmp.net). It can also be done in interactive sessions; these require either face to face contact or a "live" server, though (e.g. KGS at http://gokgs.com). It is generally thought that the teacher should be about 5 stones stronger than the pupil.
Especially in the beginning, the advice is to play, play, play, and not be too fixated on ranks or winning percentages.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-02-03 18:25:37)
Go chinese rules: should pass count?
Pass stones are irrelevant for area counting, so I think that you should not even mention them. It would only cause confusion.
Pass stones and last move compensation are methods to reconcile area and territory scoring. Last move compensation has another merit: in area scoring, the usually possible results always differ by two points, because when a point changes ownership, it is a loss of one point for one and a gain of one point for the other player. Last move compensation "sharpens" the possible results, and makes scoring very similar to territory scoring. However, this also is not necessary, so, at least as long as you don't fully understand this yourself, I would advise to keep simple area scoring and not mention anything else.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-01-31 14:38:58)
Go chinese rules: should pass count?
There is an official french ruleset that is, as far as I recall, almost exactly the same as the AGA rules. Look here, and with regard to the pass stones, also note the section "Méthode de décompte rapide":
http://jeudego.org/_php/regleGo_intro.php
This explanation uses area scoring throughout, except for the faster scoring method explained in the last section mentioned above. Pass stones are only needed for this faster scoring method. It is mostly irrelevant for scoring games on a computer.
The french rules are almost exactly what you seem to intend with your reference to chinese rules, except that they use situational instead of positional superko (see section "répétition").
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-01-29 23:03:44)
Go chinese rules: should pass count?
Lazaro Munoz, the pass stones do not "penalize" anyone, they just make the score of AGA territory scoring always equal to the score of AGA area scoring. Under area scoring, failing to occupy even a "neutral" point instead of passing costs a point (unless no neutrals or an even count of neutrals is left), and this has to be reflected in the territory scoring. AGA rules thus have two exactly equivalent scoring methods.
A better explanation might be this: Under area scoring, each move is worth exactly one point more than under territory scoring, viz. the point that it occupies. Under the assumption that both players make the same number of moves (that is the reason for the rule that White always has to move last), this precisely cancels out. Since a pass is worth 0 points under area scoring, it has to be -1 points under territory scoring, which is represented by the pass stone.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-01-29 00:48:50)
Go chinese rules : should pass count?
As far as I see, you do not have your rules written up anywhere yet, just a reference to "chinese rules".
I think that referring to rules that are not in place has high potential of confusion.
If you want to explicitly put down the rules that shall be used on this server (game rules, not tournament or server rules), I can offer you some assistance.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-01-27 21:09:41)
Go chinese rules : should pass count?
I'd like to add that, if a rule set puts some value on a pass, there is a good reason for it, not just "hey, let's make passes count."
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2010-01-27 21:06:17)
Go chinese rules: should pass count?
The question is not posed very clearly, and it seems that more explanation is required. Passes do not count in "chinese rules" per se. I think that maybe some confusion arose because there are some rule sets that put some value on all or specific passes.
Anyway, you should read e.g. this very nice write-up of the matters to consider, "On the rules of Go" by Ikeda Toshio, which you can find at gobase:
http://gobase.org/studying/rules/ikeda/
Thibault de Vassal (2009-10-22 20:41:56)
Huayong Yang is the new Go WCH finalist
Congrats to Huayong Yang who made it in the Go WCH 4 preliminary tournament with an outstanding 8/8 !
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WCH_TOURNAMENT__000004
He will play Svante Carl von Erichsen in the next Go WCH final match...
Huayong started with the minimal authorized rank (10 kyu) without an official rating but obviously he's much much stronger ... His current rating is 2334 (3 dan) already, so the question is : do his opponents have an idea on his real strength ? :)
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2009-08-28 09:44:30)
Thanks
Thank you very much.
I must admit, though, that I am a bit disappointed that all these games were decided by the clock. Game 1, I am definitely behind, Game 2, I think that I have a winning position, Game 3 is very close and would have been decided by endgame (there are some very large points open), Game 4, I am back in the game after installing a group in his moyo, but I believe he is still slightly ahead, Game 5, I think that he has to defend the group at the bottom now, so I can reduce the left side, then switch to the top right corner; I am still relatively thin at the top (compared to the rest of the board), so I think the game would have had to be decided in a fight there.
So, all in all, I think that these were really interesting games, and it is a pity that they were finished too early. Lu Ke is a very strong player, and I am really lucky to have a positive score against him. I just hope that my next opponent pays a bit more attention to the clock.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-08-28 01:06:17)
S.C. von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion !
Svante Carl von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion, for the 3rd time... after winning 2 more games in the 5 games final match which looked like in some ways to the previous one with Ke Lu.
Congrats again Svante Carl ! Definitely we need more strong players to try to rivalize :)
Here is the 4th game that just finished :
(
;
FF[1]
GM[1]
SZ[19]
AP[Ficgs]
RU[Chinese]
GN[von Erichsen,Svante Carl-Lu,Ke]
HA[0]
KM[7.5]
WR[2653]
PW[von Erichsen,Svante Carl]
BR[2483]
PB[Lu,Ke]
DT[February 28 3:6:11 CET 2009]
RE[W+T]
;
B[pd]
;
W[dc]
;
B[pp]
;
W[eq]
;
B[pj]
;
W[nq]
;
B[lq]
;
W[no]
;
B[pn]
;
W[kp]
;
B[lp]
;
W[lo]
;
B[kq]
;
W[jp]
;
B[jq]
;
W[ip]
;
B[hq]
;
W[hp]
;
B[gq]
;
W[gp]
;
B[fq]
;
W[fp]
;
B[er]
;
W[dr]
;
B[dq]
;
W[ep]
;
B[fr]
;
W[cq]
;
B[cj]
;
W[ch]
;
B[co]
;
W[cn]
;
B[bn]
;
W[dn]
;
B[cm]
;
W[nc]
;
B[kd]
;
W[ne]
;
B[pf]
;
W[ng]
;
B[gc]
;
W[ic]
;
B[id]
;
W[jd]
;
B[jc]
;
W[je]
;
B[ib]
;
W[kc]
;
B[hc]
;
W[de]
;
B[lc]
;
W[ph]
;
B[oh]
;
W[qe]
;
B[pe]
;
W[pg]
;
B[og]
;
W[of]
;
B[pi]
;
W[qf]
;
B[rh]
;
W[qd]
;
B[pc]
;
W[qc]
;
B[qg]
;
W[pb]
;
B[ob]
;
W[qb]
;
B[nb]
;
W[nh]
;
B[qh]
;
W[pl]
;
B[om]
;
W[qo]
;
B[po]
;
W[qp]
;
B[qn]
;
W[pq]
;
B[oq]
;
W[pr]
;
B[or]
;
W[rq]
;
B[mj]
;
W[mc]
;
B[kb]
;
W[lf]
;
B[lh]
;
W[jg]
;
B[ji]
;
W[mb]
;
B[oc]
;
W[ie]
;
B[he]
;
W[hf]
;
B[gf]
;
W[hg]
;
B[mf]
;
W[me]
;
B[mg]
;
W[ke]
;
B[ld]
;
W[le]
;
B[nf]
;
W[eh]
;
B[hi]
;
W[kh]
;
B[ki]
;
W[rn]
;
B[rm]
;
W[ro]
;
B[ql]
;
W[bk]
;
B[bj]
;
W[cl]
;
B[dm]
;
W[bm]
;
B[bo]
;
W[dl]
;
B[dp]
;
W[br]
;
B[em]
;
W[en]
)
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2009-07-29 00:41:23)
Unusual doesn't mean bad
I think that this is a perfectly valid opening. There have been much stranger openings that have been played by professionals, even though they appear to be "obviously inferior to standard play" (which this opening does not, in my opinion). I'd like to hear a solid reasoning for the stament that Black's first two moves "can't be best".
Thibault de Vassal (2009-07-24 20:03:52)
.. about the game
This is a running game in the current FICGS Go championship final between Ke Lu & Svante Carl von Erichsen :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-07-24 20:01:57)
New : Go games in the forum
Now you can post complete Go games in all FICGS forums with the nice interface Eidogo (Flash), see the Help section to know how to do it with the SGF /SGF tags.
In example :
(
;
FF[1]
GM[1]
SZ[19]
AP[Ficgs]
RU[Chinese]
GN[Lu,Ke-von Erichsen,Svante Carl]
HA[0]
KM[7.5]
WR[2483]
PW[Lu,Ke]
BR[2653]
PB[von Erichsen,Svante Carl]
DT[February 28 3:6:11 CET 2009]
;
B[pd]
;
W[dp]
;
B[pq]
;
W[dd]
;
B[fc]
;
W[cf]
;
B[jd]
;
W[po]
;
B[pl]
;
W[mp]
;
B[no]
;
W[mo]
;
B[oo]
;
W[hq]
;
B[nq]
;
W[mq]
;
B[cn]
;
W[cp]
;
B[ck]
;
W[qf]
;
B[qh]
;
W[nc]
;
B[qc]
;
W[oe]
;
B[pe]
;
W[pf]
;
B[of]
;
W[ph]
;
B[od]
;
W[ne]
;
B[nd]
;
W[me]
;
B[md]
;
W[le]
;
B[ld]
;
W[qi]
;
B[fe]
;
W[he]
;
B[ke]
;
W[lg]
;
B[kf]
;
W[hg]
;
B[jh]
;
W[hc]
;
B[fg]
;
W[hi]
;
B[cc]
;
W[dc]
;
B[cd]
;
W[de]
;
B[db]
;
W[eb]
;
B[cb]
;
W[fb]
;
B[be]
;
W[dj]
;
B[cj]
;
W[di]
;
B[el]
;
W[dm]
;
B[bm]
;
W[dn]
;
B[dk]
;
W[gm]
;
B[gh]
;
W[hh]
;
B[gj]
;
W[ef]
;
B[ff]
;
W[fj]
;
B[gi]
;
W[fk]
;
B[gd]
;
W[hd]
;
B[ec]
;
W[ci]
;
B[bi]
;
W[gc]
;
B[hk]
;
W[bh]
;
B[jk]
;
W[jb]
;
B[kb]
;
W[kc]
;
B[lb]
;
W[hb]
;
B[hj]
;
W[ga]
;
B[aj]
;
W[gl]
;
B[bo]
;
W[bp]
;
B[jn]
;
W[il]
;
B[hl]
;
W[hm]
;
B[ln]
;
W[mn]
;
B[ll]
;
W[jp]
;
B[ng]
;
W[og]
;
B[nr]
)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-02-28 03:35:14)
Svante Carl wins FICGS Go WCH (again)
Congratulations to Svante Carl von Erichsen who keeps the FICGS Go champion title by beating Ke Lu 5d on an impressive 5-0 score, also reaching a rating of 2653 !
A rematch just started between our two top Go players, as Ke Lu convincingly won the 3rd FICGS Go WCH preliminary tournament by 7/7
You can follow the games here :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000003
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match :
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, first of all congratulations for your win in the FICGS correspondence Go championship final. Your opponent was Ke Lu 5 dan, you won 4 games out of 5 already (the last game is not finished yet), how do you explain such a result?
Svante Carl - Hello! Thank you very much! It is certainly astonishing for me that I was able to hold my own in these games. I believe that the main factor that helped me in getting on even terms with such a strong player was that I could spend much more time analyzing each move than in a face-to-face or online direct playing situation.
FICGS - Did you have a particular preparation or plan before to start the games?
Svante Carl - The only things I planned beforehand was to really give my best, and to make the games as distinct as possible.
FICGS - The site will now try to attract more correspondence Go players from Asia (with a few chinese, japanese or korean words on the home page already), what do you think about the games format played at FICGS (30 days + 1 day / move, chinese rules komi 7.5 points) and the championship rules?
Svante Carl - I like the format. I am also interested in the rules of Go as well as the rules that surround Go, like tournament rules and time settings. My current conviction is that the "real, pure" Go rules are area rules with superko, and territory rules should be seen as a shortcut which should give the same result. I have come to think that the "Taiwan rule", i.e. White gets a point of compensation if Black got the last play (before the first pass), is a sensible part of the rules. FICGS has taken a very easy route by declaring the rule set and leaving negotiation of the result to the players. While in the end, it is only important who won, I think that showing a result as e.g. "White+3", "Black+Resign" adds a lot of flavour. As a time system, I think that bonus time (a.k.a. Fischer time), like on FICGS, is a very general and sensible approach to timing a game like Go. I think that many "real-world" tournaments and internet servers will switch to that in the future, for all, blitz, speed, normal, slow, and correspondence games. The championship format is quite nice. I like the title holder/challenger way of tournament series. The only thing I would like to see is some sort of nigiri to determine the colours in the odd game. Attracting players from Asia is really a worthwhile goal. I look forward to playing players from all over the world.
FICGS - Does correspondence Go bring you something more than real time Go? What is more addictive according to you?
Svante Carl - Since I think that analyzing is a forte of mine, I might be a bit stronger at correspondence Go than at "real time" Go. I don't think that one is more addictive than the other.
FICGS - Do you often play real time Go online? What servers do you prefer?
Svante Carl - I usually play on KGS, but not too much, perhaps one or two games per week on average, often in "bursts". KGS is quite nice, but not perfect. Sometimes I play at CyberOro, but there is much less communication; I like to watch pro games there.
FICGS - Do you use softwares that assist you in your games (FICGS rules allow this)? What do you think about computer Go in general nowadays?
Svante Carl - I only use a board or a simple SGF file viewer for analyzing. There are no playing programs that could help me. The programs have advanced quite much recently, but I think that it will still be a long time before they can beat me in an even game. Currently, most tests of these programs are against professional players with high handicaps, and I think that this is a good situation for the bots, since they get exponentially weaker the further the game is from the end -- high handicap practically eliminates the opening, their weakest spot. I would like to see more tests against amateur players at the bots' own level.
FICGS - Do you play other games (board games, video games...), what is your favourite one?
Svante Carl - Go is certainly my absolute favourite. I also know chess, although I am really weak at that. I also like "german board games", there are some really nice pearls there. In video games, well, there are also some pearls, but they get drowned by a mass of ... not so good games..., I don't waste time looking at that scene any more. I also played some online poker, but it wasn't able to keep me interested.
FICGS - Will you defend your title again against Ke Lu who also won the 3rd wch tournament?
Svante Carl - Of course, I am looking forward to that!
FICGS - Could you give us your impressions on the games, how it went from the beginning to the end, do you think that time pressure were a non-negligible factor in the result (the clocks of Ke Lu were quickly near 1 or 2 days left)?
Svante Carl - I was a bit surprised that he let his time drop to such a low level right at the beginning, perhaps he was not familiar yet with the vacancy feature at FICGS. I can't see his reasons for this, or how much time he actually could spend on his games. I was ahead in each game when it timed out, though.
I think that game 2 was quite even from the start. The skirmish in the lower left resulted in me capturing a little group, but he got a nice framework on the lower side. My prospects of reducing this were a bit hampered by the fact that my right side group was not completely settled. I found a way to sacrifice some stones to settle my group while fixing the framework's extent and keeping sente to secure my top side, at which time, the game was still almost even, but I think that I was a few points ahead then. Later, I could seal the top side with some extra points through some rather blunt forcing moves.
In game 3, my opponent made an approach with White 24 that is usually regarded as bad in this situation, because the pincer Black 25 works out very well in conjunction with the stone on the left side. He tried to settle with White 26, but I refused to make things so easy, even though the result from the usual joseki would not have been bad. He resisted Black 27, but I think that White 28 is an overplay. The resulting fight left me with nice profit in that corner and sente, while he made some centre thickness. I then tried to carefully neutralize this thickness, but I may have played some slack moves in the course. Later, I was able to keep a little moyo in the lower right centre, and then I poked into his right-side territory where he had left a serious weakness earlier.
Game 1 started out with an interesting fight in the upper right. After White 42, both the three captured black and the two almost captured white stones retain some serious aji, which I came back to fix on my side a few moves later. When I could set up a splitting attack with Black 77, he was able to connect his two weak groups, but in bad shape. I continued to keep this dragon separated from the top, planning to invade the top side afterwards. However, with White 110, instead of connecting by playing B6, he saved some centre stones, and I proceeded to separate and kill the dragon. He may have overlooked that my upper left side group was still able to live after 110 and 111.
In game 4, after White 22, Black's stones on the left side have a strange relation. The three stones in the corner are a bit far from C10, but putting another move here is way too slow. He tried to remedy this situation with the following moves. After Black 27, there are weaknesses left in both sides' shape. When I entered with White 32, I thought that his weakness at F13 would let me settle easily, but he attacked very hard. After White 60, there are some weaknesses in my shape, but he also has a weakish group in the centre. Playing at K10 with White 76 before taking the two stones with H2 felt very important to me. At move 94, I couldn't find a good move to complete my moyo at the top, but I thought that I had found a good point to invade. This was much harder than I thought, since after Black 95, the 3-3 point fails to live. With 96 and 98, I thought that I would get a ko, but he played a line that I had excluded earlier on account of too many cuts in Black's outside shape. However, with Black 107, he made things very difficult for me, since cutting at P16 doesn't work out too well -- my inside group doesn't have enough liberties. I cut at Q14 instead with the hope to at least get some outside forcing opportunities that might have been able to keep me in the game. I think that Black 115 should have been at R12, because after White 116, R12 and N16 have become miai. Black 117 just doesn't work at all. I really got lucky in the end here. These impressions are naturally one-sided, and I would be really interested what stronger players might say about these games.
FICGS - Thank you very much and have good games !
Svante Carl - Thank you!
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2009-02-15 14:19:14)
german proverb
Two rules for personal success:
1. Don't tell everyone everything
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2009-02-14 16:09:53)
Leela
I also heard good things about Leela. An older 9x9 version is free.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-30 16:43:43)
Svante Carl von Erichsen leads 2-0
Svante Carl now leads by 2-0, one game (22802) has been lost on time, the 3 running games are on the rope...
Any opinion on the games ?
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=22802 http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=22803
Normajean Yates (2008-12-17 18:05:42)
anyway, about the 16-queens mate-in-4:
Svante Carl von Erichsen showed it was possible to solve without computer help:
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=problem_read&id=311
As for proof game, The foll is from my rec.games.chess.analysis post [it *was* .analysis I think - feeling too tired to search usenet]
" This one is mine:
1. 4k3/qqqqqqqq/8/8/8/8/QQQQQQQQ/4K3 w - - 0 109: [pos. 1]
White to play and mate in 4.
There are no duals - only one moves mates in 4. [there is no mate in 3 or less.]
Move given at end of post, with sample continuation.
These two were posed by me and solved by likesforests [see fics (www.freechess.org) or chess.com] in 20 minutes total!
2. Give a proof game for pos. 1, ie Show that the position in prob. 1 is legally reachable by giving a game that leads to the position.
3. Okay, so you can reach a position where you have 16 queens on board. Can you construct a game which reaches a position with 18 queens? If so, do so! [the last part carries 99% of the credit - it is to pre-empt the answers "yes" and "no".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(note: these can be more conveniently viewed at chess.com in the thread "advantage of moving first - mate in 4 in symmetrical position" in the forum-category "more puzzles")
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solution to 2: by likesforests
[Event ]
[Site ]
[Date ..]
[White likesforests]
[Black likesforests]
[Result 1-0]
1. a4 b5 2. a5 b4 3. a6 Bb7 4. axb7 Nc6 5. Na3 bxa3 6. b8=Q a2 7. Rb1 a1=Q 8. Qb3 Qa6 9. Qa2 Qb7 10. b4 a5 11. b5 a4 12. b6 Qa6 13. b7 a3 14. Qb3 a2 15. b8=Q a1=Q 16. Qh3 Q1a5 17. Qbb3 Ne5 18. Qbg3 c5 19. Rb3 c4 20. c3 cxb3 21. c4 b2 22. c5 b1=Q 23. c6 Qba2 24. c7 Qb8 25. Bb2 f6 26. Bc3 Kf7 27. c8=Q d5 28. Qc4 Nc6 29. Qch4 d4 30. d3 dxc3 31. d4 c2+ 32. Qd2 Ra7 33. f3 Q5a4 34. Kf2 c1=Q 35. d5 Qca3 36. d6 e5 37. e4 Nge7 38. d7 Kg8 39. d8=Q Qa8 40. Qb6 Nb4 41. Qbe3 Nbd5 42. exd5 e4 43. Ne2 f5 44. Qeh6 f4 45. Kg1 e3 46. Nd4 e2 47. d6 e1=Q 48. d7 Qea1 49. d8=Q Nd5 50. Nc2 Nc3 51. Ne3 fxe3 52. Qdg5 e2 53. Qdf4 e1=Q 54. Qfg4 Qeb1 55. f4 g6 56. Qc5 g5 57. f5 Bg7 58. Qgc4+ Rf7 59. f6 Bf8 60. Q5b4 g4 61. Qe5 g3 62. Qe1 Ne4 63. Qcb3 Nd2 64. Qhc4 Nf3+ 65. gxf3 g2 66. Be2 Bg7 67. Kf2 Bf8 68. Ke3 g1=Q+ 69. Kf4 Qgb6 70. Qcc3 Be7 71. Kg4 Qe6+ 72. Kg3 Rf8 73. fxe7 Rf7 74. e8=Q+ Rf8 75. Qeb5 Qf7 76. f4 Re8 77. f5 Re6 78. fxe6 Qff8 79. e7+ Qf7 80. Rf1 Qaf8 81. e8=Q Qa8 82. Qbb2 Q4a7 83. Qed2 Q3a6 84. Rf3 Q8b7 85. Qcc2 Qac4 86. Q4b3 Qad6+ 87. Kg2 Qdc7 88. Q3a2 Qce6 89. Qhe3 Qed7 90. Q8e4 Q8e7 91. Qb2b3 Qag7+ 92. Qg3 Qbb2 93. Bc4 Qbf6 94. Kf1 h5 95. Rf5 Qfxf5+ 96. Ke1 Rh6 97. Qxh6 Qfh7 98. Qhxh5 Qfxc4 99. Qee2 Qcf7 100. Qbb2 Kf8 101. Qgf2 Ke8 102. h4 Kf8 103. Qhg4 Qhxh4 104. Qgg2 Qhh7 105. Qbh5 Ke8 106. Qhh2 Qfe6 107. Qff3 Q6f6 108. Qff2 Qff7 1-0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
solution to 3: by likesforests
Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[White "likesforests"]
[Black "likesforests"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. a4 b5 2. a5 b4 3. a6 Bb7 4. axb7 Nc6 5. Na3 bxa3 6. b8=Q a2 7. Rb1 a1=Q 8. Qb3 Qa6 9. Qa2 Qb7 10. b4 a5 11. b5 a4 12. b6 Qa6 13. b7 a3 14. Qb3 a2 15. b8=Q a1=Q 16. Qh3 Q1a5 17. Qbb3 Ne5 18. Qbg3 c5 19. Rb3 c4 20. c3 cxb3 21. c4 b2 22. c5 b1=Q 23. c6 Qba2 24. c7 Qb8 25. Bb2 f6 26. Bc3 Kf7 27. c8=Q d5 28. Qc4 Nc6 29. Qch4 d4 30. d3 dxc3 31. d4 c2+ 32. Qd2 Ra7 33. f3 Q5a4 34. Kf2 c1=Q 35. d5 Qca3 36. d6 e5 37. e4 Nge7 38. d7 Kg8 39. d8=Q Qa8 40. Qb6 Nb4 41. Qbe3 Nbd5 42. exd5 e4 43. Ne2 f5 44. Qeh6 f4 45. Kg1 e3 46. Nd4 e2 47. d6 e1=Q 48. d7 Qea1 49. d8=Q Nd5 50. Nc2 Nc3 51. Ne3 fxe3 52. Qdg5 e2 53. Qdf4 e1=Q 54. Qfg4 Qeb1 55. f4 g6 56. Qc5 g5 57. f5 Bg7 58. Qgc4+ Rf7 59. f6 Bf8 60. Q5b4 g4 61. Qe5 g3 62. Qe1 Ne4 63. Qcb3 Nd2 64. Qhc4 Nf3+ 65. gxf3 g2 66. Be2 Bg7 67. Kf2 Bf8 68. Ke3 g1=Q+ 69. Kf4 Qgb6 70. Qcc3 Be7 71. Kg4 Qe6+ 72. Kg3 Rf8 73. fxe7 Rf7 74. e8=Q+ Rf8 75. Qeb5 Qf7 76. f4 Re8 77. f5 Re6 78. fxe6 Qff8 79. e7+ Qf7 80. Rf1 Qaf8 81. e8=Q Qa8 82. Qhc1 ( 82. Qbb2 Q4a7 83. Qed2 Q3a6 84. Rf3 Q8b7 85. Qcc2 Qac4 86. Q4b3 Qad6+ 87. Kg2 Qdc7 88. Q3a2 Qce6 89. Qhe3 Qed7 90. Q8e4 Q8e7 91. Qb2b3 Qag7+ 92. Qg3 Qbb2 93. Bc4 Qbf6 94. Kf1 h5 95. Rf5 Qfxf5+ 96. Ke1 Rh6 97. Qxh6 Qfh7 98. Qhxh5 Qfxc4 99. Qee2 Qcf7 100. Qbb2 Kf8 101. Qgf2 Ke8 102. h4 Kf8 103. Qhg4 Qhxh4 104. Qgg2 Qhh7 105. Qbh5 Ke8 106. Qhh2 Qfe6 107. Qff3 Q6f6 108. Qff2 Qff7 ) h5 83. Qhc8 h4+ 84. Kg4 h3 85. Bf3 Rh5 86. Bg2 hxg2 87. h3 Rh4+ 88. Kxh4 g1=Q 89. Rf6 Qga7 90. Qec6 Q8b8 91. Q8a6 Q8e7 92. Kg4 Kf8 93. h4 Qbe8 94. Rd6 Qg8+ 95. Kf3 Qbg6 96. h5 Q6g7 97. h6 Qad7 98. h7 Qa5 99. h8=Q Qdxd6 1-0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
solution to 1: 1. Qaxf7+!
Sample continuations:
1... Kd8 2. Qexe7+ Kc8 3. Qdxd7+ Kb8 4. Qdd8#
1... Qxf7 2. Qh8+ Qxh8 3. Qxh8+ Qf8 4. Qfxf8#
"
Thibault de Vassal (2008-11-24 18:48:29)
Go championship : Lu vs. von Erichsen
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000002&boards=1
About 40 moves played in all games.. at a first sight, the games are still open, any predictions ?
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2008-07-23 17:33:36)
Janice Kim
Janice Kim was a 1 Dan professional in 1997, she is 3 Dan professional now. Is there more information available somewhere, e.g. regarding handicap and time settings?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-11 23:13:29)
FICGS Go championship final match
The first FICGS Go championship 5 games final match (in WCH Go 000002) just started !
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2478, 4 dan) vs. Ke Lu (2591, 5 dan)
http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000002.html
Nice & instructive games to follow :)
Best of luck to both.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-11-30 02:00:56)
attempt at clarification
First, the professional ranks cannot be compared to amateur ranks. A few years ago, the general assumption was that a difference of one professional rank was equal to about one third of a stone. The EGF assumes 30 ELO points between pro ranks. Recently, however, especially in Korea, there are many aspiring young players trying to become a professional, but only a handful are promoted each year. As a result, the competition for _becoming_ pro has become so fierce that any player who passes these tests is all but guaranteed to be already able to give the established players a run for their money. Another point to note is that while amateur ranks try to depict the _strength_ of a player, professional ranks are based on _merit_.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-24 16:33:54)
SC. von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion !
Svante Carl von Erichsen 4d is the first FICGS Go world champion, congratulations :)
According to the rules : "In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage."
As Svante Carl now leads the tournament by 7/7, even if he loses his last game and another player also finishes with 7/8, the TER decides. And as there's no previous winner to defend his title...
After the second championship (the level should increase), we may have the first 5 games match between two very strong players :)
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-10-17 02:10:48)
German
"Klicken Sie bitte auf die Figur, die Sie bewegen möchten." or "Klicken Sie bitte auf die Figur, mit der Sie ziehen möchten." "Klicken Sie bitte auf das Feld, auf das Sie die Figur bewegen möchten." or "Klicken Sie bitte auf das Zielfeld."
Don Groves (2007-10-11 02:08:40)
Cracking Go
Svante Carl von Erichsen escrit: "This statement seems to relate not so much to Go but more on projected calculation power of supercomputers. My impression is that "provocative" is the main intent here." No, my intent was serious, only the small joke at the end was not ;-) By making the goban lager, Go can avoid the fate of Chess regarding brute force analysis. Even at a trillion moves per second, as mentioned in the article quoted by Thibault, brute force analysis will fail if there are trillions of trillions of trillions of possible moves!
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-10-10 13:32:04)
Why clump?
What is the advantage of this in comparison to an increment of 4 days per move?
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-10-10 13:28:11)
Cracking Go
This statement seems to relate not so much to Go but more on projected calculation power of supercomputers. My impression is that "provocative" is the main intent here.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-09-28 01:07:38)
empty page
This is just a little issue: When I submit a move, and no game with pending moves is left, an empty page is displayed. I think it would be better to return to the games page immediately.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-09-13 16:15:49)
What is the difference...
What is the difference between a japanese joseki a korean jeongseok? ... After a japanese joseki, both players have an equally good result. After a korean jeongseok, both players have an equally bad result.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-09-06 22:04:56)
Norms
What is the exact definition of a "norm"? When googling, I found something along the lines of "a tournament performance indicating that a certain level has been reached", but what does it mean? Winning more than half of the games? How does it depend on the opponents' strength?
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-07-11 16:14:00)
Norms
Perhaps you could also explain what a "norm" is, for chess newbies.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-06-29 20:48:01)
Go sites
For fast games, a "real time" server is best, e.g. KGS (http://www.gokgs.com/). A great resource is the Go wiki at http://senseis.xmp.net/
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-06-01 12:26:32)
Go championship
I think that the current rules are quite good. For the current user base, 9 players round robin is enough.
If the user base gets bigger and stronger, you could introduce preliminary stages. Example: sort all players who entered the waiting list by rating, then the final league consists of the 5 strongest players plus 4 players who placed first in the preliminary (which might be a knockout, or another league).
One thing I would change in the current system: the usual custom for multi-game matches between two players is to determine colours randomly for the first game, then alternate. If an uneven number of games is played, then in the last game, colours are chosen randomly again.
As I interpret the rules in that way that all five final games are played simultaneously, I would propose that one of those games is played with random colours.
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-04-05 18:10:22)
Re: Go: simultaneous games with handicap
Aren't all games a kind of simultaneous here?
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-03-28 03:16:54)
More links
http://senseis.xmp.net (a go wiki) http://playgo.to/interactive (very good introduction) For books, you might browse e.g. http://www.hebsacker-verlag.de/ Further links can be found at the DGoB-homepage (Deutscher Go-Bund): http://www.dgob.de/golinks.htm
Svante Carl von Erichsen (2007-03-15 13:40:45)
Adjudication in correspondence games
I think that you have to be very careful with this kind of adjudication. Even if you restrict this to cases that are 100% clear, you still have to separate them from the 99% cases. I would only consider adjudication if control of the board is completely decided and one player keeps playing worthless moves.
There are 0 results for von Erichsen in wikichess.
[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 |  |