< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 395 OF 395 ·
|Mar-26-15|| ||latvalatvian: A brief history of chess for those not in the know. Paul Morphy showed up, played some good games and defeated Anderssen who was the best then. Then Morphy quit with a few mental problems and not too long after that we had Steinitz, the first official world champion. Then Lasker came along with his famous cigars and played a few games. Since then other players showed up and made a few good moves until we reach Carlsen.|
|Mar-26-15|| ||zanzibar: This is the Bistro people.
We will outlast any and all attempts at humor with our seriousness.
Be so advised.
|Mar-26-15|| ||zanzibar: <Phony> do we have info on the exact time controls used in the different sections?|
(Sorry if I missed it already)
|Mar-26-15|| ||zanzibar: <RE: USOpen97>
Here's the current best stab at sorting out the different sections.
<Phony>'s help was invaluable, together with the USCF xtab.
I believe this is pretty close to being right.
|Mar-26-15|| ||Phony Benoni: <Zanzibar> No, we don't as yet have exact playing schedules or round times. The best place to find that information would be a 1997 issue of "Chess Life" with an tournament ad. These generally had such details.|
Your numbers for TR, D8 and D5 correspond well to what I came up with at the time. One little thing: why did you use "Best Ball" for what we had been calling the "Busy Persons", those who started the tournament in round 7 of the Traditional? I had been using BB strictly for those whose made a choice between their scores in two sections, more specifically TR/EB.
I'm regarding my scan of the bulletins now as strictly a double-check of your work. It will only go through round 8, since all sections had merged beginning with round 9
|Mar-26-15|| ||zanzibar: <Phony> I was asking about time controls... for the quick play D5 vs normal slow play.|
Thanks for catching my mistake mislabeling the BP section as BB. Just a snafu which I've corrected with a quick edit.
I agree, the BB category is a small, and strict subset of the multiple entries - where they played both TR and EB R1-6 and continued with the merged EB/TR thereafter.
I definitely think the scan, and doublechecking, is a good idea. Along the ideas of epsilon**squared.
My program, while good for the mechanical work, still needs adult supervision.
Together I think we sorted it out. GG.
|Mar-26-15|| ||Tabanus: http://cdn.loc.gov/service/pnp/cph/...|
|Mar-26-15|| ||zanzibar: http://memory.loc.gov/pnp/cph/3c000...|
Has a little better resolution -
<4129 - A Game of Chess - 1906(5?)> (maybe from Illinois?)
Looks like they're both resigned to their fate.
|Mar-26-15|| ||zanzibar: <Phony> Just wondering, and you probably need those adverts in the CL&R to answer, but do you know if the BB's had the same entrance fee as the others?|
What about drop-outs/reentrants, did they have to pay another entrance fee?
|Mar-26-15|| ||Phony Benoni: Don't know for sure, but generally in those cases each new section meant a new entry fee. There may have been some discounts, especially for the BBs, but I don't know for sure.|
|Mar-26-15|| ||zanzibar: Thanks <Phony>...
Here's the final chapter - disentangling the multiple entrant players:
|Mar-27-15|| ||zanzibar: Here's my take on <USOpen96>, from the year before.|
It seems a little easier to handle than 97.
|Mar-27-15|| ||zanzibar: It's nice to be able to leverage much of the work from one year into another.|
|Mar-27-15|| ||zanzibar: As for <US Open (1995)>, it looks not so simple, and in need of some babysitting.|
But I did learn a couple of things - that 4 out of the top 7 finishers were BP-ers.
(Which shows the slight leg-up I think that section gets)
Also, it appears that there might be five Neffs:
_41 1 WA 2126 Neff, Elliott
371 1 WA 1572 Neff, Theodore
373 1 WA 1491 Neff, Raphael
354 2 WA 1326 Neff, Dr Robert
390 1 WA 1181 Neff, Ethan
Theodore maybe being missing from 1997. I assume Dr. Robert was the father, correct?
|Mar-27-15|| ||Chessical: <Tabanus> and <OhioChessFan> thank very much you for your work to correct and complete:|
Game Collection: Petrosian - Korchnoi Candidates Semifinal 1971
As you suspected, I accidentally left out a word out of the quotation (and missed out the second <i> in position), it should read:
<"Petrosian strives to attack only when the position is <in> his favour." (Spassky) (6)>
|Mar-27-15|| ||zanzibar: <RE: USOpen95>
Any idea who this fellow might be?
<USCF# 12576885 (CA)> provisional ~1900
Seems to have played in other tournaments as well.
|Mar-27-15|| ||keypusher: This appears to be a bad game score, but it's linked on the tournament page.|
Petrosian vs Tal, 1976
This appears to be the right one.
Petrosian vs Tal, 1976
|Mar-27-15|| ||Phony Benoni: The 1995 "mystery man" seems to be this guy:
His round 6 game again Levin is in the bulletin.
What usually happens in these situations is that the rating report is submitted with an incorrect ID#, and the USCF system can't cope.
|Mar-27-15|| ||Tabanus: <Chessical> I added the <in> to the game collection and to the Petrosian - Korchnoi Candidates Semifinal (1971).|
I notice you also have the unpromoted Game Collection: Prague Candidates Reserve Playoff (1956). Since we were so successful (quickly voted in) I could assist with that one too. If only someone could find the game dates!
Else, I should perhaps do Biel izt 1985 while I still have the New in Chess issue that I borrowed. <zanzibar> Would that be Ok, and are the games <x-rayed>? Biel 1985 would then probably be my last event for the 1980's.
|Mar-27-15|| ||zanzibar: <Phony> Thanks, I'll take a look and try to resolve.|
<Tab> <RE: Biel izt (1985)>... let me check my notes. It sounds familiar to me, maybe because I did something for 1993:
If I didn't already do <Biel (1985)>, I'll queue it up (near or at the top of my "todo-list").
|Mar-27-15|| ||Tabanus: <zanzibar> I put your name behind Biel 1985 again because I noticed it's one of your game collections.|
|Mar-27-15|| ||zanzibar: <Tab> Righto... I do have a collection for it.|
Game Collection: Biel Interzonal (1985)
Probably submitted games to complete <CG>'s viewpoint, but maybe not. <Carolus> always has complete and accurate collections to use for the 1st approximation.
Let me review and I'll post an status update.
|Mar-27-15|| ||Tabanus: <keypusher> Right, the game used is completely hopeless, 15.Bxh6?? I'll send a correction slip, the other game at least looks plausible (Stockfish).|
|Mar-27-15|| ||Phony Benoni: <zanzibar> Your <USOpen97> analysis was so good that I've just filed it away until I'm actually ready to use it. (Darn it, I've got to get back to the problems with 1901!)|
<USOpen96> was a similar four-section affair, as I guess you probably know. (I couldn't understand the report.)
<USOpen95> had just two sections, Daytime and Traditional (Evening). Full lists of all players in both sections are printed in the bulletins.
|Mar-28-15|| ||Chessical: <Tabanus> I would welcome your assistance with Game Collection: Prague Candidates Reserve Playoff (1956). My initial efforts to confirm the dates of the games through contemporary newspapers came to nothing. |
I then asked our two prominent Czech contributors <Gypsy> and <Honza Cervenka> if they might have any information, but at the present the dates of the games are still unresolved. I have not, therefore, promoted the collection.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 395 OF 395 ·