< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 228 OF 262 ·
|Jun-08-18|| ||Telemus: <Tabanus> I understand that some books are rare, for example, in the case of self-publishing or if they were given only as presents to friends, etc. But my understanding of an "unpublished book" is one that did not made its way into public, say libraries (and hence can be ignored in scientific context). Okay, this aspect is possibly only a definition problem. |
If Winter would be right, to how many libraries have I send a book in order to accuse justifiably people ignoring it?
|Jun-08-18|| ||zanzibar: <Telemus> raises some interesting, precise, and pointed issues concerning Gaige's work, and Winter as well.
I feel this was an unfortunate confluence of factors. But it raises several important points, ones to mull over as we do our research work.|
E.g., I strongly feel that we need more access to sources (hello Britain), and as responsible biographers should strive to utilize primary sources which are available freely and online as much as possible.
Gaige is obsolete, in the sense that the revision was illegal, but also, and perhaps even more so, because both the original and revised editions are non-searchable by a computer. And perhaps even most importantly, because both Gaige I and II are static, whereas it's obvious such documents must be dynamic to allow for the never ending stream of corrections to be applied.
The other obvious issue is the need for sourcing, which isn't always convenient or present in paper-bound formats.
But I will admit the ultimate virtue of paper-bound information - it is still the most durable and preservable of formats (save, possibly, for DNA encoding).
|Jun-08-18|| ||zanzibar: <<Telemus> But my understanding of an "unpublished book" is one that did not made its way into public, say libraries (and hence can be ignored in scientific context).>|
Hmmm... the "ignored in scientific context" caught my eye.
Theses are considered "unpublished", as are scientific preprints.
But some of these "unpublished" works are well-worth reading, if not even seminal.
E.g. <What are some interesting theses?>
As for preprints, well, here's one example - Zweig's infamous aces TH-401 (1964) preprint where he postulates the physical reality of quarks, before even Gell-Mann does:
(Zweig's paper was suppressed by the head of the CERN theory division at the time - good for biology, but bad for physics
|Jun-09-18|| ||zanzibar: Returning to more mundane issues...
<Stockholm Four Master (1919)>
Q- Can anybody tell me what the round-dates are for this tournament?
* * * * *
Trying to round-date this tournament, which is a bit unnecessary given all the game round numbers are easily know, as is the bracket:
<Dec 1-17, 1919> (TFS v26 N1-3 (1919) p4)
Still, it would be nice to have the actual game dates.
Sadly, neither TFS nor DSZ give the dates. Also, the Swedish online newspaper archive cuts off at 1902 - damn copyright issues!
(And I thought Sweden was "liberal")
Delper offers some help, but R1's reporting is from 12-04, and one assumes the games began on 12-01.
I think the schedule could be assumed to be a 3+1 day format (3 days for 4-RR pairings, 1 day for adjournment completion). Then, assuming Sundays are off-days, the schedule fits nicely with the Dec 1-17 bracket:
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
... _1 _2 _3 _4 _5 _6
_7 _8 _9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
(Oh, verbatim mode, where oh where can you be?)
That is, if you ignore the missing last completion day play. Of course, play could be held on Sundays, then there's one extra day.
Who cares? Well, if a date for games could be shoehorned in, the SCID xtab would display the correct bracket dates.
|Jun-09-18|| ||chessgames.com: Somebody submitted a correction slip noting that the move 23...Nc3? doesn't make any sense from Oral vs R Jedynak, 2010, nor does the reply 24.Qc2? (Qxc3 is fine). |
But it's a tricky position: e.g. 23...Nc5 24.Bd4 is very hard to navigate. And maybe White was seeing ghosts with 24.Qxc3. I'm inclined to believe it's just a pair of bad moves unless we can find a better explanation.
|Jun-10-18|| ||jessicafischerqueen: |
Please pardon a brief interruption.
<zanzibar> I have recently been looking at your chess history website: https://zanchess.wordpress.com
I have to say this is first rate. It strongly reminds me of <Edward Winter's> site, except you are way, way less snotty. Maybe he should read your website and learn how civilized people speak.
Your layout, photos, topics, analysis, and data provenance is all really top shelf work.
The only thing I would have liked whilst browsing was some kind of index of topics? You have a basic category list, but it would be so great if we could type in a player's name and then a list of articles would pop up.
I have a zero knowledge base on web construction, but I'm guessing this might be a really daunting and time consuming task.
Anyways, for what it might be worth, I give your site a personal rating of 10/10.
Thanks for all of that hard work man.
|Jun-11-18|| ||Tabanus: I suggested "Norway Chess" to Sargon for all six 1913 to 1918. With the option of adding "Altibox" in front for 1916 to 1918.|
Not the greatest of names, but it's the official one. And not my fault, debunkers ... Btw, nobody knows how long the sponsor Altibox will last, or the tournament itself for that matter.
<<chessgames.com: This is the forum where tournament names are settled on and implemented.> Oh yeah. Your Next Move (2018)?
|Jun-11-18|| ||Tabanus: http://www.olimpbase.org/pgn4web/an..., also not finding 24...Qxe3+. That game score must be wrong.|
|Jun-11-18|| ||zanzibar: <JFQ> thank you for your kind comments, high praise considering the source!|
You're right on several accounts, e.g. the lack of indexing is painfully obvious. The blog grew "organically", so I didn't event have the foresight to use the Wordpress tags (or barely did).
Maybe someday I'll go back over it all and try to put in some semblance of order. But, for the moment, the main thrust of the work was doing <Reichhelm's Fifty>, and I did at least try to provide a hint of how to navigate through the morass:
<First-look, look here first>
<Fifty Tournaments by Reichhelm>
As for biographer resources, there's a few helpful pages - on the less geeky side of the dial - here:
<Tales of bibliographical abbreviations>
<Tournament and Match Books - online resources>
The latter is mostly just <Calli>'s work, repackaged.
Now, as for Winter, well - I won't argue your points, but will say that he's a hero of mine - and if my interest in chess history didn't come from him directly, my efforts to get the sourcing "right"(*) certainly did. Plus, I'm definitely more geeky than he is!
<Uncle SCID> https://zanchess.wordpress.com/2014...
<Fasten your seltbelts...> https://zanchess.wordpress.com/2014...
(*) Right as is practically possible.
|Jun-11-18|| ||chessgames.com: <Tabanus: also not finding 24...Qxe3+. That game score must be wrong.> Oh, yeah you're right. Some move much earlier was probably different than recorded but I can't make out exactly what would make it work.|
<I suggested "Norway Chess" to Sargon for all six 1913 to 1918. With the option of adding "Altibox" in front for 1916 to 1918.> I think sticking to official names is the best policy. Even "Your Next Move."
|Jun-11-18|| ||Tabanus: <CG> Yes probably. The official name or a short version of it.|
<z> Surprise from me: I mainly agree with JFQ. But to complain (a you may know already): a) Your work ends up with you, not so much here. And b) I tried to copy one of your xtabs some days ago - it was not possible.
|Jun-11-18|| ||zanzibar: <Tab> quick couple of points...|
<a) Your work ends up with you, not so much here.>
OK, getting the CG-Z-impedance mismatch lower is something I worked hard on, maybe to the point of being unproductive.
But whatever, the core of the work lies in the PGN, and that's freely available, so maybe someday we can get <CG> to implement the tools we(?) need to get the impedance lower.
<b) I tried to copy one of your xtabs some days ago - it was not possible.>
This is confusing to me. All the SCID output is just plain text, and should be easy to cut-and-paste. The ChessBase xtabs are image files, and those can be "swiped" via standard techniques.
Of course, I'd suggest downloading the PGN and using SCID or ChessBase to make your own xtab in whatever format you like. That's one of the ideas behind the whole thing after all.
|Jun-12-18|| ||tpstar: As Nigel Short makes his historic bid for FIDE President, our chess world must confront the global threat of Carlsen Fanboyism. Just look at all of the pain and suffering that Carlsen Fanboys hath wrought upon the C-A-R-L-S-E-N page, with the smear campaign, and the ethics violations, and the Good Post/Bad Post dichotomy, yada yada yada. They recruited repeat offender <Francis> from Canada and repeat offender <Mark> from England, knowing they would both be rewarded with special treatment based on false narratives and revisionist history. For the record, I never received any response from writing those Norwegian kibitzers and their families. OK, it didn't help that I never wrote them in the first place, but still there was no response, which must mean something.|
This Norwegian Historian prepared a list of twenty kibitzers that he wanted eliminated from this site ("Have guts CG, axe them down" chessgames.com chessforum (kibitz #25602) ) based on his personal opinion of their posting history here and his personal opinion of their relevance to this online chess community. FIDE must then address another troubling question: does the Kingdom of Norway support state-sponsored terrorism? Consider the Norwegian kibitzer who used his player page to post paragraph after paragraph after paragraph of personal attacks against other users, then tried to sabotage the site awards in January 2012 while threatening adversaries with his "banned into oblivion" act. Consider the Norwegian kibitzers who crashed the Wesley So page to harass him right before the 2018 Candidates Tournament, causing such incredible pain and suffering that at least one was banished from that dominion. As usual, these Norwegian repeat offenders would have got away with it if it weren't for us meddling kids.
The best way to help Nigel Short accomplish his hopes and dreams is finishing your transition to become a full-fledged historical site. Wouldn't it be marvelous if people were held accountable for every single thing they have ever posted on this site, in the name of justice. Remember the Historian who sabotaged the Louis Stumpers player page biography for attention and sympathy, then remember the Historian who used multiple accounts to vote down someone's work product out of spite. If these esteemed Editors will abuse their privileges for petty personal self-glorification, then their entire professional careers must be thoroughly scrutinized for similar devious wrongdoing. Naturally, any connection to the Carlsen Fanboy crime syndicate must be uncovered and documented, like using their chessforum as an outlet for attacking and bullying and cyberstalking and threatening from April 2016 to August 2016.
Thank you for your consideration.
|Jun-12-18|| ||Phony Benoni: Any more details about tis event
Game Collection: Ostend Supllementary Tournament 1905
|Jun-12-18|| ||Tabanus: Like I said: "added words to my mouth". What more can I expect?|
<PB> There may be reports in the Dutch newspapers. In the English ones, I found only this:
<The amateurs at Ostend who provided the brilliancy prizes were so pleased with the result that the offered prizes for a competition of two games each between Leonhardt, Marco, Marshall, and Teichmann at the rate of 60 francs for the winner and 40 francs for the loser of each game. Marco beat Marshall and Leonhardt, and Leonhardt beat Teichmann and lost to Marshall.> (Belfast News-Letter, 27 July 1905, p. 3)
<After the Ostend tourney, a quadrangular contest was arranged between Leonhardt, Marco, Marshall, and Teichmann, each playing one game with the other three, and receiving a prize of 60 francs for win, and 40 francs for a loss. Teichmann and Marco scored two wins, Leonhardt 1 1/2, and Marshall 1/2.> (Falkirk Herald 2 Aug 1905 p. 8)
|Jun-12-18|| ||Tabanus: <z> It was this page: https://zanchess.wordpress.com/2016.... The Swiss xtab there is copyable, but does not have 1, 1/2 and 0 in it.|
Cannot promise I'll do it though. Too tiresome.
|Jun-12-18|| ||Tabanus: Sigh <CG>, it's Your Next Move, not YourNextMove. I suppose you have that from TWIC? Same for 2017 and 2016 (at least you are consequent).|
|Jun-12-18|| ||zanzibar: |
<<Tab> And b) I tried to copy one of your xtabs some days ago - it was not possible. [...]
The Swiss xtab there is copyable, but does not have 1, 1/2 and 0 in it.>
Eliminate the impossible, and only the possible remains...
Not really that tiresome.
|Jun-13-18|| ||Tabanus: <z> In my case, it would be to manually replace 19b= with ½, etc., etc., 190 times. That's tiresome.|
"YourNextMove": I'm planning to request Sargon change it to "Your Next Move". Any constructice objections? No? Thanks a lot.
|Jun-13-18|| ||Stonehenge: Leffler|
Nordisk Skaktidende 1875 has a J.A. Leffler from Vadstena. Can more info be found?
|Jun-13-18|| ||Tabanus: Johan Anders Leffler (18 June 1845 - 24 May 1912) is a good candidate. He lived in Vadstena 1869-1874, see https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/g... page 109 ("under åren 1869 till 1874 var bosatt på gården Stavlösa i Örberga socken", i. e. 3-4 km SE of Vadstena proper).|
http://www.schack.se/tfsarkiv/histo... pages 60 & 61 says his father Johan Albrecht Leffler (1801-1870) founded the Gothenburg Chess Club in 1879!? Probably his son Johan Anders did.
|Jun-13-18|| ||chessgames.com: <YourNextMove> vs <Your Next Move>|
Most of the official promotion that I’ve seen writes it as one word with internal caps. I understand it might look goofy, but it’s not our job to improve their PR.
Whatever we use, I might have to make a special hook in the search so that people who write it the nonstandard way still get results.
|Jun-13-18|| ||Stonehenge: <Tab>
Thanks, that was quick :)
|Jun-13-18|| ||Tabanus: <CG: Most of the official promotion that I’ve seen writes it as one word> If that's the case, so be it. I have not seen it in one word. The logo has 3 words.|
<Stonehenge> Yes, I needed to glorify myself a little.
|Jun-13-18|| ||zanzibar: <Stonehenge>'s new avatar gave me a chuckle.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 228 OF 262 ·
A free online guide presented by Chessgames.com