Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

collections   |   new tournaments   |   vote on collections   |   librarian   |   country codes   |   notes   |   edits   |   help
Kibitzer's Cafe
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 30 OF 280 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tabanus: <Also "Euwe - Keres 1939/40">

Actually, I can no longer remember if "Euwe - Keres" will be transformed to "Euwe - Keres 1939/40" upon voting.

Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: <any ethical doubts Euwe may have experienced. >

Another possibility: "might" have experienced. Does that jack up the uncertainty factor? I don't think there's any specific grammatical rules at play. Thoughts, anyone?

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <<MissS> What you do is this - put the site of the game in question in the field marked 'Site'. Is that so difficult to understand?>

You're utterly unqualified in this matter, despite previous attempts to explain it to you.

You cannot do this within the constraints of the PGN standard.

But thanks for playing...

Premium Chessgames Member
  Tabanus: <Ohio> Changes made, please check.

One game usually has one site. And if it has only one site, only one site should be given to it. Even I can understand that.

Premium Chessgames Member
  MissScarlett: <You cannot do this within the constraints of the PGN standard.>

If Alekhine was the book, I am the standard.

Putting the site of a game in the field marked 'Site' is not the radical idea you pretend it to be.

Don't force me to publicly embarrass you by calling for a vote on the matter.

Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: Game Collection: Euwe - Keres

<A match of 14 games between Max Euwe and Paul Keres staged >

was staged

<in various cities in Holland (Amsterdam, Hilversum, The Hague and Rotterdam) >

I'd prefer the list after "cities", not "Holland".

<Prior to this match, Euwe and Keres had played five times since their first meeting in 1936. >

This implies they'd played 6 times. Maybe "Prior to this match, Euwe and Keres had played five times, with their first meeting in 1936."

< Euwe establishing an early two point lead>


<+5-1=0 in games 5 and 10.>

games 5 through 10.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <MissS> Well we could pick it up from the finish of the round-and-round over on <chessgames> forum.

What's wrong with putting the actual location as a comment in the PGN?

Or having an auxiliary Location tag in the PGN?

Please, be explicit in explaining the pros and cons you might anticipate.

Oh, and where is your authority derived from?

I tend to rely on actual de facto practices of <ChessBase> and <SCID>.

(What about <NIC>?)

But sure, let's put it to a vote. Might be telling.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: Let's see an example in action - <ChessBase>'s recent treatment of R10 in <Tata Steel (2016)>.

Here's a link to a game from the round:


This round was actually not played in <Wijk aan Zee>:

<The 10th round of the Tata Steel Masters was played in the Dutch Railway Museum (Spoorwegmuseum) in Utrecht. The round was opened by Utrecht mayor Jan van Zanen. >

I'll save you a click, here's the solution <ChessBase> came up with:


[Event "78th Tata Steel GpA"]
[Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]
[Date "2016.01.27"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Karjakin, Sergey"]
[Black "Adams, Mi"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2769"]
[BlackElo "2744"]
[ECO "A45"]
[EventDate "2016.01.15"]
[PlyCount "62"]


I'm just listing the PGN header tags as an example.

So, one can list all the tournament games as being played at the main site.

Which is more acceptable to me than <MissS>'s approach (since it keeps the tournament normalized), but <CB>'s PGN is both inaccurate, and slightly misleading.

But maybe <MissS> knows better how to normalize a tournament than <ChessBase>?

I would suggest <CG> might know better, by following the previously suggested examples.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: We've been down this road before... chessforum (kibitz #24166) chessforum (kibitz #24170)

and <MissS>'s misconceptions... chessforum (kibitz #24172)

and previous pronouncements: chessforum (kibitz #24177)

and my follow-up immediately thereafter: chessforum (kibitz #24178)

Premium Chessgames Member
  jnpope: Good question... is the SITE tag meant to be used for the game itself or is it tied to the EVENT tag? If you think the SITE is part of the EVENT then you can put all the cities involved in the SITE I guess; if you think the SITE tag is attached to the game itself, then the SITE tag should reflect the exact location(s) where that game was played.

Although is seems that all the tags are related to the game itself, not the event, i.e. the date is the date the game was played, not the starting date of the event (this is why there is a EventDate tag). But one could argue either side of this...

My personal preference is that the SITE tag should be game related, not EVENT related. You can use the EVENT tag to add multiple cities, i.e.:

[Event "Holland Match (Amsterdam, Hilversum, The Hague and Rotterdam)"]

[Site "Amsterdam NED"]

[Date "1940.01.03"]

[EventDate "?"]

[Round "8"]

Again, just my opinion (and I how I organize things so I can historically track where players were on specific dates).

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <jnpope> Well, the issue has been decided by SCID and ChessBase.

Try your proposed approach on a multi-city tournament, like <Tata Steel (2016)> and watch what happens.

I'll even prepare the PGN for you in the interest of doing "the experiment".

OK, suppose you have such a PGN.

What happens when you load it into <ChessBase>, or <SCID>, and attempt to generate a crosstable?


Again, I ask the same question from flip-side of the experiment.

Suppose you have a PGN prepared as I propose, using the inclusive Site tag, and a comment.

What is wrong with having the Site tag as "(various) NED" with a comment in the PGN indicating where the actual game was played?

Really, when you want to best communicate the locations of the games, you want this view:

R1-4, R6-9, R11-13 Wijk aan Zee

R5 Amsterdam

R10 Utrecht

Of course, one could imagine the tournament splitting into two groupings, each playing in different cities on the same day.

Just speaking hypothetically.

My approach is messy in this case, but not too much more than we've already discussed.

The other approach, putting the actual location in the Site tag, gets very messy in such a hypothetical case. I think the GameList window would be quite confusing in such a case.

Luckily, it has happened just yet. Or has it?

Premium Chessgames Member
  jnpope: A quick check of the 1994 specifications ( indicate that the SITE tag is indeed tied to the EVENT.

So using it in that fashion is clearly the "correct" way to use the tag. I use it incorrectly (per the spec), but logically for my own purposes.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <<jnpope> Good question... is the SITE tag meant to be used for the game itself or is it tied to the EVENT tag?>

As I've said many times, the two tags are connected if one wants to work with properly behaved tournaments, i.e. properly "normalized" tournaments.

In fact, the EventDate tag should also be included, but being so misunderstood, <SCID> and <ChessBase> aren't fully compliant.

There is a parallel between the dichotomy of the Date and EventDate tags that should have been mirrored in a Site and EventSite tag pair, but given a lack of foresight in 1994, wasn't.

If you don't understand the Date and EventDate tags, and want to gain more insight, I recommend reading Tim Harding's treatment here:

I suggest scrolling down to <Can We Extend/Improve/Replace PGN?> about 3/4's of the way down.

I'm trying to educate people in a similar fashion about the proper use of the Site tag.

It's a more difficult task, because the need is rarer, and the standard lacks the EventSite tag.

So, we have to compensate, while working within the working parameters of the database software, like <SCID> and <ChessBase>.

Premium Chessgames Member
  jnpope: Well, I just took a peek at game 14, Lasker-Steinitz 1894:

Wow, what a piece of dung the PGN tags are... WTH is Philadelfia? No mention of Montreal where the game was actually played??

I still prefer my method.

Premium Chessgames Member
  jnpope: <should have been mirrored in a Site and EventSite>

Agreed. However, given that Site is tied to Event perhaps there should be a revised/addition to the PGN spec with a GameSite tag? That way things would be backwards compatible... I don't recall the last time a tag was added to the specification (or who is running the PGN spec committee these days... Eric Schiller was part of it early on if I recall; anybody know who is part of the governing body in 2016?).

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: Yes, it's very natural to think about Site as being tied to the actual location.

This is a very unfortunate feature where the original standard is clearly lacking.

In principle, we could add extra tags that <CG> knows how to process for displaying individual games on a webpage.

Of course, one should try to avoid making design mistakes all over again.

* * * * *

One could even add some syntax in the comments for such purposes. I do this with stub games in Z-base.

There, I've added two extensions.

First, I've created a <Stub> tag for the PGN.

Second, I inject a <@stub - ...details..> comment into the pgn.


[Stub "missing game"]

{@stub - missing game}
1.e4 e5 ...


[Stub "forfeit"]

{@stub - forfeit by player XYZ}
1.e4 e5 ...

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <jnpope> Yes, I think <GameSite> is perhaps a good suggestion.

Actually, I like the look of it all the more just typing it out.

The trouble, at the moment, is outside of <CG> such a tag basically is invisible inside of <SCID> and <ChessBase>.

Which is OK, since they don't strip it out. They just carry it along.

That's why I suggest, at present, putting in a comment as well.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <jnpope> yes, <CG> has a lot of baggage, and poor tags.

So, you found a good example of a tournament needing retro-fitting.

But some patience is needed, as people are slowly learning the need for respecting the PGN properly.

* * * * *

If I may ask, what software are you using for your PGN?

Are you collecting your games into a great big database - like Megabase or MillBase?

Do you use your database software to generate crosstables (xtabs)?

Have you ever used a Tournament Finder window (as in SCID), or something similar in Chessbase?

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <Mark Weeks> utilizes the specific Site tag in the <Lasker--Steinitz (1894)> match:

R1-8 New York
R9-11 Philadelphia
R12-19 Montreal

Now, it's a match, and the xtab is I get from <SCID> when viewing the first game looks like this:

New York, 1894

Age Nat Score 12345678

1: Lasker Em 25 GER 5.0 / 8 1010==11 (+4 -2 =2)

2: Steinitz W 57 AUT 3.0 / 8 0101==00 (+2 -4 =2)


8 games: +5 =2 -1

So, it thinks only the first 8 games in NYC are part of the match-up.

Premium Chessgames Member
  jnpope: <what software are you using for your PGN>

I use ChessBase 6.01 still for game entry, then I modify the PGN manually before I add the games to my master database. For me, event driven sites are "worthless" so all of my Site tags are treated as GameSite tags and the Event tags contain all of the non-game data (per the example I gave before). I have never needed to generate historic crosstables, but I always need to track player locations.

I use various viewers and other software for analysis (currently Arena and a Rybka 4.1x64 engine) and Aart Bik's Chess for Android on my phone.

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <jnpope> thanks for that info.

Just wondering, if you don't generate xtabs, how do you verify the correctness of your PGN?

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: Like Moses and the stone tablets, there's SCID and the xtabs.

Xtabs, the correct path for the righteous.

Premium Chessgames Member
  jnpope: When I do it, I do it old school. I have Gaige's four volumes of tournament crosstables, various historic tournament books and of course access to all those wonderful magazines linked to in the CA library. So I cross check against historic sources on a per game basis as I do my data entry.
Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <jnpope> Ha, that's what I was afraid of!

Well, such a system clearly works well for you.

But here on <CG> we have a greater challenge, given the openness and scope of the project.

I'm just curious, do you have a rough estimate of how many games/tournaments are in your master database?

Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: BTW- for the record, I check <TWIC> for Mark's treatment of <Tata Steel (2016)>: (pgn download - grpa)

He follows the tournament source, and only uses Wijk aan Zee as the site for all the games.

Generally, <TWIC> is very good about keeping the tournaments normalized.

This makes sense to me, since it's really the only way to have precise accuracy, given the scope of the task.

Jump to page #   (enter # from 1 to 280)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 30 OF 280 ·  Later Kibitzing>

A free online guide presented by
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC