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

H Runde 
Photograph copyright © 2007 Raymond Boger.  
Hans Arild Runde
Number of games in database: 19
Years covered: 1997 to 2008
Last FIDE rating: 1988
Highest rating achieved in database: 2054
Overall record: +7 -5 =7 (55.3%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games
      Based on games in the database; may be incomplete.

Repertoire Explorer
Most played openings
B29 Sicilian, Nimzovich-Rubinstein (2 games)

Search Sacrifice Explorer for Hans Arild Runde
Search Google for Hans Arild Runde
FIDE player card for Hans Arild Runde

(born Jul-07-1972, 42 years old) Norway

[what is this?]
Contributor to as User: frogbert. Fan of Magnus Carlsen since 2001. From April 2008 to August 2011, Runde maintained an unofficial version of live FIDE ratings of leading grandmasters at

On January 1, 2010, Henrik Carlsen wrote "We would also like to thank the many chess enthusiasts contributing to chess as spectators and commentators, ..., chess blogs (with significant contributions from for instance Hans Arild Runde ...)". (Source:

 page 1 of 1; 19 games  PGN Download 
Game  ResultMoves Year Event/LocaleOpening
1. H Runde vs A Groenn  ½-½55 1997 ASKOs KM , gr. AB06 Robatsch
2. O Hole vs H Runde  ½-½41 2000 ASKOs HTA04 Reti Opening
3. H Runde vs T Gabrielsen  0-146 2001 ASKOs PinseB03 Alekhine's Defense
4. C F Ekeberg vs H Runde  ½-½66 2001 Teams East 00/01, 1. divA11 English, Caro-Kann Defensive System
5. H Runde vs K Stokke  1-051 2002 Troll MastersB27 Sicilian
6. Carlsen vs H Runde 1-032 2002 Astlandserien 01/02 div. 1, ASKO II - AskerB29 Sicilian, Nimzovich-Rubinstein
7. E Hagesaether vs H Runde  ½-½56 2002 NOR Ch RorosA08 King's Indian Attack
8. H Runde vs S Johannessen 0-126 2002 Teams East 01/02, 1.div.B47 Sicilian, Taimanov (Bastrikov) Variation
9. H Runde vs B Thanke  1-043 2002 Teams East 01/02, 1.div.B86 Sicilian, Fischer-Sozin Attack
10. H Runde vs M Jensen 1-024 2003 ASKOs KM , gr. AB14 Caro-Kann, Panov-Botvinnik Attack
11. B Thanke vs H Runde 0-138 2003 NOR Team Champ , OpenB29 Sicilian, Nimzovich-Rubinstein
12. H Runde vs B Egede-Nissen  ½-½69 2005 Teams East 04/05, 2.divB01 Scandinavian
13. G Henriksen vs H Runde 0-146 2005 NOR Team Champ , OpenE13 Queen's Indian, 4.Nc3, Main line
14. H Runde vs N A Mellem  1-042 2005 ASKOs KM , gr. AB41 Sicilian, Kan
15. H Borchgrevink vs H Runde  ½-½52 2006 NOR Team ChampE12 Queen's Indian
16. O Hole vs H Runde  ½-½34 2006 ASKOs KM , Gr AD43 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
17. K Trygstad vs H Runde  1-060 2006 Teams East 05/06, 1. divB43 Sicilian, Kan, 5.Nc3
18. J Jansson vs H Runde 1-050 2007 NOR Team ChampE15 Queen's Indian
19. H Runde vs O C Moen 1-038 2008 Norwegian Club ChampionshipC78 Ruy Lopez
 page 1 of 1; 19 games  PGN Download 
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Runde wins | Runde loses  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 215 OF 243 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Feb-18-12  achieve: <frogbert> Apologies for not answering your response at Dom's a few weeks ago, also regarding the solitaire chess, but I had some issues to deal with at that moment and later found that you had already answered through Buro. He ain't all that bad at solving puzzles.

Good to see you active on many fronts and offer some deep analysis.

I even went to the lengths of trying to compose my own 8-men problem, then exhausted threw the pieces back in the box!

But a belated thanks for introducing that addictive and interesting game.

Feb-19-12  frogbert: no worries, achieve. apparently it can be rather addictive: when my father (rated 1400 in norway, at least equivalent to ca 1600 fide) visited last month, he solved all 60 puzzles in the box before he left. :o)
Feb-20-12  frogbert: shams, the past kibitzing info you get for a certain user covers a specific numbers of recent post, but limited to max 10 different forums. hence, if i spread all my kibitzes over 4-5 forums over a long enough period of time (to produce the necessary number of posts - i haven't bothered to figure out the exact number although it wouldn't be very hard), then only 4-5 forums will show up.

if you're really curious about the number, you can post bogus posts in your own chessforum (and clean up afterwards) until your chess forum is the only thing that shows up in your list. then count the posts. or you could simply ask on the forum. :o)

Feb-24-12  frogbert: i've created a new "tool" that makes it easier to "edit" posts, i.e. to copy and change a post, deleting the original and posting again, when you realized that you forgot something, made a silly spelling mistake, etc.

see my profile and chessforum for more details.

enjoy. :o)

Premium Chessgames Member
  Bureaucrat: Your new tool is cool. It also makes your "broken link converter" somewhat redundant :-).

Only one thing: At first I thought the links to the posts were displayed <below> the posts, but then I realized that they were on top of the posts... That somehow wasn't intuitive to me. I don't have any great ideas on how to improve the design, though. Perhaps if the grey line on top of the posts included the date and the link:

Feb-24-12 chessforum

I think the text about copying links could be removed.

No real need to change anything, though, as those are minor issues. I will definitely be using the new tool :-).

Premium Chessgames Member
  Bureaucrat: There ya go... the link I posted was converted to a "CG link". To see the message the way I wrote it, use the unparser :-D
Feb-24-12  frogbert: <It also makes your "broken link converter" somewhat redundant >

certainly. i just haven't come to removing it yet, and i also need to see if the new one works properly first. :o)

<At first I thought the links to the posts were displayed <below> the posts, but then I realized that they were on top of the posts... That somehow wasn't intuitive to me. I don't have any great ideas on how to improve the design, though.>

i guess you simply need to rtfm - i actually pointed out <where> the link was in the description on the forum. ;o)

<I think the text about copying links could be removed.>

yeah, probably. just wanted to make that feature abundantly clear for "new users". :o)

seemingly you had few problems figuring out how to use it, but then you're probably among the sharper knives around here, too. but it should be really simple, i think.

Feb-24-12  frogbert: i added a couple of borders and moved the date, but i'm not sure the latter makes a big difference. the borders possibly help a little to make it clear(er) to which post the link belongs. anyway. instead of spending more time on this, i really need to force myself to complete the f.a.q. for the other presumedly more widely appealing "tool". ;o)

however, before that - "real" work. :o)

Premium Chessgames Member
  Bureaucrat: <i added a couple of borders and moved the date, but i'm not sure the latter makes a big difference.>

The new design looks good!

<i guess you simply need to rtfm - i actually pointed out <where> the link was in the description on the forum. ;o)>

Yes, I did notice, eventually. My method:

1) Try it out
2) Figure it out
3) Read your explanations

Unlike my dad, who always reads the manual <before> trying anything at all, I like to push buttons first and read later.

Feb-24-12  frogbert: i guess i'm somewhere inbetween. i like finding out how things work on my own, but i also enjoy reading manuals :o)
Premium Chessgames Member
  nimh: Here are five easiest three-movers from that do not end in mate and have at least 25 solving attempts.

click for larger view

1. Rxe8 Rxe8 2. Qxe8+ Qxe8 3. Rxe8+ *

click for larger view

1... Rxc2 2. Rxc2 Rxc2 3. Qxc2 Qxe3 *

click for larger view

1. Rxd8 Rxd8 2. Rxd8 Qxd8 3. Qxf7+ *

click for larger view

1. Rd8+ Kb7 2. Nd6+ Kc6 3. Nxf7 Nxf7 *

click for larger view

1... Rxd5 2. Rxd5 Qxd5 3. Qxd5 Rxd5 *

And five hardest puzzles, also 3 moves long:

click for larger view

1. Qd1 Bf6 2. Rxh5 Qxh5 3. Nxc8 *

click for larger view

1... Be2+ 2. Kg2 Qd3 3. Rh2 Qxd2 *

click for larger view

1. Raxf6+ Kh5 2. Ra6 Rxg2+ 3. Kxg2 *

click for larger view

1. Be5 Qh6 2. d6 Rd4 3. Bxd4 *

click for larger view

1. Ra3 Bxe5 2. Rxc4 Re8 3. Rxd3 *

Where's the difference? Has it something to do with the amount of material, or the symmetry? Hardly, the average material is 50.05 for easiest and 44.85 for hardest puzzles. Neither is symmetry the cause, as the average amount of material in symmetry is bigger for more difficult problems; 3.6 - 4.2. The difference between two best moves is in all puzzles large and almost identical on average for both sets; 4.33 - 4.23.

Remarkably, both Stockfish and Rybka were able to spot the best moves and winning advantage in less than 1 second for all puzzles. For engines the difficulty is virtually nonexistent.

So, what factors make some puzzles more difficult than the other ones? What do you see?

Feb-26-12  frogbert: is that a rhetorical question, nimh?

to me, and for a human, it's rather clear why the easy ones are easy - they all had one single, simple theme where the execution was essentially "taking many times on the same square" and collect/win material. except the last one, where you force the king into a fork and win material.

neither of the hard ones had any "bang-bang-bang" sequence of straight-forward moves, imo.

however, if you're asking how we can use an engine (or our own specially crafted heuristic) to differentiate between these scenarios, i have no experience or knowledge to offer at the moment. but i guess you might have?

Premium Chessgames Member
  nimh: I want to find out which specific move features make it harder for humans to find them. There's nothing rhetorical here. Also it's not about anything related to engines.

You mentioned two factors

1) repeated captures on the same square
2) the occurrence of one simple theme

Very good, can you name any more of them, frogbert? anyone?

Here are three puzzles, all 17 moves long, yet easier than the five most difficult three-movers posted above.

click for larger view

click for larger view

click for larger view


Mar-10-12  Blunderdome:

click for larger view

Black to play. According to Nalimov, only one move holds the draw. Anyone want to venture a guess?

Mar-11-12  frogbert: finally a live rating update from me again:

<if> all the 4 team games i played against fide-rated players in the 2011-2012 season will be sent to fide for rating, then my fide rating of may 2012 will be 2054. (if only the two games from the national league will be rated, it'll be 2045. ;o)

since patzers like me are rated with a k of 15, my actual *live* fide rating is 2053,95 before rounding. :o)

Premium Chessgames Member
  KKDEREK: your best ever? :o)
Do you have plans to get some fide title? You are not that far from it..
Mar-11-12  frogbert: far away from any title that have any meaning, imho. and at a rate of around 10 classical (rated) games per year i should be happy to maintain my skills/rating at the current level.

btw, i've never been serious about improving at chess - even as a student i played only 25-30 games per year (at most) and spent more time organizing chess and otherwise helping with stuff in the club than actually studying chess. when i occasionally pick a chess book from the shelf these days, it's just because i enjoy reading about stuff, not because i have any ambition of improving. my "chess career" (as a player) was basically over before it started, since i put my feet in a chess club for the first time when i was 20. :o)

Mar-19-12  frogbert: copy of post


<I don't envy <cg>'s job trying to keep the peace...and they are trying.>

yes, they probably are, but there are a couple of problems.

1) they are seemingly understaffed, at least in some sense.

2) the available tools and the "technical" structure of the site (forums, pages) make it hard to handle the kind of issues we're seeing; maybe a more distributed form of "moderation" could've been implementable if there was more structure to build it upon.

3) the apparant tendency to "reward" those who make the most noise in the (regardless of reason) does not scale very well - it inevitably leads to more new issues than it solves.

4) it appears that a more revolutional "root cause analysis" might be needed, where one is willing to rethink a couple of factors that currently seem to be outside the scope of consideration.

returning to us, the users and kibitzers of this site, i think there are a few things most of us would do good to consider. most of the problems i observe around here are due to the following, imo:

1) there seems to be a worrying lack of tolerance for people who hold different opinions and beliefs than oneself, and way too many arguments go personal instead of focusing on the topic of debate. discuss what the other kibitzers say and argue, not who you think they are and what you assume are their motives. (because a) you don't know, and b) it's inflammatory)

2) there also seems to be a considerable tendency for passing judgment and making accusations instead of giving others the benefit of the doubt or leaving room/time for people to change their ways. there aren't bad people or good people - we're all human beings and we do good things most of the time and bad things some of the time. the big majority tries to do their best most of the time.

3) if all of us would mainly watch ourselves and make sure to keep our own path clean, we could safely leave to the site administration to take care of the few missteps that people are bound to make. we don't need private lynch mobs, "troops" or "site patrols" who think it's their task to take care of "unwanted behaviour". we don't need their cheerleaders either. those initiatives make the problem worse, not better; blow the whistle or write an email to the admins and *accept* what they choose to do (or not do) about it.

4) and if you absolutely need to interfere with how other people here behave, then try watching your *friends' behaviour* and be a friendly corrective for those who already respect and believe in you. if you can't convince a friend to change his/her ways, you can forget about making someone you openly despise listen to what you have to say.

those were my 2 cents.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Bureaucrat: Excellent post.
Premium Chessgames Member
  MarkFinan: Hey Frogbert, its me nemesistic iv'e just changed my username to my real name... Am i still okay to post the odd "immortal" here? ;)
Mar-21-12  frogbert: even normal chess games, like the ones we mortals play, are welcome. :o)

btw, i hope you've read the post of mine above/below from march 19th. being my friend *might* result in honest and sincere comments, also on other things than your chess games. but if you're up for it, then no problem!

Premium Chessgames Member
  MarkFinan: Oh...Im up for it alright :)
Premium Chessgames Member
  MarkFinan: BTW, what happened to Rogge's forum? I liked that guy.
Mar-21-12  frogbert: nothing happened, he simply keeps it clean. technically he considers it an area for pms (private messages, not prime ministers). hence, don't invest too heavily in posts there, unless you make copies or don't care if everything's suddenly gone tomrrow. :o)
Premium Chessgames Member
  MarkFinan: No i don't care about that, im not trying to rack up a post count, its just i looked a few days ago and there was the "There is no kibitzing on this page yet" message!

And you've lost me with Prime Minister's... Tell me another time lol ;)

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 243)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 215 OF 243 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, 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, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other users.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific player and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!

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 | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2014, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies