< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 22 OF 22 ·
|Dec-19-10|| ||bartonlaos: Give it up, Zygalski. You got caught and then tried to cover it up by listing the correct games. It won't work. No one here believes you anymore.|
<These are all top 1 percentile chess.com highest rateds, so not "extremely low-rated opponents". Another inaccuracy on your part.> Zygalski, it's called Chess.com's pool of online correspondence players. In that pool any patzer can have a high rating. It also exists for large OTB pools, such as USCF ratings. These ratings have relative strengths that are are slightly different than the FIDE rating. A USCF rating is about 100 points lower than a FIDE rating. And a Chess.com rating is about 100 points lower than a USCF rating. So it doesn't matter whether they are top 1% of a tight chesspool, all that matters is their relative strength. Her opponents were incredibly weak, by hundreds of points, relative to her own FIDE rating and especially considering her tournament experience.
So you've finally understood that. Good. It was a major error, and by doing that you manipulated the downstream interpretation of her results. Guilty before innocent. But instead of apologizing for your wrongdoing, you decide to stop talking about the batch that was analyzed, and instead cherry-pick a brand new game that wasn't analyzed to try to rescue your sunken position. It's not going to work.
That game you listed was played in the Two Knights Defense, an opening that is as familiar to any master as a milk is to a child. Yelena Dembo has probably had that opening mastered for at least 20 years, being a rated chessplayer since she was 3! In this game, Dembo followed Shcherbakov vs. Khismatullin Moscow. 2010.2.7. The results for black were equally devastating.
Top 1: 70%
Top 2: 75%
Top 3: 90%
Top 4: 100%
Houdini depth 20: http://www.freeimagehosting.net/upl...
That's from an entire game in a few hours, over the board, typical of the forcing nature of this opening, and also of Yelena's style. Why you are so exasperated about the fact that Yelena can do about 10-20% better given 2 to 6 days per move, free access to Chessbase, and an interactive digital board with which to practice lines and variations is beyond anyone's comprehension.
It's over, Zygalski. Crusading against Yelena is not doing anyone any good. You keep repeating your lost arguments, rallying against her for a topic that has nothing to do with Chessgames.com, and then chasing into her personal forum to make sure she reads your attacking posts. It's as if you have a personal axe to grind against a premium member. As such, your attempts should be considered as cyberstalking - see rule 4.
|Dec-19-10|| ||Zygalski: You're right bartonlaos, I lose.
Yelena's games were referred to chess.com staff & an International Master closed her account. Yelena can no longer play on that site. Clearly I was wrong!
|Jan-06-11|| ||dkappe1: <Zygalski> Which IM?|
I've been running some tests on games where opponents are mismatched by more than 600 points. I have to go to some other chess sites for that, as I haven't found many on chessgames.com.
The new rybka aquarium scripter makes running these sorts of analyses much easier.
In a small sample of 20 otb games, the average match rate (using the same methodology of the articles) for the higher rated player out beyond move 12 is over 90%.
Small sample. Not conclusive. But interesting enough to run a bigger test.
Heck, I might get a published paper on this illustrating the limits of automated cheat detection.
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." and there is a danger when amateurs blindly follow an algorithmic recipe proposed by an expert. "If she floats, she's a witch. If she drowns, she's innocent."
|Feb-10-11|| ||croco: @dkappe1: I can hardly imagine that a game between two players with such a rating discrepancy can last 20 moves out of the opening book to be included in your sample. Why do you need such a high rating gap? Are you saying that all the opponents Yelena encountered were below 1900 ELO?
Again, the matching rate is not the only factor, you can also count the average total error (and there is a paper comparing world chess champions which describes the method).|
Anyway, I think that the site in question withdrew any accusations. Or could not back them up.
|Mar-26-11|| ||Lennonfan: User<BARTONLAOS>directed me to this page....and i dont see your point old pal...and i can still only conclude one thing after reading the above posts.,...your OBSESSED with proving that ppl cheat,when all your accusations are baseless and i agree with user<zygalski>'s post..<bartonlaos> <is it possible for you to post on this thread without making personal attacks...i wonder?>...i dont think it is!!
Do you spend your entire time devoted to running games through chess engines,finding some moves agree with the players moves,then insinuate they've cheated??? Why dont you post one of your games up over at the cafe,and let some other engine anorak go through one of your games?? Your not gonna do that though are you? I wonder why!
Seriously mate,you know nothing about chess just computers.,,.so stick to the computers|
|Mar-28-11|| ||bartonlaos: <Lennonfan> You've inverted it completely, old chap. The ppl you agreed with were the ones obsessed with cheating.|
Here's an excerpt of what I had written:
<"The stronger the opponent, the greater their ability to find good moves, making it harder for you to find the clear winning lines. Conversely, the weaker is your opponent, the easier it is to maintain fidelity. This shows how erroneous it is to take engine-fidelity as any indication of 'cheating' without considering the Chess itself.
"Chess is just so much more complex than the percentages from the Top 3 method can show that each game must be analyzed as a whole, and the evaluations for each candidate need to be considered before anything can be assumed about the player's choices involved. As for analyzing or interpreting what the percentages mean?? Without the proper controls any percentage you get from analyzing those games is arbitrary."
|Mar-28-11|| ||Lennonfan: Not interested in your excerpts..no one else is either!
Everyone's said their piece regarding you and your opinions on here<BART>....night night...the nurse will be round soon lol|
|Apr-02-11|| ||Cmb: The cheats on chess.com do not always cheat, so in some cases you might find games with close to 100% of the first choice computer (e.g Houdini, Rybka, Stockfish)
moves - and even if the accusations are true I find it much more likely that a titled GM would have such results. I think that since chess.com do not allow for an Arbiter to ajourn games the rules are wrong with reference to paying cheaters, especially if they have a string of non-computer games to support their claims to innocence. This has happened to me on chess.com, my opponent had a history of games with 100% accuracy, then some games played without any obvious computer use.|
|Apr-03-11|| ||Zygalski: Well I haven't even viewed this page in quite some time.|
I see that <Bartonlaos> is still up to his old nonsense, trying to recruit people to post in this thread (which seems to have back-fired badly) whilst arguing that others are obsessed with this issue.
International Master David Pruess closed Yelena's chess.com account and as I keep saying, <engine match rate statistics were used by volunteers as a starting point to suggest possible engine users for chess.com staff to investigate. It is not known what methods chess.com use to determine if there is overwhelming evidence that a member has consulted an engine in their games. chess.com refuse to release their own cheat detection methodology.>
Some simple minds on here seem confused by the oft-repeated statement & I can't really understand why.
I personally suspect chess.com use average error analysis, which I think is better than the rather simplistic top 4 match rate methodology & have so stated on several occasions.
I also think they may use a Page Viewer Log in combination with their undiscolsed methods.
A PVL could provide valuable circumstantial evidence. For instance, it would show a suspected cheat logging into site, viewing their games, pulling down PGN/FEN then moving in these games. It would record dates & times of all the activity by that user.
If a suspect repeatedly pulls down PGN/FEN then moves in complex and/or balanced positions in their games moments later, whilst also matching an engines preferred choices, this would be extremely compelling circumstantial evidence.
|Apr-03-11|| ||bartonlaos: Hi <Zygalski>.
I don't have any desire to revisit the dead horse. This guy thought I had accused him of cheating when one of his 40+ move games registered something like 65% 88% 100% on the Top 3 method 20dHou1.5.
I explained to him that this isn't what happened, and directed him to this thread to read more about what the top 3 method represents. He didn't comprehend it though, which is why he gave such a heated response that I had also been accusing Dembo - hence the necessity for me to clarify what it all means.
|Apr-03-11|| ||wanabe2000: At the 2011 European Individual Championship (Mixed), behind Judit Polgar's third place performance, the best finish by a woman was Yelena Dembo with 6.5/11 points: http://chess-results.com/tnr45941.a.... Congratulations on a fine show!|
|Dec-08-11|| ||brankat: Happy Birthday Yelena!|
|Dec-08-11|| ||whiteshark: Many happy returns of the Day, <Yelena>!|
|Dec-08-11|| ||wuvmuffin72: Happy Birthday Yelena Dembo!
I hope you write a repertoire book for Black in the Classical Sicilian one day!
|Dec-08-11|| ||Stonehenge: Happy Birthday :)|
|Dec-08-12|| ||whiteshark: Happy Birthday <Yelena>. Hope you have a great Day!|
|Dec-08-12|| ||brankat: Best wishes for Your Birthday!|
|Apr-14-13|| ||Yelena Dembo: Thank you, guys! :) Best wishes!|
|Apr-16-13|| ||HeMateMe: Nice hat, Yelena! Your bio says your first chess tournament took place before you were four years old--do you remember playing chess at that age?|
|Jun-27-14|| ||independentthinker: I am very impressed with the games on Yelena's website. The first example in her 'wins over grandmasters' is simple chess at its best. Very impressive. Hope she takes all of her training and makes a book for Quality Chess like 'chess lessons'|
|Dec-08-14|| ||waustad: Happy b'day!|
|Nov-15-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: Nice photo of Yelena - she looks a little like Mayim Bialik from the Big Bang Theory|
|May-22-16|| ||ketchuplover: She is a trainer at https://chessrex.com|
|Jun-05-16|| ||ketchuplover: I won 2 hours of training with her but decided to pass it on to someone else at chessrex|
|Jun-30-16|| ||ketchuplover: chessrex appears infected for me at least in firefox browser|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 22 OF 22 ·