chessgames.com

K Rogoff 
Photograph courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.  
Kenneth Rogoff
Number of games in database: 132
Years covered: 1968 to 2012
Last FIDE rating: 2505
Overall record: +38 -29 =64 (53.4%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games
      Based on games in the database; may be incomplete.
      1 exhibition game, odds game, etc. is excluded from this statistic.

MOST PLAYED OPENINGS
With the White pieces:
 English (10) 
    A15 A13 A18 A16 A19
 Sicilian (8) 
    B21 B23 B38 B30 B85
 Ruy Lopez (7) 
    C68 C95 C65 C88 C97
 English, 1 c4 e5 (5) 
    A20 A29 A22
 King's Indian (5) 
    E62 E74 E63 E60
 English, 1 c4 c5 (5) 
    A30 A34 A36
With the Black pieces:
 Sicilian (12) 
    B93 B30 B60 B52 B85
 Caro-Kann (11) 
    B17 B10 B12 B13
 English, 1 c4 c5 (9) 
    A30 A34 A33
 Sicilian Najdorf (5) 
    B93
Repertoire Explorer

NOTABLE GAMES: [what is this?]
   K Rogoff vs R Blumenfeld, 1976 1-0
   Huebner vs K Rogoff, 1972 1/2-1/2
   K Rogoff vs Bisguier, 1974 1/2-1/2
   K Rogoff vs Smejkal, 1976 1-0
   Huebner vs K Rogoff, 1976 1/2-1/2
   K Rogoff vs Timman, 1971 1-0
   K Rogoff vs Ulf Andersson, 1976 1/2-1/2
   Reshevsky vs K Rogoff, 1978 0-1
   Geller vs K Rogoff, 1976 1/2-1/2
   K Rogoff vs Gulko, 1976 1/2-1/2

NOTABLE TOURNAMENTS: [what is this?]
   US Championship (1974)
   Lone Pine (1976)
   Biel Interzonal (1976)
   Lone Pine (1978)

GAME COLLECTIONS: [what is this?]
   Ken Rogoff Chess Highlights by GumboGambit
   US Championship 1974 by Phony Benoni

Search Sacrifice Explorer for Kenneth Rogoff
Search Google for Kenneth Rogoff
FIDE player card for Kenneth Rogoff


KENNETH ROGOFF
(born Mar-22-1953) United States of America

[what is this?]
Kenneth Saul Rogoff learned chess from his father at age 6, but took up the game in earnest when he got a chess set for his 13th birthday. He was soon recognised as a chess prodigy. By age 14, he was a USCF master and New York State Open Champion, and shortly thereafter became a senior master, the highest US national title. At sixteen Rogoff dropped out of high school to concentrate on chess, and spent the next several years living primarily in Europe and playing in tournaments there. However, at eighteen he made the decision to go to college and pursue a career in economics rather than to become a professional player, although he continued to play and improve for several years afterward.

Rogoff was awarded the IM title in 1974, and the GM title in 1978. He came third in the World Junior Championship of 1971 and finished second in the US Championship of 1975, which doubled as a Zonal competition, one-half point behind Walter Shawn Browne; this result qualified him for the 1976 Interzonal at Biel, where he finished 13-15th. In other tournaments he finished equal first at Norristown 1973 and Orense 1976.

Early in his economics career, Rogoff served as chief economist at the International Monetary Fund and also at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. He is currently the Thomas D. Cabot Professor of Public Policy and Professor of Economics at Harvard University.

Rogoff's biography in his own words: http://www.economics.harvard.edu/fa...; Rogoff's game against Magnus Carlsen in August 2012 in New York: http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp...; Article by Rogoff in Chessbase titled <Rogoff on innovation, unemployment, inequality and dislocation> with particular reference to professional chess: http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp...

Wikipedia article: Kenneth Rogoff


 page 1 of 6; games 1-25 of 132  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves Year Event/LocaleOpening
1. Larsen vs K Rogoff ½-½35 1968 Canadian OpenA02 Bird's Opening
2. K Rogoff vs A H Williams ½-½106 1969 World Junior Championship, B FinalA56 Benoni Defense
3. E M Green vs K Rogoff ½-½37 1969 World Junior ChB12 Caro-Kann Defense
4. K Rogoff vs S Spencer 1-020 1969 US Jnr ChpB15 Caro-Kann
5. J Durao vs K Rogoff 0-130 1970 MalagaB93 Sicilian, Najdorf, 6.f4
6. H Pfleger vs K Rogoff  1-059 1970 WchT U26 17thA58 Benko Gambit
7. K Rogoff vs Z Vranesic  0-148 1970 Ontario opB83 Sicilian
8. Ljubojevic vs K Rogoff 1-029 1971 MalagaB50 Sicilian
9. K Rogoff vs L Day ½-½21 1971 World Student OlympiadA15 English
10. K Rogoff vs Timman 1-048 1971 Malaga 11/138B08 Pirc, Classical
11. Ulf Andersson vs K Rogoff 1-036 1971 OlotB93 Sicilian, Najdorf, 6.f4
12. E Paoli vs K Rogoff 1-026 1971 Liberation tournB06 Robatsch
13. V Tukmakov vs K Rogoff  1-042 1971 Liberation tournD93 Grunfeld, with Bf4 & e3
14. J Durao vs K Rogoff  0-165 1971 MalagaB93 Sicilian, Najdorf, 6.f4
15. Karpov vs K Rogoff 1-026 1971 06, Mayaguez tt-studA22 English
16. K Rogoff vs V Tukmakov 1-041 1972 WchT U26 19th fin-AB21 Sicilian, 2.f4 and 2.d4
17. K Rogoff vs Adorjan 1-030 1972 Graz Stu ttB30 Sicilian
18. Huebner vs K Rogoff ½-½12 1972 WchT U26 19th fin-AA15 English
19. K Rogoff vs Suttles 0-147 1973 Ottawa op-CANB06 Robatsch
20. E Paoli vs K Rogoff 0-139 1973 NorristownB06 Robatsch
21. Pilnik vs K Rogoff  0-156 1973 NorristownB81 Sicilian, Scheveningen, Keres Attack
22. L Day vs K Rogoff  ½-½23 1973 CAN-opA07 King's Indian Attack
23. K Rogoff vs K Commons  1-042 1974 US ChampionshipD47 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
24. Benko vs K Rogoff ½-½30 1974 US ChampionshipB30 Sicilian
25. J Grefe vs K Rogoff  ½-½30 1974 US ChampionshipC73 Ruy Lopez, Modern Steinitz Defense
 page 1 of 6; games 1-25 of 132  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Rogoff wins | Rogoff loses  
 

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2655 OF 5709 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: previous post continued

The astute observer will recognize that most countries operate under an economic model that is a blend of more than 1 economic theory. I won't write a dissertation here to support this, as I consider it a truism recognizable to any diligent student of real-world economies.

My point is that, as america emerged from an economic model that was sort of a blend of colonialism/mercantilism during its youth as a country, it operated economically in a way that followed Austrian economics to a varying extent depending on which aspect of the economy one cares to dissect. As you must surely know, this facilitated a stupendous growth in this country in technical know how, wealth, and eventually, standard of living for the average worker.

This period was characterized by such government policies as small deficits, small and non-permanent government debt levels, and quite a bit simpler legal codes at all levels of government and in nearly all aspects of the legal system.

More to the point, though, is that recessions tended to be short-lived prior to the adoption of government intervention as the norm for addressing recessions [frequently referred to as "panics" in the histories of the times before FDR]. Correlation is not causation, but it certainly begs the question of "why for the last 80 years have we repeatedly tried to address bad economic times with the very same measures that have proven time and again to be not so effective?"

We don't need government stepping in to maintain "aggregate demand" during times of recession. What we need is for government to get out of the way of the role recessions play, which is to wipe out malinvestments in order to clear a path for the entrepreneurship of our citizens to restore economic health.

The very heart of "aggregate demand" is almost to say that people will sit by and starve to death during bad times, unless the government leads them to save themselves! Which came first, people or government? people, of course.

And we won't wait around starving during a recession until the government steps in! No! We pick ourselves up and keep plugging along. It happened before Keynesianism came along, and it will happen after Keynesianism is discarded in the dustbin of history.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  cormier: <<<<<<<1 Kings 19:11 The LORD said, “Go out and stand on the mountain in the presence of the LORD, for the LORD is about to pass by.”>

Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before the LORD, but the LORD was not in the wind.> After the wind there was an earthquake, but the LORD was not in the earthquake.> 12 After the earthquake came a fire, but the LORD was not in the fire. And after the fire came a gentle whisper.> 13 When Elijah heard it, he pulled his cloak over his face and went out and stood at the mouth of the cave.>

Then a voice said to him, “What are you doing here, Elijah?”>

14 He replied, “I have been very zealous for the LORD God Almighty.>

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: <thegoodanarchist>: The view that panics, recessions, crises, or whatever you want to call them are a necessary part of the economic environment is at best oldthink, and at worst a coverup for the evils and evildoers of capitalism. If you had a car that broke down and required a new engine every ten thousand miles, you wouldn't say that it was a way to "wipe out [malfunction] in order to clear a path [...] to restore [mechanical] health." No, you would file a case with the Consumer Protection Agency.
Dec-15-11  King Death: A little more on Social Security's race headlong toward the cliff:

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/12...

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: <King Death: A little more on Social Security's race headlong toward the cliff>

2036? This is a "headlong race" that won't reach the finish for a quarter of a century? A looming disaster, assuming we don't do anything about it for the next *25* years?

That's practically the same time scale as global warming. I'm waiting with bated breath.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: "War is over, if you want it"... John Lennon.
Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: <tga: it would be an understatement to say that the practice of using government spending to bolster aggregate demand approaches the level of being a religion among the politicians of these countries.>

Not to mention the voters.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: China has hit back. They've put a 21% tax tarrif on USA cars exported for sale in China. We had put a tarriff on the tires they sell us.

We thought they were "dumping" cheap solar panels on the USA, ruining out fledgling green power industry.

In the past, our response was usually enough to get some changes made, without further hostilities. This may be a permanent state of agression.

<http://news.yahoo.com/china-gets-re...>

Dec-15-11  King Death: <OhioChessFan: I'm not sure what I'm on record with per teachers and the future of this country, but here's a review. In general, the quality of teacher in the USA is simply pathetic...>

There are some who fit this description, no question, but the education system itself is pretty sad. American students don't get trained to use their heads any more. It's all about making their 4.0 or going 1600 on the SATs, not succeeding in real life.

<...The people who can't get a degree in anything else in college end up in education...>

And I thought that distinction went to majors like political science and English, two likely roads to the un(der)employment line even when things were better.

<...I think high tech has brought forth an irrevocable and negative change in the work force...>

There have been other forces at work here. Before high tech grabbed its piece of the stage, many people were brainwashed with the idea that blue collar jobs were infra dig and that they had to go to college to amount to anything.

<...not eveyrone is above average. Not everyone is college material. Not everyone is capable of working in high tech...>

True, but one fallacy of today's education is that nobody's self esteem can even be bruised. In sheltering them from disappointments that are part of life, we're doing today's students a disservice. They often can't cope with real problems when faced with them.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: <tga: The astute observer will recognize that most countries operate under an economic model that is a blend of more than 1 economic theory.>

Beyond the command driven models, there is a disconnect between politics and economics. The US hardly has an economic model since the total picture is a hodge podge of mostly political driven short term band aids.

<Correlation is not causation, but it certainly begs the question of "why for the last 80 years have we repeatedly tried to address bad economic times with the very same measures that have proven time and again to be not so effective?">

People who get their politics from.....I don't know where.....aren't aware of the repeated failures of the very system they are espousing. If they are made aware, they deny the obvious and find some excuse. Sort of like the communists' explanation of 30 years in a row of bad weather to explain their 30 years in a row of poor agricultural production.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Softpaw: <thegoodanarchist: My point is that, as america emerged from an economic model that was sort of a blend of colonialism/mercantilism ...>

1)When are you claiming that the U.S. "emerged" from a period of "colonial/mercantilism".

2) How and why did the U.S. benefit from this period? How essential was it that America was originally part of the British Empire, which was a state-militarist-economic entity? How important was the investment of the British Imperial profits into the U.S. economy?

3) Are you recognizing that America's government-led imperial westward expansion, government protection of infant industries via tariffs, trade restrictions etc., government involvement in massive infrastructure development (railroads, canals etc.)and so on, were essential to U.S. economic development?

< [the U.S.] operated economically in a way that followed Austrian economics..">

1) What period precisely do you claim the to be the golden age of U.S. Austrian economics?

2) What were those supposed Austrian economic policies in that period?

<More to the point, though, is that recessions tended to be short-lived prior to the adoption of government intervention as the norm for addressing recessions [frequently referred to as "panics" in the histories of the times before FDR].>

Did Keynseian policies lead to the Great Depression?

Why did (neo) Keynseianism become adopted almost worldwide (outside the Socialist Bloc and a few other regions) and why was it perceived to be so successful and universally lauded?

Why did (neo)Keynsianism come into near universal discredit in the late seventies and how did it eventually become superceded by "monetarism" (briefly), then neoliberalsm and "free market fundamentalism"?

How did the anti-Keynseian "Washington Consensus" come into being, and how did its imposition on many nations across the world, via IMF "structural adjustment" programs, World Bank development schemes etc, work out for those nations?

<We don't need government stepping in to maintain "aggregate demand" during times of recession. What we need is for government to get out of the way of the role recessions play, which is to wipe out malinvestments in order to clear a path for the entrepreneurship of our citizens to restore economic health.">

That is familar rhetoric, of course. Can you back it up with any logical arguments and empirical evidence?

Finally, why are most (all) developed nations right now pushing for budget cutbacks, wage reductions, worker "flexibility", cutbacks in pensions and health care, shifting taxes to the middle and lower classes-- in a word, "austerity" -- RATHER THAN following the prescriptions of such modern day "Keynseians" as Joseph Stigler, Paul Krugman et al.??

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Softpaw: <johnlspouge: < <Softpaw> I found your exegesis on capital interesting and useful. Even to my naive perspective, however, the problem of quantification is much more fundamental in economics and not just restricted to capital.>

I agree completely. I just chose "capital" because it is the central concept in "capitalism", yet almost no one can give it a coherent defintion, let alone show how such an entity can be quantified.

It would take several volumes to cover all the problems of economic quantification , not to mention the absurd behavioral and psychological premises the whole theoretical structure of mainstream economics is built upon.

Modern economics prides itself as being a "hard science", superior to such lower creatures as political science and sociology. But it is light-years away from being a "hard science" because of three interconnected issues:

1) Quantification problems

2) The absurd premises need to extract simplistic *economic* models out of complex and chaotic *social* systems (i.e. the untenable separation of economics from political an social forces)

3)The unavoidable inclusion of multiple unscientific, unfalsifiable value-judgments all through economic theory, however dressed up in the garb of value-free logic and mathematics.

Dec-15-11  Colonel Mortimer: "US lawmakers vote on indefinite detention"

US politicians are now the property of the highest bidder. No longer can one speak about the 'land of the free' without looking like a buffoon.

Welcome to the new world order my American cousins, the new militant pseudo-christian corporatocracy is at your service for this short trip to Armageddon.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/fe...

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Softpaw: <Correlation is not causation, but it certainly begs the question of "why for the last 80 years have we repeatedly tried to address bad economic times with the very same measures that have proven time and again to be not so effective?">

Actually, very different measures have been tried over the last 80 years, and some have been very effective-- so your premise just isn't true.

I don't see how you can fail to recognize the historic shift away from (neo) Keynseian orthodoxy and the ascendancy of neoliberalism ("market-fundamentalism", neo-classical economics).

You write as if that historic shift never happened and that Milton Friedman, Paul Volcker, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Obama, the "Washington Consensus", the EU "troika" of the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund etc. never existed.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: ^^^
Why do you read this sensationalistic crap, <Mort>? From your newspaper, above:

<A new US law will declare the world a battlefield, making virtually anyone vulnerable to indefinite military detention.>

After terrorists get in a few lucky shots, people hit back. I suppose the above newspaper also decried the commando raid a couple of months back, that killed Bin Laden, right?

How can you read such garbage?

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Shams: Oil, protectionism and the Great Norwegian Butter Crisis of 2011: http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...

Sounds like the black market high-water mark thus far is... $740 USD for one box. http://www.colbertnation.com/the-co...

Dec-15-11  Colonel Mortimer: <HeMateMe:> <Why do you read this sensationalistic crap>

Habeas corpus is a fundamental legal principal that your politicians are legislating out of common law and you think that's 'sensational'. In one sense of the word I agree with you.

<HeMateMe:> <How can you read such garbage?> Al Jazeera is many levels above the @#$%ty corporate journalism you get in the States.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: <Mort> Where do you get your daily info--The National Enquirer? The Daily Mail?
Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Shams: <Colonel Mortimer><Habeas corpus is a fundamental legal principal that your politicians are legislating out of common law>

Hey, show some respect to our Judicial Branch, please. It's working just as hard as Congress and the Executive to abolish habeas rights.

Dec-15-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  johnlspouge: < <Softpaw> wrote: [snip] 3)The unavoidable inclusion of multiple unscientific, unfalsifiable value-judgments all through economic theory, however dressed up in the garb of value-free logic and mathematics. >

I agree. <patzer2> would have made a great economics teacher.

Thanks for your views. They saved me a lot of time and effort.

Dec-16-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: Hitch died: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/201...
Dec-16-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Softpaw: Newt Gingrich: pledging allegiance to "one nation under God" makes the U.S. exceptional.

<<Referencing the Ninth Circuit, Gingrich said that judges who believe the phrase "One nation, under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the separation of church and state are "radically Anti-American" and should not be wearing the robe.>

"I taught a short course in this at the University of Georgia Law School, and I testified in front of sitting justices at Georgetown Law School and I warned them, 'You keep attacking the core base of THE AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM, and you will find an uprising against you which will rebalance the judiciary.'">

Apparently it does--at least that was a key idea behind the move to stick those words into the Pledge.

<On February 7, 1954, with President Eisenhower sitting in Lincoln's pew, the church's pastor, George MacPherson Docherty, delivered a sermon based on the Gettysburg Address titled "A New Birth of Freedom."

He argued that the nation's might lay not in arms but its spirit and higher purpose. He noted that the Pledge's sentiments could be those of any nation, that "there was something missing in the pledge, and that which was missing was the characteristic and definitive factor in the American way of life." He cited Lincoln's words "under God" as DEFINING WORDS THAT SET THE UNITED STATES APART FROM OTHER NATIONS."

President Eisenhower had been baptized a Presbyterian very recently, just a year before. He responded enthusiastically to Docherty in a conversation following the service. Eisenhower acted on his suggestion the next day and on February 8, 1954, Rep. Charles Oakman (R-Mich.), introduced a bill to that effect. Congress passed the necessary legislation and Eisenhower signed the bill into law on Flag Day, June 14, 1954.> Wikipedia

Dec-16-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Shams: <al wazir><Hitch died>

Dammit all. That is a loss.

Dec-16-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Softpaw: In any case:

<<<On March 11, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance in the case of Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School District.>

In a 2–1 decision, the appellate court ruled that the words were of a "ceremonial and patriotic nature" and did not constitute an establishment of religion.>

Judge Stephen Reinhardt dissented, writing that "the state-directed, teacher-led daily recitation in public schools of the amended 'under God' version of the Pledge of Allegiance... violates the Establishment Clause of the Constitution."> (Wikipedia)

Dec-16-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: I loved <Psycho> and <North by Northwest>. It's a loss.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 5709)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2655 OF 5709 ·  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 Chessgames.com, 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 | Little ChessPartner | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2014, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies