Members · Prefs · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing User Profile Chessforum
Member since May-04-12 · Last seen Jan-28-15
I am only a butterfly dreaming of being Chuang Zhu, dreaming of being Tiggler.

Favorite WCs all time: Kasporov, Alekine, Botvinnik, Lasker, Capablanca. Best of the rest: Nimzovitch, Rubinstein, Korchnoi, Keres. Bring back the 24 game WC matches and 12+ game candidates matches so that we can have heroic champs and challengers again. Kasparov, Alekhine, Botvinnik, Lasker, Capablanca, Steinitz, Nimzovitch, Tal, Morphy, Anand, Karpov, Fischer, Rubinstein, Keres ....

Apart from actual chess, the two topics that keep me coming back to this site are the mysteries of the Elo and related ratings schemes, and the the even more strange oddities of chess search engines.

With respect to ratings, I don't mean the routine operation of the calculations, but the scale which these operations create, sui gerenis. What is the mathematical basis, and is it reduceable to a Haar measure? Is there any reality hiding behing the statistical artifact? Are there undiscovered truths about the distribution of ratings points, and do they regress to the mean?

Engines are a big mystery to us. Not so big a mystery to us as we to them, however. <DcGentle> has a zealous purpose to create an engine that understands positional chess. If he succeeds, he will also create an engine that might be mistaken for a human, and whose moves will be explicable. My interest is more prosaic: to understand the engines in their own terms. Why do they not seem to perform correct searches at the depth they advertise. Would a better search result in more "chessic truth"? They are designed to win at short(ish) time controls, and compromise their searches to do it. But CC players need the really best moves, not some practical compromise. They don't build engines for that, so how can we trick the engines that we do have into finding the best moves, and not just winning because their blunders are not awful?

These questions lack answers, so if you have the answers, please be so kind as to post them in my chessforum. Full Member

   Tiggler has kibitzed 4442 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Jan-28-15 Tata Steel (2015) (replies)
Tiggler: <Gypsy>:< It is not the quality of the teaching, for that typically is rather terrible to middling, it is the over-all environment of excellence instead. And even more than the excellence of the faculty, it is the overall excellence of the student's peers that counts.> ...
   Jan-13-15 The World vs Naiditsch, 2014 (replies)
   Jan-02-15 Tiggler chessforum
Tiggler: Happy New Year to all, and thanks to those who left their greetings here, especially that rare bird, the ketchu plover.
   Nov-14-14 zanzibar chessforum (replies)
Tiggler: <zanzibar> I happened upon a question you posted on the Stumpers page a few months back: <Has anybody thought about this, or seen someone else do a simulation with draws included?> This was on the topic of simulations of tournament results by Monte Carlo. I had some ...
   Nov-07-14 hms123 chessforum (replies)
Tiggler: User: Lambda is a non-premium member who does beautiful original work for the WT, but posts his work mainly to the AT without any fanfare on the game forum. There are several others who do the same, of course: I'm sure you know.
   Oct-29-14 jepflast chessforum (replies)
Tiggler: <jepflast> You fixed it so fast that I wondered if I had imagined it. Thanks.
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Never kid a kidder

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 14 OF 14 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Oct-20-14  Nickster: One last post before I go. Just so you know who this 'Raman' Rossi is referring to on JONP:


Your comment is a typical example of the effects of the stupidities made by fake experts like “Raman”, that act as Professors, but lack the foundamentals of Physics, Electronics and Electrotechnics. The effects are that persons like you, clearly missing a professional understanding of the matter, instead of reading seriously a Report written by 6 Professors with a life dedicated to Science and Physics in particular, read the stupidities of imbeciles with an agenda and make us loose time to answer to absurd objections. I am not angry at you, you are just a candid non-expert-person, I am angry because every stupidity gets attention and we, honestly, do not have the time to answer. As you have perhaps read, I already suggested as a reference the wonderful book “Electronics for Dummies” to the “Prof” you got inspiration from, but he does not listen to me and continues to repeat the same stupidities. Again:
The coils of the reactor are made with a proptietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it. Your phrase “”with or without reactions involved” is pretty arrogant, and such arrogamce, perhaps, forbids you to try to understand what I wrote. If you read carefully what I wrote and what is written in the Report, you will see that “with or without reactions” is a stupidity. The nature and composition of the coils are of paramount importance in our IP and for obvious reasons I will not give any more information, albeit you demand to me not to “state that (I) cannot comment further on this, ESPECIALLY BEING AWARE THAT THROUGH THE REPORT SOME FUNDAMENTAL ( SIC!) MISTAKES ARE CARRIED OUT, SUCH AS..” and at this point you add another titanic stupidity that the Readers can find in your comment: whom do you think you are talking with ? And here is the answer to your titanically stupid statement ( I know, you are not the author of the titanic stupidity, you are just parrotting the suggestions of “Prof” Raman): just, please read … I will write in very simple language, to allow you (and “Prof” Raman, who insists not to buy ‘Electronics for Dummies’ as I suggested him) to understand, with a small effort and some focus (to Raman I suggest not to chew a gum at the same time).




Looks like Rossi follows the discussion on an Italian Forum:

A google English translation can be found here:

Oct-20-14  yskid: <Oct-20-14
member Nickster: One last post before I go. Just so you know who this 'Raman' Rossi is referring to on JONP:....>
I'm wondering where Rossi finds the time for all that chit-chat. From my point of view, re E-Cat we'll find out when Industrial Heat decides to give some news or/and test flaws are addressed. Regarding LENR however, links extracted so far seem reasonable to periodically check on progress with a caveat pointed out by Tiggler. Story worth to follow on, as long as it's free.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tiggler: <yskid> Just to be clear: is Rossi's online journal, not to be confused with respectable journals such as Nuclear Physics (A and B)
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <Tiggler: Phony Journal>

You beat me to the punch line.

I mentioned this about 2 weeks ago.

Tiggler chessforum

Everything else aside, I think Rossi should be whipped for posting a phony journal.

Oct-21-14  yskid: <Oct-20-14
member Tiggler: <yskid> Just to be clear: is Rossi's online journal, not to be confused with respectable journals such as Nuclear Physics (A and B)>
Well, well!! Thank you very much.
Premium Chessgames Member
  DanLanglois: < Point 5 insinuates fraud. >

I'm dropping back to give a definition of 'insinuates fraud':

'Insinuates fraud', here, is correct, in that it sort of means something like 'a collection of inconsistencies and peculiarities that whilst on the face of things appear pretty rum, do not establish a prima facie case of fraud.'

Premium Chessgames Member
  DanLanglois: <yskid: I'm wondering however, what is your stance on LENR in general?>

Allow me to answer a question that may be related: what do I think of energy scams?

But first, are we really done with Rossi? Because, he has been involved in nothing but one scam after another. I had mentioned in the GMARK game forum, that Rossi claimed he could turn waste into oil, coal, and gas. I did receive a retort on that, from <Nickster>. But let's review..Rossi spent over 9 years in jail, on house arrest, and on probation. The Italian courts ruled the patent was worthless and nonsense. Rossi pled guilty for some lesser crimes such as keeping false records, not paying taxes, etc. Rossi filed bankruptcy. But there's more, -- based on false testimony and false documents Rossi was arrested in 2000 for fraudulent bankruptcy.

Rossi dropped out of sight in 2000 and did not re-appear until 2008.

This story is documented here – please see the section – Andrea Rossi – Petrol Dragon – Omar

During the same time Rossi was working on the thermoelectric scam, Rossi hooked up with the Bio Development Corporation, Bedford, New Hampshire..

While working there (so to speak) Rossi claims he “realized an important plant for the production of charcoal from wood waste in Chicago.”

The story is documented here:

Rossi claimed he had invented a commercial thermoelectric device that could convert heat to electricity at 20% efficiency when the best all the other commercial devices could do was 5-6%. Rossi and his partners were able to scam millions of dollars from the DOD and DOE, even though Rossi was arrested in Italy in 2000. The final DOE/CERL report on this scam was not published until 2004. This story is documented here – The E-cat & Thermoelectric Scam of Andrea Rossi

Rossi claimed he could purify metals very inexpensively. This story is documented here –

The e-cat scam is Rossie's fifth impossible invention. To return to your question, -- well, if that's really the question that you want to be asking..?

Premium Chessgames Member
  DanLanglois: <yskid: I'm wondering however, what is your stance on LENR in general?>

For me, there is a persuasive set of arguments as to why the whole idea of Rossi’s E-Cat makes no sense and why the tests were meaningless. LENR defies what I know about nuclear reactions. I suppose that I could explain this in detail, but should I have to, Rossi has not provided more than the skimpiest details? I'm not actually a physicist. I want to be clear about that, actually..-->

It doesn't matter to me in the least, whether there is evidence for something interesting being observed in the many of the LENR experiments that have been conducted. Properly speaking, my position is that it’s impossible for anyone to say that Rossi (or anyone else) has or does not have what is claimed … I can only say it’s unlikely and that’s what I think.

The point, for me, is not even whether the tests were correctly conducted scientifically and/or whether the measurements are real. My position is not that the conditions of the tests and instrumenting was so poor that I think the paper and its conclusions are simply wrong. My reasoning is more by process of elimination. Start with this possibility: Rossi is not a fraud and the E-Cat works as claimed. I think this is hard to believe given what science and scientists tell us. I'd add, that I'm a trained scientist of a sort, btw, and it's not merely what 'science and scientists' are telling 'us', but what I'm telling you. But my point is not that I think this is hard to believe given etc..

Rather, my point is that let’s say Rossi really has an energy generation system that performs as claimed whether it’s based on LENR or pixie dust or whatever..

Then, why would he behave as he has? And HERE, is where the answer is kind of obvious. Perhaps others see this picture, and they suppose that what Rossi has is a trade secret that needs to be protected. But I have firm opinions about how people are supposed to behave, in that situation. I think that all of his deflections, secrecy, and obfuscations will eventually be found out, not because I'm such a big expert on science (though I am something of an expert), but because I am an expert on high risk investments, and investors' lack of due diligence. I rode the dot com boom/bust. I can't easily summarize the experience. I'm in my forties, I've been around people all my life. It's intuition.

Is Rossi a fraud and the E-Cat a hoax or is Rossi the herald of a new world? I am skeptical veering towards pessimism, and my reasons completely satisfy me. I wouldn't be embarrassed, if I turn out to be wrong on this one. I don't want to believe it, even if it's true, because only a moron could believe it nevertheless.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Tiggler: <DanLanglois>:<I don't want to believe it, even if it's true, because only a moron could believe it nevertheless.>

I don't want to believe it, either, but not because only a moron could believe it. I don't want to believe it because it offends my values in the scientific and engineering endeavor. Scoundrels can and often do succeed in many walks of life, but true success in science only comes from painstaking effort. Those who stick to their knitting eventually succeed sometimes, but dilettantes never do.

Genius may give rise to a break-though, of course, but even the most perverse genius works hard, is single-minded and persistent. Rossi's record displays none of these qualities.

Oct-30-14  Chess Dad: <Tiggler: Scoundrels can and often do succeed in many walks of life, but true success in science only comes from painstaking effort.>

I stayed away for a while since the whole thing is so absurd, but I just thought I'd come back to check on how things were going.

I still don't believe. But my disbelief isn't based on any wishes of mine. I simply can't believe it, even if I wanted to.

I know too much about nuclear reactions. I'm nearly done with my Master's degree in Nuclear Engineering, and I've worked nearly my entire adult life in the nuclear field, more than 20 years. My background makes this scam impossible for me to believe.

The history on Rossi provided by Dan just makes me more certain, if that were even possible.

Nov-05-14  yskid: <Oct-23-14
member DanLanglois: <yskid: I'm wondering however, what is your stance on LENR in general?>

Allow me to answer ....

To return to your question, -- well, if that's really the question that you want to be asking..?>Actually, ONLY question that I'm interested in is whether or not there is some LENR positive experimental indication. I quite enjoyed reading your reply and depiction of Rossi's "colorful profile" which certainly does not contribute to the credibility of his E-Cat project. I presume he'll have to provide confirmation of the experimental results to his newly found investors (something along McKubre's analysis of his test) yet this alliance provided him with a "code of silence" for the rest of us. Actually, when Nickster first let us know about "something looming" in the energy field I thought maybe news on Boron-fusion reactor are coming.

Nov-07-14  yskid: I have to expand my "question of interest" little beyond LENR. Reason for it is that discussion at Vortex, , brought in focus Fractional Quantum Hall Effect and "non-nuclear version of LENR" (for which LENR label would be inaccurate). Apparently "Several times ...., the fractional Hall effect has been tied to thermal anomalies."

Incidentally, in the newly published Rossi's patent application it is referred to "non-conventional source of energy which lies between chemical energy and nuclear energy" which covers potentially "grey areas" (must give some credits to the lawyers sometimes).

Dec-17-14  Nickster: Finally an interview with one of the authors of the Lugano report:

Bo Höistad was interviewed last week:

Dec-18-14  yskid: <Dec-17-14
member Nickster: Finally an interview with one of the authors of the Lugano report:......>
I believe that theoretical explanation will have to precede commercial building of the devices. Question is when or even weather or not will be published for the "retail audience" ?!
Premium Chessgames Member
  WinKing: Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays to you & yours <Tiggler>! :)
Premium Chessgames Member
  wordfunph: <Tiggler> Merry Christmas!
Dec-26-14  cormier: Joyeux Noël ...
Dec-30-14  Nickster: Happy Holidays to all and thank you <Tiggler> for the use of your forum.

Unexpected news the other day:

Dec-30-14  Nickster: Today MFMP (Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project) will attempt to replicate the Russian's extraordinary results. MFMP is a group dedicated to researching Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (often referred to as LENR) while sharing all procedures, data, and results openly online.

It is funded by donations and is totally Open Source.

If you wish to follow there will be a live feed!! A link will be given soon on their web page:

Wish them luck. Positive or negative it should be interesting ...

Dec-30-14  Nickster: We have a link:

Just about to start ...

Just so you know what we are seeing:

Russian researcher Alexander Parkhomov 'claims' to have replicated the 'Rossi Effect'. He gives specific instructions on the fuel he used. MFMP is trying to replicate his replication.

Dec-30-14  Nickster: To see the actual data go to:

Select 'View' for 'Dog Bone Test'. Check 'Update With New Data' to get periodic live updates.

They are now doing calibration tests. This is without the 'fuel'. This is needed for a baseline. The loaded test will be done later.

This is going to take a while. Very slow moving but for someone playing Corr. chess I guess maybe not so slow.

Dec-30-14  Nickster: The test is over. Results are negative. No excess heat. You come to your own conclusions.

In the coming days/months the MFMP team will try different fuel combinations.

Dec-31-14  yskid: Happy New Year to all!
Thank you Tiggler for letting us use your site for LENR posting. Thank you Nickster to bringing E-Cat to our attention.
Jan-01-15  ketchuplover: peaceful 2015 to ye
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tiggler: Happy New Year to all, and thanks to those who left their greetings here, especially that rare bird, the ketchu plover.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 14)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 14 OF 14 ·  Later Kibitzing>

Take the Premium Membership Tour
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 user 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.

You are not logged in to
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:

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