< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1045 OF 1045 ·
|Dec-12-17|| ||Tabanus: <Ohio> I have no energy left. There are hundreds of events. I only try to give the very minimum of information (when, where, results, etc., where there's little or nothing from before). I added a line under the table about the four other events. And a link to the official GCT site and to London 2016.|
|Dec-12-17|| ||chessgames.com: <Why would someone expect to find that listed on the London Tournament page?> Thia is a discussion for the Bistro, not here, but my main criticism with the data is that it’s an awful abuse of the [table]...[/table] feature. If you don’t view it on a studio monitor you’re out of luck.|
|Dec-12-17|| ||Tabanus: It does say that it was the the last tournament of the GCT 2017. But how this will look in 5 years from now? No idea ;)|
<Let's have a dedicated page for the GCT each year> I'm not expecting that to happen. There are now three separate pages for only one of the five events, e. g. Grand Chess Tour Paris (Rapid Tiebreak) (2017) and two more. And 10 pages for GCT 2017 in total.
|Dec-12-17|| ||Tabanus: <CG> Delete it then, and be your own vandal.|
<awful abuse of the [table]...[/table] feature.> There's only one "table[" in front and one "]table" at the back. I can easily view the table both in IE and Chrome. Your problem is that you won't have any bios at all, am I right? The many blank bios you have suggests so. Btw I think your bios <is> of general interest. Rather than your Christmas Clues, in my wishful thinking.
|Dec-12-17|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: I moved the GCT table under the London one, hopefully it's more friendly now. It's still an eyesore, but I think that information should be there in principle.|
|Dec-12-17|| ||chessgames.com: <I moved the GCT table under the London one> Bless you SQ, that's exactly the issue that bothered me. Now that it's viewable on most platforms we can continue the discussion of whether it's needed, and where.|
|Dec-12-17|| ||Tabanus: Fine. I can delete from Giri and down if you think that's handsomer. The last 14 played in only one event. The table will be incomplete then, but may look better. That's what counts, right? And CG, don't be shy about it: if you tell me to stop, I will.|
|Dec-12-17|| ||Tabanus: <viewable on most platforms>|
I have not considered that, sorry. I don't own a smart phone or whatever myself. How wide can it be? St. Louis Rapid & Blitz (Blitz) (2017) is not viewable either?
|Dec-12-17|| ||zanzibar: RE: Analysis
<<chessgames> In what sense are they not playable?>
Let's consider this page:
D Byrne vs Fischer, 1956 [analysis]
I assume this is the output from analysis - and as you can see the SF8 suggested improvements aren't playable.
Playable as in - I want to move the board pieces to follow the computer moves.
This would require a way to jump into and out of subvariations - basic (advanced) stuff.
* * * * *
Next - maybe I haven't been paying enough attention, but the subvariations are generated exactly how?
You mention a minimum of 60-sec/ply, which seems to imply (to me) that you did a "walk-thru", i.e. allowed a 60-sec min analysis of a position, took the leading candidate, then advanced/repeated for a set of moves.
Then you allowed another 60-sec analysis in the final position, and appended the eval for the subvariation's final position.
Is this correct?
BTW- if I was spending fuel to analysis a game there might be circumstances when I would want to do "walk-throughs", rather than picking a position and churning.
This raises the issue of how to run the engine. SCID has an annotate mode, when it plays through a game at a fixed dt for each move.
There is also a finish game mode, where it allows more flexibility - allowing the user to specific either a fixed dt or a fixed depth for each move.
Are you familiar with these kind of issues?
|Dec-12-17|| ||Boomie: <OhioChessFan: Meh, that ship has sailed. In any case, I'm not sure how moving posts from that page to forums would save money, and Rogoff is aware of the page and has no objections.>|
The idea is to delete the posts, not move them. There is no reason to preserve posts that nobody will ever read. They are taking up space and space is money in this game.
Do you have a reference to GM Rogoff having no objections? That he may be nice enough not to object is beside the point. In fact, it makes it even more egregious to trash his page.
The posters who are addicted to political debate can use their own forums for that. Or maybe they should find an outlet at a site dedicated to it.
|Dec-12-17|| ||chessgames.com: <tabanus> <I don't own a smart phone or whatever myself. How wide can it be?> There's no magic number; the wider you make it the more platforms it will be unfriendly to. It's possible to get it nice looking on 90% of the platforms or 70% or 40%. 100% is not possible—we're not trying to make these pages useable from an Apple iWatch—but mobile phones are ubiquitous. I'd suggest just avoiding the side-by-side formatting and always list one table under the previous.|
<St. Louis Rapid & Blitz (Blitz) (2017) is not viewable either?> It's problematic, yes.
Anyhow I don't think anybody questions that you're doing good work, it's a question of where this material should be placed. Perhaps one day we'll have pages for "meta tournaments" (things like the Grand Prix and the Grand Chess Tour) that can branch off into the smaller tournaments that comprise it and when that day comes you can cut your tables out of the tournament pages and insert it into the meta-pages.
<zanzibar> I'm sorry I misunderstood what you were saying. Yes, it would be very nice if Stockfish suggested moves could be played through Olga.
|Dec-12-17|| ||offramp: <Boomie: <OhioChessFan: Meh, that ship has sailed. In any case, I'm not sure how moving posts from that page to forums would save money, and Rogoff is aware of the page and has no objections.>
The idea is to delete the posts, not move them...>|
YES! Delete them! All those hideous hateful posts! Delete them forever, make the world a better place.
|Dec-12-17|| ||chessgames.com: <z> <Next - maybe I haven't been paying enough attention, but the subvariations are generated exactly how?>|
It all starts with a 300 millisecond / ply scan of the entire game to get the "feel" for it. If there are drastic changes in evaluation around certain moves they are flagged for later review. Just takes a minute and is surprisingly accurate as a starting point.
Next it moves through at the minimum requested (n) seconds per ply, but when it gets to any of the flagged moves, it spends 8 times longer than normal (i.e. 8n).
Now it goes back and looks and sees if any NEW drastic changes in evaluation have appeared as the result of (presumably) understanding the position more accurately. If so, it gives them the 8x treatment as well.
This loop can continue several times, especially in a situation where the incredible move is too deep for Stockfish to understand. It first thinks that move 25 is the "?" culprit, but upon deeper analysis decides that 24 is really the move that deserves the "?", then upon still further analysis thinks that the combination started after 23._? — the process can take hours especially if you set it on maximum time.
Any position that is given a "?" or a "better is" indication automatically is given an 8x evaluation, as it's important to know the evaluation of the position after the inferior move was made. Oh, and the final position (assuming it's not checkmate) is always given extra time, since people always want to know about that.
Finally when there are no more "mysteries" in the eyes of SF, it releases the annotated game.
Furthermore, our SF has been specifically hacked to abort all computation the instant it finds a forced mate. So if you spend an hour on a position and it finds a mate-in-33 after 7 minutes, it stops, you get your Fuel deducted, and it doesn't load the server trying to improve upon mate. This creates the issue that it could in principle find a quicker mate if we let it run; but we decided that's not particularly important to anybody except problemists.
|Dec-12-17|| ||chessgames.com: It's come to my attention that the database spends an inordinate amount of time sorting out the ignore lists on some of the extremely large forums such as the Café and Rogoff.|
Because of this, we're already coming up with a scheme in which these behemoth forums can be archived up to some certain point in time (or a certain page number).
We have no plans on deleting posts but if they were placed in some archive available only for those who wanted to search them, I have a hunch they wouldn't get much use anyhow.
Moreover, it would make the server faster. It's embarrassing to say how much fo the server is consumed by the routine algorithm that figures out what posts to show somebody every time they refresh one of these monster pages. Not just the "off topic" pages, but things like Carlsen and So etc., they all have become an incredible drain over the years. Our hardware gets better but the data we serve gets bigger still.
The notion of making a "real Rogoff page" and a "real Odd Lie" page (etc.) is a separate issue.
|Dec-12-17|| ||Tabanus: Oh boy. And me who worked so hard to put the tables side-by-side to make it look good and avoid scrolling.|
I put them over/under now (two of them, are there more?), no problem at all.
|Dec-12-17|| ||OhioChessFan: Tab over under looks much better.
cgc, Dedicated pages would be great.
|Dec-12-17|| ||sonia91: The IMSA Elite Mind Games deserve to be covered, there are several strong players playing. 2016: Tournament Index search: "imsa"|
|Dec-12-17|| ||MostlyAverageJoe: <CG> Klu #13 was pretty much a repeat of klu#41 from Chessgames Present Hunt Clues Page 2012 -- no?|
And here I thought I sent you enough new stuff :-)
|Dec-12-17|| ||Alien Math: <Võ Thị Kim Phụng> performed well at the London Chess Classic’s FIDE Open , gaining 44.8 Elo points, to reach a total of 2,425 points and enter the world’s top 50 and Viet Nam’s No 1 spots. |
|Dec-12-17|| ||chessgames.com: <Klu #13 was pretty much a repeat of klu#41 from Chessgames Present Hunt Clues Page 2012> More or less, but after all, it is the first night of Hanukah this evening.|
<IMSA Elite Mind Games> We're working on getting the PGN to this very strong but under-promoted event. If anybody has a source please let us know.
|Dec-12-17|| ||Alien Math: only 2 pgn not listed or shown for <IMSA Elite Mind Games> are the Basque Men /Women All Games, others are to right with http://iemg2017.fide.com/en/compone... and 91 92 93 for last number|
|Dec-12-17|| ||MostlyAverageJoe: <chessgames.com: It's come to my attention that the database spends an inordinate amount of time sorting out the ignore lists on some of the extremely large forums such as the Café and Rogoff.>|
I suppose that one thing that is really degrading the performance is providing the correct page count. Simplify the algorithm: count the pages without applying the ignored list, and apply the filtering only when rendering the page. Some pages may end up sparsely populated or even blank, but this way you'll never have to fetch more posts in one try than 25. Additional benefit: page numbers will be identical for everyone, not like it is now that the numbering depends on the ignore list.
If having sparsely populated pages is not good, then consider getting rid of the "Jump to page#" feature. I imagine that this one does put a lot of load on the database, if used, but I'd venture a guess that it is used rather infrequently. Most people probably click the Earlier/Later links, which can be handled by fetching the candidate posts, filtering out the ignored ones, then fetching more until there is enough to fill the page. Once you know the last post fetched, the approximate page number could be displayed.
Or maybe use the counting from the first paragraph, and the page fill method from the second. Now you can compute page numbers quickly, but the content of the pages would overlap; this can be visualized by having the overlapping posts displayed in gray instead of black, so that attention would be drawn only to the unseen-yet content.
|Dec-12-17|| ||zanzibar: <<offramp> YES! Delete them! All those hideous hateful posts! Delete them forever, make the world a better place.>|
No, don't just delete them. Burn them. Yes, yes, burn them all!
Burn the posts alive at the stake!
And we shall dance round and round in ecstatic joy!
|Dec-12-17|| ||zanzibar: Everybody knows how much I like Fire:
(Gheesh, the music is so great, yet the vimeo video so awful!)
Let's watch me in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U5... (short version)
https://vimeo.com/190315596 (long version, beware vimeo)
Nothing beats Ronson! I'll have mine neat.
|Dec-13-17|| ||Tabanus: I removed 14 more eyesores from London Chess Classic (2017). For editors: they are still present in version 57 (of 72 versions).|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1045 OF 1045 ·