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

🏆 Ultimate Blitz Challenge (2016)

  PARTICIPANTS (sorted by highest achieved rating; click on name to see player's games)
Garry Kasparov, Fabiano Caruana, Wesley So, Hikaru Nakamura

Chessgames.com Chess Event Description
Ultimate Blitz Challenge (2016)

Played in St. Louis, Missouri, USA 28-29 April 2016. Players received 5 minutes for the whole game with a 3-second increment from move one. Games started at 2:00 pm USA/Eastern. Prize fund: $50,000.

Live games: http://www.uschesschamps.com/2016-u...

 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Nakamura vs Caruana 1-0672016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeA18 English, Mikenas-Carls
2. Kasparov vs So 1-0382016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC45 Scotch Game
3. Caruana vs So 1-0392016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeA07 King's Indian Attack
4. Nakamura vs Kasparov ½-½472016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeE98 King's Indian, Orthodox, Taimanov, 9.Ne1
5. So vs Nakamura 1-0212016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeE53 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3
6. Kasparov vs Caruana ½-½452016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC45 Scotch Game
7. Caruana vs Nakamura 1-0462016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC50 Giuoco Piano
8. So vs Kasparov 1-0262016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeD85 Grunfeld
9. So vs Caruana ½-½772016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeA05 Reti Opening
10. Kasparov vs Nakamura 1-0492016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC45 Scotch Game
11. Caruana vs Kasparov ½-½602016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeB31 Sicilian, Rossolimo Variation
12. Nakamura vs So 1-0962016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeA45 Queen's Pawn Game
13. Nakamura vs Caruana 1-0692016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeA10 English
14. Kasparov vs So 0-1412016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeB40 Sicilian
15. Caruana vs So 0-1622016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeA07 King's Indian Attack
16. Nakamura vs Kasparov 1-0522016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeD70 Neo-Grunfeld Defense
17. Kasparov vs Caruana 1-0692016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC30 King's Gambit Declined
18. So vs Nakamura  ½-½412016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeD37 Queen's Gambit Declined
19. Caruana vs Nakamura  ½-½542016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
20. So vs Kasparov 1-0252016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeA41 Queen's Pawn Game (with ...d6)
21. So vs Caruana 1-0492016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
22. Kasparov vs Nakamura ½-½702016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeC45 Scotch Game
23. Caruana vs Kasparov 0-1402016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeB90 Sicilian, Najdorf
24. Nakamura vs So 1-0602016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeD70 Neo-Grunfeld Defense
25. Nakamura vs Caruana 1-0342016Ultimate Blitz ChallengeD31 Queen's Gambit Declined
 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 29 OF 31 ·  Later Kibitzing>
May-17-16  Overgod: <Big Pawn: <If there is one piece of advice I can give to anybody here (including you, <Pawnsac>), it would be this: believe in nothing,> Ok, then let's start by not believing anything you wrote in this post.

Wow, I feel better already.

Atheists create an imaginary world in which they live without God, so that they can rationalize their sin and live as they want without any sort of responsibility toward God.

That's why people become atheists. It's a mental, emotional and spiritual deficiency.

Atheism is expressed in the proposition "God does not exist".

What good reasons and arguments are there to think this is true?

What should anyone think that atheism is true?

Atheism makes a truth claim: God does not exist. Truth claims need arguments, evidence and reasons to justify them. What are those reasons?>

Thanks for proving my point. You obviously didn't read (let alone comprehend) a single thing that I wrote.

May-17-16  Big Pawn: What do you mean? I copied this right from you:

<If there is one piece of advice I can give to anybody here (including you, <Pawnsac>), it would be this: believe in nothing...>

So I took your advice right there and decided to implement it by not believing your post to be true.

Now answer my questions:

Atheism is expressed in the proposition "God does not exist".

What good reasons and arguments are there to think this is true?

What should anyone think that atheism is true?

Atheism makes a truth claim: God does not exist. Truth claims need arguments, evidence and reasons to justify them. What are those reasons?

May-18-16  Big Pawn: You take the time to reply, but don't come armed with answers to my questions?
May-18-16  Appaz: I didn't know you accepted the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a divine entity, <Big Pawn>.

Since you can not prove it does not exist, you have to accept it's existence.

May-18-16  Fiona Macleod: In an obvious state of non-existence, you don't prove non-existence. What needs proof is existence if existence is being posited.
May-18-16  Clemens Scheitz: <Overgod>

I'm glad to hear about your passion for music and I wonder if your "superior" music taste is as good as mine (ha!). When you get a chance please comment on a couple of pieces I was showing <Visayanbraindoctor> under "Russian Team Championship".

As far as <...our cosmos is an immanent as well as transcendent intelligent creation, govern by beings trillions of years ahead of us in evolution> I would like to ask you if you believe that these "superior beings" have any empathy or concern for the suffering of innocent sentient "lower beings", and if so, what is, according to you, the reason why they did not use their power to improve the conditions under which life started to unfold in this planet. I'm counting on you not to throw the " Original Sin" irrational experiment into your answer. If you are tempted, save it and less just concentrate on the music.

May-18-16  Clemens Scheitz: <Big Pawn>

The philosophical reasons behind Positive Atheism are there and you probably know it. My guess is that you just like to debate people and I don't have the time for that, but to give you the benefit of the doubt I will list the ones that I find stronger and you can read about them on your own.

- Argument for evil ( to simplify things, just concentrate on natural evil, if that doesn't convince you, it's time for a lobotomy)

- Incoherence of the attributes of God (Omniscience, Omnipotence, Omnibenevolence, etc. )

- Hiddenness of God.

- Reverse or atheist teleological argument.

- Meaninglessness of religion language

Two good sources are J.L.Mackie's "The miracle of theism" and Michael Martin's "Atheism, a philosophical justification". These books are about 30 years old so they don't contain some newer developments, but no amount of recent mental gymnastics by theologians and closed minded preachers has been able to undermine the philosophical strength and common sense value of positive atheism.

May-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <Clemens....My guess is that you just like to debate people....>

He likes to browbeat others, not have the healthy give and take implicit in the concept of debate.

May-18-16  chessalem: "I don't know if we each have a destiny, or if we're all just floating around accidental-like on a breeze. But I think maybe it's both. Maybe both are happening at the same time."

Albert Einstein

May-18-16  diceman: <Appaz: I didn't know you accepted the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a divine entity, <Big Pawn>. Since you can not prove it does not exist, you have to accept it's existence.>

I haven't heard of the <Flying Spaghetti Monster> angering atheists.

May-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: <perf: He likes to browbeat others, not have the healthy give and take implicit in the concept of debate.>

Says the purposely obnoxious punk who will gladly make 100 posts insulting me though I have not addressed him in the interim. Find a mirror.

May-18-16  diceman: <perfidious:
<Clemens....My guess is that you just like to debate people....>

He likes to browbeat others>

That explains it.
I thought perf walked into a low ceiling fan.

May-18-16  Big Pawn: Hi <appaz>

Did you know that of the 10 highest IQ's on earth, 8 are theists? And of those 8 6 are Christians?

http://www.examiner.com/article/of-...

Are you on the list?

Have a great day!

May-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <Did you know that of the 10 highest IQ's on earth, 8 are theists? And of those 8 6 are Christians?>

Since no global reliable register of IQ scores exists, this claim is utter crap.

May-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: Even worse, no IQ test can measure anything beyong 140-150. And, even the meaning of IQ itself is up to debate. IQ test measure nothing but the ability to take IQ tests :D
May-18-16  diceman: I cant believe Kasparov was on the list.
May-18-16  Big Pawn: <May-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member keypusher: <Did you know that of the 10 highest IQ's on earth, 8 are theists? And of those 8 6 are Christians?> Since no global reliable register of IQ scores exists, this claim is utter crap.>

Sorry this fact annoys you so much. Try to cheer up. Have a GREAT day!!

May-18-16  Big Pawn: <appaz: Since you can not prove it does not exist, you have to accept it's existence.>

Lol - do you really think like this?

Proofs lie only in mathematics.

We have good reasons to believe that a Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist. What kind of evidence would we expect to find? That's the question.

But the heart of your rebuttal really says that you don't like atheism carrying a burden of proof, but that's too bad. You've been brought up with pop culture views on atheism.

Any truth claim requires evidence, reasons and arguments for justification. "God does not exist" is one such claim. It's a truth claim; a proposition.

Let's just cut to the chase: are you denying that a truth claim, such as "God does not exist" needs evidence, reasons and arguments?

I just want to know where your intellectual level is. Now please enlighten us with your philosophical knowledge and understanding.

May-18-16  Big Pawn: <May-18-16 Fiona Macleod: In an obvious state of non-existence, you don't prove non-existence. What needs proof is existence if existence is being posited.>

Ah, the presumption of atheism. See my post to <appaz> above. Truth claims needs evidence for justification.

Do you have any reasons, arguments and evidence for the truth of this claim: God does not exist?

Please list them all so I don't get confused.

May-18-16  diceman: <Positive Atheism>

Ahhhh, that's how you fix it.
Put <Positive> in front of it.

May-18-16  Jim Bartle: <<appaz: Since you can not prove it does not exist, you have to accept it's existence.>

Lol - do you really think like this? >

Do you not understand, I mean really, not understand, that he is mocking your reasoning, not making a serious claim? <Flying Spaghetti Monster> wasn't enough of a hint?

May-18-16  Big Pawn: <evil ( to simplify things, just concentrate on natural evil, if that doesn't convince you, it's time for a lobotomy>

If there is no God then moral values do not exist objectively. If moral values do not exist objectively then evil doesn't exist. If evil doesn't exist then what's the problem?

Oh, I see. You are appealing to some objective moral standard yourself when you appeal to evil.

The problem is that given atheism, there are no objective moral values, yet you are appealing to them as if evil isn't just some idea in my mind and yours, each with our own correct notion even if they are opposites, but you appeal to an objective moral value and standard.

There is no ontological explanation of objective moral values sans God. Present one if you can.

Now what if God exists and evil exists?

What are your premises that explicitly make it a contradiction?

Are you aware that modern philosophers of religion are backing away from the problem of evil given the fact that they can provide no premises on which to base their assertion that God and evil can't coexist without contradiction?

I refer you to a debate from this year between Christian philosopher William Lane Ceaig and atheist philosopher Kevin Sharp.

In short, God in his omnipotence may have greater moral reasons to justify evil, and unless you can show that not to be the case, the problem of evil is no longer a problem.

Further, the problem of evil assumes that our primary reason for existing is to be happy. This may not be true. Our primary reason for existing could be to find God and have a relationship with Him. If this is true then perhaps a world with evil, like ours, is the one best suited to bring the most people to God. We see this happening now in the Middle East. Droves of persecuted people are coming to Christ like never before under the persecution and evil of Isis.

(Disclaimer: I've typed this all with one finger on my phone with autocorrect on. So if there are spelling errors...)

May-18-16  not not: atheist are good people, cos they reason things out

believers are good people too, cos they are harmless (they follow you around with silly "Jesus loves you" crap and smile as if there was anything good about this place)

but there are people who are day dreaming in very dangerous way - they think that Bad violated Good and that is how Big Bang happen; and they BELIEVE they are the bad ones

so "to get high" from big bang moment of creation, whilst being bad, they need to violate good: that is why child abuse happens, animals are slaughtered in horrible way, wars happen, and other bad stuff

Obama, Putin, Erdogan, Bagdadhi, all these polititians, all these "religious scholars" (pope included), they are nothing but carnivor dinosaurs - 60 mln years ago they would be running around biting left and right

they think they look humans; but they are not, they are just dinosaurs, lizards who look bit better

these people are f u ck ed up in their head big time: they want good to violate bad, just to get aroused from BIG BANG moment; and their day dreaming is very very dangerous

in psychology they are called psychopaths; and that is what they are

atheists and believers are good folk; carnivor dinosaurs who like biting are not; unfortunately, there is quite a few of them around everywhere, especially in politics (they are all the same, just lizards)

good job, there are no psychological tests to get any job; it might be hard to fill vacancies in nearly every field if psychopaths were not allowed

I remember one psychologist; she said to me "If they (psychopaths) were not allowed to do anything, there will be loads of people out of job"

religion is not bad; anti-religion (big bang moment, abusing of good, psychopath politicians, etc) that is the real problem this place is suffering from long time

when the sun goes down, it will all stop, thanks God

May-18-16  diceman: <Jim Bartle:

Do you not understand, I mean really, not understand, that he is mocking your reasoning, not making a serious claim? <Flying Spaghetti Monster> wasn't enough of a hint?>

Jim seems to think liberals are unique.

May-18-16  Big Pawn: <Jim Bartle: <<appaz: Since you can not prove it does not exist, you have to accept it's existence.> Lol - do you really think like this? >

Do you not understand, I mean really, not understand, that he is mocking your reasoning, not making a serious claim? <Flying Spaghetti Monster> wasn't enough of a hint?>

Mockery doesn't scare me <Jim>, and besides, some people really think like this and may be reading along. If <appaz> had anything smarter to say he would have said it. I've answered him fully.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 31)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 29 OF 31 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!

Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC