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

🏆 European Club Cup (2005)

Player: Shakhriyar Mamedyarov

 page 1 of 1; 4 games  PGN Download 
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Mamedyarov vs B Ivanovic 1-0322005European Club CupD37 Queen's Gambit Declined
2. Z Gyimesi vs Mamedyarov 0-1552005European Club CupD97 Grunfeld, Russian
3. Mamedyarov vs Khenkin  1-0532005European Club CupD37 Queen's Gambit Declined
4. B Barth Sahl vs Mamedyarov 0-1282005European Club CupB03 Alekhine's Defense
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Mamedyarov wins | Mamedyarov loses  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Oct-19-05  THE pawn: Ivanchuk is the king of the kings! ( well, after kasparov, fisher, tal, capa, morphy etc.etc.etc. hehehe) I just find it so sad that he did not participate in san luis, and I still don't know the reason why he didn't. But one thing's for sure, he is as good as any super hyper GMs right now and I would really enjoy more a match between him and topalov than topa vs kramnik. definitely. I would also like a Ivanchuk Hydra match, that would be a blast.
Oct-19-05  THE pawn: Look at this one: Ivanchuk vs S Volkov, 2005 This madness starts with 14.dxe6! and Ivanchuk shows the awsome range of the queen. A game to watch!

Ivanchuk is awsome, no loses in the entire tournament, for what I know.

Oct-19-05  Marvol: Compare Ivanchuk's games to that of the Classical World Champion:

Ivanchuk: 21st European Club Cup (2005)/Vassily Ivanchuk Kramnik: 21st European Club Cup (2005)/Vladimir Kramnik

I will refrain from any comments.

Oct-19-05  THE pawn: <Marvol> Lol, I didn't want to start a war by criticising Kramnik, but I guess it doesn't matter anymore. Yeah, he is no longer the player we knew ( kramnik)
Oct-19-05  SnoopDogg: At least he won with black against McShane.
Oct-19-05  iron maiden: A 2788 performance rating is not all bad. As a footnote, compare it with Kasparov's performance in this event last year.
Oct-19-05  suenteus po 147: <iron maiden> Do you mean 2788 was Kramnik's performance rating? What was Kasparov's last year?
Oct-19-05  iron maiden: Last year Kasparov turned in a 2635 performance and lost 14 rating points. In five games he lost to Rublevsky, beat Shirov, then drew Huzman, Sax and Adams.
Oct-19-05  Vanka: Why Chucky beat Volkov 2 times here by white pieces in 41 moves (according to his perfomance list?)
Oct-19-05  Vanka: All moves in both games are identical too :)))
Oct-19-05  Vanka: And the openings are C11 (first game) and C13 (second game) French but moves are still identical ??
Oct-19-05  bumpmobile: <Vanka> Moves 12-15 are different (or at least in a different order)in the two games. I imagine CG.com just put both of them in until one or the other could be confirmed.
Oct-20-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  chessgames.com: Re: Ivanchuk vs S Volkov, 2005

We received the score of this game from a user who submitted it while the tournament was taking place, then when we received the official score from the website the moves had changed.

The two pages are merged now, but which move order is correct is still up in the air. We will assume the official site has it right, until we know otherwise. We have this page to highlight the differences between the two scores http://www.chessgames.com/perl/dupe...

Oct-21-05  Dionyseus: <iron maiden>
How are you getting 2788 performance rating for Kramnik? His opponents were:

Gelfand 2724 draw
Aronian 2724 draw
Dreev 2698 draw
McShane 2625 win

Average rating of opponents = 2693
Total Score = 2.5
Total Games = 4
Rating Performance = 2706

As for rating change, he apparently gained 2 rating points, so his new rating on the January list will be 2741, unless he plays more games before the deadline.

Oct-21-05  iron maiden: I'll be busy the next couple hours but I will recheck the performance rating tonight. If it is indeed 2706 I don't see how Kramnik gains any points from it.
Oct-21-05  acirce: <Last year Kasparov turned in a 2635 performance and lost 14 rating points. In five games he lost to Rublevsky, beat Shirov, then drew Huzman, Sax and Adams.>

He drew Azarov as well. Not in this database but here's the game:

[Event "EUCup 20th"]
[Site "Izmir"]
[Date "2004.10.03"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Azarov,Sergei"]
[Black "Kasparov,Garry"]
[Result "1/2"]
[Eco "B97"]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.f5 Nc6 11.fxe6 fxe6 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.e5 dxe5 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Ne4 Qxa2 16.Rd1 Be7 17.Be2 0-0 18.0-0 Ra7 19.Rf3 Kh8 20.Rg3 Rd7 21.Qh6 Rxd1+ 22.Bxd1 Rf7 23.Qh5 Qa5 24.Kf1 Qd8 25.Qxf7 Qxd1+ 26.Kf2 Qxc2+ 27.Ke3 Bc5+ 1/2

Oct-21-05  KingG: <acirce> Thanks for the game. Kasparov analyses the following game in his DVD on the Najdorf Vallejo-Pons vs Kasparov, 2004. It's basically the same game with some transpositions.
Oct-21-05  TruthHurts: <http://schach.wienerzeitung.at/asp/...;

"GM Kramnik Vladimir 2744 NAO Chess Club 2788 2.5/4 "

<Dionyseus>, you're elo calculator is wrong :). 2.5/4 against 2693 is obviously around this performance anyway: A draw against 2724 for a 2744 rating does lose very few points. Lets say maximum 0.5, multiplied by 2, makes -1. Then a draw against Dreev should be about -0.7 or 0.8. Then a win against a 2625 for a 2744 should be about +4. Which makes -1-0.8+4 = 2. Kramnik is 2744 he wins 2 points in 4 matchs, 2788 rating performance seems therefore normal.

Now with a real calculator lets see:
www.fide.com go on rating change calculator, I entered here a rating of 2788 and a score of 2.5/4 against 2693 it gives +0, actually -0.2 which is +0. So 2788 is indeed his rating performance as it would keep his rating equal. I also put there a rating of 2744 against 2693 and a 2.5/4 score which makes indeed that Kramnik wins 2.2 elo points (like I supposed). A 2706 performance would have made lose points for Kramnik who is 2744, which is not possible anyway without the calculs (+2.4) because of his results: 3 draws against high ratings plus a win against an aproximatively 2650 makes that a 2744 wins points.

But I understand where your mistake comes from. And actually it is not yours but fide's sites mistake. On fide.com in the rating performance calculatorsection I put the average opposition 2693 and a 2.5/4 score against them and it gives what you said, a 2706 performance. Which is obviously not possible.

Because we have a draw against a 2724 while he is 2744 which gives -0.3: *2 =-0.6. A draw against a 2698 which gives -0.6. And a win against a 2625 which gives +3.4.
-0.6-0.6+3.4=2.2.

<Dyonseus> you should write to fide.com their calculator is rubbish lol ;).

Oct-21-05  TruthHurts: <As for rating change, he apparently gained 2 rating points, so his new rating on the January list will be 2741, unless he plays more games before the deadline. >

<Dionyseus>, dude, to win 2 points while your rating performance (you calculated 2707) is under your actual rating (2744) is not possible. You can't perform under your rating and win some points. Seing this could have had prevent your mistake at least help you ;) to see that something was wrong somewhere.

Oct-28-05  Vladimir Lover: Go Kramnik!
Oct-28-05  stijn: TruthHurts: <As for rating change, he apparently gained 2 rating points, so his new rating on the January list will be 2741, unless he plays more games before the deadline. >

<Dionyseus>, dude, to win 2 points while your rating performance (you calculated 2707) is under your actual rating (2744) is not possible. You can't perform under your rating and win some points. Seing this could have had prevent your mistake at least help you ;) to see that something was wrong somewhere.

Yes it is possible. If you would win against a 900 rated players and draw to 2800 players while being a 2700 player. You would win several rating points while having a performancerating much lower than you own rating.

Nov-01-05  VishyFan: <Dionyseus> the rating performance is indeed 2788, with an average rating of 2693 and with a score of 62.5%(rounding off to 63, his rating performance would be 95 points plus the average opposition rating)......., 2693+95 is indeed 2788...
Nov-02-05  TruthHurts: <Yes it is possible. If you would win against a 900 rated players and draw to 2800 players while being a 2700 player. You would win several rating points while having a performancerating much lower than you own rating. >

Very true. But I was talking about regular tournaments where the differences between the player's elo doesn't get over 350, which was the case for Kramnik at the european cup.

Nov-02-05  TruthHurts: Note that actually what you said <stijn> might not be true: http://www.fide.com/ratings/calcula... 900 rated players would be counted in the elo performance as 2350 rated players (2700-350) and not as 900 rated players. Beating 900 rated players or 2350 would count the same on the elo performance of a 2700. What you're saying only works if we count 900 rated players without taking in count the 350 points rule in the average of faced opponents, I think that new fide rules don't permit that, though I'm not sure and might be wrong:

<Help notes:
Rtg - Rating of a player.
Rc - Average rating of rated opponents.
Rc note: A difference in rating of more than 350 points will be counted for rating purposes as though it were a difference of 350 points. >

As much as we count any player more than 350 points away from your rating as only 350 points away in the calculus of average rated opponents, it is not possible to have a rating performance under your actual rating and to win points.

Note that the problem of this method is that in particular cases (when difference in elo goes over that 350), two players with different elos facing axactly the same field will have different elo performances. However it secures a coherence between the points won and the performance.

Nov-02-05  VishyFan: <stijn> the scenario u have given might be possible in a world where the rating differences for Performance ratings and for calculating change in ELO differently........, as long as they both follow the same rating difference limit (in this case, it is 350), nobody can gain points while having a rating performance lesser than the person's original rating.......
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is 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, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. 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: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, 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 at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
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 | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us


Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC