Only three draws, really. The advanced search returns the games twice because both players match the search "Kosintseva" :)>>

<< COMING RIGHT UP >>

In a desperate last-minute betting frenzy, User: Barok Espinosa won a number of high-stakes wagers and rocketed to first place! His final total was 21,072 chessbucks. Congratulations to Barok, a free year's premium membership has been added to his account.

The top 10 players have all now qualified for the upcoming Championship Leg. This means they will start the next leg with 10,000 chessbucks instead of the normal 1,000.

THE TOP 10 LIST, FALL 2009

(1) Barok Espinosa (21,072)
(2) SwitchingQuylthulg (19,623)
(3) malthrope (12,879)
(4) BlackDahlia (10,740)
(5) kspiteri (9,533)
(6) dalbertz (9,073)
(7) Inertia (8,116)
(8) wallytherhino (7,187)
(9) angeloram (6,982)
(10) Shadowmancer (6,298)

The next leg will begin on or about January 1st 2010 and will last about 3 months. A number of players have qualified for the championship leg so that they will receive 10K chessbucks, however even if you didn't qualify you can still compete... it will just take a lot of luck to catch up. We will provide the complete list of qualifying players later.

What I told you was with absolute certainty. I'd stake my life on what I told you was true. You're not dealing with an ordinary memory in my case (for clarification I'd suggest viewing the section "Mal's profile..." and "Postscripts" located in my Profile). I have both a mental image of it as well as stored memory. ;)

However, you've left yourself open for one last possibility - <"Is it possible that you bought the 300 ticket in two steps (e.g. 200, then later 100?)"> Yes, that is exactly what I did. Having bet $200 first and then later followed up with another $100 = $300 total. Your investigation of the logfiles should now prove quite useful. In the future, I will save a hard copy of any anomalies that might crop up. Then you will have three infallible memory points to deal with! ~lol~ ;)

Moving right along...

Congrats to <Barok Espinosa> for winning the Fall leg. I thought <Switch> had it, but it just goes to show that anything can happen in the final bet. As for me? I did my job and qualified in the Top Ten. <*grin*>

"Happy New Year" to everyone! :^)

- Mal

PS: <a4a5: I was massively lucky the past two days and moved up from #447 on the list to #12, only to fall short 100 chessbucks of being in the top ten. Good times anyway!>

<[Mal:] However, you've left yourself open for one last possibility - <<"Is it possible that you bought the 300 ticket in two steps (e.g. 200, then later 100?)">> Yes, that is exactly what I did. Having bet $200 first and then later followed up with another $100 = $300 total. Your investigation of the logfiles should now prove quite useful. In the future, I will save a hard copy of any anomalies that might crop up. Then you will have three infallible memory points to deal with! ~lol~ ;)>

This is where they now need to examine and investigate. It should provide the truth to the answer they are seeking. ;)

see you guys in Championship Leg next year..

Thanks to CG.com and to <malthrope>, <NakoSonorense>, <wordfunph>...

Our logfile investigation yielded two interesting things. One, that you did indeed buy it in two stages (100 plus 200), but also something entirely unexpected: that the number was, oddly, written into the logfile as "0100" and not simply "100", likewise your next bet was "0200" and not just "200".

Of course the leading-zero issue should make absolutely no difference, and if you want to write "5 chessbucks" as "0005" you should be welcomed to. However, our programmer is scratching his head trying to figure out why those leading zeros weren't snipped off long before they hit the logfile, like they should have. This might be a clue as to what was so different about this one transaction which never manifested before.

Those familiar with ChessBookie Game Help Page know that these players will all start with a whopping 10,000 chessbucks--however, those who didn't qualify shouldn't give up hope, because historically there have always been cases of very lucky people who started with 1,000 and still had a respectable finish. (At least one of them is in the following list.)

♔ QUALIFICANTS FOR THE CHESSBOOKIE CHAMPIONSHIP ♔

You are right, OF COURSE Barok Espinosa should be in the list. Sorry Barok! Yes, you qualify. And the total # of qualificants is 37, not 36.

About the "top 12", I just went to the Hall of Fame where it clearly says <Qualifying runners up...> and lists not 9 people like all other legs, but 11. I haven't the foggiest idea why, unless it's simply a typographical error which went unnoticed for a year.

I would have to go back to kibitzing during that time to see if there was some particular reason for giving them qualifying status e.g. if some bet at the very end was in error we may have magnanimously allowed them to qualify to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I make a living from these two glorious lines of Perl code:

my $juice = int(($pool-$winpool)/20);
givetobookie($juice);

Note that "$pool-$winpool" is another way of saying "loser pool" and /20 is another way of saying *0.95.

a) loser pool * 0.95

b) int(loser pool * 0.95)

c) loser pool - int(loser pool/20) (that is, loser pool minus juice)?

Well thanks <ChessBookie> :) I simply knew the final bet was $300 and that three reference points (in total) were used to form this conclusion (stored image of the bet, stored fact in memory and lastly I'd several thought processes regarding the final bet total being $300 and the merits of it plus or minus). Three points of memory reference with me means it's an absolute certainty <"unless"> it's due time to invoke Holmesesque principles to discover the ultimate truth! ~lol~ ;)

<Our logfile investigation yielded two interesting things. One, that you did indeed buy it in two stages (100 plus 200), but also something entirely unexpected: that the number was, oddly, written into the logfile as "0100" and not simply "100", likewise your next bet was "0200" and not just "200">

Yes exactly and now that I think about it my bet was initially $100 and $200 was tacked on later. My mind was simply fixated only on the bet total being $300 as the main point of contention. As per my usual MO which is to bet $10 or $100 first and only then make additions to it... When I'm using <ChessBookie> the BET text box will always pop-up a <zero> as the first integer appearing on the screen. Sometimes I'll add to it (010 or 0100) and other times delete it (the <zero>) first then post numerically (10 or 100). It appears to be a totally random choice on my part which way I'll go with it! ~lol~ ;)

<Of course the leading-zero issue should make absolutely no difference, and if you want to write "5 chessbucks" as "0005" you should be welcomed to. However, our programmer is scratching his head trying to figure out why those leading zeros weren't snipped off long before they hit the logfile, like they should have. This might be a clue as to what was so different about this one transaction which never manifested before.

We'll be doing some testing in the next few days before the Championship Leg begins. Thanks for your help.>

Well <ChessBookie>, I'm glad the problem was finally uncovered... :) All I knew was that my refund (from the canceled game Russian Women's Championship: Rd 8: Pogonina vs Stepovaia bet) was $100 short and I thought you should know about it! :D

Good Luck with your testing procedures...

And, "Happy New Year!" :^)

My Best, - Mal

PS: <SwitchingQuylthulg: <malthrope> Sorry for doubting your memory ;-))>

No problem <Switch> :) Your story about <"a species of very intelligent salamander-like creatures that invented blindfold chess but went extinct millions of years ago"> and <"technical draw - managing to convince 98 per cent of US population that Apollo splashdowns had to be faked after the astronauts discovered the Moon was made of cheese"> was a classic! :))

PPS: <Chessgames Bookie: however, those who didn't qualify shouldn't give up hope, because historically there have always been cases of very lucky people who started with 1,000 and still had a respectable finish. (At least one of them is in the following list.)>

Twice actually. ;)

In the Winter Championship leg of 2008 <technical draw> was the very first to prove it was possible by placing 3rd! :)

Then in the Winter Championship leg of 2009 <DCP23> was the second to overcome this handicap by placing 8th. He immediately proclaimed himself - the People's Champion! :)

References: ChessBookie Hall of Fame - http://www.chessgames.com/chessbook... - http://www.chessgames.com/chessbook... - last, but not least -- my infallible memory! ~lol~

It appears that in the 1st Winter <ChessBookie> Championship leg of 2007 that six members all starting with $1,000 made it into the 'Top Ten' that year (unless my eye to monitor screen coordination has played tricks on me again!).

The six were: <hairmajorchair>, <Andoy>, <kellmano>, <Bob726>, <Shajmaty> and <ronaldducalang>.

However, after that it has only occurred twice (once each in 2008 and 2009) as previously explained with <technical draw> & <DCP23> respectively. No one starting with only $1,000 c-bucks has ever won the Winter <ChessBookie> Championship title yet! ;)

Could <YOU> be the first? :P

- Mal

Thanks

The 37 lucky qualificants all have 10,000 chessbucks in their account, and everybody else has the normal 1,000 chessbucks.