In regards to your Openings by year question in chessgames forum...

Do you run SCID at all?

If you don't, or if you don't use the Opening Tree feature, I could give you a quick run-down on how to do exactly what you requested.

There's a little bit of a learning curve, but it's mostly intuitive, and therefore, fairly obvious in usage.

(This doesn't apply to all the advanced features - but everything is well worth learning to use)

It's free (aka open-source) software - so the first step is to download a copy (I suggest v4.4):

https://sourceforge.net/projects/sc...

Find your version - let's assume you run windows, then this is the right version:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/sc... (32-bit)

https://sourceforge.net/projects/sc... (64-bit)

The 32-bit is safest, as it works pretty much everywhere.

The next thing you need is a good, complete database - for that, I recommend <MillBase> - another free download:

http://katar.weebly.com/blog/millba...

And the direct link:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u... (144Mb compress/240 Mb compressed)

It's compressed with 7zip, so you might need that software to unpack it:

http://www.7-zip.org/download.html

<MillBase> is up to date with TWIC as of 2017-07. It's historically very complete as well - not perfect, but very good.

Now, you want to create an opening tree from the games.

The quick starting point is to use all the games in <MillBase>.

Select that database in SCID.

Then run the Tree Window button (it's a button on the SCID toolbar that looks, funnily enough, like a tree - often next to the ECO button)).

That will build an opening tree window from the games in the database. Just close the tree window when done.

(To close - right click on the tab, and select close)

If you run opening explorer it should be familiar enough to just hit the ground running.

OK, next step - select a range of games over a certain period.

Use the <Header Search> feature - another button on the toolbar, this time one that looks like a pair of binoculars.

That allows you to select games from a given interval in time. You can permanently make another database, or you can just copy them to the clipboard database in SCID (for temporary use).

After you set up a "filter" via the Header Search, you can go to the Database Switcher winder, and click-drag the games from the database (e.g. <MillBase>) into the Clipboard db.

Then select the Clipboard and rerun the Tree Window button on just those games. It will give you what you wanted.

Don't be put off by this long post. I probably didn't explain it as well as possible. I think, with a little determination, you should quickly figure it out, and realize that it's fairly easy and straight-forward.

I'll check your forum over the next couple of days - in case you have a question or two.

1) pride vs brag
hard to classify an overt statement of accomplishment. classification is usually specific to each recipient

2) non-verbal cues
written text is devoid of them. hard for readers to discern intent and meaning.

<1) pride vs brag>

I mostly had in mind posts that announce that the puzzle was "easy" when in my opinion it was not. Since I am a active 2200 player (USCF master), I logically assume that a user who finds easy something I do not must be way above 2200. I find it odd that anyone that strong and prone to bragging would not write anything about their strength on their user profile, because if they brag about solving a puzzle, why not to brag about their rating too? Announcing that a not-so-easy puzzle was easy makes a claim for high placement in the status hierarchy of chess players. But the world of chess has a well-polished system to define that hierarchy: the rating system (nice treatment of it in Gary A. Fine's "Players and Pawns" and in Puddephatt, A. 2008. “Incorporating Ritual into Greedy Institution Theory: The Case of Devotion in Organized Chess,” The Sociological Quarterly, 49(1): 155-180.)

I would also say that calling the puzzle "easy" is clearly bragging rather than pride. Pride would not lead someone to deride the puzzle, since that detracts from the merit of solving it. A proud statement would be more like: "I was able to solve this difficult puzzle!"

<2) non-verbal cues
written text is devoid of them. hard for readers to discern intent and meaning.> In the absence of the resources provided by face-to-face communication, it is on the writer to make sure his/her meaning is properly conveyed. I can only infer that he wants to announce to the world that 1) he solved the puzzle, 2) it was easy (when it was not so to me). Then what I wrote above (which addresses intent) seems appropriate, or at least seems to fit. I am open to hear alternative analyses where the components of the story also fit. (And I am not even considering that it is not true that he solved the puzzle.)

On a different note, I looked at your user page and noticed that sometimes you post puzzle suggestions on game pages.

Daniel Freeman (also known as <CG>!) advised me that if I want to suggest a puzzle, I can email him, but he told me not to post on the game page so as not to attract attention to it. Over time, I suggested (via email) a number of puzzles that did become puzzles of the day. I still do that now and then.

Round 1: Mariano Sana (2205) v FM Ian Findlay (2406): 0-1

Round 2: Sungho Yim (2373) v Mariano Sana (2205): 1/2-1/2

Round 3: Mariano Sana (2205) v WIM Ashritha Eswaran (2238): 1/2-1/2

Round 4: Gabriel Sam (2313) v Mariano Sana (2205): 0-1

Round 5: Mariano Sana (2205) v FM Sam Shmakel (2450): 0-1

Round 6: Andy Lin (2314) v Mariano Sana (2205): 1-0

Thank you! Yes, I plan to submit all six. A few of them are pretty interesting.

1. Dr. A. Saidy was there! Wow, he's still competing. Good for him. =)

2. N. De Firmian ($1417) and A. Lenderman ($225) won some prize money, but doubtful it was enough to cover for the trip + room + food. Tough to making a living only playing chess. =))