alexmagnus Member since Dec-06-04 · Last seen Jan-16-26 Hobby player. If you feel misunderstood, feel free to say it. My favourite players are: Magnus Carlsen, Kateryna Lagno and Hanna Marie Klek! The domination list, based on the peak rating distance to the #10 player (official lists only, distance 50+ needed to "qualify"): Kasparov 175 (January 1990) Fischer 160 (July 1972) Karpov 130 (January 1989) Carlsen 123 (March 2014) Kramnik 110 (January 1998) Tal 105 (January 1980) Ivanchuk 105 (July 1991) Anand 105 (July 1998) Korchnoi 95 (January 1980) Topalov 84 (July 2006) Caruana 80 (October 2014) Aronian 72 (March 2014) Spassky 70 (January 1971) Shirov 65 (July 1994) Ding 64 (Nov 2022, Dec 2022, Jan 2023) Nakamura 62 (October 2025) Gelfand 60 (January 1991) Kamsky 60 (January 1996, July 1996) Morozevich 57 (July 1999) Portisch 55 (January 1980) Jussupow 55 (July 1986) Timman 55 (January 1990) So 53 (February 2017) Adams 52 (October 2000) Mamedyarov 52 (November 2018, December 2018) Erigaisi 51 (Dec 2024, Jan 2025, Feb 2025) Bareev 50 (July 1991) Vachier-Lagrave 50 (August 2016) ... (Gukesh 43 October 2024) #1 record distances to #2 (no qualification hurdle): Fischer 125 (1972) Kasparov 82 (January 2000) Carlsen 74 (October 2013) Karpov 65 (January 1982) Topalov 34 (July 2006, October 2006) Anand 23 (July 2007) Women's "domination list" since July 2000: J. Polgar 248 (April 2007) Hou 160 (December 2015, February 2019) Humpy 114 (October 2007) Goryachkina 100 (August 2021) S. Polgar 96 (January 2005) Xie 92 (January 2005) Ju 92 (August 2019) A. Muzychuk 82 (August 2012) Zhu J. 77 (December 2025, January 2026) Stefanova 76 (January 2003) Lei 67 (December 2025, January 2026) Galliamova 65 (January 2001) Zhao 64 (September 2013) Kosteniuk 58 (July 2006) Lagno 58 (February 2019) Chiburdanidze 57 (October 2000) Cramling 56 (April 2007) T. Kosintseva 56 (November 2010) Zhu C. 52 (April 2007) M. Muzychuk 52 (June 2019) N. Kosintseva 51 (November 2010) Earliest Soviet championship with living players: USSR Championship (1955) (Shcherbakov) Earliest Interzonal with living players: Gothenburg Interzonal (1955) (Panno) Earliest Candidates with living players: Amsterdam Candidates (1956) (Panno) Earliest WC match with living players: Karpov - Korchnoi World Championship Match (1978) (Karpov) Earliest WC match with living winner: Karpov - Korchnoi World Championship Match (1978) (Karpov) Earliest WC match with both players living: Karpov - Kasparov World Championship Match (1984/85)

alexmagnus has kibitzed 11707 times to chessgames   [more...]

Jan-02-26 alexmagnus chessforum   alexmagnus: <2. Murzin 252> 2652 of course :D      Dec-12-25 Yifan Hou   alexmagnus: I wonder if she still believes there was some conspiracy against her back in that Gibraltar tournament. A question I wouldn't dare to ask her in such a public AMA but that I'd really like to know the answer to. Now, after all the years that passed sice the controversy...      Dec-12-25 Yagiz Kaan Erdogmus   alexmagnus: <Highest-rated 12-year-old ever> Btw, you know who held that record before Erdogmus broke it? Judit Polgar. All the way since 1989.      Dec-05-25 Vachier-Lagrave - Erdogmus (2025)    alexmagnus: <What ever happened to 60 years old Smyslov and Korchnoi being world top 20 dynamos?> Both were consequences of what I refer to as <Fischer gap>.      Nov-30-25 FIDE World Cup (2025)    alexmagnus: o complete the statistics, here Sindarov's way to winning this World Cup. Qualified: by rating R1: bye R2: 1.5-0.5 vs Petrov R3: 1.5-0.5 vs Theorodrou R4: 1-1 vs Yu, rapid 1.5-0.5 R5: 1.5-0.5 vs F. Svane QF: 1-1 vs Martinez, rapid 1-1, quick rapid 1.5-0.5 SF: 1-1 vs ...      Nov-24-25 Wei Yi vs A Esipenko, 2025    alexmagnus: <If Esipenko doesn't win the third-place match to get into the Candidates, this blunder could haunt him for the rest of his life. I hope he makes it; he played very well in the match against Wei Yi, all things considered. He also missed the Candidates by a whisker in the 2023 ...      Oct-27-25 Vladimir Kramnik    alexmagnus: The worst thing to me in the whole debate is Kramnik claiming he showed concern for Naroditsky's health during the latter's final stream. Concern? It was pure <mockery>. If this is the way VK expresses concern, I don't want anyone, ever, to have an emergency with only ...      Oct-23-25 Daniel Naroditsky    alexmagnus: Whatever the cause of death, we've all seen that final stream. Even if his death turns out to be unrelated to Kramnik, it doesn't make Kramnik less of a bully.      Sep-15-25 FIDE Women's Grand Swiss (2025)    alexmagnus: <I think the women should play, say, nine rounds> Usually the formula for the optimal number of rounds in a Swiss system is the floor of the binary logarithm of the number of players plus three. So in this case it would be eight rounds in the women's section and nine in the      Sep-11-25 FIDE Grand Swiss (2025)    alexmagnus: <When has a World Champion lost three games in a row? Kasparov lost to Karpov in the 1986 match, in a tournament surely never.> Ding lost four in a row one IIRC. And of course, when it comes to WC matches, Steinitz lost five in a row against in his match vs Lasker (games ...

indicates a reply to the comment.

< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 57 ·  Later Kibitzing> Jun-15-08    alexmagnus: <sheaf> (from the debate on the MC page). So, here is my first question. How much time is one given at the IMO? 6 tasks for...? Two days? Three? A week? Jun-15-08    sheaf: My knowledge maybe outdated, but I thought there are two sets of problems day 1/day2 3 problems on each day.. but why do you ask that, are you testing me? why would you do that ? and what exactly are you testing me on ?? Jun-15-08    alexmagnus: I'm not testing you, <sheaf>, I just wanted to go on with the debate. 1 day for 3 problems...Now, not much time to think, yes? What I meant, is - in an olympiad one has to be quick. You have some relatively little time for a difficult (but wit enogh talent solvable in that amount of time) task. In real science, you have to prove things proving which may take months, and you don't even know if what you are trying to proof makes sense at all :). Months of patient thinking. It is one of the main differences between an olympiad and what proffessional mathematicians do. It's like running marathon in relation to a 100 meter run. Jun-15-08    sheaf: I like the analogy, but life is finite, bounded above (as well as below). I dont have a theory for IMO-->Real Math , but there isnt too much of difference in the basic nature except as you mentioned patience and I might add "motivation" not in classical terms but from a mordern and scientific perspective, an unmotivated but concerted effort is as likely to fail as a disorganised one (this is my opinion, i dont claim an objective truth).. Now if dont stop now(1.57 am on my comp); then I am going to have some problems in coming weeks. So I apologize in advance, probably I will drop in sometime in near future to continue the debate(I promise you on that, provided you retain some interest).. thanks for a nice conversation. Jun-16-08    ifatkullin: alexmagnus, sheaf: I'd say the greatest difference between math olympiads and math research is that in the first case you know that the problem is (at least in principle) solvable within the given amount of time, whereas in the second case this may not be possible altogether. (So I'd agree with alexmagnus' point of view.) Thus one needs much more motivation and belief in his/her personal ability for being a successful researcher. Another very important feature a researcher needs to possess is the ability to choose good (nontrivial yet solvable) problems. (Would be nice if *god* would make up some math olympiads for math professors so they'd know that all the problems they are given from above may be solved in a week or two of hard work! ;-) ). And all of this should, of course, be complimented by excellent analytical/logical abilities... (In case you're wondering I am a professional mathematician with a reasonable math/science olympiad track from my teenage years.) Jun-20-08    alexmagnus: I made some minor changes to the song in my profile. Now it's "'Cause the game against Carlsen 's still stuck in my head" and the penultimate "intermezzo" ends with "And checkmated my lungs with a scream!" Jul-02-08    alexmagnus: Hm, I'd like to leave a message for a player who I don't know if he reads cg.com (I hope he does, though still the probability he finds my profile is very low). Still, maybe somebody who knows him reads this one by accident. The "message" is, if <Z.Szajbély> or someone who knows him reads it - <I want a rematch>. Answer here for details :) Jul-06-08    Thorski: <alexmagnus: ...and the penultimate "intermezzo"> It's called a bridge. =) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge... Great song by the way! Jul-11-08    alexmagnus: <continuation of the numerous rating inflation debates> Here are results of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest, which can be regarded as the world championship in competitive eating, since 1980: With 12-minute-limitation: 1980: 1. 9 1981: 1. 11(Winner stopped eating after five minutes) 1982: 1. 11 1983: 1. 19 (world record) 1984: 1. 9 1985: 1. 11 1986: 1. 15 1987: 1. 12 1988: 1. 14 1989: 1. 13 1990: 1. 16 1991: 1. 21 (world record) 1992: 1. 19 1993: 1. 17 1994: 1. 20 1995: 1. 19 2. 19 1996: 1. 22 (WR) 2. 20 1997: 1. 24 (WR) 1998: 1. 19 1999: 1. 20 2. 19 2000: 1. 25 (WR) 2. 24 3. 22 2001: 1. 50 (WR) 2. 31 3. 23 2002: 1. 50 2. 26 3. 25 2003: 1. 44 2. 30 2. 29 2004: 1. 53 (WR) 2. 38 3. 32 2005: 1. 49 2. 37 3. 32 2006: 1. 53 2. 52 3. 37 2007: 1. 66 (WR) 2. 63 3. 49 10-minute time limitation: 2008: 1. 59 2. 59 3. 42. Now, are you going to tell me there is a hot dog inflation? Obviously no. Still, the numbers are growing. I think, mainly due to appearance of a dominator (see 2001 and later). Jul-11-08    rogge: That <terminator> theory makes sense ;-) Jul-11-08    alexmagnus: It is also kind of clear why the appearance of a dominator leads to the progress of everybody. While watching what the dominator is doing (in any sport), the other sportspeople try to understand what the difference between him and them is. On the top level (in any sport), dominance is rarely achieved by pure talent (which may lead one on the top, but not to a dominator status); mostly the dominator shows some completely new technique, unknown before. I neither know what Kasparov showed to the chess world (maybe some top players from 1986-99 can answer) nor what Kobayashi showed to the world of competitive eating, but obviously their appearance made both sports progress faster than ever before. Jul-11-08    Xaurus: <alexmagnus> Remember this position? :) click for larger view 21...Qxa3+ Jul-11-08    alexmagnus: Our last game on FICS, no? Jul-11-08    Xaurus: <alexmagnus> That's correct! It may not have meant much to you but to me it was a great experience to actually win a few games. I haven't played since we played those games and I don't think I will. It was kind of a "farewell" for me as a chess player. From now on I'm focusing on a guy called Magnus. ;) Jul-11-08    alexmagnus: I rarely get into such a king hunt. If my king falls it's mostly missed mate in a couple of moves; if the hunt is on the board, it's me hunting. And - you were lower rated than me. Such games get stuck in the memory - losing to a lower rated player by checkmate after a spectacular king hunt... Still I don't want a rematch like in the case of my first tournament opponent (I wonder if I'll ever get <that> rematch...) :) Jul-12-08    Xaurus: <alexmagnus> It's funny, I won 3 of the 11 games we played and all 3 times I won with black. Never with white. The last 2 of those 3 wins I got I won by getting your King out running. :) Jul-25-08    alexmagnus: Hm, remember once we discussed the fact that chessmetrics ratings drift too despite Sonas saying he "calibrates" them? I think now I understand why. He doesn't take the average of players number 3 to 20 on any list and evens it everywhere (that's how many people misuderstood this idea). He takes the players 3 to 20 on the list X, calculates their average and then makes the same average for <the same players> on the list X+1. Jul-25-08    alexmagnus: Just for fun, I need FIDE top-50 or better even top-100 lists since the very first 1970 list! Aug-17-08    alexmagnus: A semi-spectacular finish in my own blitz game: click for larger view 31.Nxf6 Qxf6 32.Rxh7+ Kxh7 33.Nf5+ Kg6 34.Qh5# Sep-05-08    alexmagnus: Carlsen became live rated number 1. finally. Now I'll wait for a day when two other of my favourite players become nr. 1 in the (female) world and in Germany respectively :) Sep-05-08    alexmagnus: Not that I don't trust them more, I just try to be realistic at first :) Sep-06-08    Artar1: <We need your vote in our Battle of the Brains2 game. Can you vote right now? The team needs you. Thanks!> Sep-13-08    alexmagnus: For those who believe that Chessmetrics' calibrating method is good to define inflation, I have a message: in the October list it is 0 points in comparison to the July list :). That is it, the average of the players, who were rated 3 to 20 in the July list, is in both lists 2742. Sep-14-08    alexmagnus: Just did the "Chessmetrics-like calibrating" for all FIDE lists from July 2000 to October 2008. Apparently, by this understanding of inflation, we had a 9-point <deflation> since July 2000. Only one list (October 2000) was inflationary towards the July 2000 list, though there are many lists that are inflationary towards previous list. The list with the record deflation towards the July 2000 list was the January 2006 list (deflation: 22 points). The list with the most deflation towards the previous list was the April 2002 list (deflation: 6 points), the list with the most inflation towards the previous list was the January 2008 list (inflation: 5 points). Yearly comparisons (July->July): 2000->2001: -4 2001->2002: -12 2002->2003: +3 2003->2004: -2 2004->2005: -3 2005->2006: 0 2006->2007: +4 2007->2008: +5. Sep-14-08    alexmagnus: Ok that's how the Top-25 since July 2000 would look like by these calculations: 1.Kasparov 2862 Jan 03 2.Topalov 2831 Jul 06 3.Kramnik 2825 Apr 02 4.Anand 2824 Apr 06 5.Ivanchuk 2801 Okt 07 6.Morozevich 2797 Jul 08 7.Carlsen 2795 Okt 08 8.Svidler 2787 Jan 06 9.Leko 2781 Jul 05 10.Aronian 2779 Jul 06 11.Mamedyarov 2771 Jul 07 12.Adams 2768 Jul 02 13.Shirov 2764 Jan 08 14.Radjabov 2762 Apr 08 15.Ponomariov 2759 Apr 02 Jul 02 Apr 06 16.Polgar 2756 Okt 05 17.Bareev 2752 Okt 02 Okt 03 18.Gelfand 2750 Okt 07 19.Jakovenko 2749 Jul 07 20.Bacrot 2748 Apr 05 21.Grischuk 2745 Jul 03 Okt 03 22.Wang Y. 2745 Okt 08 23.Karjakin 2743 Apr 08 24.Navara 2741 Okt 06 25.Movsesian 2741 Okt 08 Jump to page #   (enter # from 1 to 57) search thread:    < Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 57 ·  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: No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members. Nothing in violation of United States law. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members. No trolling. 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. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times. 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 user 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.

You are not logged in to chessgames.com. If you need an account, register now; it's quick, anonymous, and free! If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.