ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 426 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Aug-28-11 | | LIFE Master AJ: If you need one example of just one game, here is one that I first TRIED to upload when I first became a member here: Kasparov,Garry (2851) - Barua,Dibyendu (2555) [D36]
KasparovChess GP g/60 Internet (1.1), 12.02.2000
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5 c6 6.Qc2 Be7 7.e3 Nbd7 8.Bd3 0-0 9.Nge2 Re8 10.0-0 Nf8 11.f3 Ng6 12.Rad1 h6 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Bxg6 fxg6 15.e4 g5 16.e5 Be7 17.f4 gxf4 18.Nxf4 Rf8 19.Ng6 Rxf1+ 20.Rxf1 Be6 21.Ne2 Qd7 22.h4 Re8 23.Ng3 Bf7 24.Nxe7+ Rxe7 25.Nf5 Re6 26.Nd6 Bg6 27.Qc3 Rxd6 28.exd6 Qxd6 29.Qa3 Qb8 30.Qe7 Qg3 31.Rf3 Qg4 32.Qf8+ Kh7 33.Qf4 Qd7 34.Rg3 Be4 35.Qe5 Qf7 36.h5 Qd7 37.b4 a6 38.a4 Kg8 39.a5 Kh7 40.Kf2 Kg8 41.Qb8+ Kh7 42.Qf8 Bc2 43.Qf4 Be4 44.Qe5 Kg8 45.Ke3 Kh7 46.Ke2 Kg8 47.Qb8+ Kh7 48.Qf8 Bc2 49.Kd2 Be4 50.Kc1 Qc7 51.Rg4 Qd7 52.Rf4 Bxg2 53.Qf5+ Qxf5 54.Rxf5 Kg8 55.Kd2 Bh3 56.Rf4 Be6 57.Ke3 Bf7 58.Rf5 Kf8 59.Re5 Be8 60.Kf4 Bf7 61.Kg4 Be8 62.Kg3 Bf7 63.Kf4 Be8 64.Kf5 Bxh5 65.Ke6 Bg6 66.Re3 Bc2 67.Rf3+ Kg8 68.b5 cxb5 69.Kxd5 b4 70.Kc4 b3 71.Kc3 g5 72.d5 g4 73.Rf4 h5 74.d6 1-0 I think Garry's play is very brilliant. About 3-4 months ago, I studied this game (in detail) with my local student, John Laning. You already have Garry's other game against Barua, why not this one? I personally think Garry's play was/is very brilliant. (There may be a couple of POTD's in there as well.) I also have TRIED to upload about 50 games from "Chess Life" recently ... (last six months) but all to no avail. (I have taken to logging out recently when I upload a game, so you won't say, "On no, AJ is trying to send us another game.") |
|
| Aug-28-11 | | LIFE Master AJ: I also tried to upload 10-20 "GM-vs-GM" games ... all are theoretically significant and related to our CG Challenge Game vs Akobian (same line of the Classical Qc2 Nimzo) ... NONE of these have been posted yet ... |
|
| Aug-28-11 | | LIFE Master AJ: I also have the (relatively) new book (Botvinnik vs. Smyslov; 1954, 1957, 1958.) I know - at one time - that all of these games were NOT available (here) - but (for whatever reason) ... all of my attempts to update this DB were usually ignored or passed over ... |
|
Aug-28-11
 | | kutztown46: Here is an idea for your consideration. In between World vs. GM games, we often have Team White vs. Team Black games. Sometimes computers are allowed and sometimes not. What if a certain opening was selected (say the Benoni)? The first few moves of the game (characteristic of the opening system chosen) would be "forced" and the game would start at the end of the forced series of moves. The twist is, instead of randomly assigning participants to one of the teams, allow participants to choose which side they want to play on. Computer use could be allowed. I got this idea while observing the passionate debate on the World Team regarding the Benoni. Some team members thought it would be a very good idea. Others thought it was the height of insanity. I think a fair number of people would enthusiastically participate in this type of challenge. Of course, the opening would not have to be the Benoni. You could have a poll of some kind to see what opening would generate the most interest. |
|
Aug-28-11
 | | chessgames.com: <twinlark> We've gotten more than our share of rain lately but other than that, Irene flew right by us. It was very fortunate for our friends up north that she simmered down over the Atlantic. Incidentally, we've changed hosting companies since 2005 when hurricane Wilma struck. The ISP we were leasing space from had a fancy million dollar generator, but it wasn't quite fancy enough to power their entire building. Solution? Turn off half of their clients! (Chessgames included.) Long story short, we don't do business with them any more. Anyhow, thanks for asking. |
|
Aug-28-11
| | chessgames.com: <kutztown46>
The idea of a "thematic match" applies to Team-vs-Team games here at Chessgames is brilliant. We'd have to pick an appropriate opening, or put it up to a vote, or perhaps draw one out of a hat. And we should try to be careful to not pick anything which has been essentially refuted. (For instance, wasn't the Halloween attack under the microscope in the correspondence world not long ago? Or is that still going on? We don't want to merely duplicate the research of others.) Our schedule dictates that our next team game should be "computers-allowed-Fischerandom" if we follow our pattern strictly. Although Fischerandom has its adherents, some chess fans find it irrelevant, so delaying the next Chess960 game was something we had already considered. Now you have offered a third option: we could instead enjoy a "computers-allowed-thematic" game in place of the Chess960 match. A Benoni, a Shirov-Shabalov Gambit, a Blackmar-Diemer Attack, a King's Gambit, a Fried Liver Attack, the "Immortal Draw" variation... you name it, all's fair in thematic events. And in the end, we'll have a very convincing body of evidence to bolster specific assessments about the opening: our little contribution to opening theory. That is an exciting prospect which we'll take seriously. |
|
Aug-28-11
| | chessgames.com: <LIFE Master AJ> <I have millions of games in my DB ... I don't agree that most (all) were are junk.
However, I DO concur with what you are trying to do here!> Well, Freeman's estimate might be total nonsense. We'll just keep accumulating good games and see how many we get. <On a side note, I have uploaded hundreds of games over the last 3-4 months. ... Many of these games have NOT been posted. Is there any aprticular reason for this, other than a high work load?> There must be. I just took a look at your recent submissions and I see your plea for help now specifically about needing to add Kasparov vs D Barua, 2000 numerous times. I can't imagine why that particular game wouldn't have been accepted, except it's worthwhile to note that there used to be a bug which rejected some games as duplicates which weren't. And that bug is now fixed. So conceivably it might have gotten snagged on that. Anyhow if there are other specific games that were apparently rejected, either name them or resubmit them and we'll try to figure out what the problem is. You apparently give us squeaky clean output from chess software, so any software bugs are likely to be on our end. <ALSO> Another thing which is worth mentioning, not just to you but to all PGN submitters: it's perfectly safe to submit the same game twice. Some users are afraid to do that, they feel like they are "pestering us" or being rude, might cause a duplicate, etc. The fact is it's really no bother at all and the software is too smart to get duplicates that way. If you aren't sure if you submitted a game, or if you are afraid that it got unfairly rejected, feel free to submit it again. |
|
| Aug-28-11 | | DrNyet: For the Opening Explorer and the Endgame Explorer, are all games included regardless of the players' ratings? |
|
Aug-28-11
| | chessgames.com: <DrNyet> Yes, all games. |
|
| Aug-29-11 | | twinlark: The leader board you post on the World Cup (2011) page is a bother. I'm not sure what the answer is but it's not especially useful, being a knockout tournament, for obvious reasons. Maybe as the tourney progresses you could just include the people that are left in the tournament, progressively winnowing the field. That way, the names and games of players who have been knocked out are thrown back into the general database, and if anyone is curious about their games, they can be retrieved from their player pages, while the remaining players will still have all the games they've played still accessible through the links on the leader board. Once you get down to the final sixteen, or even thirty two (three more than you're currently displaying), you can keep their names on the leader board batched according to the round to which they've survived. Just my suggestion FWIW. |
|
| Aug-29-11 | | e4ia: @ <twinlark The leader board you post on the World Cup (2011) page is a bother. I'm not sure what the answer is but it's not especially useful...etc > I don't know which link was posted;
this results link should more than suffice
http://chess.ugrasport.com/?page_id...
or download the pairings at that specific link from sponsor |
|
Aug-29-11
 | | WannaBe: <chessgames.com> Unable to reproduce the same problem with Firefox 3.6.6, currently, it looks like it is an IE issue. |
|
| Aug-29-11 | | LIFE Master AJ: Thanks for posting the Kasparov game ... prolly a POTD in there around move 68. |
|
Aug-29-11
| | chessgames.com: <twinlark: The leader board you post on the World Cup (2011) page is a bother. I'm not sure what the answer is but it's not especially useful, being a knockout tournament, for obvious reasons.> Yes we knew that from the start. It was fun to have it for round #1 and even for the 2nd game it conveyed some interesting info, but at this point we've abandoned it. Ideally we could have special software designed for knock-outs and similar tournaments based on "mini-matches", but until then we'll have to rely on links offsite. <WannaBe> Thanks, we'll look in that direction. |
|
Aug-29-11
| | WannaBe: <chessgames.com> Don't worry about it, looks like it is a strong possibility that it was 'user' induced error after all. Tried again on IE9 both Vista/Win7 and was unable to see it today. Sorry about the false-alarm. |
|
Aug-30-11
 | | kingscrusher: Hi Chessgames
Please could consideration be given for games from the recently completed Saints Open be added - as it shows the return of one of the UK's top players GM Sadler http://www.cotxeres.org/open/
Best wishes
K |
|
Aug-31-11
| | chessgames.com: <kingscrusher> Sure, we can get those games, but their site has pretty sloppy data so it will take a while for us to fix their PGN. They like to jumble player's names around, and have dates of "????.??.??" tossed in at random. Don't worry, we've seen worse. Not to keep you in suspense, you can meanwhile check out the games here: XIII Open Internacional Sants (2011). |
|
| Aug-31-11 | | angslo: cg.com, why did you delete the beautiful post of <moronovich> (on magnus carlsen page yesterday) in which he was trying to help me by saying <get a life, angslo>
could you please explain what was wrong with that post? |
|
| Aug-31-11 | | angslo: anybody else here any idea why?
i have hard time understanding the policies of cg.com. <moronovich> was really trying to help me. yesterday andday before ,i had days off from work and i posted here at cg.com. today i should not be posting here. i should be completely focused at my work so, even though i have grown a lot there are still some compulsive , obsessive tendencies, i think. right guys ? so,moronovich was just trying to help. why was his post deleted? |
|
Aug-31-11
| | chessgames.com: <angslo> This forum is not for discussing specific admin actions. Feel free to email chess@chessgames.com for a more thorough discussion of a specific post. |
|
| Aug-31-11 | | angslo: there got to be transparency. you should explain how your specific action follow from your guideline. i have no intention discussing it through email - not at the moment at least. so, what do you say about this argument of mine? in favor of transparency and in opposition of arbitrariness, should not u discuss it here instead of through email. |
|
Aug-31-11
| | chessgames.com: <angslo>
If it helps, let me say this: there were three recent "whistles" on posts that involved you (either posted by you, or to you). In all three cases the same boxes were checked, "ATTACK", and "OFF-TOPIC". When it comes to deciding whether something is an attack, that can be very slippery. As you point out yourself, even a turn of phrase like "get a life" could be sincere and heartfelt. We don't claim to be able to read minds and know people's intentions. Luckily, the other half of the whistle complaints--the "OFF-TOPIC" part--was easy to determine with relative certainty. The admins merely ask themselves "What does this post have to do with Magnus Carlsen?" If the answer is "absolutely nothing" then they delete the message without compunction. If you want to continue to discuss Showtime's Dexter series and other matters unrelated to Carlsen, you are welcome to do that on our site, but please find a venue more suitable such as the Kibitzer's Cafe or somebody's chessforum. I sincerely hope that helps clarify how we enforce our rules. |
|
| Aug-31-11 | | twinlark: <ceegee>
If I could change the subject back to a discussion I seem to have missed, about including old tournaments in the database, could you tell me whether you'd be willing to include the games of all the previous World Team Championships 1985 when the first one was played in Lucerne? The PGNs are here: http://www.olimpbase.org/ (link in the left column). Similarly with all the Olympiads and other serious events. Similarly I guess, your <Tournaments> database linked through New Games Page seems to include only the tournaments that have been played since this site opened. Will this be extended backwards in time in due course? Finally...the recent years are interwoven with each other, with 2010 and 2011 events interspersed at the top of the database index. Similarly you have 2009 and 2011 events <underneath> the 2002 entries. Any chance of straightening all this out? |
|
| Aug-31-11 | | twinlark: While I'm on a roll, each year of the tournaments page is getting longer, and sometimes after using a find function (from the browser's "edit" menu) to locate a tournament, it's impossible to see which year it's in, without scrolling up or down to the next year heading. Would it be possible to have some sort of marker or whatever that makes it clear what year we're looking at? Maybe even include the year with the information posted about each tournament rather than just the month? |
|
Aug-31-11
| | WannaBe: Is that a French roll or an Egg roll? |
|
 |
|
ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 426 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
