ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 696 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-09-14 | | Karpova: <chessgames.com>
Almost four years have passed, don't you think it is about time to correct Lepeshkin vs Alekseev, 1955 ? |
|
| Apr-09-14 | | LIFE Master AJ: [Event "Dieppe op"]
[Site "Dieppe"]
[Date "2013.08.29"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Andrei Istratescu"]
[Black "Igor Rausis"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C42"]
[WhiteElo "2646"]
[BlackElo "2552"]
[PlyCount "52"]
[EventDate "2013.08.26"]
[EventType "swiss"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "FRA"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "2013.11.20"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d4 d5 6. Bd3 Nc6 7. O-O Be7 8. c4 Nb4 9. Be2 O-O 10. Nc3 Be6 11. Ne5 Bf5 12. a3 Nc6 13. cxd5 Nxc3 14. bxc3 Qxd5 15. Bf3 Qd6 16. Bf4 Nxe5 17. Bxb7 Rab8 18. Bxe5 Qb6 19. Qf3 Rxb7 20. Qxf5 Qc6 21. Rfe1 Bd6 22. Bxg7 Kxg7 23. Qg5+ Kh8 24. Qf6+ Kg8 25. Re5 h6 26. Qxh6 f5 1-0 |
|
| Apr-09-14 | | LIFE Master AJ: I also submitted it ... with the names reversed, if that makes any difference. Many weeks have passed, as far as I can tell, it still has not been uploaded yet ... |
|
Apr-09-14
 | | WannaBe: No, a game submitted with names reversed makes no difference... |
|
Apr-10-14
 | | chessgames.com: New Zealand Seniors Championship (2014) |
|
Apr-10-14
| | chessgames.com: <Karpova> Yes, it is time. I was confused at first what was going on there, but then I was reminded with Once's nice summary: <Now that is seriously funny - and what a dilemma for chessgames.com. Do they correct the game score and keep make all the kibitzing utterly irrelevant? Or do they delete 6 pages of lovely and lively chat? Or keep the game score as it is?> I guess we'll opt for choice one, and hopefully the kibitzing will make it clear what has transpired. |
|
| Apr-10-14 | | LIFE Master AJ: So why hasn't the <above> game been posted ? I submitted both of these games (between Andrei Istratescu and Igors Rausis); but ZERO progress, as far as I can tell. This is also NOT an isolated case! I often post/copy the PGN score, when I submit a game (I also have a CB file of these games); ... I have found omissions going as far back as 2006. |
|
| Apr-10-14 | | TheFocus: <AJ> We all have submitted games that have not been posted yet. Some submitted years ago. Don't take it personally. It is the only pet peeve I have about the site. |
|
| Apr-10-14 | | optimal play: <TheFocus> <... Some submitted years ago ...> Years!? Crikey! And I was starting to get itchy about a few games I posted back on 19th January! :O |
|
| Apr-11-14 | | LIFE Master AJ: Well, I guess its nice to know its not personal ... just behind on everything, I guess. I have a pretty deep library. I also have now about 100+ DVD's ... they send me these things to review. Obviously, when they feature a game, and tout it as being important to theory, I also think it is important. (Mots of the games, I did not come up with these ideas on my own.) It's a shame, I want this site to be current on key games as regarding opening theory, too bad if no one else shares my passion in that department. |
|
Apr-11-14
 | | juan31: chessgames.com; i dont now if is correct or not, to make a sugestion for the "game of the day" i propose; A J Booth vs R Taylor, 2014 |
|
| Apr-12-14 | | TheFocus: <Chessgames.com> Is it still a rule that a game collection must be four games or more to qualify for Historical Page status? If so, this match Game Collection: 1964 Portisch - Reshevsky Play-off Match would not qualify, even though it is a play-off match for eighth place of the Amsterdam Interzonal (1964). Could an exception be made here? |
|
Apr-12-14
 | | Domdaniel: I agree with LMAJ -- < I want this site to be current on key games as regarding opening theory>.
If there's still a serious backlog of submitted games, however, it's hard to see just how games of theoretical significance could be prioritized. |
|
Apr-12-14
 | | perfidious: <Dom> Seems to me that such a task would require someone who is A) a strong player with time on his/her hands and B) au courant with theory. |
|
Apr-12-14
| | chessgames.com: <<Chessgames.com> Is it still a rule that a game collection must be four games or more to qualify for Historical Page status?> Honestly I don't recall the details. The reason for having a "minimum number of games" clause was to prevent accidentally nominating a collection that was either empty or nearly empty, and sometimes these 'shells' might have the same name as the real collection. If there are truly 2-3 game matches that deserve the be given tournament pages then we'll just have to change the limit. Let me get back to you. <juan> That's a great suggestion; it's a pleasure to see our very own Richard Taylor play such a sparkling finish. |
|
Apr-12-14
| | chessgames.com: <TheFocus> Yes, the minimum was set at 4 games, but I just lowered it 2 games. Anything below 2 games the admins can handle on a case-by-case basis. |
|
| Apr-13-14 | | TheFocus: <The reason for having a "minimum number of games" clause was to prevent accidentally nominating a collection that was either empty or nearly empty, and sometimes these 'shells' might have the same name as the real collection.> In that regard, this collection, 18th DSB Kongress (1912), has 28 games missing and should be eliminated as a Historical Page until the submitted games are included. Somehow it was voted in before the games were added. <The reason for having a "minimum number of games" clause was to prevent accidentally nominating a collection that was either empty or nearly empty, and sometimes these 'shells' might have the same name as the real collection.> The Biographers will no longer vote in a collection that is incomplete and unsourced. By the way, the two and three game collections can still not be nominated. |
|
Apr-13-14
| | chessgames.com: <By the way, the two and three game collections can still not be nominated.> Really? I haven't actually tried to do it but the code change seemed so simple I didn't think it required testing. Could you please give me a link to a tournament with 2-3 games so I can do a test? |
|
| Apr-13-14 | | TheFocus: Try this one. Game Collection: 1964 Portisch - Reshevsky Play-off Match |
|
Apr-13-14
| | chessgames.com: Oh, I see the problem now, thanks. We'll have it working in a jiffy. |
|
Apr-14-14
| | Domdaniel: <CG> Have you looked at the 'find similar games' link for Karpov vs Kasparov, 1985?
The error I described above is still there. |
|
| Apr-14-14 | | The Last Straw: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nb5 d6 6. c4 Nf6 7. N1 c3 8. a6 Na3 9. d5 cxd5 10. exd5 exd5 11. Nb4 Be2 12. Bc5 |
|
| Apr-14-14 | | davide2013: I was watching this game: M Basman vs Keene, 1968
And it is written: Notes by Ray Keene, but there are no notes at all. Did they disappear? Or maybe they never existed? |
|
Apr-14-14
| | Domdaniel: <davide2013> That game has '!' on moves 24 and 26, which qualifies as annotation. Maybe we should ask Mr Keene for more. |
|
| Apr-15-14 | | Thanh Phan: I confess to allowing our Hânh, or primary contact to providing information with updates concerning the pgn series listed, as she has the most experience with the problems following the continual ongoing updates of the java conspiracy, her notes on java problems shouldn't be ignored, unless you really don't wish the supported pgn series to work, in that case, resume your complaints |
|
 |
|
ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 696 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
