|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 91 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jul-06-07
 | | kutztown46: Forum planning for 47. Bc3:
Possible moves are 47...Qf4+, Qg5
Forums for 47...Qf4+:
Forum 1: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kh1 d2 49. Qd1
Forum 2: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kh1 d2 49. Bxd2
Forum 3: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kh1 Qc1+ 49. Kh2 Qg5 50. Bf3
Forum 4: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kh1 Qc1+ 49. Kh2 Qg5 50. Qb4
Forum 5: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kg1 Qg5
Forum 6: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kg1 d2
Forum 7: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kg1 Qe3+
Forum 8: 47...Qf4+ 48. Kg1 Qc1
Forums for 47...Qg5:
Forum 1: 47...Qg5 48. Kh1
Forum 2: 47...Qg5 48. Qb4
Forum 3: 47...Qg5 48. Bf3
Forum 4: 47...Qg5 48. Qf7
Forum 5: 47...Qg5 48. Qc4
Forum 6: 47...Qg5 48. Qd1
Forum 7: 47...Qg5 48. Qa4
Forum 8: 47...Qg5 48. Qb1 |
|
Jul-06-07
| | kutztown46: Forum planning for 47. Kh1:
Possible moves are 47...Qe1+, Re8, Qg5
Forums for 47...Qe1+:
Forum 1: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc2 d2 50. Bxd2 Rxd2 51. Qf3 Forum 2: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc2 d2 50. Bxd2 Rxd2 51. Qg3 Forum 3: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc2 d2 50. Bxd2 Rxd2 51. Qc3 Forum 4: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc2 Qg5 50. Bf3
Forum 5: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc2 Qg5 50. Qb4
Forum 6: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc2 Qg5 50. Qf7
Forum 7: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc2 Qc7+
Forums for 47...Re8:
Forum 1: 47...Re8 48. Qf7 Re1+ 49. Kh2 Qxb2 50. Qf8+ Kh7 51. Qf5+ g6 52. Qxd3 Qe5+ Forum 2: 47...Re8 48. Qf7 Re1+ 49. Kh2 Qxb2 50. Qf8+ Kh7 51. Qf5+ g6 52. Qxd3 Qf6 Forum 3: 47...Re8 48. Qf7 Re1+ 49. Kh2 Qxb2 50. Qf8+ Kh7 51. Qf5+ g6 52. Qd7+ Qg7 53. Qxd3 Qe5+ Forum 4: 47...Re8 48. Qf7 Re1+ 49. Kh2 Qxb2 50. Qf8+ Kh7 51. Qf5+ g6 52. Qd7+ Qg7 53. Qxd3 Qc7+ Forum 5: 47...Re8 48. Qf7 Re1+ 49. Bf1 Qxb2 50. Qf8+ Kh7 51. Qf5+ g6 52. Qd7+ Forum 6: 47...Re8 48. Qf7 Re1+ 49. Bf1 Qxb2 50. Qf8+ Kh7 51. Qf5+ g6 52. Qxd3 Forums for 47...Qg5:
Forum 1: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Qxd2 50. Qf3 Qd1+ Forum 2: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Qxd2 50. Qf3 Qc1+ Forum 3: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Qxd2 50. Qg3 Qd1+ Forum 4: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Qxd2 50. Qg3 Qc1+ Forum 5: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Qxd2 50. Kh2
Forum 6: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Qxd2 50. Bf1
Forum 7: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 |
|
Jul-06-07
| | kutztown46: Forum planning for 47. Kg1:
Possible moves are 47...Qg5, Qe1+, Qe3+
Forums for 47...Qg5:
Forum 1: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 50. Qf3 Qxg2+ Forum 2: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 50. Qf3 h5 Forum 3: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 50. Qf3 Rd8 Forum 4: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 50. Qf3 Ra2 Forum 5: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 50. Qf3 Rxg2+ Forum 6: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 50. Qf3 Qe7 Forum 7: 47...Qg5 48. Bc3 d2 49. Bxd2 Rxd2 50. Qf3 Qg6 Forums for 47...Qe1+:
Forum 1: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc3 Qc7+ 50. Kh1 d2 51. Bxd2 Rxd2 52. Qf3 Qc1+ Forum 2: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc3 Qc7+ 50. Kh1 d2 51. Bxd2 Rxd2 52. Qf3 Rb2 Forum 3: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc3 Qc7+ 50. Kh1 d2 51. Bxd2 Rxd2 52. Qa4 Qc1+ Forum 4: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc3 Qc7+ 50. Kh1 d2 51. Bxd2 Rxd2 52. Qa4 Rd8 Forum 5: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc3 Qc7+ 50. Kh1 d2 51. Bxd2 Rxd2 52. Qa4 Rb2 Forum 6: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc3 Qc7+ 50. Kg1 d2 Forum 7: 47...Qe1+ 48. Kh2 Qe7 49. Bc3 Qc7+ 50. Kg1 Qc5+ Forums for 47...Qe3+:
Forum 1: 47...Qe3+ 48. Kh1 Qe1+ 49. Kh2 Qe7 50. Bc3 Qc7+ Forum 2: 47...Qe3+ 48. Kh1 Qe1+ 49. Kh2 Qe7 50. Bc3 d2 Forum 3: 47...Qe3+ 48. Kh1 Qg5 49. Qd1
Forum 4: 47...Qe3+ 48. Kh1 Qg5 49. Bc3
Forum 5: 47...Qe3+ 48. Kh1 Qf4 49. Qc3
Forum 6: 47...Qe3+ 48. Kh1 Qf4 49. Bc3
Forum 7: 47...Qe3+ 48. Kh1 Qe7 |
|
Jul-06-07
| | kutztown46: If white moves Be5 or Qc3, then forum assignment is easy because our next move is obvious. Just copy the forums as shown and make the assignments. If white moves Bc3, Kh1 or Kg1, then it is more tricky because there is more than one plausible choice for us. My advice is to wait a few hours and see what direction the team seems to be going. If there is a strong favorite, again it becomes easy. For example, suppose white moves Kg1 and very quickly most team members support Qg5. Just use all seven Qg5 forums and have just one each for Qe1+ and Qe3+. If there is not a strong favorite, then it gets trickier. Just choose a number of forums for each plausible black move, combining my suggested forums as needed. |
|
Jul-07-07
 | | Open Defence: congrats!!! well done!!! |
|
Jul-07-07
 | | chancho: <kutztown46> Thanks for all your hard work on the forums as well as the variation index. It was such a pleasure being a part of the world team with you. |
|
| Jul-07-07 | | chesstoplay: Just wanted you to know that your questions were e-mailed to Yury tonight as part of the first attachment. Thanks again!
Peter / chesstoplay |
|
| Jul-08-07 | | twinlark: <<kutztown46>> Congratulations on excellent leadership and helping to bring the World Team in to a well deserved and brilliant win! |
|
Jul-09-07
 | | Tabanus: Hello <kutztown46>, here is the list I had ready for 47.Be5: Analysis of 47...Qg5 48.Bc3 d2
Analysis of 47...Qg5 48.Bc3 Qf4+ and others
Analysis of 47...Qg5 48.Bg3 d2 49.h4
Analysis of 47...Qg5 48.Bg3 d2 49.Bf3 and others
Analysis of 47...Qg5 48.Bc7 d2
Analysis of 47...Qg5 48.Bc7 Rd7 and others
Analysis of 47...Re8 48.Qc3
Analysis of 47...Re8 48.Qd5
Analysis of 47...Re8 48.Bc3 and others
You have done this many times, and knows best how it works. I just have an idea: Let's say 47...Qg5 wins. Now, why not just continue with only six forums (the six Qg5 forums)? I see the following advantages: 1) The analyses stay in the same forum for a longer time (at least 3 days longer). Less confusing for the reader, especially if the hosts do not update. 2) The 3 remaining forum hosts get a break.
After e. g. 48.Bc3 there is only two left, so now you would have start with 9 again. (I think I would prefer 8, with the 9th in reserve.) You probably noticed that I entered the forums and made starter diagrams (with a 'quick look' or RV's line in addition). What do you think of this? I did not think it was necessary always to do so, since the position was won (later stages), but I think this may be useful in the GMT middlegame if the host does not do it. I think maybe <twinlark> did it a few times, I can't remember! <Karpova> did it for me when I was new in the GMAN game, it was OK. I will probably want to do this in the GMT game... hopefully the forum hosts think this is OK and don't feel it's interfering too much. Sorry about my bad English! Hmm, another idea: maybe it's wise to encourage the forum hosts *not* at all to make "Analysis of ...." in their forum headers, since this will not be updated anyway!? Well, let's see what happens. Anything can happen...
|
|
| Jul-10-07 | | Artar1: <kutztown46>:
I would like to personally thank you for all of your fine effort and dedication to our game. We couldn't have done it without you. You possess wonderful organizational leadership and skills, something that was very much needed in our game with Yury. Without organization, a team cannot hope to function at its best. I look forward to working with you again. Take care. Best regards,
Artar1 |
|
| Jul-12-07 | | Red October: If the World Team needs a dedicated forum for anything you can use mine, I may not have the computer power or the chess analysis skills of some of the more accomplished analysts but am keen to help in any way I can |
|
Jul-12-07
| | Tabanus: <kutztown46>
<Red October> (alias Open Defence) was a dedicated forum host in the GMAN game. She may want a permanent forum, but could also host a "temporary" one. I will try to answer your post in my forum. I hope more dedicated hosts will volunteer! |
|
Jul-12-07
 | | WannaBe: I will volunteer to host a temporary permanent one, or a permanent temporary one. Either or. |
|
| Jul-12-07 | | zanshin: <kutztown46> I know it's way too early, but I'd like to volunteer to host a temporary forum. Hopefully, I've learned how to do so from the GMYS game. I've also gotten Fritz 10 so I can analyze my assigned lines to complement the analyses of the other Team members. But if you find yourself swamped with offers from more competent analysts, then I'll understand ... whatever is best for the Team, right? |
|
Jul-12-07
| | Tabanus: <WannaBe> You are always here, but I fear the number of off-topic posts would take enormous proportions :) <zanshin> One does not have to be a "competent analyst"! |
|
| Jul-12-07 | | zanshin: <Tabanus: <zanshin> One does not have to be a "competent analyst"!> It sure helps! It's not that hard to search the main forum for relevant engine analyses and paste them into your forum. I think that's the minimum a forum host should do. But I also think the host should be able to summarize on his/her forum as well as the main forum the main ideas behind all those lines. I know that you and Kutztown46 are thinking of reducing the number of forums, or making them more variable. As I said in the GMYS game, I think that's a good idea. Use only the number of forums you need. Here's another idea: rank the forum hosts. Assign forums preferentially to the higher ranked hosts, or assign the less important lines to the less capable analysts. I don't know if Kutztown46 has been doing this intentionally or not, but I think it's a good idea (although it might be controversial). At critical times in the game, you go with your "starters." Those of us who are not "starters" don't mind being benched because we understand our roles. I hope you understood the American sports analogy ;-) |
|
Jul-12-07
| | Tabanus: <zanshin> <kutz> will decide :) If he wants to rank the forum hosts, it's OK with me. If he won't, it's OK too. I hope we will get so many good hosts available that the question becomes irrelevant. The hosts should get a break sometimes, and who can tell in advance what will be good or bad ;) <I also think the host should be able to summarize on his/her forum as well as the main forum the main ideas behind all those lines> I think this is way too much to ask for. The host will not be able to understand a 30-ply deep tactical line, not to mention several of them. Remember in the GMYS game honest competent people complained they did not understand the position between moves 20 and 40? I don't think people would listen much either. I hope we'll get good summarizers on the main page. |
|
| Jul-12-07 | | Artar1: <kutztown46: <Artar1>, can you clarify your plans for the new game?> I think you have understood me correctly.
This time around I will be providing two services:
1. Deep Shredder 9 analysis, brute force, running 24/7, a service similar to what <RV> provides. (You know <RV> may want to go on a vacation, or something! Gasp!) 2. Sliding forward analysis on any line requested using my dual-core box and Deep Fritz 10. I am hoping to upgrade this unit soon to a full-blown Quad Core. If you need a temporary forum host, I can do that too if there are too many slackers. Good forum candidates would be <jepflast>, <Tabanus>, <Hugin>, <Tef>, <Themofro>, <chancho>, <Deep Breath>, <whatthefat>, <zanshin>, <GoldenKnight>, <Bommie>, <Dionyseus>, <Nightranger>, <cornflake>, and <dalbertz>. Let me know if you have any more questions. |
|
| Jul-12-07 | | zanshin: <Artar1> Thanks for the plug ;-) With you and <RV> working together, I'm beginning to think we can let GMT choose the opening! ;-) <Tabanus: The host will not be able to understand a 30-ply deep tactical line ... I hope we'll get good summarizers on the main page.> I understand what you're saying. What I mean by summary was a more simplistic statement such as, "if he plays this, we should reply with this (because ...)" That might be too simplistic. And I agree, I wish we could have <Destructor>-type summaries on the main page. The forum host might not be able to see how his/her conclusions rank compared with the other lines being studied. |
|
Jul-12-07
| | Tabanus: <zanshin> I noticed that you wrote summaries earlier, and if the host wants to this it's fine. I just don't think it's a big deal. I have not thought much about it really; let's say we have three forums for 17.d5 etc., perhaps there is a chance that one host recommends the move and the two others not. <The forum host might not be able to see how his/her conclusions rank compared with the other lines being studied.> Exactly! I think the main purpose of the forums is to collect the analyses and make them easily accessible. This should facilitate the debate on the main page, where consensus will be reached (more or less) anyway. |
|
Jul-12-07
| | kutztown46: <Red October>: Thanks for the offer to host a forum. I'll definitely keep you in mind. <zanshin>: Same for you. You did a fine job in the GMYS game. <Tabanus> and I have been talking about it, and I think we both agree that the best analysts should not be forum hosts. They should instead be free to roam all the forums and contribute analysis where it is needed and not have to worry about maintaining their own forum. I am NOT going to rank forum hosts. In fact, I made a deliberate effort during the last game to try to give all of the forum hosts a chance to host the forum perceived to be the main line. <zanshin>: I agree with <Tabanus> that summarizing can be a lot to ask of a forum host. Before I became forum coordinator in the last game, I hosted a few forums for "underdog" moves. I thought my head was going to explode. I was doing my own analysis and also trying to answer all the critics and follow the analysis of others. The hardest part was writing a summary. That's why we get so few of them and that's why I hope <TheDestruktor> will do that for us in the new game. |
|
| Jul-13-07 | | zanshin: <kutztown46> Fair enough! Thanks for the reply. I understand your reasons for not ranking the hosts as well as not having the best analysts host forums. So if you need the poorer analysts as hosts, I'm your guy ;-) Seriously, I'm available to do as much or as little as needed. |
|
| Jul-16-07 | | MrSpock: <Refutation of illogical voting candidates:> I will start after my holidays on August 11.
Greetins from Switzerland |
|
| Jul-17-07 | | dalbertz: Thought I'd reply here, too, Kutz - I'll be happy to host a forum again for the Timmerman game. |
|
| Jul-20-07 | | Boomie: <Kurtztown: 2) You might like this one. Once we know what variation of what opening we are playing, I would like to see someone host a forum devoted to reviewing specific games relevant to the variation we are playing. For example, suppose we are in a certain variation of the KID. Someone should coordinate the review of games which white did not win which opened with that variation. I did this briefly in the last game.> That one does appeal to me the most. I like to put up lots of pictures. The lines sometimes put me to sleep. LOL Did you see my breakdown of the openings on page 129? It could help you with forum assignments. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 91 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
A majority vote for 1-0 means we resign. 