|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 128 OF 128 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
May-13-13
 | | chessgames.com: OK, round two of the chronology project employs some methods that Phony suggested, to use the [EventDate "..."] tag. There was also a bug eliminated where a single game missing a date could throw off an otherwise perfect tournament. (Now it works quite oppositely: if even ONE game in a tournament has a full date, we use it in absence of other information.) As these projects usually go, we ended up with a list of "curious exceptions": the tournaments that the software couldn't figure out. Let's take a look at one or two of them: London (1851)
USSR Championship 1966/67 (1966)
Just reading the tournament pages it's clear we have at least a vague idea of when these events took place, but nevertheless no game in these tournaments have a specific date, nor does the PGN show an EventDate tag without "??-??". This shouldn't be a big deal to fix, and 26 problems out of 1,453 tournaments is a very good ratio. Anyhow, other than this handful of "curious exceptions" that caught my eye, I do believe the chronology of the Tournament Index should be greatly improved now. |
 |
May-13-13
 | | TheFocus: This is why <Phony> is our leader. He's always thinking of ways to improve things. Thank you, Fearless Leader! |
|
May-13-13
 | | Phony Benoni: <chessgames.com> Thanks for your work on this. The "curious exceptions" shouldn't be difficult to handle, particularly since we generally know the starting date of a tournament. For instance, London (1851) began 1851.05.27 and USSR Championship 1966/67 (1966) on 1966.12.28. If nothing else, we could just slap those dates on everything from the first round. There still might be a few outliers such as correspondence tournaments. |
|
May-14-13
| | TheFocus: <Linares 1994> was nominated at Game Collection Voting on May 11. |
|
May-15-13
 | | Tabanus: Crosstable in Linares (1994) is not straightened out yet. |
|
May-16-13
| | Tabanus: I'm unable to improve the Jacob Altusky bio. Please let me know about mistakes, or if the English is unreadable. I wondered if Bobby went to the Talmudical Academy, but could not find any proof. I believe there is no online list of students. |
|
May-16-13
 | | Shams: Maybe not the place to ask, but do you guys submit correction slips for incorrect game scores based on no evidence other than the logic of the game itself? For example, it's obvious that Black must have played 26...Kc7 here and the "c" was read as an "e" when the game was transcribed. Should I still search out the correct score (if there is one) or can I submit as is? What if it's a different game and things are slightly less clear? K Friedrichs vs B Schneider, 2001 |
|
May-16-13
| | Phony Benoni: <Shams> Often. It helps if you can find a copy of the score with the correct move, but that can be difficult; typos tend to be perpetuated. http://www.365chess.com/game.php?gi... has the same score as we do. And if you've got a player like Marshall, some of whose best moves were described as looking like typographical errors. care is needed. It may be for this reason that game score typos seem to take the longest time to be corrected. The example you give does seem clear-cut, though. |
|
| May-17-13 | | thomastonk: The current USCF has been founded in 1939 as a merger of two regional chess organisations (according to Wikipedia). But what has happened before? There have been already some organisations in the 19th century, that's sure. Is their history already described? All hints are welcome. Thank you. |
|
May-17-13
 | | jnpope: I have a "problem" with event classifications that I thought you fine folks might be able to help me solve. I'm going through my Pillsbury database and I'm adding/updating event data. Pillsbury gave exhibitions of various types including a case where, due to having a limited amount of time, would start off giving a blind simul of 6, 8 or 10 boards, and after making 8, 10, or 12 moves, would stop and rattle off the location of the pieces on a number of boards. Then, sometimes with additional boards/players being added, would convert the exhibition over to a regular simultaneous so he could speed things along (probably to have the exhibition end on time so he could catch the train to his next exhibition). Is there an accepted nomenclature/abbreviation for such an event (along the lines of "simul", "blind simul", etc.)? |
|
May-17-13
| | Phony Benoni: <jnpope> That's one I hadn't heard before. I know of no such nomenclature myself, and wonder if there has to be one. There are so many rare variations that it may not be worthwhile to invent a new one each time, especially when it could well be forgotten before coming up again. For such rare situations, we could just rely on a brief note in the text of the game to explain the circumstances. If it has to have some designation, I would put it with exhibitions where a limited number of games are played blindfold and the rest in regular simul style. But I don't know what to call those either. |
|
May-17-13
 | | gauer: On the Garry Kasparov page, some may wonder whether something there is new: in addition to showing notable games (in a good deal of cases), and world championships or annotations (in some cases), the calculations also show a "notable tournaments" parameter (Anand currently has only year post-2000 ones here, except the other world championship contentions), and Fischer and Steinitz also have their own newly created tournaments created as a result of the new index, too (for Kramnik, it didn't care whether he had notable tournaments from pre or post-2000, so it is picking the best from the entire list)! So that looks like a neat, new feature - but can a player be notable to a tournament without finishing near the top of the leaderboard?! In regards to doing blind-simuls, a friend who does them says that a main way to get a lot better at them is to do that so-called "position-check" each 5-10 moves or so (rather than merely memorizing move-orders of the opening, it is also both important as an exercise to: name a colour or colour of a piece of a random or empty square, and to check which lines the line movers are controlling, and to what extent (obviously, a pinned knight doesn't control a line if it is pinned, and a bishop can be obstructed prematurely by a piece of either colour - games like kriegspiel are supposed to help a bit for that, too) they can exercise it). |
|
May-18-13
| | Phony Benoni: <thomastonk> I don't know if the history of 19th century national chess associations in the United States has been researched in detailed. One place to look for some fragmentary information is the Book of the Fifth American Congress. This contains a brief memoir of each of the previous congresses, and a summary of the short-lived attempts to build a national organization that each Congress spawned. If you can are able to access Google Books, you can look here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=S9... There were others; for instance, the USA Chess Association held several annual tournaments around 1890, and was apparently in existence as late as 1900 (or at least had a President). Admittedly I have not researched this at all, and there is of course much more to the story. But in those times local clubs and some state associations held sway. There's a bit more to the merger at the end of 1939 that began the USCF. The two organizations, the National Chess Federation (NCF) and the American Chess Federation (ACF), were actually national in scope. The NCF concentrated on master affairs, such as selecting the Olympiad team and running the US championship tournaments which began in 1936; otherwise, it was not active. The ACF was more broadly based, its showpiece being an annual championship tournament open to all comers. Both arose from the Western Chess Association (WCA). This was formed in 1900 (as the Northwestern Chess Association), its scope gradually expanding to all of the US and Canada outside of New York and Pennsylvania. Its leaders formed the NCF in 1926-27, the WCA surviving as a local wing of the national organization. Eventually, dissatisfaction with the inactivity of the NCF led the older organization to reclaim its former scope as the ACF in 1934-35. |
|
| May-18-13 | | thomastonk: <Phony Benoni> Thank you very much. The question arose, when I saw within a few days one such organisation founded in 1871, and another one a quarter of a century later. I will read that book on the fifth congress. |
|
May-19-13
| | Tabanus: On M Didier it looks like I will have to give up too. The book "Amos Burn. A Chess Biography" by Richard Forster (2004) has <L. Didier> on pp. 559, 560, 561 and 643. Perhaps some of you owns this book and can check where the L. is from. |
|
May-20-13
 | | crawfb5: After a long wait, the missing games from Game Collection: 1951 Wertheim Memorial have been added. It is now nominated for a tournament page. |
|
May-20-13
| | Phony Benoni: Just nominated Game Collection: City Club Masters/Amateurs. This tournament is generally known as "London 1900". While I found a number of contemporary sources for the "Masters/Amateurs" name, it might be better to use the generally accepted name. I can go either way, so feel free to vote "NAY" if you'd prefer a change. Also, the Club held a similar tournament in 1904 which I may work on, so it would be good to have a precedent. |
|
May-20-13
| | Phony Benoni: Game Collection: Leningrad 1934 nominated. |
|
May-20-13
| | Phony Benoni: Game Collection: Wageningen 1958 nominated. Busy night. |
|
May-21-13
| | Phony Benoni: OK, I nuked Game Collection: City Club Masters/Amateurs for now. The problem in my mind with "London City Club Masters/Amateurs" is that their proper name was "City of London Chess Club", and that make the Event name kind of long. I'll mull it over for a bit. |
|
May-21-13
| | Tabanus: <PB> Why not just "London (1900)". We already have London (1851) and London (1883). Unless it can be confused with another tournament. |
|
May-21-13
| | TheFocus: I'm with <Tabanus> on this "London (1900)." Just put <City of London Chess Club> in the intro. That should cover everything. |
|
May-21-13
| | Phony Benoni: You're right; I was probably trying to be too exact. Stick with what people will look for, and put details in the introduction. So it's back up for voting. |
|
May-21-13
| | TheFocus: <Phony> And now it's in!! |
|
May-21-13
| | jnpope: FYI, I think I found a significant clue in the M Didier hunt |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 128 OF 128 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
