KWRegan: Regarding whispers from Li Chao about his opponent, and the general "how did this happen?" query, here is the answer I posted to the Facebook NMC group: The answer is that Li Chao played well below his usual level in that game, and his opponent did not play much better. I get markedly different results from chess-db.com; I have never seen a full explanation of how they run their tests. Here are my results, Houdini 4 in single-PV mode to depth 17, http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/.../Reyk...Abrahams, Daniel vs. Li, Chao b : 15 / 36 = 41.7%, 0.096
Li, Chao b vs. Abrahams, Daniel : 11 / 36 = 30.6%, 0.106
*Very* low matching and *high* error from both players---by my rough formula for error 0.096 the quality is 3475 - 1.4*(10,000x0.096) = 3475 - 1.4*960 = 3475 - 1344 = 2130. Here are Li Chao's other games---you can tell immediately at a glance that he played much better and to his normal strength in the other rounds.
Li, Chao b vs. Amin, Bassem : 8 / 21 = 38.1%, 0.041
Li, Chao b vs. Galego, Luis : 9 / 12 = 75.0%, 0.013
Li, Chao b vs. Harika, Dronavalli : 30 / 46 = 65.2%, 0.027
Li, Chao b vs. Kobalia, Mikhail : 12 / 26 = 46.2%, 0.053
Li, Chao b vs. Ontiveros, John : 11 / 22 = 50.0%, 0.048
Li, Chao b vs. Rapport, Richard : 15 / 20 = 75.0%, 0.025
Li, Chao b vs. Restuccia, Francisco : 9 / 18 = 50.0%, 0.068
Li, Chao b vs. Rozentalis, Eduardas : 21 / 34 = 61.8%, 0.047
Kibitzing
