Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Kenneth Rogoff
Number of games in database: 189
Years covered: 1968 to 2012
Last FIDE rating: 2505

Overall record: +64 -36 =88 (57.4%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games in the database. 1 exhibition game, blitz/rapid, odds game, etc. is excluded from this statistic.

With the White pieces:
 Sicilian (14) 
    B23 B21 B82 B25 B83
 English (9) 
    A15 A13 A10 A18 A16
 Ruy Lopez (9) 
    C84 C69 C91 C97 C60
 English, 1 c4 c5 (9) 
    A36 A34 A39 A30 A32
 English, 1 c4 e5 (7) 
    A29 A20 A28 A22
 King's Indian (6) 
    E62 E63 E69 E67 E74
With the Black pieces:
 Sicilian (16) 
    B93 B30 B81 B53 B84
 Caro-Kann (11) 
    B17 B14 B13 B12
 English, 1 c4 c5 (10) 
    A30 A34 A33 A36 A31
 Petrov (8) 
    C43 C42
 King's Indian Attack (6) 
 Grunfeld (6) 
    D86 D76 D91 D93 D87
Repertoire Explorer

NOTABLE GAMES: [what is this?]
   Rogoff vs S Spencer, 1969 1-0
   Rogoff vs R Blumenfeld, 1976 1-0
   Rogoff vs Timman, 1971 1-0
   Huebner vs Rogoff, 1972 1/2-1/2
   Rogoff vs A H Williams, 1969 1/2-1/2
   Rogoff vs Larsen, 1976 1/2-1/2
   Smejkal vs Rogoff, 1980 0-1
   Sosonko vs Rogoff, 1976 1/2-1/2
   Rogoff vs O H Castro Rojas, 1976 1-0
   A Lombard vs Rogoff, 1976 0-1

NOTABLE TOURNAMENTS: [what is this?]
   Norristown (1973)
   USA-ch / Zonal (1975)
   Lone Pine (1978)
   United States Championship (1974)
   Rubinstein Memorial (1975)
   Lone Pine (1976)
   United States Championship (1978)
   Las Palmas (1976)
   Biel Interzonal (1976)

GAME COLLECTIONS: [what is this?]
   Ken Rogoff Chess Highlights by GumboGambit
   US Championship 1974 by Phony Benoni
   US Championship 1975 by suenteus po 147

   🏆 Exhibition blitz game
   Rogoff vs Carlsen (Aug-28-12) 1/2-1/2, blitz

Search Sacrifice Explorer for Kenneth Rogoff
Search Google for Kenneth Rogoff
FIDE player card for Kenneth Rogoff

(born Mar-22-1953, 69 years old) United States of America

[what is this?]

Kenneth Saul Rogoff learned chess from his father at age six, but only took up the game in earnest when he received a chess set for his 13th birthday. He was soon recognised as a chess prodigy. By age 14, he was a USCF master and New York State Open Champion, and shortly thereafter became a senior master, the highest US national title. At sixteen, Rogoff dropped out of high school to concentrate on chess, and spent the next several years living primarily in Europe and playing in tournaments there. When eighteen, he made the decision to go to college and pursue a career in economics rather than to become a professional player, although he continued to play and improve for several years afterward.

Rogoff was awarded the IM title in 1974 and the GM title in 1978. He came third in the World Junior Championship of 1971 and finished second in the US Championship of 1975, which doubled as a Zonal competition, one-half point behind Walter Shawn Browne this result qualified him for the 1976 Interzonal at Biel, where he finished 13-15th. In other tournaments he finished equal first at Norristown 1973 and Orense 1976.

Early in his economics career, Rogoff served as chief economist at the International Monetary Fund and also at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. He is currently the Thomas D. Cabot Professor of Public Policy and Professor of Economics at Harvard University.

Rogoff's biography in his own words:; Rogoff's game against Magnus Carlsen in August 2012 in New York:; Article by Rogoff in Chessbase titled <Rogoff on innovation, unemployment, inequality and dislocation> with particular reference to professional chess:

Wikipedia article: Kenneth Rogoff

Last updated: 2019-09-30 19:27:17

 page 1 of 8; games 1-25 of 189  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Larsen vs Rogoff ½-½351968Canadian OpenA02 Bird's Opening
2. Rogoff vs S Spencer 1-0201969US Jnr ChpB15 Caro-Kann
3. Rogoff vs Bellon Lopez  1-0341969Wch U20 prel-CA07 King's Indian Attack
4. Rogoff vs J Krotki  1-0461969Wch U20 fin-BC05 French, Tarrasch
5. Rogoff vs S Bouaziz  ½-½451969Wch U20 fin-BA00 Uncommon Opening
6. E M Green vs Rogoff ½-½371969Wch U20 prel-CB12 Caro-Kann Defense
7. Rogoff vs Ermenkov 0-1401969Wch U20 fin-BB14 Caro-Kann, Panov-Botvinnik Attack
8. E Torre vs Rogoff 1-0281969Wch U20 fin-BB14 Caro-Kann, Panov-Botvinnik Attack
9. E M Green vs Rogoff  0-1251969Wch U20 fin-BA36 English
10. Rogoff vs A Urzica  ½-½261969Wch U20 prel-CC84 Ruy Lopez, Closed
11. Rogoff vs G Ligterink  1-0481969Wch U20 fin-BA09 Reti Opening
12. L Ogaard vs Rogoff  0-1271969Wch U20 fin-BD87 Grunfeld, Exchange
13. Rogoff vs Andersson  0-1331969Wch U20 prel-CA04 Reti Opening
14. R Meulders vs Rogoff  0-1491969Wch U20 prel-CA07 King's Indian Attack
15. N Craske vs Rogoff  0-1431969Wch U20 fin-BA07 King's Indian Attack
16. Rogoff vs J Kristiansen  1-0351969Wch U20 fin-BB69 Sicilian, Richter-Rauzer Attack, 7...a6 Defense, 11.Bxf6
17. K Payrhuber vs Rogoff 0-1211969Wch U20 fin-BC42 Petrov Defense
18. Rogoff vs A H Williams ½-½1061969Wch U20 fin-BA56 Benoni Defense
19. Rogoff vs R Toran Albero  1-0341970MalagaB32 Sicilian
20. Pomar Salamanca vs Rogoff  1-0401970MalagaA31 English, Symmetrical, Benoni Formation
21. Rogoff vs Z Vranesic  0-1481970Ontario opB83 Sicilian
22. Rogoff vs Kurajica  ½-½371970MalagaA53 Old Indian
23. J Durao vs Rogoff 0-130197010th Costa del SolB93 Sicilian, Najdorf, 6.f4
24. H Pfleger vs Rogoff 1-0591970WchT U26 17thA58 Benko Gambit
25. Pomar Salamanca vs Rogoff  ½-½521971MalagaA49 King's Indian, Fianchetto without c4
 page 1 of 8; games 1-25 of 189  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | Rogoff wins | Rogoff loses  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8264 OF 8264 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: Steve Kerr in Dallas, commenting on the shooting:


May-25-22  nok: <<nok: Is monotheism a comparative advantage for an empire?>

Alexander the Great, the Roman emperors prior to Constantine, Attila, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, and the Incas all managed without it.>

Tamerlane?? Please don't post batshit.

Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: <nok: Tamerlane?>

OK, he was a Muslim. My mistake. Substitute the Babylonian, Assyrian, Scythian, Hsiung-nu, Vandal, or Visigoth empire.

Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <saffuna: <Easy: Intelligence plus ingenuity defeats lack thereof.> Or...building an empire that encircled the world.>


They go hand in hand.

Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <Rdb: <thegoodanarchist> , I am going on break now ....>

I am going to miss you.


Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <Z free or die: <<tga> Who said black lives don't matter?> Let's just begin with these two...

<Michael Slager>...>

I don't know who Michael Slager is.

<and <Derek Chauvin>.>

I doubt he ever said that, and I doubt you can back up your claim with any evidence.

Derek Chavin was a pawn in a game. He was set up, by being taught a submission technique by his own department, his own employer, that has absolutely horrible optics. This, in an age of pervasive public video capability.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that funding and political impetus to teach this technique came from globalist oligarchs, for the express purpose of setting up a cop to appear to kill a criminal.

But the toxicology report says George Floyd died from a drug overdose. Having this happen after a cop performed a technique he was instruted to do, created the desired opportunity to obtain an inflammatory video that supposedly justified a color revolution.

<Serious answer.>

Not really serious at all, if you can't provide evidence of DC actually putting such a thought into words.

And even if you could, you are talking about a pawn in a game.

Can you name a <leader> of public opinion who said black lives don't matter? I am guessing no.

Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <diceman: <thegoodanarchist: <nok: Prove it by saying "Black Lives Matter.">

Who said they don't matter?>

That's not the correct question. >

Actually, it is (at least, one of the correct questions (plural)). It highlights the implicit lie of the leftist propaganda.

Given your posting history, you should have picked up on this angle.

Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <But the toxicology report says George Floyd died from a drug overdose. >


<An independent autopsy ordered by Floyd’s family ruled Floyd’s death a homicide. The two doctors who conducted the autopsy concluded that Floyd died of asphyxiation, or suffocation.

The Hennepin County medical examiner’s office also ruled that Floyd died in a homicide. But it said the cause of his death was "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law-enforcement subdual restraint, and neck compression," which occurred while Floyd was being "restrained.">

Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: No call for a mug shot of the shooter in Uvalde? Cannot believe the foremost purveyor of hatred in the Rogovian miasma is remiss in this way--perhaps he has abandoned this page.
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: Salvador Rolando Ramos is his name.
May-25-22  George Wallace: <Salvador Ramos: Everything We Know About Texas School Mass Shooter>

Hispanic gunman.

See the mugshot...

May-25-22  George Wallace: The war in Ukraine has strengthened Russia and will continue to strengthen them. Russia is just destroying Ukraine and grinding their military to bits in Donbas. The media has pretty much dropped the war. Putin is doing his naked victory dance.

The media has shifted to the Monkey Virus.

Who will Russia take next? Anyone want to take a guess?

Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <The war in Ukraine has strengthened Russia and will continue to strengthen them. Russia is just destroying Ukraine and grinding their military to bits in Donbas.>

After failing in its initial assault, Russia changed its objective to Donbas alone and is slowly, slowly winning.

<Who will Russia take next?>

Well, since he failed to take Kyiv, I suspect he's fully concentrated on the Donbas.

May-25-22  George Wallace: Fraud Pop, the alleged president, said he would defend Taiwan military if China attacked. He was asked if America would be willing to act militarily if China invaded and he flat out said, "Yes", without blinking an eye.

Can someone tell me how it benefits America to go to war with China over an island off the coast of China?

Fraud Pop is doing his best to drag us into a war with China.

Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <OhioChessFan:

<tga: Dogma and doctrine from the church are infallible.>

Who says?>

Dude, we went round and round on this in <BP>'s forum a year and a half ago. I can't count all the times I made a convincing argument and got crickets or circular arguments in return.

I don't know what it is with you, but you have an irrational vendetta against the RCC, about which you become mute when faced with points you can't refute.

You are just sniping now. If you were serious, you would have finished the discussion a year and a half ago in <BP>'s forum.

Premium Chessgames Member thegoodanarchist: <OhioChessFan: *Isn't it nice a group of men tell us they somehow know those mystery words not <written>?> It's even nicer to know that an apostle instructed the church to stand fast and hold to words not written, and traditions.

Makes it all Biblical and such.>

And this one:

< thegoodanarchist: ... < OhioChessFan:

I've never affirmed a belief in sola scriptura.>

Oh dear. It's <the only thing> you've affirmed in our conversation, going back to early December.>

on councils:

<tga: <OCF>...

Now you have denied scripture itself, I'm afraid. You've been presented with a NT, scriptural method for the church to resolve disputes. Instead of accepting it, now you say scripture must tell us to keep using councils, or your default position is to reject them!>

And this one:

<thegoodanarchist: My reply to this post: Big Pawn chessforum (kibitz #5506)


<<<tga:Wrong! The original protestants INVENTED sola scriptura. >>>

Sigh. Who says?>

Well, let us see... Using <your> criteria of <contemporaneous witness statements, set forth before the public>, the actual reformers themselves, and their contemporaries, as well as those in the RCC resisting them - in other words, all the key players in the reformation - are the ones who say so, <in writing>!

You demanded recorded statements from contemporaneous witnesses, in the post just before this one. I've got that in spades. Which is why you must ignore them, in order to maintain your construction.

You may truly not care about Luther, Calvin, Melanchthon, Zwingli, the 95 thesis, their books, their written confessions, and the written counter arguments, but you also cannot accept these people and their written records if you want to maintain your denial.

But they do exists. And they aren't going away just because you won't read them.>


<OCF: I. Don't. Care. About. The. Reformation.>

Indeed. You cannot care, or else you will have to abandon your facade. Again, you have no objective standard for accepting historical evidence. When it suits you, you appeal to the written record. When the written record contradicts you, you say "Who says?">

<tga: <OCF: Anyway, you're assuming your entire conclusion here. >

No more than you. I am still waiting for you to explain who compiled the NT, what was their methodology, and why is it more believable than the 382 AD Council of Rome historical record?

When you can <convincingly> answer that, then I will stop asserting that you are also assuming your conclusion.>

etcetera. etcetera. etcetera.

Start with the Jan. 05 2021 page of <BP>'s forum, and work your way backwards. ALL OF THIS has been covered already.

I stand by this: <You demanded recorded statements from contemporaneous witnesses, in the post just before this one. I've got that in spades. Which is why you must ignore them, in order to maintain your construction.>

May-25-22  George Wallace: <After failing in its initial assault, Russia changed its objective to Donbas alone...>

Can you show me where Russia said, in the beginning, that they objective was anything other than protecting the breakaway republics in the east?

Russia defeated the Azov battalion in Mariupol aka the Nazi Battallion. So they've "denazified" Ukraine as promised.

Then they strck at Ukrainian military infrastructure throughout the country, destroying airports and everything else so they wouldn't be able to shore up the final push in Donbas.

Now they are taking Donbas.

Seems to me Russia is doing exactly what it said it would do.

They might not be doing what western observes thought they should do, but they are doing what <they said> they would do from the beginning.

But the <central point> is Russia simply winning this war. Nobody is talking about Ukraine winning anymore.


They're talking about Russia having momentum and Russia taking the Donbas region.

I think anyone who has been paying attention for the last 6 weeks could see this was inevitable.

This is probably the reason Germany didn't want to give Ukraine millions of dollars worth of equipment. They knew it would be a waste of money, just throwing it down the drain. Setting it on fire.

Wasting millions of dollars on a totally lost cause.

May-25-22  George Wallace: A lot of people do not like Putin, especially right now. He sent his army into Ukraine to rape, murder and destroy, and that's exactly what they've done, on a grand scale. No doubt, it is absolutely horrific.

But if you look at this objectively, from a geopolitical and pragmatic point of view, you have to admire Putin and take your hat off to him. He told everyone, "I'm going into Ukraine, I'm going to rape, kill, steal and destroy until I'm fully satisfied, and YOU aren't going to do a damn thing about it -OR ELSE!!!" and that's what happened.

Putin knew that the EuroLibs sit down to pee.

He knew they wouldn't DARE interfere with Russia's army, and they didn't. And, almost as if to stroke his ego, western leaders, one by one, spoke openly about how they don't want to provoke Putin. It was the west's number one concern and number one strategy. The bedrock of all their actions was not to provoke Putin.

Don't make Putin mad!

Well, what can we say?

Putin judged rightly and he took advantage of the opportunity of a lifetime. Every single western leader is totally cucked and he knew it. It's never been quite like this before, but it is now and he didn't let this opportunity slip by.

We must admit, as impartial observers, that Putin played this one beautifully. This is his masterpiece and his legacy.

The only question is now, what will he take next, because he can take whatever he wants.

He can just roll up and take it - and nobody is going to really interfere.


He just went from Putin the president of Russia bla bla bla whatever - to Putin The Great in the history books (or Putin the Terrible).

Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <Z free or die: RIP <TheFocus> Nikolai Brunni (kibitz #110)

Didn't always agree with him on these pages, but certainly wish him well in the next life - this one was tragically too short.>

Thank you kindly for bringing this to our attention. It hit me hard, like the passing of <tpstar>, <domdaniel>, and <sneaky>.

I will be saying prayers for <TheFocus>, Mr. Brunni.

Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: Sorry to hear about the death of Nikolai Brunni, <the focus>. He was generally thoughtful and insightful. I think he just liked to blow off some steam on this page.
Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <al wazir: ...Why not arm the students too?>

The same reason we don't give them alcohol, F1 race cars, chainsaws, and porn.

What is it about the concept of "child" that you don't understand?

Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <saffuna: <<<But the toxicology report says George Floyd died from a drug overdose. >>> False.

<An independent autopsy ordered by Floyd’s family ruled Floyd’s death a homicide. The two doctors who conducted the autopsy concluded that Floyd died of asphyxiation, or suffocation.>>

Two can play this game, Jim.

The original report was overdose. The family hired someone else to make the asphyxiation call. Since he was hired by the family, just what were you expecting him to find?

Jim, you are confusing subjectivity with objectivity. It's why you saw the web page about free Alabama voter ID, yet you still couldn't say it was free.

But be of good cheer! God still loves you!

Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <What is it about the concept of "child" that you don't understand?>

The Buffalo shooter got guns legally while still a child. Maybe the Uvalde shooter as well. Same going back to at least Columbine.

Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <blubbering paederast: A lot of people do not like Putin, especially right now....>

But <you> adore him and worship his every success; why are you whingeing about it? Cos, like the former president, you crave the admiration of everyone?

Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: The report said Floyd died of asphyxiation. He died because a policeman held him down and obstructed his breathing for nine minutes.

No way was that police technique or policy. Not until the person passes out and dies.

Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Former Tinpot Despot wanted no part of any former chief executives during COVID pandemic in its early stages, per former counsellor:

<In March 2020, then-President Donald Trump wanted a "course correction" after "mostly critical" reviews of his Oval Office address on COVID-19, his former senior counselor Kellyanne Conway wrote in her new book.

She suggested engaging with the four living former presidents.

"'They each have dealt with major crises,'" she recalled telling Trump in "Here's the Deal: A Memoir," out Tuesday. "'It will show leadership, bipartisanship, and calm everyone.'"

Trump, however, wasn't interested.

"'Ugh,' he said. 'They're all horrible to me,'" Conway wrote of his response.

Conway pressed on, saying "they haven't been great," but added "this is bigger than all that."

She also thought the move could help him get reelected.

Trump listened to her pitch, she wrote, on how Jimmy Carter could offer advice and George W. Bush would engage. She reminded him of how he and his wife Melania "genuinely got along" with Bush and his wife Laura during Bush's father's funeral.

"'Barack Obama would not decline. He dealt with Ebola and swine flu, and this is serious, too. More serious, it seems,'" she wrote, describing her advice to Trump.

She also told Trump, "'Bush and Obama would help and then go back to their lives. The only one who may be tough to get rid of is Bill Clinton. He'll enjoy the spotlight again, loves this stuff, and'—I smiled—'may want to be your best buddy.'"

Trump later told reporters he didn't want to "bother" the former presidents.

"I don't think I'm going to learn much and, you know, I guess you could say that there's probably a natural inclination not to call," he said during a White House coronavirus task force briefing.

In April 2020, however, he spoke with his campaign rival Joe Biden about ideas for tackling COVID.

"It was a cordial conversation, which I witnessed, and Biden was especially engaged," Conway wrote. "So much so that, after the call, President Trump looked at me and to my surprise declared: 'Everyone is wrong. He hasn't lost it.'">

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 8264)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8264 OF 8264 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific player only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC