Lost On Time

Time 2021-10-31 06:06:47

Web Name: Lost On Time

WebSite: http://lostontime.blogspot.com

ID:216710

Keywords:

Lost,On,Time,

Description:

keywords:
description:

Lost On Time

We all lose on time in the end.

Tuesday, 29 October 2019 Ever get the feeling you've been cheated - there's nothing thereBanned from the Roxy, OK
I never much liked playing there anyway
- Crass

Ive been playing competitive chess for more than forty years, over the board, by correspondence and on the internet. This is, by a margin, the most disgusting thing - and the most upsetting thing - that has ever happened to me in all that time.

As you might surmise, I dont really give a damn whether I ever play another game on Chess.com. There are other places.

What I do give a damn about is my good name, and the willingness of Chess.com to dirty my name, just as they have dirtied other peoples names, without having to justify themselves in any way, without having to put forward even the smallest scrap of evidence.

Its not just the principle of the thing, that the process is plainly contrary to natural justice. Its the effect of being accused, without being able to see, let alone challenge, what is alleged against you. Thats psychologically distressing in a way that I dont think I can describe. So I wont attempt to, except to observe that its cost me an awful lot by way of stress and disturbed sleep.

Of course Chess.com are a private company. They have the right, within the law, to have who they want on their site and to ban who they want from their site.

What they dont have the right to do is to call somebody a cheat without backing it up.

But that is what they have done.


And thats disgusting, when youre on the receiving end. Thats mud, and mud sticks.

Read more Posted byejhat12:00 pm5 comments: Ever get the feeling you've been cheated - wrong in fact, wrong in theory?So how does Chess.coms system work anyway?

I dont really know, and I dont particularly want to speculate, not more than Im obliged to. It ought to be up to them to explain themselves, not up to me.

But I also dont know
whether that system has been assessed independently, and even if so, how thoroughly and how expertlyhow much it risks (and is understood to risk) catching the wrong people as well as the right oneshow much its reliability may vary (and is understood to vary) according to the sample size of gameshow much it may depend (and is understood to depend) on fallible human inputs, human judgments and so on.I dont know. But I do know that Chess.com arent in possession of a foolproof system. Of course they arent, because theres no such thing as a foolproof system. And I do know that they are wrong in this particular instance. Spectacularly wrong.

What I think, however, is that their method to some degree involves looking at the moves you have played, and seeing how many match with the preferred choice of a computer program. Whether they do anything else, or what precisely their criteria are, who knows. (But how reliable those criteria are - on that, I do have a well-informed opinion.)

One question this raises is - since there is such a thing as theory in chess, when in the game do they start scrutinising? Presumably not on move one. But if not, at what point does the matching begin? If they start too early, when in fact youre still in book (because book use is permitted in these games) isnt that a point where errors can be committed? Because moves which youre finding from a printed source are being marked down as moves youre finding with a program?

Let me give you an example. Let me give you several examples.

When you finish a game on Chess.com, you get a little game report, which includes some basic computer analysis, and a chart that looks like this.


What it means precisely, I couldnt say, but I can guess what Best Move means, and what Book means. And I can guess that 99.3 is a high figure, whatever it means precisely and however theyre calculating it. The game it refers to is this one.

[Site Chess.com]
[Date 2019.07.01]
[White passy234]
[Black Justinpatzer]
[Result 0-1]
[WhiteElo 2055]
[BlackElo 2149]
[EndDate 2019.07.05]
[Termination Justinpatzer won by resignation]
1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 Bg4 3. Bg2 c6 4. c4 e6 5. O-O Nf6 6. Qb3 Qb6 7. Qc2 Nbd7 8. cxd5exd5 9. d3 Qc5 10. Qb3 Qb6 11. Qc2 Qc5 12. Qd1 Bd6 13. Nc3 O-O 14. Be3 Qa5 15.a3 Rfe8 16. b4 Qd8 17. Rc1 a5 18. Qb3 Qe7 19. Rb1 axb4 20. axb4 Ne5 21. Nxe5Bxe5 22. Rfe1 d4 0-1

So weve got a twenty-two move minature, in which Black plays five moves of theory, and then turns over White in short order with an extremely high Accuracy rate. Which is pretty suspicious, isnt it?

Except it isnt. Because this, which suggests that theory ends after five moves on each side


and which would mean that the players were playing their own moves from this position


is wrong. Very wrong.

In fact Black was playing published theory until move sixteen.

Specifically, he was following Petrosian v Vovhannisyan, Lake Sevan 2015, which you can see below (to move 14, but as there was a repetition, we had played two more moves apiece) as it appears on page 202


of Delchev and Semkov, Attacking the English/Reti, Chess Stars, 2016


which I have on my bookshelves.

Which is how I came to be in the position below, after Blacks 16...Qd8, before I had to play any moves of my own.


White then varied with 17 Rc1. So my original contribution consisted of five moves - five very ordinary moves - and then, after a simple blunder by White


a very obvious pawn fork to win the game.

Suddenly the game looks very different, doesnt it? Suddenly its perfectly normal, unexceptional. Suddenly theres nothing odd about it at all.

Read more Posted byejhat11:00 am3 comments: Ever get the feeling you've been cheated - what would be the point?Id like to look at a few positions from some of the games I played on Chess.com.

Ive not been through all the games I played on that site. Nor do I intend to: I shouldnt have to and I havent got the energy.

So why these games and why these positions? Because when Chess.com said I was banned, several games immediately came to mind, in which I remembered (having analysed tham after they were over) having made blunders of one kind or another. Missed wins, missed draws, other weak moves.

Which makes Chess.coms claim all the more incomprehensible. There may be no such thing as computer moves - but there may be such a thing as moves you dont play, if youre seeking to win games with the help of a program. And below, you can see some of them.

Analysis is pretty perfunctory where its provided at all, because I assume readers have access to computers, and probably better ones than mine. I looked at these with DroidFish running on an Android phone and rarely getting much above 20-ply. So Im not vouching for everything it claims, and once again, if your view differs from the one given here, thats what the comments box is for.

All of what follows has been put to Chess.com. (In fact, rather more than this: when emailing them I drew attention to quite a few manifestly inferior moves, ones where the computer sees many superior alternatives. Ive omitted them here for the sake of relative brevity, but they are there to be found, if it should please you to look for them.)

Ive not received an answer to any of them.
- - -
Here, as an aperitif, is a quick game, but not one so brief that it doesnt contain a remarkable miss by the winning side.

[Site Chess.com]
[Date 2019.02.27]
[White Justinpatzer]
[Black FathiAli77]
[Result 1-0]
[WhiteElo 2124]
[BlackElo 1976]
[EndDate 2019.03.04]
[Termination Justinpatzer won by resignation]
1. Nf3 Nc6 2. d4 d5 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 Bg4 5. Ne5 Nxe5 6. dxe5 Nd7 7. Qxd5 c6 8. Qe4 Qa5+ 9. Nc3 Nxe5 10. Bf4 Ng6 11. O-O-O e6 12. Qc4 Rc8 13. Bd6 Ne5 14. Bxe5 1-0

White played 12 Qc4 here, a perfectly good move, and for that matter one after which White may well be winning.

However, there is something stronger. See if you can spot it.

Or if you cant, ask your program, which will point it out immediately.

Position after 11....e7-e6
Did you see the spectacular win? I didnt. Its 12 Qxc6+.

DroidFish did.

But I didnt ask DroidFish, did I? Not until after the game had finished.

Read more Posted byejhat10:00 amNo comments: Ever get the feeling you've been cheated - my 22 unmemorable gamesAttached, at the foot of this piece, are the scores of all the games I played on Chess.com since I began to play regularly. Theres only twenty-two of them, which isnt many.

Prior to that I think I only played casual games with friends, although, not having access to my account to check, I cant be sure. On completion of a game, players receive an email with, among other things, the score of the game. I have listed every game of which I had an email in the appropriate file. If anybody has access to earlier games, please let me know and Ill add them.

All games were played at the rate of one day per move. I preferred opponents with ratings relatively close to mine (150 or 200 points) and ones who had already played a lot of games on Chess.com. I tried not to be playing more than two games at any time (occasionally three if one were already all but over). They were played in two periods within the last twelve months: from 19 November 2018 to 4 March 2019 and from 1 July 2019 to 10 August 2019.

My overall results in these games were 15 wins, 4 draws and 3 losses (though one loss and one win were on time, and one loss was against a player subsequently disqualified, for what its worth). These wont be unusual statistics at all for a player who is basically working their way up, given that most of my opponents - early on, especially - must have been rather weaker in playing strength than I am.

In fact nothing about the games, their course or their outcome seems to me at all out of the ordinary. But if you think differently, or have any other comment to make, go ahead. Thats what the comments box is for. (Comments with consistent names, handles or initials only, please.)

For your convenience a file of these games is available by request in the comments box - please leave your email address or other contact details - or via my Twitter account (either tweet or send a Direct Message) or via the English Chess Forum where I am JustinHorton or via my Facebook account. It may be shared as you see fit.

[Site Chess.com]
[Date 2019.07.22]
[White 3foldcountergambit]
[Black Justinpatzer]
[Result 0-1]
[WhiteElo 2125]
[BlackElo 2210]
[EndDate 2019.08.10]
[Termination Justinpatzer won by resignation]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. d3 d6 5. c3 Bd7 6. Nbd2 g6 7. Nf1 Bg7 8. Bg5h6 9. Bh4 O-O 10. Ne3 Qe8 11. a4 a6 12. Bc4 Be6 13. Bxf6 Bxf6 14. Nd5 Bxd5 15.Bxd5 Nd8 16. O-O c6 17. Bc4 Ne6 18. a5 Rd8 19. Qb3 Nc5 20. Qb6 Rd7 21. b4 Bd822. Qa7 Ne6 23. Bxe6 Qxe6 24. Qe3 f5 25. Qxh6 f4 26. Ng5 Bxg5 27. Qxg5 f3 28.Rae1 Rf4 29. gxf3 Rh7 30. Re3 Rh5 31. Qg3 g5 32. c4 Kh8 33. Rb1 g4 34. Kf1 Rh335. Qg1 gxf3 36. Ke1 Rg4 37. Qf1 Qh6 38. Kd2 Rg2 39. Kc3 Rgxh2 40. Qd1 Rxf2 41.Re1 Rhh2 42. b5 cxb5 43. cxb5 Qe6 44. Rh1 Qc8+ 45. Kb3 Qc5 46. Rxh2+ Rxh2 47.bxa6 Qb5+ 48. Kc3 Qxa5+ 49. Kb3 Qxa6 50. Kc3 Qc6+ 51. Kb3 Qb5+ 52. Kc3 Qa5+ 53.Kb3 Qa2+ 54. Kc3 Rh7 55. Rb4 Qa3+ 56. Rb3 Qc5+ 57. Kb2 Rh2+ 58. Kb1 Qf2 59. Rxb7Qa2+ 0-1
Read more Posted byejhat9:00 amNo comments: Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?I hadnt expected to be posting here again, not really. But something came up, something important - important to me, because Im involved, but also potentially important for other people.

I had a good summer, on the chessboard: placed second in Paignton, qualifying for the British Championship. And then, a few days after I got home, I received an email which began like this....

Hello Justinpatzer

Unfortunately your Chess.com account has been closed because we have determined it to be in violation of our Fair Play Policy.

We are always sad when we close any account. We want everyone to be able to enjoy chess. However, we must protect the integrity of the game and cannot allow players to use outside assistance in their games (advice from other players, chess engines/computers, etc).

This came as a shock. A huge shock. Because I have not used outside assistance in my games. Nor thought of doing so.

Read more Posted byejhat8:00 am7 comments: Thursday, 4 July 2019 ZzzzzzzThis blog is in hibernation until such time as its author rediscovers some enthusiasm for it.Posted byejhat8:00 am3 comments: Wednesday, 22 May 2019 The Monkey's PawI never - until yesterday - knew that The Monkey's Paw


begins with a chess game.


No wonder they came to no good.


[Also see]Posted byejhat8:00 amNo comments: Monday, 20 May 2019 Jimmy RiddleI dont read the British Chess Magazine, since its full of trash, but I do know people who do, and so I happen to know that for some reason, it has devoted eleven pages of its latest issue to a review of a review.

The review in the first instance (which youve probably seen already) is Olimpiu Urcans piece discussing Ray and Byrons book on the Caruana-Carlsen match (which you probably havent). But you might recall that this review was the ostensible reason for Chess and Bridge Magazine ceasing to stock the book.

The review in the second instance is a review of Olimpius review.


The BCM is considerably closer to Ray, right now, than is its rival, and the reviews appearance, and the books disappearance from Chess and Bridge, are very much connected.


The review is by Jimmy Adams, and it is a load of old balls from start to finish, including, in just one sentence above, the claim that Olimpius website is patreon.com - see the difference, Jimmy? - and a grim inability to actually spell the name of the chap hes criticising, which is Olimpiu, not Olympiu, a misspelling that appears at least twenty times. To be fair Jimmy says more than once that he doesnt go looking for typos and mistakes and Lord, that surely is the truth.

Im not going to give the piece much more attention than it deserves - although if youve read this far, I probably have already - not least because I doubt Jimmy believes very much else of what he wrote. The point of rebutting charges in which the prosecution dont believe in the first place has always eluded me, and this particular indictment is written in a style reminiscent of Bart Simpson


except we might describe Jimmy Adams version as theres nothing wrong with this - well only a little - well maybe more, but who cares anyway. Jimmy doesnt, thats for sure.

Theres an old saying about not going mud-wrestling with a pig, as there is a newer one about not feeding the trolls. When Jimmy Adams, who has been writing about chess for many years, pretends not to know whats wrong with a writer publishing the same material in several places without saying where its appeared before - of course he knows. So why bother arguing? Itd constitute getting oneself dirty while the pig enjoys it. That said, this little passage is worth a moment of our time.


I know you dont believe what youre writing, Jimmy, but what are you actually writing here?Chess Notes contains essentially cut and paste? In what sense? In some sense comparable to Rays prodigious recycling of his old material? In some other sense? What, Jimmy, are you talking about?

We dont know, and neither does he. At very least, he doesnt care whether what hes saying makes any sense or not, and thats not an argument, nor an advocate, that you can engage with. What else can you make of this?


Theres no evidence for it, but it may very well be true. Alas, Jimmy doesnt go on to explain why, because, pffft, anything may be as true as anything else, if I only choose to say so.
Read more Posted byejhat8:00 am5 comments: Friday, 19 April 2019 Think againOn this blogs predecessor, we used to maintain a regular feature called Bad Book Covers, trying to identify the best of the worst in our particular field.

Ive not really been keeping up since, but looking back, the last item in the series was from Thinkers Publishing, and its Thinkers Publishing whose eyewatering efforts have been drawn to my attention again recently.

Take for instance Improve Your Practical Play in the Middlegame, by Alexey Dreev, published last year. What is that disembodied hand? Why is it trying to put the pawns eye out? Is that king some kind of ghost? Who drew this? Who thought it was a good idea?


Talking of disembodied, this is Edouards My Magic Years With Topalov, due later this month, but what are those heads doing on the cover? Who did this to them? Will they ever be at rest?

Read more Posted byejhat8:00 am1 comment: Wednesday, 3 April 2019 About SchmidtOver the last few days, Ive found quite a lot of adverts popping up for this book on my smartphone.


Matter of fact, it popped up three times during the course of one single article.


Naturally I was curious to look up the book, since 6.99 is pretty cheap for a chess book these days. Or any day in the last, what, couple of decades? (By contrast, this one, due out later this year, will set you back 19.99, and thats not bad at all by todays prices.)

So what are we getting for our money?


You may well ask, since the blurb is unsure even what opening we are discussing


which may undermine our confidence that the games have been carefully selected.

Read more Posted byejhat8:00 am2 comments: Friday, 29 March 2019 SurprisesIt was my wifes birthday on Sunday, and as we were due to be working in Madrid in the coming week, we went up a day early, had lunch in a couple of bars near the Rastro and then had a walk round the Manzanares, beginning at the abandoned Vicente Calderón

dead football stadium
and spotting, to our surprise, some turtles on the way.

live turtles
As we were going to the pictures in the evening, we left the riverbank to go over up the hill that takes you to the area, just off the Plaza de España, where there are several cinemas, and just before we reached the railway bridge


we had a second surprise. By the side of the road, a small group of people had set up a homemade chessboard, with a set of plastic pieces.


So I did what you would have done, which was to wander up to the players in the hope - rewarded, as it happens - of being invited to play a game.
Read more Posted byejhat8:00 am3 comments: Wednesday, 20 March 2019 Is this really a good way to promote women's chess? IIWell said.


It would be good to see less of this kind of tat in the future.

And, for that matter, this.Posted byejhat8:00 amNo comments: Monday, 18 March 2019 TheoryTheres a Twitter account I follow and a Tweet last week happened to catch my eye.


If you have the sound on you might have recognised Baba ORiley and you might even recognise the meme, though I confess I find this example a particuarly obscure rendering. But never mind that -

- whats this?


Its this.

Ive never come across that cover before.

Ive never come across the position before either, though Ive been close once or twice.


Read more Posted byejhat8:00 amNo comments: Saturday, 16 March 2019 Three out of fourI logged on relatively early on Thursday for the last round of the World Team Championship, I guess an hour or so in, which is relatively early when its kicked off at seven in the morning, Anyway I checked Chessbomb for early results and I could see that there were three of them, all in the Azerbaijan v Egypt match.

Naiditsch-Amin on board one had already finished early in a popular repetition


as indeed had Adly-Mamedov on board two, in another popular repetition


one so popular, in fact, that you could also see it on board four, in Hesham-Safarli.


Guseinov and Fawzy still seemed to be playing on board three, so I took a look, expecting to see another draw unfold before my very eyes.

Not a bit of it.


In fact Im not totally sure whether it was before or after Blacks twelfth when I looked in, but its not of any importance, since the game was pretty much up already


and had been for a couple of moves.


So whats going on there then?

Read more Posted byejhat8:00 am1 comment: Friday, 15 March 2019 Chess in Art Revisits 3. Dorothea TanningThis Revisit is to Tate Modern for the splendid retrospective of Dorothea Tanning (1910 - 2012) who passed away just a few years ago, but not before we had the chance - back in 2010 - to wish her Happy Birthday on the occasion of her 100th. The exhibition runs until June 9th, so plenty of time to catch it. She has been insufficiently appreciated, perhaps, on this side of the pond, yet offers many treats - if you like her sort of thing.

Read more Posted byMartin Smithat8:00 amNo comments: Wednesday, 13 March 2019 "Sometimes"Oh really?


One wonders which instances of players "sometimes" yelling Zugzwang Robert Macfarlane has in mind.


[Vaguely relevant]
Posted byejhat8:00 amNo comments: Friday, 8 March 2019 Chess in Art Revisits 2. Tom HackneyFor the second of these Chess in Art Revisits, we catch up with Tom Hackney, about whom we have blogged frequently during his Chess in Art career (since 2012 in fact; see full list appended below). Back in January Tom was exhibiting at the London Art Fair, where we had a chance for a chat.


Read more Posted byMartin Smithat8:00 amNo comments: Tuesday, 5 March 2019 Follow byI was saying just yesterday that carelessness is a Ray characteristic. There's a million examples to choose from, but here's a nice one from his Spectator column from the last issue but one, in which Ray annotates the game Artemiev v Nakamura from Gibraltar.

Better put, in which the game Artemiev v Nakamura from Gibraltar is annotated.

Not that Ray is pretending it's all his own work.


Based on? They surely are.

Gibraltar bulletin
After a couple of early notes of Ray's own making, most of what follows from move 21 onwards is straightforward copying out.

Ray in the Spectator
Well, that's what Ray does, it's what he's been doing for forty years. I particularly like this example, though, because, the Gibraltar bulletin being prepared for publication quite quickly, it contains, understandably enough, a couple of obvious errors. (Happens here all the time.)



But - and I do love this - although Ray is happy to change a word here and there just to make it look like he's doing some original work, he's left the errors entirely intact.


Posted byejhat8:00 amNo comments: Monday, 4 March 2019 Examining the examinerComing back to Rays fake charity, the Brain Trust, and its accounts, I mentioned before that up to year ending 31 March 2016 the accounts were examined by the accountancy firm Blick Rothenburg, but not subsequently.

This might help explain a couple of things, one of which¹ might be the deterioration in quality of the 2017 accounts in particular, perhaps best illustrated by the fantastic upside-down, back-to-front page that appears there, giving the impression that whoever submitted them didnt really know what they were doing.


Other examples, of various kinds, include the section numbers skipping from 14 to 16, missing out 15


the retention of an x where there ought to be a specific figure


and a failure of arithmetic (its 90,333).


Or from the latest accounts, year ending 31 March 2018, theres an inability to get the name right of one of the grant-receiving entities


and getting the wrong date for Eric Schillers death (it was 3 November). Really youd think theyd get that right.


But this kind of carelessness is of course a Ray characteristic. It might also be the sort of thing a professional would put right before approving and submitting the accounts. So why deprive yourself of their useful services? One possible reason might be the difference in remuneration due to the Independent Examiner, which hopped up to four grand in Blick Rothenburgs last year


and then hopped down.


Another possible reason might be that the new Independent Examiner, David Massey, doesnt just come cheap, but doesnt appear either to be independent, or to do any examination. Why would you care that all the major grants go to Rays old friends and business partners, when youre one of them?
Read more Posted byejhat8:00 am1 comment: Older PostsHomeSubscribe to:Posts (Atom)If, when and whatThis is the chess blog of Justin Horton, who posts as ejh. There is no publishing schedule. Posts may appear on Mondays or they may not. Come to that they may or may not appear on other days too.Mouthing offComments policy: we currently have unmoderated comments but no doubt this will be tightened up at some point. Considerably less leeway will be available to commentors who choose to post anonymously.

Comments should be in English or Spanish - or French if they are reasonably short.
Getting hold ofOn Twitter as @ejhchess. Email address may be added one day, don't count on it. You could also PM me on the English Chess Forum.House illiteratesMartin SmithejhOpinions...are those of the poster and not necessarily those of the blog owner, who might believe anything at all for all you know.
Other placesChess And MusicChess Book ChatsDouglas GriffinStreatham and Brixton Chess ClubThese we have lovedStreatham and Brixton Chess BlogFrauds, plagiarists and BS merchantsChessboxingRay's Twitter accountSusan PolgarFollowersBlog Archive 2019(32)October(5)July(1)May(2)April(2)March(10)February(3)January(9) 2018(71)December(5)November(16)October(7)September(9)August(1)July(6)June(1)May(5)April(3)March(8)February(3)January(7) 2017(102)December(6)November(13)October(8)September(10)August(5)July(12)June(14)May(10)April(6)March(3)February(9)January(6) 2016(93)December(11)November(15)October(9)September(9)August(6)July(5)June(7)May(11)April(12)March(6)February(2)

TAGS:Lost On Time 

<<< Thank you for your visit >>>

Hot Websites