A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 20th 11, 11:24 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Detectorist
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 88
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!



You guys kill me. How about his son's David over 400 point rating
increase in 7 months. Did he cheat, too? lol
  #22  
Old July 20th 11, 11:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Taylor Kingston[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,329
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Jul 20, 7:55*am, MikeMurray wrote:

In the last 12 months, he's scored 98-1 against players rated under
1900. *He's scored 30-0 against players rated under 2100. *He's scored
6-0 against players rated under 2300. *


Mike, I don't understand this. A player rated under 1900 is also
rated under 2100 and under 2300. Therefore, how can AZ be 98-1 against
U1900s but 30-0 against U2100s and 6-0 against U2300s? The number of
wins should be increasing as the "under" number increases, and if the
one loss belongs to the U1900s it also belongs to the U2100s and
U2300s. Or by "under 2100" do you mean between 1900 and 2099?


  #23  
Old July 20th 11, 11:58 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
MikeMurray
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 618
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:29:59 -0700 (PDT), Taylor Kingston
wrote:

On Jul 20, 7:55*am, MikeMurray wrote:

In the last 12 months, he's scored 98-1 against players rated under
1900. *He's scored 30-0 against players rated under 2100. *He's scored
6-0 against players rated under 2300. *


Mike, I don't understand this. A player rated under 1900 is also
rated under 2100 and under 2300. Therefore, how can AZ be 98-1 against
U1900s but 30-0 against U2100s and 6-0 against U2300s? The number of
wins should be increasing as the "under" number increases, and if the
one loss belongs to the U1900s it also belongs to the U2100s and
U2300s. Or by "under 2100" do you mean between 1900 and 2099?



My post wasn't clear. I was referencing ranges, looking at the USCF
chart, working from the top (i.e., lower ratings) down. So he was
98-1 against players rated 0-1899, etc.

The chart is he
http://main.uschess.org/datapage/gam...memid=12400396

It references last-12-months rather than year-to-date as in the
original post, but I was too lazy to go through the tournaments and
compute YTD myself.
  #24  
Old July 21st 11, 01:25 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Taylor Kingston[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,329
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Jul 20, 2:58*pm, MikeMurray wrote:

The chart is hehttp://main.uschess.org/datapage/gam...memid=12400396

It references last-12-months rather than year-to-date as in the
original post, but I was too lazy to go through the tournaments and
compute YTD myself. *


That chart has some important information. There certainly seems to
have been major changes in both his consistency against lower-rateds,
and his success rate against experts and masters.
For example, since 1991 his overall percentage against 1600s and
1700s was 94% and 93% respectively. In the last year it's been 100%.
Against 1800s he had scored 88%, and against 1900s 76%, but in the
last 12 months it's been 98.5% (+64 -1 =0).
The big change is against the 2000+ group. His lifetime percentages
had been:

vs. 2000s: 69%
vs. 2100s: 47%
vs. 2200s: 53%
vs. 2300s: 22.5%
vs. 2400s: 3.4%

In contrast, in the last 12 months he's played 23 games against
players rated 2000 to 2299, winning all of them, 100%. That's a BIG
change.

This is something that was not apparent in the sample of tournament
crosstables I looked at earlier, in which he played much lower-rated
opposition. As of 12 months ago, Zelner since 1991 had played
opponents rated 2400+ 29 times, losing 28. Now suddenly he's 2400+
himself.
As Elo himself explained, such quantum leaps are not uncommon, but
as far as I know they are almost always found in youngsters. Yet
Zelner is somewhere around middle age, right? In his 40s at least? I
have no grounds other than improbability to question his recent leap,
but genuine or not, I'd sure like to know how he's done it.
  #25  
Old July 21st 11, 02:17 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
The Master
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,146
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Jul 19, 10:41*am, MikeMurray wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:15:27 -0700 (PDT), Detectorist

wrote:
I understand. However, on the way to this incredible streak, he's
beaten 19 experts and 4 masters without a loss. That's a heck of a run


Some players very consistently beat weaker players, but are erratic
against their peers and very unsuccessful against stronger opponents.
Other players seem able to beat almost anybody on a given day but are
also prone to dropping a point to almost anybody on another.

If one of the super-consistent guys sticks to contests populated by
players weaker than himself, he may well become overrated.

Some geographic or age-related pools of players may be over or under
rated. *For example, the set of seniors probably has a much higher
ratio of players with current strength lower than their rating or
their rating floor, for example, and the issue of the rapidly
improving under-rated juniors has been much discussed. *

I suspect that rapidly improving players tend to prioritize the high
prize class events, which means rating points would be harder to come
by in those events.

So, someone playing low-prize fund tournaments *in a region with a lot
of retirees and without much junior activity might glean a rating
higher than he'd get by contesting class sections of high-prize fund
national tournaments.

I'm not saying it's cheating to target events where rating improvement
is more likely, but it's naive to think two ratings of "x" have
necessarily measured the same performance.



Rather than assume that such a player is the villain, consider
another possible
explanation for why it is so difficult in high class prize tourneys on
the ratings of
non-cheating participants. I was shocked, yes shocked, to learn many
years
ago that some of the players I had often faced and who I believed to
be perfectly
respectable chessplayers in fact were cheaters.

One example was a case in which a player, in his quest for
Goichbergian dollars,
visited his hotel room now and then to consult his opening books
during play. This
of course only happens in events with slow time controls and lots of
money on the
line.

Another case involved a player I had faced many times who, I learned
decades
later, had tried with some success to cheat against another local
player, whose
own stories helped explain the reported experience of a thrid party
who, as he put
it, could not defeat this particular opponent 'with queen odds.'
Well, obviously if
the opponent is occasionally making illegal 'adjustments' to the
position while his
opponent is away from the board, it is possible to win with amazing
consistentcy.
The player in question even tried to nudge one of my rooks off the
board during a
blitz tourney, and he is the same fellow who cheated a drunken
DeFirmian out of
a win in a blitz tourney where I spectated by making an illegal
(double)move!

The most recent example, and one which I admit is only conjecture on
my part,
involves a certain win over a certain grandmaster in a certain local
event -- also a
B.G. slow time control special. It turns out that a computer analysis
of a long
endgame has it that while the GM kept making errors, losing ground in
the all-
seeing eyes of Rybka, his much lower rated opponent played *exactly*
as the
world's strongest engine would have, matching at every move. But
how? Well,
as I discovered quite by accident, the presumed 'helper' was actually
named in
this player's own game annotations! It isn't often that a non-
participant is so
named in annotating a win and here the fact is striking. Personally I
like to take
all the credit for my wins by naming only myself and my hapless
opponent, on
those rare occasions where I have prevailed.

So don't forget to consider the fact that there is sometimes rampant
cheating
going on at such events, before slamming a player for merely beating
up on his
inferiors at the local club (for trophies and chumpchange).
  #26  
Old July 21st 11, 02:32 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Taylor Kingston[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,329
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Jul 20, 5:17*pm, The Master wrote:

Well, obviously if
the opponent is occasionally making illegal 'adjustments' to the
position while his
opponent is away from the board, it is possible to win with amazing
consistentcy.


I am surprised that this could work very often. Personally I am by
no means like Alekhine, Tal or Fischer, who seemed to remember
practically every move they ever played, but I can always tell if the
position in one of my games has been altered while I was away from the
board, especially in a way that would significantly change the
evaluation of the position. And one can always check the scoresheet to
lay bare such a crude and transparent subterfuge.
  #27  
Old July 21st 11, 02:32 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
The Master
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,146
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Jul 19, 11:14*am, raylopez99 wrote:

Thanks for your insights MM. *But as I pointed out, in lieu of the
fact that Zelner's results improved from a zig-zag 'random' pattern
before late 2003 to a smooth "moon shot" afterwards, you have to
conclude, as None says, that it's entirely possible that the fix is in
and Zelner is cheating.

Remember he owns some sort of computer chess paraphernalia shop, and
it's conceivable that he rigged a system, using his wife perhaps as
the assistant, to feed him moves from Rybka. *Hence his ability to
always win.



You are as 'insightful' as ever, Dr. Innes.

If this Zelner character were getting moves relayed to him from
Rybka his
USCF rating would easily exceed those of Kamsky and Nakamura, not
rest
at the lowly level of 2300. Rybka you see, gives odds even to
grandmasters,
much as Paul Morphy -- were he alive today -- might offer a rook or a
knight
to such rgc regulars as yourself, Taylor Kingston or Sam Sloan.

Sometimes I wonder if some of the vaccuum tubes inside your pointy
head
are not burned out and in need of replacement. Visit your local Radio
Shack
and see if you can find one of those dusty old machines that sell new
ones.
  #28  
Old July 21st 11, 02:48 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
MikeMurray
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 618
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:24:19 -0700 (PDT), Detectorist
wrote:


You guys kill me. How about his son's David over 400 point rating
increase in 7 months. Did he cheat, too? lol


It gets stranger all the time.

Son, David: eight years working his way up from 666 (hmmmmm) to a
bit over 1700, then eight more years basically bouncing around 1700,
plays a tournament where he goes from 1735 to 1733, then about ten
days later WINS the under 2000 section of the National Chess Congress,
gaining 270 points in that event, then a month later WINS the under
2100 section of the North American Open. Must have raked in some nice
prize money in those two events.

So, after 16 years of sub-1800 play, he goes from 1733 to 2096 in
about five weeks!

About six months later, he drops out of the under 2400 section of the
World Open, but not before racking up a 2342 performance rating,
scoring 3-3 against 2306, 2295, 2409, 2356, 2401 and 2286.

Amazing!

What the hell is going on?
  #29  
Old July 21st 11, 02:54 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
none
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,073
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Jul 20, 3:49*pm, raylopez99 wrote:
On Jul 21, 2:26*am, None wrote:


Nice. By any chance did you notice what the R^2 was? I'm thinking it
woulda had to be greater than one to win 98/99. :)


Thus the numbers are statistically implausible, not unlike Z's Elo
"smooth moonshot jump" over the last 8 years.

The point is R^2 cannot be greater than one. Therefore his results are
very suspicious. I'm going to ask Sam Sloan to look into this alledged
scandal permitted by our current board. The son's results are little
amazing too. Sam, sic 'em boy.

  #30  
Old July 21st 11, 02:56 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
none
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,073
Default Incredible 12 month chess winning streak!

On Jul 20, 5:29*pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Jul 20, 7:55*am, MikeMurray wrote:

In the last 12 months, he's scored 98-1 against players rated under
1900. *He's scored 30-0 against players rated under 2100. *He's scored
6-0 against players rated under 2300. *


* Mike, I don't understand this. A player rated under 1900 is also
rated under 2100 and under 2300. Therefore, how can AZ be 98-1 against
U1900s but 30-0 against U2100s and 6-0 against U2300s? The number of
wins should be increasing as the "under" number increases, and if the
one loss belongs to the U1900s it also belongs to the U2100s and
U2300s. Or by "under 2100" do you mean between 1900 and 2099?


There you go again Taylor.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sound and Fury in Polgarland B. Lafferty[_6_] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 3 December 15th 08 10:20 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] pribut@yahoo.com rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 February 19th 06 06:44 AM
Wikipedia Biography of Eric Schiller Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 2 December 22nd 05 09:02 PM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] pribut@yahoo.com rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 October 19th 05 06:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.