Alas, poor Bloodgood, I knew him well.

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...SBN=487187866X
http://www.amazon.com/dp/487187866X

Alas, poor Bloodgood, I knew him well.

I think I must be one of the very few players who met and knew Claude
Bloodgood before he got the death penalty, and before he became the
highest rated chess player in the United States with 2702.

I even played a rated tournament game against him. It was a poorly
played game, especially on my part, but my excuse is I was 13 years
old at the time.

[Event "Virginia Open Championship"]
[Site "Hampton, Virginia"]
[Date "1958.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Bloodgood,Claude F."]
[Black "Sloan,Sam"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B21"]

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 e5 4.cxd4 d6 5.Bc4 Nf6 6.dxe5 Nxe4 7.Qf3
Qa5+ 8.Nc3 d5 9.Bxd5 Qb4 10.Qxe4 Qxe4+ 11.Nxe4 Be7 12.Nf3 O-O
13.Bg5 Bxg5 14.Nfxg5 Bf5 15.Bxb7 Nd7 16.Bxa8 Rxa8 17.Nd6 Bg6
18.Rc1 Nxe5 19.Rc8+ Rxc8 20.Nxc8 Bf5 21.Nxa7 g6 22.Ke2 f6 23.Nf3
Nc4 24.b4 Be6 25.Rc1 Nb6 26.Rc6 Bxa2 27.Rxb6 Be6 28.Rxe6 1-0

Happily, I keep my old chess magazines and I still have the "Virginia
Chess News Round-Up" dated April 1, 1958.

This publication has a rating list, not the USCF Rating List but the
Virginia Chess Federation Rating List.

The highest rated player in the state was Irwin Sigmond rated 2124.

I clearly remember that Sigmond was a master, so these ratings were
probably lower than the USCF standard. However, ratings have seriously
inflated since 1958.

On the same list, Claude Bloodgood was rated 1721, Sam Sloan was rated
1461 and Anthony Pabon was rated 1812. Richard Callaghan was rated
1824 and Andrew Schoene was rated 1952.

Page 10 of this "publication" has an article entitled "Virginia Rating
System" that states:

"We are still trying to get squared away on a decent rating system for
the chess players of our state, and State Rating Secretary Claude
Bloodgood has pointed out several fallacies in our present system of
assigning ratings which highlights the need for a change. Moreover,
his criticism is constructive, for he has submitted as proposal method
which uses as a basis the percentage of wins with the average rating
of opponents in any specific event and rating the individual games
from this basis instead of an arbitrary 1000 points to start.

"As arguments in favor of Bloodgood's proposed rating system we have
the following: 1st - The proposal system correlates the Virginia
ratings with the U. S. Chess Federation ratings, and may be much more
accurate due to having an abundance of material to base the rating on
as compared with the USCF."

Bloodgood's proposed modifications to the rating system were
subsequently adopted. However, within a few years the entire system
was abandoned either because the USCF Rating system was more widely
accepted, or because Bloodgood went to prison, or both.

This same publication lists several tournament results of Claude
Bloodgood. He drew a match with Larry Robinson, 3-3. The match ended
on April 23, 1958.

In the 1958 Penninsula Club Championship, a 12 player round-robin,
Bloodgood broke even, scoring 5.5 - 5.5. The winner was Sam Mason,
scoring 9-2.

Sam Sloan

On Nov 25, 9:27*am, samsloan wrote:
Alas, poor Bloodgood, I knew him well.

Shared Death Row?


Sam Sloan

I found some of his games online--add these to your collection please
if you don't already have them.

RL

Bloodgood - Cetenski Winston - Salem Ladder, 3rd match game November
10, 1971 (notes by Bloodgood): 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cd 4.Nd4 Nf6
5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.f5 Nc6 11.fe fe
12.Nc6 bc 13.e5! de 14.Bf6 gf 15.Ne4 f5? (15...Be7) 16.Be2 Be7 (if
16...fe 17.Bh5 Ke7 18.O-O Qd6 19.Rf7 Kd8 20.Rf8 wins) 17.Bh5 Kf8
18.Qh6 Kg8 19.Rb3 Black Resigns. In the note to Black's 16th, modern
computer analysis prefers 18.Rf1. The program also says that after
19...Kd8 20.Qa5 Ke8 21.Rh7 mate is better.

Bloodgood (2250 postal) - Barnsley (2475 postal, British Postal
Champion), correspondence game 1997: 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 c5 3.e4 de 4.Ne5
Nd7 5.Bb5 a6 6.Bd7 Bd7 7.Bb2 Bf5 8.O-O e6 9.f3 ef 10.Qf3 Qc7 11.Na3 f6
12.g4 Bg6 13.Rae1 O-O-O 14.Nce4 h5 15.g5 Bf5 16.gf gf 17.Bc3 Qg7
18.Kh1 Rh6 19.Ba5 Rd4 20.Nb6 Kb8 21.Nac4 Qc7 22.Nd5 Qc6 23.Bc7 Ka7
24.Bb6 draw.

On Nov 25, 9:34*am, raylopez99 wrote:

I found some of his games online--add these to your collection please
if you don't already have them.

RL

Bloodgood - Cetenski Winston - Salem Ladder, 3rd match game November
10, 1971 (notes by Bloodgood): 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cd 4.Nd4 Nf6
5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.f5 Nc6 11.fe fe
12.Nc6 bc 13.e5! de 14.Bf6 gf 15.Ne4 f5? (15...Be7) 16.Be2 Be7 (if
16...fe 17.Bh5 Ke7 18.O-O Qd6 19.Rf7 Kd8 20.Rf8 wins) 17.Bh5 Kf8
18.Qh6 Kg8 19.Rb3 Black Resigns. In the note to Black's 16th, modern
computer analysis prefers 18.Rf1. The program also says that after
19...Kd8 20.Qa5 Ke8 21.Rh7 mate is better.

Bloodgood (2250 postal) - Barnsley (2475 postal, British Postal
Champion), correspondence game 1997: 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 c5 3.e4 de 4.Ne5
Nd7 5.Bb5 a6 6.Bd7 Bd7 7.Bb2 Bf5 8.O-O e6 9.f3 ef 10.Qf3 Qc7 11.Na3 f6
12.g4 Bg6 13.Rae1 O-O-O 14.Nce4 h5 15.g5 Bf5 16.gf gf 17.Bc3 Qg7
18.Kh1 Rh6 19.Ba5 Rd4 20.Nb6 Kb8 21.Nac4 Qc7 22.Nd5 Qc6 23.Bc7 Ka7
24.Bb6 draw.

They are not Grobs!

When the rating system was started in 1950 every player who got an
even score of 6-6 in the 1950 US Open was assigned a rating of 2000.

That was the starting point. Players rated over 2100 were experts,
over 2300 were masters, over 2500 were Senior Masters and over 2700
were grandmasters.

Within about two years it was noticed that everybody's rating was
dropping. The only two players over 2700, Reshevsky and Fine, had lost
those ratings.

Finally in about 1956 the standard was dropped by 100 points to the
present standard where over 2000 is expert and over 2200 was master.

By then, the rating of the average tournament player had dropped from
2000 to 1700.

Soon thereafter they started introducing bonus points to keep the
ratings from dropping. It was these bonus points that eventually
propelled the rating of Claude Bloodgood from 1721 in 1958 to 2702 in
1996.

On 11/25/2010 9:40 AM, samsloan wrote:
When the rating system was started in 1950 every player who got an
even score of 6-6 in the 1950 US Open was assigned a rating of 2000.

That was the starting point. Players rated over 2100 were experts,
over 2300 were masters, over 2500 were Senior Masters and over 2700
were grandmasters.

Within about two years it was noticed that everybody's rating was
dropping. The only two players over 2700, Reshevsky and Fine, had lost
those ratings.

Finally in about 1956 the standard was dropped by 100 points to the
present standard where over 2000 is expert and over 2200 was master.

By then, the rating of the average tournament player had dropped from
2000 to 1700.

Soon thereafter they started introducing bonus points to keep the
ratings from dropping. It was these bonus points that eventually
propelled the rating of Claude Bloodgood from 1721 in 1958 to 2702 in
1996.
IMO, they should do away with rating floors.

"BLafferty" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
On 11/25/2010 9:40 AM, samsloan wrote:
When the rating system was started in 1950 every player who got an
even score of 6-6 in the 1950 US Open was assigned a rating of 2000.

That was the starting point. Players rated over 2100 were experts,
over 2300 were masters, over 2500 were Senior Masters and over 2700
were grandmasters.

Within about two years it was noticed that everybody's rating was
dropping. The only two players over 2700, Reshevsky and Fine, had lost
those ratings.

Finally in about 1956 the standard was dropped by 100 points to the
present standard where over 2000 is expert and over 2200 was master.

By then, the rating of the average tournament player had dropped from
2000 to 1700.

Soon thereafter they started introducing bonus points to keep the
ratings from dropping. It was these bonus points that eventually
propelled the rating of Claude Bloodgood from 1721 in 1958 to 2702 in
1996.
IMO, they should do away with rating floors.

A cogent argument against rating floors might be worth something,
but your *opinion* is irrelevant in this context.

On Nov 25, 10:18*am, BLafferty wrote:

IMO, they should do away with rating floors.-

Who asked you?

On Nov 25, 3:27*am, samsloan wrote:

The highest rated player in the state was Irwin Sigmond rated 2124.

I clearly remember that Sigmond was a master,

Probably true, since Sigmond wrote a column for Chess Life for awhile.

SBD