8352 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
are there any good books out there on the scotch game?
Latest one (which is bulky and quite good) is by the "Greek" WGM Yelena Dembo and English IM Richard Palliser.
Thats a shameless plug pfren lol! :-P
In fact isnt Yelena Dembo living somewhere near you?
In one of the islands in your neighbourhood?
Actually she lives in the northest isle of Kyklades for a couple of months each year, while I live at the southest one all year. This is quite some distance.
Of course she is a very strong player and a good writer, but she can hardly be regarded as Greek. Or OK, she is partly Ukrainian, partly Hungarian, partly Jewish, and partly Greek- I'm sorry, but I do not know how much of each. After all, it doesn't matter at all, chess-wise.
Not going to comment on the book, since I don't know anything about it, but I'd like to mention that WGM Dembo is "persona non grata" here on chess.com after she was banned from the site for cheating - was it in 2010? Can't remember.
Yes I've heard the story, but I seriously doubt that Yelena Dembo was cheating in chess.
This is a rather odd story, I also know about it. I do not know Dembo in person (I only know her husband, who didn't comment anywhere about the instance) so I can't say if I believe she was cheating, or not.
Statistical analysis was done on her games - either she was using an engine, or she was by far the best correspondence chess player ever, her quality of play far superior to any past or current correspondence world champions.
The discussion is not one to have here however, but head over to the cheating forum if you're interested http://www.chess.com/groups/home/cheating-forum
where the methods are regularly debated. However, the people who actually perform the analysis and know the most about the whole thing believe the site is actually far too conservative in banning users. They only act if ~100% sure.
True, but also true that statistical analysis was done on Capablanca's games and was proved he was using Fritz 12. What does that tell us?
I personaly think that sometimes the evaluation algorithms they use spit out faulty results and that no case is 100% when it comes down to GMs (its another story when you check moves made by club players like me, or Capablanca).
No, on average there are certain levels of match-up that humans can't seem to break (which is very interesting to me considering players from 60 years ago fared no better it seems).
Yes, 1 or 2 games you can even have 100% best moves, especially when facing a weak opponent. All these things are taken into account of course, they don't boot you for 1 game.
Factly, I have received a warning here on a game I played. The warning was 100% correct- my moves were largely dictated by an engine, but this was homework I had done in a variation of the Dutch defence, right after the end of established theory, some one year ago!
But of course this sort of thing can happen once, or twice. If it happens all the time, then something fishy is going on.
thanks for the suggestion.yeah....I too have heard about this curious banning.hmm....she probs was cheating though,since the statistics clearly show that.
We dont actually know what kind of check it was done on her, or how many games they checked or how many moves matched the computers results. Chess.com does not disclose the methods used.
To me it just does not make any sense at all. Why would any titled player be cheating here. Its not like some nob who tries to win points for their team. She doesnt need recognition ot plaudits and there is no money involved.
I see it entirely the other way around, although I don't see any incentive for any player to cheat.
The WGM could well have been cheating to help promote her books/name etc. It's not like I'd particularly heard of her before she was banned - however, if she had risen to become one of Chess.coms best players and active on the site, then I would know her. She has books etc. to try and sell after all, and coaching services.
On the other hand, why would the site ban her unless they were absolutely certain? What motivation could they have to not want a respected titled player contributing to the site?
Also, I don't think it can even be suggested that the site didn't do proper analysis on her games. I think I remember top 3 match up rates for a sample of 20 games being posted, but all this of course had to be deleted from public forums when Dembo threatened the chess.com with a lawsuit unless they dropped the "cheater" tag, which the site backed away from (lawsuits are expensive in the States).
I find it strange, people asking "where is the evidence?" when actually the site HAS evidence, and the person asking has none, just a gut feeling that "something might not be right". Nevertheless, debate is healthy I suppose!
Well ofcourse you are entitled to see things any way you want, no one said otherwise.
First let me say that i knew Denbo way before chess.com (not personaly obviously) she has featured in many international tournaments. Just because you didnt know of her doesnt mean she is not very strong player.
Also i agree that books and coaching could be a reason for cheating (again i am not saying that she did cheat)
Now, about the absolute certainty of the results let me tell you what i know.
The published analysis (the 20 games or so you mentioned earlier) was not done by chess.com but by a chess.com furummer (Steve Collyer) using rybka3 at 12-20 ply depth (about 2000 -2300 elo player in other words).
Also (and this is important) forcing moves and variations were not excluded. Also he (steve collyer) said that his findings are not to be taken as proof (he actually said "gospell").
Apparently after he (collyer) complained to chess.com they had IM david pruess investigate the games and he banned dembo.
Chess.com never published any results, or explained what method used to determine cheating. Never said they had absolute evidence.
Now i would like to think that chess.com's results are accurate and i am here (in this chess site and not some other site) because i like the punishment dished out to cheaters, as opposed to other sites who do bugger all. But in some cases (namely high profile names) i would like to see some hint of proof.
I dont think it's so unreasonable to expect some explanation is all im saying.
by Kansha a few minutes ago
Would a 2000 ELO player beat Kasparov if he had a piece advantage?
by AngeloPardi 3 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by chesskenabe 4 minutes ago
Game automatically aborted
by Kansha 5 minutes ago
A group question.
by Kansha 6 minutes ago
So I was having dinner with Gary Kasparov the other day...
by RandyRhoads 7 minutes ago
4/26/2013 - Mate in 5
by ChootyD 9 minutes ago
No more multiple games for Standard members?
by Steve212000 9 minutes ago
6/19/2013 - Short and Sweet
by strngdrvnthng 17 minutes ago
by Ragnarokkr 18 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com