72 ( +1 | -1 ) I'm just curious.....I have read numerous posts referring to GM's playing on this site. Who are they? Are we sure? As a very average player (I hover around 1450), I am intrigued by these top level players. It is my dream to play as many of them as I can so I can hopefully learn something. If anyone could identify these Grandmasters I would be grateful:)
PS - I am well aware that the top players on this site are STRONG! Cairo, Duchess, Mateintwo, and the rest (sorry for not naming more) could obviously destroy me and are all very deserving of their status. What I am interested in is identifying those players who have actually achieved all of their GM norms.
Thanks:) - tag1153
yet another PS - GO CAIRO! You rule!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (and are a very cool guy:)
69 ( +1 | -1 ) This is correspondence chess.Not many OTB masters have time for this type of chess, it is very demanding to study and train and play in OTB tournaments at the master level.. At least that is the impression I get, maybe some retired GM's might play here, but I have noticed that OTB (over-the-board) players usually either play in classical tournaments (40/2, sd/60) or they play rapid or blitz chess...I guess the reaon being that memory and blind calculation play a huge role in OTB chess but not as much as in correspondence since here, you can look up your moves in opening books or move the pieces around the board for hours analyzing your next move.
17 ( +1 | -1 ) You are not correct.....in your assumption that Masters, IMs and a few GMs do not play CC. This form of chess has many top players and assuming they do not have time for this is not correct at all. Chuck
87 ( +1 | -1 ) chuck..I said "not many" and my post was meant as a general statement concerning practicing GMs (note the part about retired GMs). And I believe I am correct. If not, then please give me a list of modern FIDE IMs and GMs who play here on Gameknot, I know of none myself, but I am sure there are a few *not many* of course. I am surprised this is coming from you since you described yourself as long time chess player who is currently retired and 'has the time now' in your profile. If you really think my post was way off base then why don't you answer tag1153 yourself by giving him a list of Gameknot players who are GMs? I just answered him to not get his hopes up, because I play in USCF tournaments and I find that the players and particularly the professional players (FIDE grandmasters) I speak to there rarely have any interest in correspondence chess.
78 ( +1 | -1 ) GM's?I don't believe any GM would play here. They would play on ICCF. I don't want to hurt anyones feelings, but IMO GK is not considered to be a serious CC site. Imagine a GM who has to spend a month to play 1200 rated players to get a decent rating. It's hard for me to imagine that.
The fact that GK is not considered to be a serious CC organisation can be seen from our matches against IECC who ask us to play via e-mail. IMO they do it in order to discourage "woodpushers" from wasting their time. IECC does not want to play against 1200 rated players. GM's also don't want to do that. Plus -- GM's don't want to play computers, that are so commonly found in such kind of sites. Players who are totally unknown in the chess world show a GM level performance.This is not serious.
31 ( +1 | -1 ) I did not say here at GK.When I read your post it painted CC with a brad brush. I have played GMs in US Chess Federation CC matches. I have played Master rated players and above in different CC venues. That's all I was saying is that correspondence chess is very popular and has been for many years.
215 ( +1 | -1 ) Dearchessfriend soikins, with all due respect!
Its is hard to believe that you know anything on what your talking about, when you write like this quote: "I don't believe any GM would play here" Please show us the facts, you could be right. And this quote: "I don't want to hurt anyones feelings, but IMO GK is not considered to be a serious CC site" Yes, in your opinion, but who else? On top of everything, you use this quote: The fact that GK is not considered to be a serious CC organisation can be seen from our matches against IECC who ask us to play via e-mail. What does that proof? And this quote: "GM's don't want to play computers, that are so commonly found in such kind of sites" Which GM's don't want to play computers? They use them everyday for preparation! And may I ask for hard evidence, in your last sentence. or shall I take this quote: "Players who are totally unknown in the chess world show a GM level performance.This is not serious." Is this hard evidence?
Here are some real facts:
ICCF has been working hard and spending a lot of money on creating a new webserver, this has been going on for more than two years. Gameknot have allready exsisted more than 4 years as a webserver!!
I have no idea how many GM's or IM's if any playing in here at Gameknot. The fact is I have been playing more than 25 years thru ICCF and now 3 years at Gameknot and I will continue to play both places.
What make you think, as you write quote: "They would play on ICCF" What's going to happen when ICCF launch there webserver in July 2004 and according to you, GM's don't want to play such sites, were computers are so commonly.
Please get your stuff right, before criticize. Nothing wrong with constructive criticism and suggestions for improvements.
Finally if your feelings around Gameknot, is like you descripe them above, why are you playing here?
65 ( +1 | -1 ) Another provocative question: sense of this thread?
I assume there are some (not many but at least a few) GMs playing here at GK, but I don't think they are usually willing to "reveal their true identity as a GM", because of all kinds of fanmail like "would you play me" "can you give me some lessons" etc. I don't want to annoy anyone, but try to put yourself in such a position, I think messages like that CAN start to go on ones nerves and make them stop playing on GK. If they play on the internet CC they have their reasons and their right for some privacy, so why bothering them? If you knew one and happened to play him/her, simply try to enjoy it. So I don't really get the point of this thread.
27 ( +1 | -1 ) master on gameknot.Have you ever played sisyfos anybody??? He told me he used to be rated 2300+ in the sixties, which is Master level I think. Anyway he thrashed me easily and has a 134 wins, 1 loss record, which is pretty impressive methinks. He's also bald and swedish.
363 ( +1 | -1 ) to cairoFirst of all, thank you for your post.
I was quite shure that such kind of reaction will come, so I posted just a part of what I wanted to say, cause if I would have said all of what I wanted, I probably wouldn't be able to play here anymore. The subject is too painfull to discuss it openly.
About Correspondence chess in general -- it is in crisis, because an avarage amateur can play like a GM using a computer. I'm not the only one saying it. Latvia, country from which I come has good CC traditions, and the these questions have been discussed here for example by IM Zhuravliov. And it has been discussed everywhere and there is no need to repeat the discussion here. Programmers are working on creating software that would be able to detect computer use but untill that we have no "hard evidence" that would prove that anyone uses a computer in his CC games. Therefore, like aforementioned IM Zhuravliov pointed out: CC ratings and titles are of no value.
I cannot give you hard evidence on my claims about GM's not playing here, but I can tell you about one conversation with a GM that I witnessed. Actually this is a delicate case the should not be discussed in a forum, therefore I won't mention names. The situation was as follows: a CC player (my coach) and his fellow GM where analysing a correspondence game (what do you know -- it is forbidden to use anyones assistance!), they also consulted computer, by the way (forbidden!). Then one candidate master (expert) who was also in the room proposed to the GM to play in one CC event which had good prize money (the event was on a website similar to GK). Candidate master said something like this: "With your positional understanding and with computer assistace you could whipe them all out and take the cash!" (The expert (and his computer) is rated about 2700 on the site and is among the top players there). The GM replied: "Why should I waste my time on those computer assisted woodpushers, this is not serious. Correspondence chess is not playable anymore." Of course this is no hard proof, because this is just one case and I'm not a reliable source, but I do believe this to be a general sentiment about Correspondence chess.
ICCF? I don't think many OTB GM's play there. Maybe some of the retired ones. But if they would play, then they would choose ICCF because payments ant communication via e-mail discourages avarage computer assisted players from participating in such events.
Now about Gameknot. It is based on server, there are a lot of "freeriders" (myself among them), the site claims to have several thousand members (mostly dead accounts). The playing is simple, it does not require much work like it is in e-mail chess or classical correspondence chess. Just make your move on board and that's all. Everyone who knows the moves can do it. Therefore here are so many players who hardly know the moves. And it is also easy for them to repeat computer moves too.
At last -- I have no hard evidence, of course. I just said what I feel, and how I see it. I don't accuse anyone here. I also understand that GK is a place meant for masses, for all people, regardless of their skill. And I believe that it is treated like such a place by other organisations. I'm glad that GK has changed the rating system, so that we don't have these 3000 players. This just looks silly.
P.S. ICCF has worked so long on their webserver becauce they want to create the software that tracks the computer abuse. By the way -- I don't believe that ICCF server is going to be popular.
44 ( +1 | -1 ) Wow! I had no idea......that my simple question would draw such a response. Being relatively new to GK I was not aware that this ground had been covered in such detail. Thanks for bringing me up to speed. Now for the real shocker - I actually am a Grandmaster. My real name is Ivan A. Drawinski......:)
*can't wait to see who thinks I'm telling the truth:)*
Gotta go now - many pieces to hang, many wins to draw, and many draws to lose. Thanks folks!