Hrqls: Borislav Ivanov is not banned, he just refused to take off his shoes and socks and forfeited his game. He will be back playing chess again. he should demand all his opponents, especially those GMs rated above him take off shoes and socks and underwear even after search completed.....
If he can beat the computer by 10-0, he himself also a machine, only computer can beat computer,
no wonder his move match the top choice of the chess engines..

computeropponen: i agree: chess should be played naked! like the olympics in ancient times!

and female chess compeition should be broadcast live ;)

did i say some one is a cheater here? no. i just pointed out that someone with so high BKR in chess with 2717. i just can't believe it. he is just a suspect in my opinion....
Borislav Ivanov, the Bulgarian 2300 chess master who is banned for refusing to take off his shoes and socks demanded by the arbiter of the tournament , now he quit chess.
He was searched many x and no electronic equipment was found, so he is just a suspect, i don't think he is a cheater....
i have read the articles @ chessbase.com: "He never calculated moves" and" Borislav Ivanov speaks out"
he was accused of cheating by many masters some are the loser against him, no one who beat him has raised any question abt his game that he is cheating. Rombaldoni Axel who analysised the game he lost to him. even said " absolutely, he is cheating" in an interview.
in an interview Borislav speak out that he practice a lot with the computer, and after beating Rybka & Houdini by 10-0 each, he was absolutelly sure that no-one was gonna stop him winning...why not get him to prove it?
i won't take off my shoes and socks because i have toenail fungus ..ha

now people have something to talk about, not like before, the creator just post his tour by a short note like this; PC-yper 2013.....

An analysis of BKRs simply indicates grades get inflated with activity For example if you look at the most popular and least popular games on the site (based on the current number of games being played) you get the following:

(a) No of established grades
(b) Top Grade
(c) Number of grades over 2000
(d) % over 2000

Most Popular

1 Ludo
(a) 327
(b) 2350
(c) 222
(d) 68%

2 Backgammon
(a) 670
(b) 2634
(c) 571
(d) 85%

3 Chess
(a) 513
(b) 2717
(c) 162
(d) 32%

Least Popular

1 Alquerque
(a) 19
(b) 2030
(c) 2
(d) 11%

2 Jarmo
(a) 25
(b) 1713
(c)0
(d) 0%

3One Way checkers
(a) 11
(b)1873
(c) 0
(d) 0%

You have to be a very strong player (or have a very strong computer) in an unpopular game to get a grade of over 2000. You would need to win a lot of games and have a perfect record. Compare that with backgammon where 85% of grades are over 2000. You are almost guaranteed to have a grade of over 2000 with a half decent record because everyone you play against has a grade of over 2000.
Do the statistics indicate there are lots of chess computers being used? Not to me. Yes the top grade is higher than Ludo and Backgammon but the number of grades over 2000 is a much smaller percentage of the total population. If a high grade indicates cheating then there is a lot more going on in Backgammon and Ludo, which I would have thought was impossible.
The conclusion I draw is that
1. Grades across games are not comparable.
2. Grades are inflationary
3. There will be no correlation between a BKR and a FIDE grade.
Why is the system inflationary? I don’t know but I guess it has something to do with good players staying on in the system and weak players not. For example if 2 players with a 1500 grade play, the winner gets say 1600 and the loser gets 1400. The loser stops playing and drops out of the system. The winner carries on playing and the average grade is now 1600.

to je diskuze o nicem !

computeropponen: there is some other factors which might be of some influence: on a game site you can chose your opponents and you might win more by timeout than otb and you might stall or speed up certain games to get the ultimate profit or bkr changes

to day even a world champion use computer program to analysis the game, espcially for the opening. he just replay all the moves he memorized from the computer, and this is not cheating.

computeropponen: FYI, the BKR never claimed to be mappable in any way to FIDE ratings. It follow a rather simple rule that only result in a relative difference; the absolute value has no meaning. Typically, games where a lot of people play, the ratings spread out very far (see Ludo or Runs); games where only a small number of people play, 1512 is already a top-10 rating (Portuguese Checkers). That is just a consequence of the definition.

I agree that 2000+ in Chess is probably about a FIDE master rating. Which implies that we have about 155 FIDE masters plus cheaters here.

Aganju:
1) the perfect chess player does not exist, no one could manage not lost a game. so no one is perfect. that is true!
2) my nick is computeropponent, actually i don't use computer program, i hate it. what i mean is that my opponent my be using computer.
3) the BKR is inflated figure. i am an unrated chess player, i have beat my opponent Lightbug with 1868 BKR very easy. i was rated abt 1580 long x ago (more than 20 yrs) so i come up with this number.
FIDE rating = BKR - (500 to 700)
i can tell you that a true 2000+ is a master rating.

Justaminute: That's true.. and that's why I play three check and loop since some years on this site, but never standard chess

Aganju: Which is the joy of chess variants like three check and loop

computeropponen: This is an old discussion; it seems that 90% of the top-rated 100 chess players here on BK are using software (in other words: cheating), as they are just too good to be true.
I have talked with one player that is a verified International FIDE Master and he barely can make it into the top 50 players. So either all world class chess players are here under secret IDs (including all the dead ones), or there are cheaters between them.

Again, note that this is an ongoing (and by now boring) discussion on all gaming sites; some claim that the rules don't disallow software so it is not officially cheating (correct), some claim that it is a lie and that they are just that good (hard to believe for me), and some just never answer if asked.
And some might be really that good.

computeropponen:
BKR=FIDE rating minus (500 to 700) could be more

the highest BKR for chess is 2717
so high it is higher than Karpov's FIDE rating
good 4 KXX... ha

nerus marus !

happyjuggler0:
how to compare BKR and FIDE rating?
who is FIDE rated?

the greatest chess player who can beat everyone and won most of game and lost some. he could be a world champion . but the perfect chess player who drew most of game and won some games against the world champions and never lost a game. because he is undefeated.

computeropponen: Aganju's original reply was to a post of mine: Tournaments (happyjuggler0, 2013-09-02 03:52:55)

He gave a clear and concise (and logical) explanation, which I seem to have not thanked him for.

Thanks Aganju!

To computeropponen , I would like to point out that the game was indeed recorded as a draw for rating purposes, but my lower rated opponent advanced in the tournament because of the unintuitive way that the rules were set up.

If you somehow think this is unfair, I refer you to: http://chess.about.com/od/chessvariants/a/Armageddon-Tiebreakers.htm


My game I posted about was Logik, but it could just as easily have been chess as your post gives an example of. If you read my last link, the you should know that in the world of "real" chess matches and tournaments, that tie break odds of a similar sort are used when it is not practical to allow a system of tiebreakers based on original time controls that could very well extend for an insane amount of time,. It is true however that these are not based on FIDE ratings....

Aganju:
in a draw game, one player may have upper hand position but forced to accept a draw. for example: perpetual check in chess.(it is not allowed in chinese chess) it depends how a draw is defined. if a weak player drew with a strong player, it considered is a win or little win, then the one with upper hand position should be declared a winner.
in my opinion a draw is a draw.
a win could be awarded 1,or 2 even 3 points, a draw 0.5 or 1 pt .....

computeropponen: What I mean is that getting a draw is a slightly better result for the lower rated person (imagine you play chess with Karpov and manage to get a draw), and therefore the lower rated person gets in the next round.
A better alternative would be of course to play another game, but first, that is the choice of the person setting up the tournament (and he chose different), and second, that has other issues, like it could go on forever while all others wait.

Anyway, this is how it is defined, and who doesn't like it has the choices to not enter such a tournament or suck it up and play. And any tournament creator can define that matches are for '1 point', which results in repeat game, instead of choosing '1 game', which forces this kind of decision after a draw.

Aganju:
draw is draw
no one wins
little win? i don't get it

Retep:
the 10 games you like but i don't know how to play those games.

Retep:
3 days per move? weekend ? vacation? slow head player tournament? ha

JerNYC: all online turnbased sites with the same weakness. the game should be played under time contro: 5 minutes max per move

looking for players    End of September!

Big Jungle Elimination - October 2013

3 days per move + weekends + vacations, max. 32 players (tournament starts at my 32nd birthday).

Everyone with a jungle rating is invited, anyone else may contact me to get an invite

iv2 sobota 21 9 2013 Matous grupoid 4 clovece

Retep: thanks! signed up for all, prepared to lose half of them in the first round :)

Retep's 32nd birthday - October 2013

There are 10 games I like in this tournament. Contact me if you wish an invite

iv2 Boris a jeho vesely rorys Ctvrtek 5 9 2013 pavouk

happyjuggler0: it depends on the way the tournament was setup. If it is for one point, you would have another match. If it was for one game, that game is done and that's it. In this case, a draw results in the lower ranked participant moving into the next round (a draw is considered a 'little win' as he should have lost with the lower ranking)

In this tournament DeaD Man's GaMeS to StarT Sep 1 , my logik game and another logik game are draws ( a common outcome). This is an elimination tournament but we didn't start a second game to decide the bracket, like I thought we would.

Does this happen all the time, or is it different this time?

There are a few seats open
September Backgammon

September Games  starts beginning of September

Aganju: This is the only site I know of where all games have to be finished to initiate the next round. Which means an extremely slow player who is already ineligible to advance can hold up the tournament for an indefinite length of time. I generally like the site and the competition, but I find the tournaments to be the weakest feature.

JerNYC: Because the complexity of verifying this fact can be extraordinary high, and even if it is low in many cases, someone has to code it for those cases.
The owner of this site has made it very clear, multiple times, that this or any other improvement of BrainKing is not high on his list of life priorities, so no such code is to be expected.

I'm sure this has been discussed before but if somebody could kindly remind me why a second round can't begin for the advancing players when all others have been mathematically eliminated from contention, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

New tournament   End of Summer Games

Are you rated 1600 or lower (or unrated) in knight fight? Sign up for my tournament then First Friday Knight Fights Low Ratings it only needs one more player and it will start.