Why even play TheBigKat?

Originally posted by 1shooter
I am a terrible player. That being said.

TheBigKat do you cheat a straight forward question.

I can look up a bunch of quotes and jargon. And maybe even have correct English. But I never seen anywhere where you said NO I DON"T CHEAT

So I ask do you cheat.

IF you say no good enough for me.

No I do not cheat. There's no reward in it, so why bother? KT and C are cyber bullies and delusional.

Originally posted by TheBigKat
No I do not cheat. There's no reward in it, so why bother? KT and C are cyber bullies and delusional.

Well there you have it.
Conclusive proof of innocence. Better proof than my silly automated engine match rate analysis on my daft quad core pc with the pathetic Houdini engine.
As I said, had you been analysed 3 or 4 years ago we would not be able to have these enlightening chats, as you would have been banned.

With ludicrously high match rates of
{ TheBigKat (Games: 20) }
{ Top 1 Match: 514/745 ( 69.0% )
{ Top 2 Match: 640/745 ( 85.9% )
{ Top 3 Match: 692/745 ( 92.9% )
{ Top 4 Match: 715/745 ( 96.0% )
if you aren't cheating, then presumably no one else is either.

Poor old Magnus, eh? Quite pathetic by comparison...
{ Magnus Carlsen vs 2600+ (Games: 20) }
{ Top 1 Match: 477/828 ( 57.6% )
{ Top 2 Match: 617/828 ( 74.5% )
{ Top 3 Match: 690/828 ( 83.3% )
{ Top 4 Match: 732/828 ( 88.4% )

Originally posted by TheBigKat
How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

Easy. By posting the matchup rates from each.

😴

Originally posted by TheBigKat
No I do not cheat. There's no reward in it, so why bother? KT and C are cyber bullies and delusional.

dear kat,
Strong chessplayers do NOT lack credentials, but you lack credentials. Hmm. Maybe you are possessed of the spirit of Harry Pillsbury which enables you to make a meteoric rise in chess ability. One thing for sure is that you are not a strong experienced OTB player because a strong player would recognize the obvious farce you have created. And you don't even realize it. 😛😛😛

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Easy. By posting the matchup rates from each.

😴

Yes, it is.

6th Correspondence Chess World Cup Final 1968-1971
Top 4 finishers

{ Rittner, H. (Games: 15) }
{ Top 1 Match: 203/337 ( 60.2% )
{ Top 2 Match: 254/337 ( 75.4% )
{ Top 3 Match: 276/337 ( 81.9% )
{ Top 4 Match: 293/337 ( 86.9% )

{ Zagorovsky, V. (Games: 15) }
{ Top 1 Match: 201/378 ( 53.2% )
{ Top 2 Match: 267/378 ( 70.6% )
{ Top 3 Match: 311/378 ( 82.3% )
{ Top 4 Match: 328/378 ( 86.8% )

{ Estrin, Y. (Games: 15) }
{ Top 1 Match: 201/339 ( 59.3% )
{ Top 2 Match: 263/339 ( 77.6% )
{ Top 3 Match: 291/339 ( 85.8% )
{ Top 4 Match: 301/339 ( 88.8% )

{ Thiele, E. (Games: 15) }
{ Top 1 Match: 302/511 ( 59.1% )
{ Top 2 Match: 386/511 ( 75.5% )
{ Top 3 Match: 417/511 ( 81.6% )
{ Top 4 Match: 443/511 ( 86.7% )

{ Top 4 Players}
{ Top 1 Match: 907/1565 ( 58.0% )
{ Top 2 Match: 1170/1565 ( 74.8% )
{ Top 3 Match: 1298/1565 ( 82.9% )
{ Top 4 Match: 1365/1565 ( 87.2% )

7th World CC Championships 1972-75
Top 3 finishers:

1st place
Estrin (9 games)
Top 1 Match: 153/256 (59.8% )
Top 2 Match: 191/256 (74.6% )
Top 3 Match: 209/256 (81.6% )

2nd place
Boey (13 games)
Top 1 Match: 268/449 (59.7% )
Top 2 Match: 342/449 (76.2% )
Top 3 Match: 376/449 (83.7% )

3rd place
Zagorovsky V (10 games)
Top 1 Match: 153/252 (60.7% )
Top 2 Match: 190/252 (75.4% )
Top 3 Match: 208/252 (82.5% )

8th World CC Championships 1975-78
Top 4 finishers:

1st Place
{ Sloth, Jorn (Games: 7) }
{ Top 1 Match: 160/271 ( 59.0% )
{ Top 2 Match: 214/271 ( 79.0% )
{ Top 3 Match: 237/271 ( 87.5% )
{ Top 4 Match: 244/271 ( 90.0% )

2nd Place
{ Zagorovsky, Vladimir Pavlovich (Games: 11) }
{ Top 1 Match: 228/400 ( 57.0% )
{ Top 2 Match: 294/400 ( 73.5% )
{ Top 3 Match: 330/400 ( 82.5% )
{ Top 4 Match: 347/400 ( 86.8% )

3rd Place
{ Kosenkov, Vsevolod Tikhonovich (Games: 10) }
{ Top 1 Match: 162/316 ( 51.3% )
{ Top 2 Match: 215/316 ( 68.0% )
{ Top 3 Match: 248/316 ( 78.5% )
{ Top 4 Match: 263/316 ( 83.2% )

4th Place
{ Khasin, Abram Yosifovich (Games: 7) }
{ Top 1 Match: 141/226 ( 62.4% )
{ Top 2 Match: 180/226 ( 79.6% )
{ Top 3 Match: 188/226 ( 83.2% )
{ Top 4 Match: 195/226 ( 86.3% )

{ All Players }
{ Top 1 Match: 1287/2448 ( 52.6% )
{ Top 2 Match: 1719/2448 ( 70.2% )
{ Top 3 Match: 1927/2448 ( 78.7% )
{ Top 4 Match: 2060/2448 ( 84.2% )

9th World CC Championships 1977-83
Top 3 finishers:

{ Oim, Tonu O. (EST) (Games: 11) }
{ Top 1 Match: 236/396 ( 59.6% )
{ Top 2 Match: 313/396 ( 79.0% )
{ Top 3 Match: 349/396 ( 88.1% )
{ Top 4 Match: 363/396 ( 91.7% )

{ Baumbach, Fritz dr (GER) (Games: 12) }
{ Top 1 Match: 269/433 ( 62.1% )
{ Top 2 Match: 334/433 ( 77.1% )
{ Top 3 Match: 363/433 ( 83.8% )
{ Top 4 Match: 386/433 ( 89.2% )

{ Mikhailov, Aleksey Ivanovich (Games: 14) }
{ Top 1 Match: 331/573 ( 57.8% )
{ Top 2 Match: 437/573 ( 76.3% )
{ Top 3 Match: 476/573 ( 83.1% )
{ Top 4 Match: 503/573 ( 87.8% )

12th World CC Championships 1984-91
Top 3 finishers:

1st Place
{ Sanakoev, Grigory K. (RUS) (Games: 10) }
{ Top 1 Match: 194/328 ( 59.1% ) Opponents: 160/327 ( 48.9% )
{ Top 2 Match: 249/328 ( 75.9% ) Opponents: 228/327 ( 69.7% )
{ Top 3 Match: 280/328 ( 85.4% ) Opponents: 254/327 ( 77.7% )
{ Top 4 Match: 295/328 ( 89.9% ) Opponents: 271/327 ( 82.9% )

2nd Place
{ Franzen, Jozef (SVK) (Games: 8) }
{ Top 1 Match: 140/240 ( 58.3% ) Opponents: 117/237 ( 49.4% )
{ Top 2 Match: 189/240 ( 78.8% ) Opponents: 173/237 ( 73.0% )
{ Top 3 Match: 203/240 ( 84.6% ) Opponents: 196/237 ( 82.7% )
{ Top 4 Match: 214/240 ( 89.2% ) Opponents: 208/237 ( 87.8% )

3rd place
{ Kauranen, Risto (FIN) (Games: 12) }
{ Top 1 Match: 227/398 ( 57.0% ) Opponents: 217/396 ( 54.8% )
{ Top 2 Match: 301/398 ( 75.6% ) Opponents: 299/396 ( 75.5% )
{ Top 3 Match: 331/398 ( 83.2% ) Opponents: 331/396 ( 83.6% )
{ Top 4 Match: 358/398 ( 89.9% ) Opponents: 354/396 ( 89.4% )

{ All Players }
{ Top 1 Match: 989/1790 ( 55.3% )
{ Top 2 Match: 1344/1790 ( 75.1% )
{ Top 3 Match: 1487/1790 ( 83.1% )
{ Top 4 Match: 1579/1790 ( 88.2% )

Originally posted by Zygalski
[b]6th Correspondence Chess World Cup Final 1968-1971
Top 4 finishers

{ Rittner, H. (Games: 15) }
{ Top 1 Match: 203/337 ( 60.2% )
{ Top 2 Match: 254/337 ( 75.4% )
{ Top 3 Match: 276/337 ( 81.9% )
{ Top 4 Match: 293/337 ( 86.9% )

{ Zagorovsky, V. (Games: 15) }
{ Top 1 Match: 201/378 ( 53.2% )
{ Top 2 Match: 267/378 ( 70.6% )
{ T ...[text shortened]... tch: 1344/1790 ( 75.1% )
{ Top 3 Match: 1487/1790 ( 83.1% )
{ Top 4 Match: 1579/1790 ( 88.2% )[/b]

🙄 All this from a 1500 rated player? Creepy. How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

Originally posted by TheBigKat
🙄 All this from a 1500 rated player? Creepy. How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

I don't claim to be anything I'm not. 😉

Originally posted by TheBigKat
🙄 All this from a 1500 rated player? Creepy. How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

? I am not sure what you want to express...
This is applied statistics and nothing to do with chess ability.
Correspondence chess is correspondence chess regardless if you play by post or by internet. Zygalksi's numbers show how correspondence players on the top level compare to a (modern) chess computer. It is really impressive that the Masters find so many moves which are deemed best by the computer.

OTB chess and correspondence chess don't compare very well, since there are Masters on correspondence who never became OTB masters.

So a good correspondence player need not be a good otb player.
Probably a good correspondence player will ahve a higher match-up, due to the fact that he may play around with the situation on board. However some computer moves will never enter the evaluation by a human since they seem so illogical. The computer will not have any qualms about the situation on board just crunching the numbers.

And that from a 1300 player 😲

eh what the hell wrong with a 1500 player other than not being better

I am 1500 destroyed some masters in otb more than once in long and short games.

Truth be told really great games can come from terrible players.

Originally posted by TheBigKat
🙄 All this from a 1500 rated player? Creepy. How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

Here comes the slander that TheBigKat uses for his defense.

I think stats don't measure everything but Zygalski has given a convincing argument that TheBigKat has gone beyond the norm of even the best players in the world. By the way, thank you for taking the time to provide all of those stats.

Caissad4 and King Tiger also bring up credentials which TheBigKat is very foggy on. It goes within reason, that for a player to play at such a high level as TheBigKat, he should have a very high rating somewhere. The fact that he will not give us that information, that we can confirm says a lot. What does he have to lose by withholding it?

Lastly, TheBigKat keeps saying how can you compare OTB, correspondence chess and internet chess to each other? I will be the first to admit that there is some room for variance. Some people cannot calculate in their head as well, but in internet and correspondence chess, they can do better because they can move the pieces around on a board. However, does not the stronger OTB player become even stronger when he can do the same? I would argue that internet chess is harder than correspondence chess because players play more games at one time. Finding the best moves over a larger pool of games and remembering all of those variations is a daunting task. However, it becomes a simpler task when you use a search engine as your safety net.

Originally posted by TheBigKat
🙄 All this from a 1500 rated player? Creepy. How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

Umm...He's not, in this post. Do try to pay attention, 'editor'.

Here's one I did a while ago. OTB GM Duncan Suttles playing a correspondence tournament between 1978-1981.

Houdini 1.5a 32bit - 15ply

{ Top 1 Match: 160/274 ( 58.4% ) }
{ Top 2 Match: 205/274 ( 74.8% ) }
{ Top 3 Match: 233/274 ( 85.0% ) }
{ Top 4 Match: 251/274 ( 91.6% ) }

and his opponents

{ Top 1 Match: 152/273 ( 55.7% ) }
{ Top 2 Match: 198/273 ( 72.5% ) }
{ Top 3 Match: 227/273 ( 83.1% ) }
{ Top 4 Match: 240/273 ( 87.9% ) }

Originally posted by TheBigKat
🙄 All this from a 1500 rated player? Creepy. How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

What's your rating then?

He isn't comparing CC with OTB he is comparing how many of your moves match the recommendations of software in the same positions you had.

It is worth understanding the credentials of some of the players cited in the above list.

Dr Freiderich (Fritz) Baumbach OTB FIDE Master regular East German Olympiad player
Jozef Frantzen, OTB International Master
Grigory Sanakoev master strength Russian player rated 2250 ish
Yakov Estrin master strength Russian player and theorist.
Jorn Sloth IM (former Danish Junior Champion I believe)

All fantastic credentials to back their top level pre-computer CC play. What are yours?

Originally posted by TheBigKat
🙄 All this from a 1500 rated player? Creepy. How do you compare OTB to internet chess?

Here comes the slander that TheBigKat uses for his defense.

I think stats don't measure everything but Zygalski has given a convincing argument that TheBigKat has gone beyond the norm of even the best players in the world. By the way, thank you for taking the time to provide all of those stats.

Caissad4 and King Tiger also bring up credentials which TheBigKat is very foggy on. It goes within reason, that for a player to play at such a high level as TheBigKat, he should have a very high rating somewhere. The fact that he will not give us that information, that we can confirm says a lot. What does he have to lose by withholding it?

Lastly, TheBigKat keeps saying how can you compare OTB, correspondence chess and internet chess to each other? I will be the first to admit that there is some room for variance. Some people cannot calculate in their head as well, but in internet and correspondence chess, they can do better because they can move the pieces around on a board. However, does not the stronger OTB player become even stronger when he can do the same? I would argue that internet chess is harder than correspondence chess because players play more games at one time. Finding the best moves over a larger pool of games and remembering all of those variations is a daunting task. However, it becomes a simpler task when you use a search engine as your safety net.