The world champion plays here

For discussion pertaining to Chess, Net-Chess, or general interests.
Post Reply
wulebgr
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 1:12 pm
Location: PNW USA
Contact:

The world champion plays here

Post by wulebgr » Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:03 pm

Here on slowchess, I found a player named Kasimzhanov. His player info states he lives in Uzbekistan.

His record here so far 56-1-0 w-d-l

Is this player the FIDE world champion, or just a poser using a clever handle?

See http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1789

cohonas
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 6:23 pm

Post by cohonas » Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:50 pm

It is obviously an imposer using his "name", in his user info he has mis-spelled his first name :)

username: kasimzhanov
rating: 2491
joindate: 7/19/2004 10:51
provisional: n
lastlogin: 8/20/2004 9:3
gameswon: 51
gamesplayed: 52
gameslost: 0
gamesdrawn: 1
firstname: Rustan
lastname: Kasimzhanov
country: Uzbekistan
sex: male
state:
averating: 2050
emailnotify: yes
webpage:
ratingfloor: 2100
timeouts: 0

His first name is not Rustan, it is Rustam.

juselton
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 6:17 am

Post by juselton » Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:13 am

He also misspelled his last name which is Kasimdzhanov.

I know this question has come up before but I will ask it again--- Is anyone on this site capable of giving a world class player any competition. If you think you can---stand and make yourself known!

Just remember, we're not talking kindergarten chess here guys. These guys play chess for blood!

jstripes
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 3:56 pm

Post by jstripes » Mon Sep 27, 2004 11:15 am

cohonas wrote:It is obviously an imposer using his "name", in his user info he has mis-spelled his first name :)
[snip]
firstname: Rustan
lastname: Kasimzhanov
country: Uzbekistan

His first name is not Rustan, it is Rustam.
I have two games against this alleged poser, and he appears to be world champion material, as he offered a draw before the fifteenth move. At some point after the above was posted, he corrected the misspelling of his first name. His user info now shows his name as Rustam. Perhaps he is the real thing!
"The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks. . . . See the line from a sufficient distance, and it straightens itself to the average tendency."
Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Self-Reliance"

neric
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 3:26 am

Post by neric » Mon Sep 27, 2004 12:38 pm

I played 4 games with him and I have to say that he was the toughest opponent I have met here so far. His 2600+ rating didn't come from nowhere.

Still it is kinda shocking to see him drop down to 2200 after he obviously went nutz. He resigned like 50 games at once and is offering matches with weird starting positions (like stalemate or forced loss of a piece).

juselton
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 6:17 am

world champion

Post by juselton » Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:16 pm

I'm curious about people who say---" he was the toughest opponent I've met here so far." Thats fine, so far as it goes, but how does that qualify the player as anywhere near world class material.

Who is neric? whats his name? whats his uscf rating or his fide rating. If he is a Grandmaster (incognito) with a rating of 2600 plus then a statement like "my toughest opponent" holds water. If, on the other hand, he has a rating of 1800 then his statement doesnt really mean very much does it.

Neric has mentioned he has 25yrs of international experience. Why not share that experience with us here. Name some of your memorable international tournaments and top players you have faced. Lay your credentials on the table my friend.

neric
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 3:26 am

Post by neric » Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:51 pm

If you don't want to trust my judgement then check my statistics on slowchess. It has to be seen in relation to that.

wulebgr
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 1:12 pm
Location: PNW USA
Contact:

Post by wulebgr » Tue Sep 28, 2004 6:33 pm

Interesting squabble neric and juselton! I checked the stats for both of you posers, and found impressive credentials. You two ought to play a match; I'll watch.

As for the silent one (who may not even read these forums for all I know), even if kasimzhanov is Kasimdzhanov, the FIDE champion, he's still a poser because the FIDE world champion title is tainted by the format of the tournament. Kasimdzhanov is world-class, but he is not a super-GM.

The current match between Leko and Kramnik is the true world championship match. A future match between Kasparov and Kasimdzhanov will be won easily by Garry, then the Leko-Kramnik winner will hopefully play Kasparov. After the winner of that bout takes on Anand (the strongest active player these days), we might again have a world champion that deserves all the respect once due the title.

In any case, kasimzhanov, as neric noted, is a strong player, although he's engaging in some bizarre behavior. Even if he is not the illustrious Kasimdzhanov, he has selected a nice handle.
Wulebgr

“From a fish’s point of view, a wulebgr is a leech.”

juselton
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 6:17 am

trust

Post by juselton » Tue Sep 28, 2004 6:43 pm

Well, it would have been much simpler to say ---if you don't trust my judgement, here are my credentials. I have played in this tournament and that tournament; I have played this master and that master. Voila-the case is closed.

You have decided to take the nebulous response--- "check my statistics on Slowchess." Sir, Slow chess is Munchkin land, it's cyberville, it's lala land.
In just the past year we've had bozos who had never won a game who had ratings approaching 3000 or more (if memory serves me correctly). If I was going to trust someones judgement based on their Slowchess statistics then I would probably buy the Brooklyn bridge as well.

Good day to you sir, my intention was not to offend you and if I have I apologize.

juselton
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 6:17 am

Post by juselton » Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:13 pm

wulebgr---there is much in what you say---interesting post.

Have you ever wondered what a world class player would be doing here. What would his (her) purpose be? Try out new novelties---I don't think so! Use our top players as sparring partners---I don't think so!

So what is the deal. Why sould someone believe a world class player would be playing here? I'm not saying they don't play here or have never played here---my question is why would they play here.

I was reading the Chessmaniac home page recently and they were interviewing Yelena Dembo (woman GM). The webmaster asked her how she came to Chessmaniac to play. Her answer was extremely interesting and logical. She said her Dad asked her to play here and to take one minute per move. Her opponents are taking anywhere from three days to fourteen days and Yelena is taking one minute per move. I think she is 60 wins and 2 losses.

Someone said Larry Christiansen used to play here. Now Larry is a great blindfold player and blitz player. If he did actually play here do you think he might have played ten second chess without sight of the board?

jstripes
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 3:56 pm

Re: trust

Post by jstripes » Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:02 am

juselton wrote:Sir, Slow chess is Munchkin land, it's cyberville, it's lala land.
In just the past year we've had bozos who had never won a game who had ratings approaching 3000 or more (if memory serves me correctly).
Wow, ratings near 3000 with no wins!? Provisional or established? It seems that Greg was cleaning up a mess like that when I started here almost one year ago. Still, your description sounds more extreme than I remember. Your memory is likely serving another master.

I agree that the ratings are absurd here. Normally I'm an A - B correspondence player. Here I'm over 2400! There has been a lot of talk about the rating problem here, without anyone arriving at a mathematical solution that Greg can accept. But munchkin land?

I've played in several simuls, where a GM or IM takes under one minute per move, and the other players play at something close to normal tournament pace. I've never seen a record anything close to 60-2 at these events. In those games, as in most of the games I play at any speed, Fritz can usually find a win that was missed by one or both players. In IM/GM tournament games, on the other hand, egregious errors are less frequent. Surprisingly, such errors are also less common by players above 2600 on SlowChess.

Chessmaniac sounds like Yahoo.
"The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks. . . . See the line from a sufficient distance, and it straightens itself to the average tendency."
Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Self-Reliance"

juselton
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 6:17 am

Post by juselton » Wed Sep 29, 2004 6:17 pm

As far as ratings go you think my memory is serving another master and in the very next sentence you agree with me that the ratings were absurd---Sir, you sound like a Yahoo!

And that was the point of my post. Why would any world class player want to play Yahoos like you or me? If they were getting paid they might play here. (they're not) If they were getting a good work out, they might play here (they're not). The only way they could get an interesting game playing Yahoos like you is to give tremendous odds. Read my lips mr stripes---"tremendous odds".

The only way a world class player could get an interesting game on Chessmaniac is to give tremendous odds.

jstripes
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 3:56 pm

Post by jstripes » Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:40 am

juselton wrote:As far as ratings go you think my memory is serving another master and in the very next sentence you agree with me that the ratings were absurd---Sir, you sound like a Yahoo!

And that was the point of my post. Why would any world class player want to play Yahoos like you or me?
I believe you and I agree that the ratings here are inflated, but perhaps disagree quite a bit on the conclusions we draw from that observation. My rhetorical flame thrown at the credibility of your memory was an attack on what appeared hyperbolic rhetoric. Such excess often undermines a credible argument. I could easily agree with your point, but not the argument you use to get there. If such discrimination has become the definition of a yahoo, then I'll grudgingly embrace the label.

Nevertheless, I went back through some old posts, and it appears that your memory proved a better servant than I alleged. It was as bad as you say. My suspicion that you were engaging in excessive rhetoric proved to be the error. It was my mistake, not yours.

Several of these players now have ratings of 800, however, so Greg cleaned up that element of the problem quite a bit. There does remain one 3000 player--shilder--who has not played more than one move in any game.

I still disagree with some of the conclusions you appear to draw from your assessment of the ratings here. I believe there are strong players here who could give a world class player a good game. Whether there are actually any world class players, however, and why they might choose to play here, I would not presume to know. When a world class player identifies his- or herself in a manner that can be verified, then we will know. Until then, we have rumors and speculation.

I went to Chessmaniac's page and found the interview with Yelena Dembo. It was interesting, and I am grateful to you for bringing it to our attention. Clearly Chessmaniac is a bit more serious than Yahoo as a chess site.

If you wish to continue firing missles across the Columbia, I'll be happy to oblige. But let's remove the warheads. Shalom.
"The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks. . . . See the line from a sufficient distance, and it straightens itself to the average tendency."
Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Self-Reliance"

wulebgr
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 1:12 pm
Location: PNW USA
Contact:

Post by wulebgr » Mon Oct 04, 2004 9:01 am

wulebgr wrote: As for the silent one (who may not even read these forums for all I know), even if kasimzhanov is Kasimdzhanov, the FIDE champion, he's still a poser because the FIDE world champion title is tainted by the format of the tournament. Kasimdzhanov is world-class, but he is not a super-GM.
Rustam Kasimdzhanov is number 47 on the October FIDE rating list, Kramnik is 3 (but numbers 4 and 5 are within 5 ELO), Leko is 6.
Wulebgr

“From a fish’s point of view, a wulebgr is a leech.”

jstripes
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 3:56 pm

Post by jstripes » Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:21 am

jstripes wrote: I have two games against this alleged poser, and he appears to be world champion material, as he offered a draw before the fifteenth move. Perhaps he is the real thing!
He thinks it is time for to resign, and has said so on more than one occasion. Although former World Champion Garry Kasparov is subject to terrible temper tantrums when he loses, I know of no history of strong GMs engaging in such asinine behavior and unsportsmanlike behavior.

He does not deserve the handle he chose for himself, as the real Rustam Kasimdzhanov is a gentleman (and I'll even be rooting for him against GK in January).
"The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks. . . . See the line from a sufficient distance, and it straightens itself to the average tendency."
Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Self-Reliance"

supertimchan
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2000 5:14 am

Post by supertimchan » Fri Nov 19, 2004 4:10 am

There are strong players who play correspondance chess. Net-chess is a correspondance chesss site. The quality of correspondance chess world championship is greater than the classical world chess championship.

itsmenow
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2004 1:43 pm

Post by itsmenow » Fri Nov 19, 2004 5:01 pm

Theoretically mail chess should be stronger than standard chess controls :shock: . But giving the privilege of playing so many games at once (I do this myself) one finds himself playing 50 or more games at a time :P , giving only minuts if not seconds to each move and games. This of course gives less quality of moves :( .

I wonder if the # of games played by a person at the same time can be limited :? ... Nevertheless if this could be done there are people playing with more than one nick :twisted: .


I still wonder how could a person without wins got the 3000 elo.

And there is still more. How to prevent the use of chess software (the only thing I can come up is with reduced amount of time to move). I know at least a case where is very suspicious.


For me chess is a gentleman's game so I play with honesty and pride. Also if someone is loosing severely it should not ask for merci (ask for draw in mate in two for example).

There, I have said what I had in mind since I got tangled in this exiting chess site.

Good luck to all in the 2004 tournament. :D

wulebgr
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 1:12 pm
Location: PNW USA
Contact:

Post by wulebgr » Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:10 pm

itsmenow wrote:Theoretically mail chess should be stronger than standard chess controls :shock: .

[snip]

And there is still more. How to prevent the use of chess software (the only thing I can come up is with reduced amount of time to move). I know at least a case where is very suspicious.
You cannot prevent the use of computers in correspondence chess; you can only play better than the computers, or take your lumps.

The term "computers" is unreasonably vague:
1. Computers are required to log into a website such as Slowchess/Net-Chess.
2. Use of chess playing Engines (computer generated moves) should be considered cheating unless specifically permitted, as it is in some correspondence chess.
3. Use of chess databases (computer assisted searches) should be acceptable unless specifically prohibited.

I believe honest players make their own moves with the assistance they believe acceptable. If I lose to a better player, and he or she cheats with the use of a chess engine, then I lose. Big deal.
Wulebgr

“From a fish’s point of view, a wulebgr is a leech.”

itsmenow
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2004 1:43 pm

Post by itsmenow » Mon Nov 22, 2004 6:41 pm

Well I never mentioned use of computers exactly for the reason you argumented; I mentioned "use of chess programs". :roll:

If being the case I could potentially sweep at least 99% (cheating of course) :twisted: of the people here by using two things at my hand.

1 software: fritz 8. junior8, shredder... pick your choice. 8)

2 hardware: double xeon at 2.6 Ghz, 2Gb ram. :twisted:


But I think just like you do, I believe in honesty and good will. :wink:

As a matter of fact I think there is a way for unmasking those that use chess software. Analyzing their moves with chess software!!!
:twisted: :twisted:

jumpnmustang
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 3:43 pm

Post by jumpnmustang » Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:29 am

hi there. I don't post here much but I love reading all of this. Sometimes it's funny, sometimes it's cool to see your answers to my questions..

So here is a few.

1. What do you folks think about the 2003 tournament winner?

2. How many of you are from FICS? I noticed one but I don't recognise the handle and hope that those of you that are from FICS wouldn't mind letting each other know.

3. What exactly do you people think about expending the rating floor if we can talk greg into it.. I personally think that is the main reason it's inflated. incidently I only say that because I looked at the difference between mine here and mine in FICS:) and the fact that like USCF .. FICS shows the average curve to be in the 1400's-1500's where as here the average curve is 2100-2200. that would mean that the average 1500 can make master here hahaha... very misleading.. but that is my opinion and I think part of it is the taking advantage of everyone having a rating floor. I trust FICS's due to the fact that my rating there is actually consistant with my preformance OTB for some reason... so...

Thanks for the amusing topics and hope to get to know more of you here.

Jesse, (jumpnmustang here, Nemisis (SR) (CA) FICS ;-) )

ludwig
Platnum
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2003 1:36 pm

Post by ludwig » Sun Dec 05, 2004 10:41 am

this weakling has a lot of rude boasts about himself when you play him

Post Reply