Best Style/Strength Ratio?

[BrendanJNorman]

So what do you say Brendan? Are you willing to be the judge and take a look at some games played and award points to the side with best style to see if this thing works at all?

The hardest part will be to produce the games, but I already have an idea of how to achieve same level quickly...

Sure man, I'm willing to be an objective judge of some games - sounds like fun.

Do you think doing such a limit-strength exercise with Fizbo 2, Fire 6 and Andscacs would also be interesting? They already have quite attractive styles.

BTW...I'm now at 2450 Elo on chess24...making progress.

I seem to be picking up the aggressive style elements of my preferred engines too - my main point in using them.

[pgn][Event "chess24 online game | blitz"]
[Site "chess24.com"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[Round "?"]
[White "chessplayer68"]
[Black "ChessnCognac"]
[Result "0-1"]
[BlackCountry "au"]
[BlackElo "2449"]
[ECO "A00"]
[Time "04:37:19"]
[TimeControl "300"]
[WhiteCountry "us"]
[WhiteElo "2073"]

1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 { [%clk 0:04:57] } 2...Qd6 { [%clk 0:04:59] } 3.b5 { [%clk 0:04:55] } 3...Qb4 { [%clk 0:04:56] } 4.Be5 { [%clk 0:04:46] } 4...Qxb5 { [%clk 0:04:47] } 5.Bxc7 { [%clk 0:04:44] } 5...d4 { [%clk 0:04:30] } 6.Qc1 { [%clk 0:04:16] } 6...Nc6 { [%clk 0:03:56] } 7.e3 { [%clk 0:04:09] } 7...Qd5 { [%clk 0:03:44] } 8.c4 { [%clk 0:03:52] } 8...Qf5 { [%clk 0:03:04] } 9.Nf3 { [%clk 0:03:40] } 9...e5 { [%clk 0:02:53] } 10.exd4 { [%clk 0:03:10] } 10...e4 { [%clk 0:02:36] } 11.Ne5 { [%clk 0:02:52] } 11...Nxd4 { [%clk 0:02:32] } 12.Qb2 { [%clk 0:02:13] } 12...Bc5 { [%clk 0:02:22] } 13.d3 { [%clk 0:01:08] } 13...Nf6 { [%clk 0:02:09] } 14.Nc3 { [%clk 0:00:39] } 14...O-O { [%clk 0:01:51] } 15.dxe4 { [%clk 0:00:23] } 15...Nxe4 { [%clk 0:01:46] } 16.f3 { [%clk 0:00:13] } 16...Nxc3 { [%clk 0:01:40] } 17.Qxc3 { [%clk 0:00:11] } 17...Bb4 { [%clk 0:01:38] } 18.Qxb4 { [%clk 0:00:03] } 18...Nc2+ { [%clk 0:01:35] } 0-1 [/pgn]

That guy was 2070, so no genius, but certainly no patzer either.

Beat a fellow 2450ish guy in a similar way this morning too.

23 moves.

Amazing how people crumble when placed in tactical complications - Thanks OpenTal, Thinker, Komodo Kinghunter, ProDeo 2.6 Attacker Li, Zappa DA etc etc for the lessons!

[Ovyron]

Do you think doing such a limit-strength exercise with Fizbo 2, Fire 6 and Andscacs would also be interesting? They already have quite attractive styles.

Sure, if this things works we can use it to check the style of anything, and finally have some objective data about styles.

Interesting to see you mention Fire, I have used Fire 5 extensively for analysis, and it quickly fell down in usefulness, below Critter, Hannibal, Texel, Chiron, or Strelka... but haven't gotten to Fire 6 much, does it play much different than 5?

BTW...I'm now at 2450 Elo on chess24...making progress.

Nice jump!

Do you have any idea about how Chess24 rating compares to FIDE? Because you want to reach 2300 FIDE rating? Maybe when you check again you play with a performace of 2360 and yell "oops! overshoot!"

Amazing how people crumble when placed in tactical complications - Thanks OpenTal, Thinker, Komodo Kinghunter, ProDeo 2.6 Attacker Li, Zappa DA etc etc for the lessons!

If my method works I predict it'll find some engine that currently hasn't been mentioned in style posts, that will manage to score more style points than these engines that keep being praised, we will see...

[BrendanJNorman]

Sure, if this things works we can use it to check the style of anything, and finally have some objective data about styles.

I think the best method of testing objectively for style is to create a points system based on a table of themes.

"Hitting" one of the themes during a game scores points for the engine, so for example, leaving two or more pieces en prise at once (covered by tactics) might score 2 "style" points.

Sacrificing one's queen (positionally) might score ten style points, and having multiple pins in place might score a few...in the end, all points are added up and the game is "rated".

I will write a blog post soon outlining a proposal for such a "style rating system", but I look forward to hearing your ideas too.

Interesting to see you mention Fire, I have used Fire 5 extensively for analysis, and it quickly fell down in usefulness, below Critter, Hannibal, Texel, Chiron, or Strelka... but haven't gotten to Fire 6 much, does it play much different than 5?

I dunno man, I haven't used it much. I was a fan of Fire 2.2 and Firebird 1.2 due to their attractive styles, but I haven't looked at the latest ones.

Just mentioned it since you are using 3300 monsters.

Do you have any idea about how Chess24 rating compares to FIDE? Because you want to reach 2300 FIDE rating? Maybe when you check again you play with a performace of 2360 and yell "oops! overshoot!"

It seems to me, and I might be wrong, that chess24 is about 200 points higher than chess.com, so ideally, I should be able to crack 2500+ on chess24 assuming a good internet connection and sober play (not trying to be too fancy as I often do - thanks to my engine friends' influence).

If my method works I predict it'll find some engine that currently hasn't been mentioned in style posts, that will manage to score more style points than these engines that keep being praised, we will see...

Looking forward to hearing more about it.

[BrendanJNorman]

By the way, how many "style points" would I score for the following effort?

Note that if 29.Ke2?? Nf4+ is mate lol

It's a shame the time scramble at the end spoiled it.

[pgn][Event "chess24 online game | blitz"]
[Site "chess24.com"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[Round "?"]
[White "NewUser2"]
[Black "ChessnCognac"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackCountry "au"]
[BlackElo "2433"]
[ECO "A55"]
[Time "05:44:39"]
[TimeControl "300"]
[WhiteCountry "eg"]
[WhiteElo "2131"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 { [%clk 0:04:57] } 2...d6 { [%clk 0:04:59] } 3.Nc3 { [%clk 0:04:56] } 3...Nbd7 { [%clk 0:04:58] } 4.e4 { [%clk 0:04:54] } 4...e5 { [%clk 0:04:57] } 5.Nf3 { [%clk 0:04:46] } 5...Be7 { [%clk 0:04:54] } 6.h3 { [%clk 0:04:37] } 6...c6 { [%clk 0:04:52] } 7.Be3 { [%clk 0:04:26] } 7...Qc7 { [%clk 0:04:49] } 8.Be2 { [%clk 0:04:17] } 8...h6 { [%clk 0:04:46] } 9.Rc1 { [%clk 0:04:06] } 9...Nf8 { [%clk 0:04:43] } 10.O-O { [%clk 0:03:53] } 10...g5 { [%clk 0:04:36] } 11.dxe5 { [%clk 0:03:48] } 11...dxe5 { [%clk 0:04:34] } 12.Qa4 { [%clk 0:03:24] } 12...Bd7 { [%clk 0:04:20] } 13.Rfd1 { [%clk 0:03:21] } 13...Ng6 { [%clk 0:04:18] } 14.Qb3 { [%clk 0:03:16] } 14...g4 { [%clk 0:04:14] } 15.hxg4 { [%clk 0:03:12] } 15...Nxg4 { [%clk 0:04:12] } 16.Nd5 { [%clk 0:02:44] } 16...cxd5 { [%clk 0:04:07] } 17.cxd5 { [%clk 0:02:42] } 17...Qd6 { [%clk 0:03:57] } 18.Bc5 { [%clk 0:02:38] } 18...Qxc5 { [%clk 0:03:56] } 19.Rxc5 { [%clk 0:02:36] } 19...Bxc5 { [%clk 0:03:56] } 20.Bb5 { [%clk 0:02:19] } 20...Rd8 { [%clk 0:03:39] } 21.Rd2 { [%clk 0:02:04] } 21...Rg8 { [%clk 0:03:25] } 22.Bxd7+ { [%clk 0:01:54] } 22...Rxd7 { [%clk 0:03:23] } 23.Qb5 { [%clk 0:01:49] } 23...Bb6 { [%clk 0:03:12] } 24.d6 { [%clk 0:01:43] } 24...Nf4 { [%clk 0:02:07] } 25.Nxe5 { [%clk 0:01:28] } 25...Nh3+ { [%clk 0:01:37] } 26.Kf1 { [%clk 0:01:14] } 26...Nh2+ { [%clk 0:00:50] } 27.Ke1 { [%clk 0:01:05] } 27...Nf3+ { [%clk 0:00:38] } 28.gxf3 { [%clk 0:00:54] } 28...Rg1+ { [%clk 0:00:34] } 29.Qf1 { [%clk 0:00:43] } 29...Ba5 { [%clk 0:00:22] } 30.Nxd7 { [%clk 0:00:35] } 30...Bxd2+ { [%clk 0:00:17] } 31.Kxd2 { [%clk 0:00:34] } 31...Rxf1 { [%clk 0:00:15] } 32.Nf6+ { [%clk 0:00:33] } 32...Kd8 { [%clk 0:00:13] } 33.e5 { [%clk 0:00:31] } 33...Rxf2+ { [%clk 0:00:13] } 34.Ke3 { [%clk 0:00:31] } 34...Rxb2 { [%clk 0:00:11] } 35.f4 { [%clk 0:00:29] } 35...Rxa2 { [%clk 0:00:11] } 36.Ke4 { [%clk 0:00:28] } 36...Ra3 { [%clk 0:00:10] } 37.f5 { [%clk 0:00:27] } 37...Nf2+ { [%clk 0:00:10] } 38.Kd5 { [%clk 0:00:26] } 38...Nd3 { [%clk 0:00:09] } 39.e6 { [%clk 0:00:24] } 39...Ra5+ { [%clk 0:00:08] } 40.Kc4 { [%clk 0:00:23] } 40...fxe6 { [%clk 0:00:06] } 41.fxe6 { [%clk 0:00:22] } 41...Re5 { [%clk 0:00:06] } 42.e7+ { [%clk 0:00:20] } 42...Rxe7 { [%clk 0:00:03] } 43.dxe7+ { [%clk 0:00:19] } 43...Kxe7 { [%clk 0:00:03] } 44.Nd5+ { [%clk 0:00:18] } 44...Ke6 { [%clk 0:00:02] } 45.Nf4+ { [%clk 0:00:17] } 45...Kf5 { [%clk 0:00:01] } 46.Nxd3 { [%clk 0:00:16] } 46...Kg4 { [%clk 0:00:01] } 47.Nc5 { [%clk 0:00:15] } 47...Kg3 { [%clk 0:00:00] } 48.Nxb7 { [%clk 0:00:14] } 48...h5 { [%clk 0:00:00] } 49.Nd6 { [%clk 0:00:12] } 49...h4 { [%clk 0:00:00] } 50.Nf5+ { [%clk 0:00:11] } 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

[velmarin]

BTW...I'm now at 2450 Elo on chess24...making progress.

Nice jump!

Do you have any idea about how Chess24 rating compares to FIDE? Because you want to reach 2300 FIDE rating? Maybe when you check again you play with a performace of 2360 and yell "oops! overshoot!"

Brendan has a FIDE rating of 2120.
It seems that these scores mentioned are very inflated.

[Ovyron]

I will write a blog post soon outlining a proposal for such a "style rating system", but I look forward to hearing your ideas too.

My claim is that setting the engines at the same performance and then making it a blind test where you award points can be faster than such a table.

So here it is, Stockfish Catastrophe set at the same playing level of OpenTal. 10 games were played at secret conditions. To make it as blind as possible results have also been taken away, and the order the games were played were shuffled.

Please, take a look at the games. If in a given game, white played with a better style, set it as "1-0", if black played with a better style, set it at "0-1", and if both sides played terribly dull, give them a "0-0" (needed since in the future we might test two dull engines and they might play boring game after boring game.)

Let's see if OpenTal crushes Stockfish in style as people claim!

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "A10"]
[Opening "English opening"]

1.c4 e6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 d5 4.d4 c5 5.Bg2 dxc4 6.O-O Nc6 7.Na3 cxd4 8.Nxc4 Be7
9.b4 Nxb4 10.Nxd4 O-O 11.Rb1 Nxa2 12.Bb2 Nd5 13.Qb3 Nab4 14.Rfd1 Qc7 15.Rbc1 Bd7
16.e4 Nf6 17.Ne5 Qd8 18.Nxd7 Qxd7 19.Nc2 Qb5 20.Bf1 Qa5 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.Rd7 Nxc2
23.Qxc2 Bb4 24.Qe2 b6 25.Rcc7 Qg5 26.Qd1 a5 27.f4 Qg6 28.Bd3 Rad8 29.e5 Rxd7
30.Rxd7 Qh6 31.exf6 Qxf6 32.Kg2 Qb2+ 33.Kh3 Qg7 34.Bc2 Qf6 35.Qh5 Qg7 36.Kg2 Rc8
37.Bd3 Bc5 38.f5 exf5 39.Qxf5 Re8 40.Qf4 Be3 41.Qf3 Bd4 42.Rd5 h6 43.Qf5 Bc5
44.Qf4 Be3 45.Qd6 Qb2+ 46.Kh3 Bg1 47.Qc6 Re6 48.Qc8+ Kg7 49.Bc2 Qb4 50.Rd8 Qc5
51.Rg8+ Kf6 52.Qd8+ Re7 53.Bd1 Qd4 54.Qf8 Qxd1 55.Qxh6+ Ke5 56.Kh4 Qe2 57.Qf4+
Kd5 58.Rd8+ Kc6 59.Rd2 Qe6 60.Rc2+ Kb7 61.Qf3+ Ka7 62.Rc6 Qa2 63.Rf6 Qxh2+ *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Opening "Sicilian: closed, 2...Nc6"]
1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Ng4 5.d4 cxd4 6.Nxd4 Ngxe5 7.Be3 e6 8.Be2 d5
9.O-O Bd7 10.Nb3 Bb4 11.Qe1 O-O 12.a3 Be7 13.f4 Ng6 14.Rd1 Bh4 15.g3 Bf6 16.Nc5
b6 17.Nxd7 Qxd7 18.b3 Qc8 19.Na2 Nge7 20.g4 Bb2 21.c3 Bxa3 22.b4 Rd8 23.Rd3 e5
24.fxe5 Nxe5 25.Qf2 Rf8 26.Qg3 f6 27.Bd4 Nxd3 28.Bxd3 Nc6 29.Qh4 h6 30.Be3 Ne5
31.Bf5 Qc4 32.Bxh6 gxh6 33.Qxh6 Kf7 34.Qh7+ Ke8 35.Re1 Qc6 36.Qg6+ Kd8 37.Rxe5
Re8 38.Rxe8+ Qxe8 39.Qxf6+ Kc7 40.Qg7+ Kb8 41.Kf2 a5 42.h4 Ra7 43.Qf6 Rb7 44.g5
Ka7 45.g6 Re7 46.Bd3 Re6 47.Qg7+ Re7 48.Qd4 Re1 49.Qf4 Ka8 50.Qf3 Re5 51.g7 Qg8
52.Qf8+ Re8 53.Qf6 Re6 54.Qg5 Bb2 55.h5 Rc6 56.h6 *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B01"]
[Opening "Scandinavian (centre counter) defence"]

1.e4 d5 2.e5 c5 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.d4 cxd4 6.Nb5 Bc5 7.Be2 f6 8.Bf4 g5 9.Bg3
a6 10.Nbxd4 g4 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Nd4 Qb6 13.Nb3 h5 14.Nxc5 Qxc5 15.Bh4 Qb4+ 16.c3
Qe4 17.exf6 Qxg2 18.Rf1 e5 19.Qa4 Kd7 20.O-O-O Nh6 21.Rg1 Qxh2 22.Bg3 Qxg1
23.Rxg1 a5 24.Rd1 *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B23"]
[Opening "Sicilian: closed"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 e5 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Nf3 Be7 5.O-O d6 6.d3 Nf6 7.Bd2 O-O 8.h3 Be6 9.Re1
Nd4 10.a4 Rc8 11.Be3 Bd7 12.Nd2 Rb8 13.f4 a6 14.a5 exf4 15.Bxf4 Re8 16.Rf1 Bc6
17.e5 dxe5 18.Bxe5 Bd6 19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.Nce4 Rxe4 21.Nxe4 Kh8 22.c3 Be5 23.Bxf7
Qc7 24.Bc4 Nb5 25.Nxf6 Nd6 26.Bd5 Qg7 27.Nh5 Qg6 28.Qe2 Bg7 29.Bxc6 bxc6 30.Rae1
c4 31.dxc4 Re8 32.Nf4 Qf7 33.Ne6 Qg6 34.c5 Nf7 35.Nf4 Rxe2 36.Nxg6+ hxg6 37.Rxe2
Ne5 38.Rd1 Kg8 39.Rd8+ Kf7 40.Ra8 Nc4 41.Rxa6 Bf8 42.Rxc6 *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B01"]
[Opening "Scandinavian (centre counter) defence"]

1.e4 d5 2.e5 e6 3.d4 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.O-O Qb6 8.a4 dxc3
9.Nxc3 a6 10.a5 Qc7 11.Be3 Nxe5 12.Nxd5 exd5 13.Re1 Nxf3+ 14.Qxf3 Be6 15.Bd4 Ne7
16.Rxe6 fxe6 17.Qh5+ Kd7 18.Qf7 Qc6 19.b4 Re8 20.b5 axb5 21.Rb1 Rc8 22.h4 Kc7
23.Be5+ Qd6 24.Bxd6+ Kxd6 25.Bxb5 Nc6 26.Qxb7 Rc7 27.Qb6 Be7 28.Rc1 Rhc8 29.a6
Bd8 30.Qc5+ Ke5 31.Qc3+ Kf5 32.Qf3+ Ke5 33.Re1+ *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D00"]
[Opening "Queen's pawn, Mason variation"]

1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nh5 4.Bd2 g6 5.c4 Bg7 6.cxd5 c6 7.dxc6 O-O 8.Bc3 e5
9.Nxe5 Nxc6 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.e3 Rb8 12.Bd3 Nf4 13.exf4 Re8+ 14.Kf1 c5 15.Na3 Qh4
16.dxc5 Bxc3 17.bxc3 Rb2 18.Nc2 Bb7 19.Qc1 Qg4 20.f3 Bxf3 21.gxf3 Qxf3+ 22.Kg1
Qg4+ 23.Kf2 Rxc2+ 24.Qxc2 Qxf4+ 25.Kg2 Qg4+ 26.Kf1 Re3 27.Be2 Qh3+ 28.Kf2 Rxc3
29.Qe4 Rxc5 30.Rad1 Rf5+ 31.Bf3 Rf6 32.Rd3 a6 33.Qd4 Kg7 34.Ra3 h6 35.Qc3 a5
36.Rxa5 Qh4+ 37.Kg2 Kh7 38.Re1 *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "A04"]
[Opening "Reti opening"]

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.d4 b6 4.a3 c5 5.d5 Ba6 6.Qc2 exd5 7.cxd5 g6 8.Nc3 Bg7 9.g3
O-O 10.Bg2 d6 11.O-O Re8 12.Bf4 b5 13.Rfe1 b4 14.axb4 cxb4 15.Nd1 Nxd5 16.Bg5
Qd7 17.e4 Nc7 18.Ne3 h6 19.Bh4 Nc6 20.Ng4 Qxg4 21.Qxc6 Rac8 22.h3 Qe6 23.Rxa6
Nxa6 24.Qxa6 Bxb2 25.Rd1 g5 26.Nxg5 hxg5 27.Bxg5 Bg7 28.Qb7 b3 29.Rb1 Rb8 30.Qa6
b2 31.h4 Qb3 32.Qe2 a5 33.Qg4 Kf8 34.e5 Rxe5 35.Qd7 Qe6 36.Qa7 Rc8 37.Rxb2 Re1+
38.Kh2 Bxb2 39.Bh3 Qd5 40.Bg2 Qf5 41.Bf4 Be5 42.Bh6+ Kg8 *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "B01"]
[Opening "Scandinavian (centre counter) defence"]
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 e5 3.c4 Nf6 4.Qe2 Bc5 5.Qxe5+ Be7 6.Bd3 O-O 7.Ne2 Ng4 8.Qd4 Bf6
9.Qf4 Re8 10.Nc3 Bg5 11.Qd4 Nc6 12.Qc5 Be7 13.Qb5 a6 14.Qa4 Bc5 15.Ne4 Rxe4
16.Bxe4 Nxf2 17.dxc6 Nxe4 18.Qb3 Qh4+ 19.g3 Qf6 20.cxb7 Bxb7 21.Qxb7 Re8 22.Qxc7
Qf3 *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "A04"]
[Opening "Reti opening"]
1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Bf4 g6 4.e3 Bg7 5.h3 O-O 6.c4 c5 7.Nc3 cxd4 8.exd4 Nc6
9.Be2 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Bf5 11.O-O Rc8 12.Rc1 Nb4 13.b3 a6 14.g4 Bd7 15.a3 b5 16.Bxb5
Rxc3 17.Bxd7 Na2 18.Ba4 Nxc1 19.Bxc1 Qd5 20.Be3 Ne4 21.Qe2 f5 22.Kh2 fxg4
23.hxg4 Bh6 24.Bxh6 Rfxf3 25.Be3 Nxf2 *[/pgn]

[pgn][Event "Turing"]
[Date "2018.02.13"]
[White "UNKNOWN"]
[Black "UNKNOWN"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "A25"]
[Opening "English: Sicilian reversed"]
1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e4 5.Ng5 Bb4 6.Ngxe4 Nxe4 7.Nxe4 d5 8.cxd5
Qxd5 9.Nc3 Qg5 10.d4 O-O 11.a3 Ba5 12.h4 Qf6 13.Bd2 Bf5 14.g4 Bxc3 15.bxc3 Be4
16.Rh3 Qe6 17.c4 f5 18.d5 Qf7 19.g5 f4 20.dxc6 fxe3 21.Bxe3 Rad8 22.Qb3 bxc6
23.f4 Bf5 24.Rh2 Rfe8 25.Kf2 Qh5 26.Re1 Re4 27.Bg2 Re6 28.Bf3 Qe8 29.Rd1 Rb8
30.Qc3 a5 31.h5 Qe7 32.h6 Re8 33.Bd4 gxh6 34.Qxa5 Bc2 35.Rg1 Bg6 36.Be5 Qf7
37.gxh6 Rxe5 38.fxe5 Qf4 39.Rg3 Rd8 40.Rhg2 Qd4+ 41.Kf1 Qxc4+ 42.Re2 Qh4 43.Kg2
Qxh6 44.e6 *[/pgn]

[BrendanJNorman]

BTW...I'm now at 2450 Elo on chess24...making progress.

Nice jump!

Do you have any idea about how Chess24 rating compares to FIDE? Because you want to reach 2300 FIDE rating? Maybe when you check again you play with a performace of 2360 and yell "oops! overshoot!"

Brendan has a FIDE rating of 2120.
It seems that these scores mentioned are very inflated.

It seems HGM deleted my original response to this without even mentioning doing it.

This essentially means I don't even have a voice here anymore...

So I will respond to you, AND him, via my own site.

[hgm]

[moderation]

By all means, do that!

Note that I have better things to do than explain myself when you misbehave during my lunch. This is not a Chinese or Australian jurisdiction, so calling someone a 'dipshit' counts as an insult, rather than an expression of respect...

[BrendanJNorman]

[moderation]

By all means, do that!

Note that I have better things to do than explain myself when you misbehave during my lunch. This is not a Chinese or Australian jurisdiction, so calling someone a 'dipshit' counts as an insult, rather than an expression of respect...

You moderate with extreme bias and this is well known.

Circle jerking with your buddies insulting people at will or twisting their words to implicitly insult them, whilst wielding the axe aggressively the moment someone you disagree with makes the slightest transgression.

It's clear to see.

And yes, I noticed the veiled insults you threw at China and Australia.

Classy as always.

This is the true reason your little site only has 1500 members after ten years.

YOU...as well as your arrogant, mean-spirited buddies turn people off.

[Ovyron]

You moderate with extreme bias and this is well known.

Circle jerking with your buddies insulting people at will or twisting their words to implicitly insult them, whilst wielding the axe aggressively the moment someone you disagree with makes the slightest transgression.

It's clear to see.

I'm just going to quote Ed Schröder on this:

CCC is a democratic forum, folks choose the leaders that rule over them.

With Robert Hyatt, H.G.Muller and Harvey Williamson ruling Talkchess, it's perhaps proof of the failure of democracy...