Comments for Claus Jensen Chess Blog

Comment on 2008 World Chess Championship Match, Game 10 by Cialismales

Cialismales — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:17:42 +0000

I love your site, but honestly tell you that you need more for him to monitor those who commented with your records

Comment on Rating Test 1 by Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 04:34:34 +0000

i have 2300 fide rating..but your rating estimator suggests i have 50 points lower

Comment on Fried Liver Attack by Melatonin

Melatonin — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 04:10:09 +0000

IE8 has some bugs too although it is more stable than IE7 and IE6:’.

Comment on My chess videos (72) by Claus Jensen

Claus Jensen — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 22:07:15 +0000

@James Douglas
I am making videos primarily out of love to the game and in deep admiration of those great players who created so many masterpieces over the years.
If someone finds any of the videos helpful in anyway then that makes me even happier, so your comment is very much appreciated

Claus

Comment on My chess videos (72) by James Douglas

James Douglas — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 21:31:10 +0000

Hi Claus, thanks for putting this stuff up - it’s been a great help. It must have taken some time and effort to put it all together. I also agree with your approach to censorship - tolerating comments we consider appropriate does not constitute freedom of speech, but rather tolerating those we don’t.

Comment on Capablanca Video #3: Was it a sound sac? by Claus Jensen

Claus Jensen — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 12:20:58 +0000

@tmills

thanks for making me aware of the typo.
It has been corrected now

Comment on Capablanca Video #3: Was it a sound sac? by tmills

tmills — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:52:01 +0000

I would replace “Just for yourself” by “Judge for yourself”.

tmills

Comment on Still offline! by Claus Jensen

Claus Jensen — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 20:12:25 +0000

Finally back online!
I have realized that I’m extremely close to being a net-a-holic (the word probably doesn’t excist but I’m sure you know what it means!) and that not being able to move in my games made me almost insane!

The good news is that the lack of internet has given me time to work intensively on my Marshall Attack e-book which is very close to finished!

Comment on Video: David Bronstein-Bent Larsen, Amsterdam 1964 by Valeyskatrt

Valeyskatrt — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 23:42:00 +0000

Hi youn fnd this

Comment on The 2008 Redhotpawn Quiz by Claus Jensen

Claus Jensen — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 21:36:36 +0000

It’s been more than 1½ years since I posted this quiz so I think it’s about time to post the answers!

1) The reason why the game mod team was not dismissed until 28th of january is that this is the date where I reported Gatecrasher for cheating in 2007 championship!!
After my reporting jan 18th I of course did some analysises of the 2007 championship games. And Gatecrashers numbers were so bad that I saw no other option tha to report him to the site admins.

Look up reported player #1 stats in my Leaving RHP blog entry for details on Gatecrashers numbers.

2) It’s quite obvious to me that 4 players were having critical numbers from the 2007 championship:
Gatecrasher, English Tal, myself and Patrick06

3) These questions are of course very difficult to answer.
But still today it puzzles me how Russ and Chris could decide to put Gatecrasher in a new game mod team when they knew only too well that he had been cheating in the 2007 championship.

4) To avoid a case like mine, the new game mod team started checking each other.
Gatecrasher had the most critical stats, followed by Korch and David Tebb.
The stats of Tony and Phlab were considerably cleaner than the Big 3.

5) Gatecrasher had very critical stats when checked by his new game mod team mates. But David Tebb protected him and then Gate and Tebb teamed up and decided that Korch was a cheater!
Crisis in the game mod team!

6) Phlabibit left the game mod team because “he was tired of the mods pointing fingers at each other”

This could easily translate into: I’m not supporting Gatecrasher and Tebb’s personal vendetta against Korch which has only one purpose: Take focus away from Gatecrasher’s critical numbers and put pressure on Korch to support a ban of cludi!

7) I think this has been answered thoroughly in the previous answers…

I have no idea who is forming the new team. But I was banned august 18th or 19th 2008. That’s all I know…

9) Of course it isn’t!
Too many persoanl interests, too much camraderi, too much general bias.

I don’t know what the situation is today, but 1 or 2 years back, game moderation was no more than a farce!

10) No he wasn’t.
Gatecrasher tried to ban Korch to save his own ass, David Tebb supported a known cheater (Gatecrasher) and supported a ban of Korch unless he would cooperate and support my banning.

Btw, I noticed that Gatecrasher managed to win the 2008 championship by dragging out all his games against the players he knew were reported for cheating. They were of course banned and Gatecrasher could afford a few losses against other players and still win the championship!
Nice tactic!

Comment on Capablanca Video #3: Was it a sound sac? by Claus Jensen

Claus Jensen — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 03:07:33 +0000

Thanks for sharing - and indeed a very nice game!
The exchange sac effectively stops white’s attack and after that he can concentrate on his own attack. In the end he just had enough material to mate Bogoljubov beautifully - great!

Claus

Comment on Capablanca Video #3: Was it a sound sac? by Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 23:58:45 +0000

Re your series on exchange sacs. I thought you might enjoy the following game played in San Remo in 1930. Black sacs the exchange on move 23.

[Event "San Remo (Italy)"]
[Site "It"]
[Date "1930.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Efim Bogoljubov"]
[Black "Mario Monticelli"]
[ECO "E21"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "78"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Nf3 b6 5.Bg5 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Bb7
7.e3 d6 8.Bd3 Nbd7 9.O-O Qe7 10.Nd2 h6 11.Bh4 g5 12.Bg3 O-O-O
13.a4 a5 14.Rb1 Rdg8 15.f3 h5 16.e4 h4 17.Be1 e5 18.h3 Nh5
19.c5 dxc5 20.d5 Nf4 21.Nc4 Rh6 22.Rf2 f5 23.d6 Rxd6 24.Nxd6+
Qxd6 25.Bc4 Rf8 26.exf5 Rxf5 27.Rd2 Qe7 28.Qb3 Rf8 29.Bd3 e4
30.Bxe4 Bxe4 31.fxe4 Qxe4 32.Qc2 Qc6 33.c4 g4 34.Bxh4 gxh3
35.g3 Ne5 36.Rb3 Ne2+ 37.Rxe2 Rf1+ 38.Kxf1 Qh1+ 39.Kf2 Ng4#
0-1

I particularly like the checkmate.I’ll let you be the judge as to whether or not the exchange sac is positional or tactical but at the end the sacs come thick and fast.