2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

    Originally posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
    The only way to encourage more odds games may be to play them for money.
    Exactly.

    For example, Kevin, I might offer to play you for $100 with odds of two pawns. You might offer to play Bator for $100 if he gives you whatever. Then all of the spectators could wager on who wins!

    Comment


    • #17
      modern odds matches

      Originally posted by Gordon Ritchie View Post
      It is curious that play at odds has fallen out of popularity....
      Some GMs are not too proud to receive material odds matches against computers...

      The Komodo team ran a few of them last year, as this was thought to be the only way of making humans competitive with their monster program. The games had various handicaps -- material, moves, moves and material --- and the results were interesting, and much more interesting than they would have been in a straight-up man vs machine match.

      Nakamura vs Komodo:
      https://www.chess.com/news/komodo-be...al-battle-1331

      Mikhalevski vs Komodo:
      https://www.chess.com/news/view/komo...ura-match-5456

      2015 matches
      https://en.chessbase.com/post/komodo...es-against-gms

      Handicap: less time and no opening book
      there was a match in 2016 where Komodo played with 3 minutes +1 sec vs 90 + 30, and had an opening book of only 3 moves... but somehow played the first 20 moves of a Sicilian Sveshnikov and drew with GM Sergey Erenburg:

      [Event "Blitz 90m+30s-3m+1s"]
      [Site "Bethesda"]
      [Date "2016.06.26"]
      [Round "3"]
      [White "Erenburg, Sergey"]
      [Black "Komodo 1660.00 64-bit"]
      [Result "1/2-1/2"]
      [ECO "B33"]
      [Annotator "Kaufman,Larry"]
      [PlyCount "124"]
      [EventDate "2016.??.??"]
      [EventType "blitz"]

      1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 {At this point Komodo was out of its limited
      match book.} 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bf4 e5 8. Bg5 a6 9. Na3 b5
      10. Nd5 Be7 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. c4 (12. c3) 12... b4 13. Nc2 Rb8 (13... a5) 14.
      b3 Bg5 15. g3 Bh6 (15... O-O 16. Bg2 a5 (16... Be6 $11) 17. O-O Ne7 18. h4 Bh6
      19. Nxe7+ Qxe7 20. Qd5 Qc7 21. Rad1 Rd8 22. Kh2 Bg4 23. Rde1 {1-0 (55)
      Nakamura,H (2759)-Van Wely,L (2692) Wijk aan Zee 2012}) 16. h4 O-O 17. Bh3 Be6
      {Rogozenco,D: 'A typical answer. Black agrees to trade the bishops (which
      would favor White), but ... on square e6 (which would favor Black, solving the
      problem of square d5).'} 18. Kf1 a5 19. Kg2 Rb7 {Rogozenco,D: 'Leko
      demonstrates the resources of Black's position. It will become clear soon that
      besides preparing the transfer of the rook to the kingside, the last move also
      prepares a maneuver for the knight.'} (19... Kh8 20. Qd3 Qd7 21. Bf5 g6 22. Bh3
      Bxh3+ 23. Rxh3 f5 24. f3 fxe4 25. Qxe4 Qf5 26. Re1 Rb7 27. g4 Qxe4 28. Rxe4 $11
      {1/2-1/2 Marcetic,M (2258)-Maksimovic,S (2267)/Vrnjacka Banja 2005 (33)}) (
      19... Ne7 $5 20. Nxe7+ Qxe7 21. Qd3 $14) 20. Qd3 (20. Bf5 {Rogozenco,D: 'A
      curious case when both sides are trying to trade a piece and at the same time
      create double-pawns in their own pawn structure.'} Kh8 21. Qd3 Nb8 {Rogozenco,
      D: '!' Rogozenco,D: 'The knight goes to c5.'} 22. Rad1 Na6 23. Qf3 {Rogozenco,
      D: 'A provokative move. Morozevich believes that as long as his pieces are on
      the light squares, there is little danger for White.'} g6 24. Bh3 f5 25. h5
      fxe4 26. Qxe4 Nc5 27. Qe2 Bxd5+ 28. Rxd5 Rbf7 {Rogozenco,D: 'White succeeded
      to implement his "light-squared strategy", but he obviously underestimated
      Black's dynamic resources.'} 29. Rf1 gxh5 30. Qxh5 Qf6 31. Bg4 Ne4 {Rogozenco,
      D: '!' Rogozenco,D: 'Provoking the advance of the f-pawn, which will create
      another target - pawn g3. Notice that Black can find targets for attack only
      on the dark squares and from this point of view Morozevich was right. The
      problem is that Black's active pieces are too strong and inevitably cooperate
      much better. This dynamic factor always secures Black enough counterplay.'} 32.
      f3 Qg7 33. Rdd1 Nf6 {Rogozenco,D: 'Not bad, but Black had much more
      perspective ideas.'} ({Interesting was} 33... Nxg3 $5 34. Kxg3 Rf6 {followed
      by Bf4 and Rh6.}) ({The simplest way to achieve a big advantage was} 33... Nd2
      34. Rf2 Rf6 {This move, which practically wins the game, escaped Leko's
      attention. Black threatens 34...Ne4 35.Rf1 Nxg3 36.Kxg3 Bf4+ followed by ...
      Rh6 - which would have been the complete failure of Morozevich's strategical
      concept.} ({Leko saw} 34... Ne4 {which makes a draw, but he correctly was
      seeking for more.})) 34. Qh3 Nxg4 35. Qxg4 Qf6 ({The endgame after} 35... Qxg4
      36. fxg4 Rxf1 37. Rxf1 Rxf1 38. Kxf1 Kg7 39. Ke2 e4 {is probably a draw:} 40.
      Nd4 Kf6 {and White cannot win pawn a5:} 41. Nc6 Ke6 42. Nxa5 $2 Kd7 43. c5 d5
      $1 $19) 36. Qe4 Bf4 {Rogozenco,D: 'Finally Leko can use his bishop for attack.
      The Hungarian must have been fascinated by this idea and he lost too much time
      making it work.'} 37. Kf2 {Rogozenco,D: '!'} (37. gxf4 Qh4 $1 38. Rf2 Rxf4 {
      followed by 38...e4 secures Black a strong attack.}) 37... Qh6 38. gxf4 Rxf4
      39. Rh1 Qg7 40. Qd5 e4 {Rogozenco,D: '?' Rogozenco,D: 'The fatal mistake in
      time trouble.'} ({Black makes a draw with} 40... Rxf3+ 41. Qxf3 e4 $1 42. Qxf8+
      Qxf8+ 43. Ke1 ({or} 43. Ke3 Qf3+ 44. Kd2 Qf4+) 43... Qf3 $11) 41. Rdg1 {
      Rogozenco,D: '!'} Rxf3+ 42. Ke2 Rf2+ 43. Kd1 {Rogozenco,D: 'The knight on c2
      turns out to be a great defender.'} Qe5 (43... Qc3 44. Rxh7+ Kxh7 45. Qh5#) 44.
      Rh5 {Rogozenco,D: '+-'} Rf1+ 45. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 46. Ke2 Qf4 47. Qd4+ Kg8 48. Rg5+
      Qxg5 49. Kxf1 Qc1+ 50. Ne1 Qf4+ 51. Kg1 Qg5+ 52. Ng2 Qc1+ 53. Kh2 Qh6+ 54. Kg3
      Qg5+ 55. Kf2 {1-0 (54) Morozevich,A (2707)-Leko,P (2763) San Luis 2005 CBM 110
      [Rogozenco,D]}) 20... Nb8 21. Rad1 Nd7 $146 {Upper: just to reinforce an
      interesting point: Komodo had been playing this position on its own -- with no
      opening book database to refer to -- since move 3, and only here deviates from
      high-level GM theory.... despite playing at 3 min + 1 sec per move.} (21... Na6
      22. f4 (22. Qf3 Nc5 23. Ne1 Na6 24. Qh5 Nc5 25. Qe2 Na6 (25... Qc8 26. Nd3
      Bxh3+ 27. Rxh3 Ne6 28. Ne1 Nd4 29. Rxd4 exd4 30. Nc2 Re8 31. g4 Bc1 32. Nxd4
      $16 {1-0 (45) Ismagambetov,A (2451)-Kozlov,R (2350) Astana 2007}) 26. Qf3 Ra7
      27. Nc2 Nc5 28. a3 Rb7 29. axb4 axb4 30. Rb1 Bxd5 31. cxd5 Qb6 32. Qe2 Ra8 $15
      {0-1 (53) Kosintseva,N (2493)-Kovalevskaya,E (2434) Gorodets 2006}) 22... Nc5
      23. Qf3 exf4 24. Nxf4 Bxh3+ $2 (24... Bxf4 $142 $15) 25. Nxh3 Re8 26. Rhe1 Rbe7
      27. Nf2 Qb6 28. Ng4 Nxe4 29. Nd4 Kf8 30. Nxh6 gxh6 31. Qf4 d5 32. Nf5 Re5 33.
      Rxd5 Qf6 34. Rxe5 Qxe5 35. Rxe4 Qxe4+ {0-1 (34) Golubev,R (2361)-Erzhanov,A
      (2240) Moscow 2015}) 22. Qe2 Ra7 23. Ne1 Nc5 24. Nd3 Bxd5 25. Nxc5 Bc6 26. Nd3
      Qe7 27. Bg4 Raa8 28. Bf3 g6 29. h5 Bg5 30. Kg1 Kg7 31. Bg2 Rad8 32. Ne1 Qa7 33.
      Qg4 $6 h6 34. Qe2 Rh8 35. Nf3 Be7 36. Ne1 Bg5 37. Nf3 Bf6 38. Ne1 Be7 39. Nc2
      Bg5 40. Ne1 Rhg8 41. Nf3 Bf6 42. Ne1 Kh7 43. Kf1 Rgf8 44. Kg1 Bb7 45. Nc2 Bg5
      46. Ne1 Kg7 47. Nf3 Bf6 48. Ne1 Qb6 49. Nc2 Bg5 50. Ne1 Be7 51. Nc2 Ra8 52. Ne3
      a4 53. Kh2 axb3 54. axb3 Ra3 55. Rd3 Qa7 56. Rhd1 Ra5 57. Qg4 Bc8 58. Qe2 Ra2
      59. R1d2 Ra5 60. Rd1 Ra2 61. R1d2 Ra5 62. Rd1 Ra2 1/2-1/2

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: modern odds matches

        Why do they ever allow computers to play with the knowledge of opening book that humans have developed over the years? Should not the computer simply have to start thinking from move one?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: modern odds matches

          Maybe there was money involved in the GM vs. computer at odds games. :) For a long time I've felt that by even 'looking' at more than one chessboard at a time, 'moving' the pieces around, etc., computers were in effect 'cheating', even though it is unavoidable for them. Banning computers from playing in events doesn't do anything about computer-assisted cheating, though.
          Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Tuesday, 7th February, 2017, 01:48 PM.
          Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
          Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: modern odds matches

            Originally posted by Brad Thomson View Post
            ...simply have to start thinking from move one?
            That's exactly why some players like Fischer Random/Chess 960.

            And why some players hate Fischer Random/Chess 960.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: modern odds matches

              Chess seems to have the best starting position for the given pieces and their movements, IMHO. Some Chess960 starting positions are definitely worse than others, I've read long ago. Other drawbacks of Chess960 are that there would be no opening books to sell, and that merchandising and movie representation of such a board game seems harder since there is no starting position to display (the same is true for Go). A way around this is to have one set starting position for, say, 100 years (or 1 year, as Kasparov has suggested), but that would kind of negate the original major aim of Chess960.
              Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Wednesday, 8th February, 2017, 10:54 PM. Reason: Spelling
              Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
              Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

              Comment


              • #22
                Round 5 Pairings

                If there are no further BYE requests these are possible pairings.

                HTML Code:
                Pairings for Round 5. 2017 RA Club Ch: :o
                
                Bd	#	Res	White	#	Res	Black
                1	15		Zachary Dukic (2078 4.0)	2		David Gordon (2310 4.0)
                2	8		Sam Marin (2155 3.5)	5		Ramon J. Cova (2222 3.0)
                3	6		John Upper (2212 3.0)	12		Ben Kellar (2115 3.0)
                4	14		Svitlana Demchenko (2086 3.0)	9		Saeid Sadeghi (2149 3.0)
                5	10		William G. Doubleday (2136 3.0)	13		Dusan Simic (2100 3.0)
                6	23		Dan Kearnan (1878 3.0)	11		Francesco Dunne (2118 3.0)
                7	17		David Fei (2022 3.0)	1		Qiyu Zhou (2326 2.5)
                8	3		Mate Marinkovic (2269 2.5)	16		Simon Kuttner (2078 2.5)
                9	4		Kevin Pacey (2225 2.5)	20		Jeff Groot-Lipman (1928 2.5)
                10	46		Noah Marchildon (1360 2.5)	7		Stijn De Kerpel (2196 2.5)
                11	18		Sasha Solunac (2010 2.0)	29		Jan Huus (1779 2.0)
                12	21		Abdelaziz Mahdjoubi (1912 2.0)	30		Daniel Xu (1753 2.0)
                13	22		Stefan Lanceman (1880 2.0)	36		Vikram Mallur (1628 2.0)
                14	37		Denis Lemieux (1563 2.0)	24		Alex Danilov (1843 2.0)
                15	26		Peter Arseneau (1822 2.0)	41		Romy Peters (1501 2.0)
                16	31		Eric Van Dusen (1742 2.0)	27		Gordon Ritchie (1808 2.0)
                17	28		Konstantin Vlasenko (1784 2.0)	48		David Brock (1280 2.0)
                18	45		Yaorui Xu (1377 1.5)	54		Michaell Tan (1072 2.0)
                19	51		Daniel Wang (1133 1.5)	50		Alexander Dukkardt (1229 1.5)
                20	59		Vladimir Dukkardt (800 1.5)	44		Victor Samuel (1377 1.5)
                21	42		Keven Eyre (1418 1.0)	25		Amos Kuttner (1828 1.0)
                22	32		Paul St. Pierre (1731 1.0)	43		Xu Rong [Caroline] Chen (1418 1.0)
                23	38		Gerard Felderhof (1555 1.0)	57		Emil Wang (982 1.0)
                24	47		Alexander Stopic (1353 1.0)	39		Yves Arsenault (1546 1.0)
                25	52		Daniel Labib (1117 1.0)	40		Drew Metcalfe (1511 1.0)
                26	55		Dave Westbury (1054 0.5)	53		Rami Labib (1080 0.5)
                27	58		Wahida Chowdhury (845 0.5)	56		Jonathan Levine (1005 0.0)
                 	60	½ 	Samer Hockayem (unr. 1.5)	 	 	BYE
                 	33	½ 	Simon Perkins (1728 1.5)	 	 	BYE
                 	34	½ 	Garland Best (1676 2.0)	 	 	BYE
                 	49	½ 	Jeremy Sztuka (1264 1.5)	 	 	BYE
                 	19	½ 	Ray Kuryliw (1993 2.5)	 	 	BYE
                
                
                
                Last edited by Halldor P. Palsson; Tuesday, 14th February, 2017, 11:07 PM. Reason: NEW byes

                Comment


                • #23
                  Standings after Round 5

                  Zachary Dukic is at the helm and poised to win the $500 first prize in our club championship.

                  HTML Code:
                  Standings. 2017 RA Club Ch
                  
                  #	Place	Name	Rtng	Rd 1	Rd 2	Rd 3	Rd 4	Rd 5	Tot
                  1	1	Zachary Dukic	2078	W55	W9	W8	W20	W2	5.0
                  2	2-7	David Gordon	2310	W47	W15	W7	W16	L1	4.0
                  3	 	Ramon J. Cova	2222	W59	L16	W38	W17	W12	4.0
                  4	 	Saeid Sadeghi	2149	W42	W18	H---	H---	W15	4.0
                  5	 	William G. Doubleday	2136	W24	L20	W40	W28	W14	4.0
                  6	 	Francesco Dunne	2118	W49	W23	L16	W26	W20	4.0
                  7	 	Ben Kellar	2115	W50	W40	L2	W24	W13	4.0
                  8	8-12	Qiyu Zhou	2326	W37	W14	L1	H---	W16	3.5
                  9	 	Mate Marinkovic	2269	W39	L1	W23	H---	W25	3.5
                  10	 	Kevin Pacey	2225	H---	W22	L20	W43	W27	3.5
                  11	 	Stijn De Kerpel	2196	W48	D17	W27	L12	W32	3.5
                  12	 	Sam Marin	2155	W41	D27	W36	W11	L3	3.5
                  13	13-24	John Upper	2212	L40	W50	W37	W21	L7	3.0
                  14	 	Dusan Simic	2100	W31	L8	W48	W30	L5	3.0
                  15	 	Svitlana Demchenko	2086	W51	L2	W42	W46	L4	3.0
                  16	 	David Fei	2022	W43	W3	W6	L2	L8	3.0
                  17	 	Ray Kuryliw	1993	W53	D11	W29	L3	H---	3.0
                  18	 	Abdelaziz Mahdjoubi	1912	W60	L4	L24	W53	W37	3.0
                  19	 	Stefan Lanceman	1880	H---	H---	L32	W41	W40	3.0
                  20	 	Dan Kearnan	1878	W54	W5	W10	L1	L6	3.0
                  21	 	Alex Danilov	1843	H---	D38	W49	L13	W60	3.0
                  22	 	Konstantin Vlasenko	1784	H---	L10	H---	W42	W38	3.0
                  23	 	Jan Huus	1779	W57	L6	L9	W49	W43	3.0
                  24	 	Romy Peters	1501	L5	W57	W18	L7	W36	3.0
                  25	25-35	Simon Kuttner	2078	H---	H---	H---	W39	L9	2.5
                  26	 	Sasha Solunac	2010	W44	H---	D28	L6	H---	2.5
                  27	 	Jeff Groot-Lipman	1928	W56	D12	L11	W44	L10	2.5
                  28	 	Gordon Ritchie	1808	H---	W33	D26	L5	H---	2.5
                  29	 	Garland Best	1676	H---	W46	L17	H---	H---	2.5
                  30	 	Denis Lemieux	1563	H---	H---	W45	L14	H---	2.5
                  31	 	Victor Samuel	1377	L14	L37	D60	W54	W53	2.5
                  32	 	Noah Marchildon	1360	H---	H---	W19	H---	L11	2.5
                  33	 	Michaell Tan	1072	H---	L28	D41	B---	H---	2.5
                  34	 	Andrew Svensson	1070	H---	H---	H---	U---	W52	2.5
                  35	 	Vladimir Dukkardt	800	H---	U---	U---	W58	W51	2.5
                  36	36-45	Peter Arseneau	1822	W61	H---	L12	H---	L24	2.0
                  37	 	Daniel Xu	1753	L8	W31	L13	W55	L18	2.0
                  38	 	Eric Van Dusen	1742	H---	D21	L3	W50	L22	2.0
                  39	 	Simon Perkins	1728	L9	W55	H---	L25	H---	2.0
                  40	 	Vikram Mallur	1628	W13	L7	L5	W56	L19	2.0
                  41	 	Yves Arsenault	1546	L12	D54	D33	L19	W55	2.0
                  42	 	Drew Metcalfe	1511	L4	W60	L15	L22	W57	2.0
                  43	 	David Brock	1280	L16	W47	W59	L10	L23	2.0
                  44	 	Jeremy Sztuka	1264	L26	H---	W54	L27	H---	2.0
                  45	 	Samer Hockayem	unr.	H---	H---	L30	H---	H---	2.0
                  46	46-54	Amos Kuttner	1828	H---	L29	H---	L15	D49	1.5
                  47	 	Paul St. Pierre	1731	L2	L43	L56	W61	H---	1.5
                  48	 	Gerard Felderhof	1555	L11	W56	L14	L52	D50	1.5
                  49	 	Keven Eyre	1418	L6	W61	L21	L23	D46	1.5
                  50	 	Xu Rong [Caroline] Chen	1418	L7	L13	W57	L38	D48	1.5
                  51	 	Yaorui Xu	1377	L15	H---	L53	W60	L35	1.5
                  52	 	Alexander Dukkardt	1229	H---	U---	U---	W48	L34	1.5
                  53	 	Daniel Wang	1133	L17	D59	W51	L18	L31	1.5
                  54	 	Dave Westbury	1054	L20	D41	L44	L31	W56	1.5
                  55	55-58	Alexander Stopic	1353	L1	L39	W61	L37	L41	1.0
                  56	 	Daniel Labib	1117	L27	L48	W47	L40	L54	1.0
                  57	 	Emil Wang	982	L23	L24	L50	W59	L42	1.0
                  58	 	Wahida Chowdhury	845	H---	U---	U---	L35	H---	1.0
                  59	59-61	Michael Abt	1668	L3	D53	L43	L57	---	0.5
                  60	 	Rami Labib	1080	L18	L42	D31	L51	L21	0.5
                  61	 	Jonathan Levine	1005	L36	L49	L55	L47	H---	0.5
                  

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Round 1 of 2017 RA Club Championship January 19 to March 2

                    Still two rounds to go, but an impressive performance to this point by Zachary.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: modern odds matches

                      Originally posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
                      Chess seems to have the best starting position for the given pieces and their movements, IMHO.
                      Hi Kevin, what do you mean exactly? How is the starting position the best? Most suited to seeking immediate development and central control?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: modern odds matches

                        Hi Brad

                        I go into great detail about that, and other aspects of why chess is arguably free of arbitrariness as a board game of skill, in the following CFC blog entry of mine:

                        http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/en...games-of-skill
                        Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
                        Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: modern odds matches

                          That is very interesting, Kevin.

                          I agree that chess possesses a certain perfection that ought not be tampered with as no improvements are possible.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: modern odds matches

                            Originally posted by Brad Thomson View Post
                            That is very interesting, Kevin.

                            I agree that chess possesses a certain perfection that ought not be tampered with as no improvements are possible.
                            As it is true with most any artificial confine, the starting position of standard Chess is completely unnatural.

                            Perfection is unnatural.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: modern odds matches

                              Originally posted by Neil Frarey View Post
                              Perfection is unnatural.
                              Then so must be you yourself. :)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Pairings for Round 6!

                                Please e-mail fs889@ncf.ca if you need a bye in rounds 6-7.

                                1) byes are zero points for rounds 6 & 7;
                                2) the winner(s) will receive the trophy and cash prize of $500 at the AGM;
                                3) champion(s) will take on the membership in a simultaneous exhibition after the AGM.

                                These pairings will change as I am expecting 5-10 byes in round 6 :o

                                HTML Code:
                                Pairings for Round 6. 2017 RA Club Ch:
                                
                                Bd	#	Res	White	#	Res	Black
                                1	5		Ramon J. Cova (2222 4.0)	15		Zachary Dukic (2078 5.0)
                                2	2		David Gordon (2310 4.0)	10		William G. Doubleday (2136 4.0)
                                3	9		Saeid Sadeghi (2149 4.0)	11		Francesco Dunne (2118 4.0)
                                4	12		Ben Kellar (2115 4.0)	3		Mate Marinkovic (2269 3.5)
                                5	1		Qiyu Zhou (2326 3.5)	8		Sam Marin (2155 3.5)
                                6	7		Stijn De Kerpel (2196 3.5)	4		Kevin Pacey (2225 3.5)
                                7	23		Dan Kearnan (1878 3.0)	6		John Upper (2212 3.0)
                                8	13		Dusan Simic (2100 3.0)	22		Stefan Lanceman (1880 3.0)
                                9	24		Alex Danilov (1843 3.0)	14		Svitlana Demchenko (2086 3.0)
                                10	28		Konstantin Vlasenko (1784 3.0)	17		David Fei (2022 3.0)
                                11	41		Romy Peters (1501 3.0)	19		Ray Kuryliw (1993 3.0)
                                12	29		Jan Huus (1779 3.0)	21		Abdelaziz Mahdjoubi (1912 3.0)
                                13	16		Simon Kuttner (2078 2.5)	44		Victor Samuel (1377 2.5)
                                14	18		Sasha Solunac (2010 2.5)	46		Noah Marchildon (1360 2.5)
                                15	20		Jeff Groot-Lipman (1928 2.5)	37		Denis Lemieux (1563 2.5)
                                16	27		Gordon Ritchie (1808 2.5)	55		Andrew Svensson (1070 2.5)
                                17	34		Garland Best (1676 2.5)	54		Michaell Tan (1072 2.5)
                                18	60		Vladimir Dukkardt (800 2.5)	26		Peter Arseneau (1822 2.0)
                                19	30		Daniel Xu (1753 2.0)	40		Drew Metcalfe (1511 2.0)
                                20	39		Yves Arsenault (1546 2.0)	31		Eric Van Dusen (1742 2.0)
                                21	49		Jeremy Sztuka (1264 2.0)	33		Simon Perkins (1728 2.0)
                                22	36		Vikram Mallur (1628 2.0)	48		David Brock (1280 2.0)
                                23	25		Amos Kuttner (1828 1.5)	45		Yaorui Xu (1377 1.5)
                                24	43		Xu Rong [Caroline] Chen (1418 1.5)	32		Paul St. Pierre (1731 1.5)
                                25	38		Gerard Felderhof (1555 1.5)	51		Daniel Wang (1133 1.5)
                                26	50		Alexander Dukkardt (1229 1.5)	42		Keven Eyre (1418 1.5)
                                27	47		Alexander Stopic (1353 1.0)	56		Dave Westbury (1054 1.5)
                                28	52		Daniel Labib (1117 1.0)	58		Emil Wang (982 1.0)
                                29	59		Wahida Chowdhury (845 1.0)	53		Rami Labib (1080 0.5)
                                

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X