Author: Norm Pollock
Date: 08:51:38 01/13/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 13, 2005 at 11:42:02, Pierre Bourget wrote: >On January 13, 2005 at 10:46:39, Louis Fagliano wrote: > >>The number of games each year in ChessBase’s “flagship database” (their term) >>keeps whizzing rapidly upwards: >> >>Mega Database 1999 1.1 million games >>Mega Database 2000 1.4 million games >>Mega Database 2001 1.7 million games >>Mega Database 2002 2.0 million games >>Mega Database 2003 2.3 million games >>Mega Database 2004 2.6 million games >>Mega Database 2005 2.9 million games >> >>It’s just about 300,000 games per year. Yet if you were to collect all of the >>new games compiled by Mark Crowler in TWIC for one year you would end up with >>about 75,000 to 80,000 new games for that calendar year. Where are the extra >>games coming from? >> >>To me it doesn’t look like they’re coming from any good sources. >> >>Case in point: Take the classic beginner’s opening 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5. Now I >>would expect that in a quality or “flagship database”, there shouldn’t be any >>more than 5 or 6 games with that silly opening by White. >> >>I did a search to find out how many games in Mega Database 2005 started out with >>1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 and was shocked to find out there are 258 games!! Even worse, >>White actually wins 94 of those games! >> >>Want more? Well after 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 there are a flabbergasting 80 games, yes >>count ‘em 80, where Black replies 2... Nf6?? and loses a pawn instantly to 3. >>Qxe5+. >> >>Is Mega Database in danger of becoming FatBase? At least in the FatBase product >>they are honest enough to tell you that the games include a lot of garbage. >>Just because all the headers and names are consistent doesn’t mean quality if >>you have hundreds of games that start out with 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5. >> >>Even worse, in their search for more games regardless of how awful, they are >>still leaving out some quality games. In a few opening treatise’s there is >>occasionally a reference to a game that I cannot find in Mega Database. > >I have Big Database 2004 and I intend to get the new BD 2005.Since I am mostly >interested by old games ,could you tell me if there is a substantial increase >for the following period: > > >0-1900: >1901-1950: >1951-1980: > >Thanks. > >Pierre And what about 500bc - 1bc? Lot's of great games there too! Actually I do not believe there was a 1 bc, 0 or 1ad. I think the sequence went: 2bc, 1, 2ad.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.