Friday, May 04, 2007

Garry Kasparov makes TIME 100 list

source and Time Magazine:

Garry Kasparov makes TIME 100 list

04.05.2007 – Once a year Time Magazine compiles a list of the 100 most influential people in the world. Oprah Winfrey made the list a record five times, Bill Gates four times, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela and Condoleezza Rice three times. The 2007 list which hits the newsstands today includes a chess player who today is "leading a lonely fight for greater democracy in Russia."

TTIME 100 is an annual list, compiled by Time Magazine, of the 100 most influential people in the world. The list was first published in 1999 as a list of the 100 most influential people of the passing century. It soon became an annual feature, listing the 100 people influencing the world most greatly every year. They are separated into five groups: Leaders and Revolutionaries, Builders and Titans, Artists aand Entertainers, Scientists and Thinkers, and Heroes and Icons. Each category has 20 nominees, sometimes in pairs or small groups. The magazine made it clear that the people recognized are those who are changing the world – for better or for worse.
Record holders for TIME 100 nominations are Oprah Winfrey, who was listed five times, followed by Bill Gates (four times), George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela and Condoleezza Rice (three times).

This year's list includes Queen Elizabeth, US presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Pope Benedict XVI, YouTube founders Steve Chen and Chad Hurley, film director Martin Scorsese, and supermodel Kate Moss. Separately, Time named 14 "power givers" including Bill and Melinda Gates, Angelina Jolie, Queen Rania al-Abdullah of Jordan, George Soros. The list includes 71 men and 29 women from 27 countries. It does not include President Bush. On the current TIME 100 list we find actors Leonardo DiCaprio, Sacha Baron Cohen (of "Borat" fame), as well as entertainment newsmakersBrad Pitt, Justin Timberlake, Cate Blanchett and America Ferrera. Politicians include California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nancy Pelosi (writeup by Newt Gingrich!), Michael Bloomberg, Angela Merkel, Tzipi Livni, Sonia Gandhi and Ayatullah Ali Khamenei. Amongst the Scientists and Thinkers we find Al Gore, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Richard Dawkins. Builders and Titans include Richard Branson and Steve Jobs, while Heroes and Pioneers include (tennis star) Roger Federer, Oprah Winfrey, George Clooney and Michael J. Fox.

"The TIME 100 is not a hot list. It's a survey not of the most powerful or the most popular, but of the most influential," writes Editor Richard Stengel. "We look for people whose ideas, whose example, whose talent, whose discoveries transform the world we live in. Yes, there are Presidents and dictators who can change the world through fiat, but we're more interested in innovators like Monty Jones, the Sierra Leone scientist who has developed a strain of rice that can save African agriculture. Or heroes like the great chess master Garry Kasparov, who is leading a lonely fight for greater democracy in Russia." Here's his writeup:

Garry Kasparov
By Michael Elliott
Garry Kasparov likes to say he has been in politics all his life. In the Soviet Union, the nation in which he grew up, chess was a way of demonstrating the superiority of communism over the decadent West, and a chess prodigy was inevitably a political figure. Kasparov never dodged that fate; when he took on and eventually defeated Anatoly Karpov, the darling of the Soviet chess establishment, in 1985, his image as a prominent outsider – Kasparov is half Jewish, half Armenian – was fixed.

Kasparov's status has been maintained in post-Soviet Russia. His organization, the Other Russia, a coalition of those opposed to the rule of President Vladimir Putin, has held a series of demonstrations, often broken up by the police. For Kasparov, Russia today, dominated by a combination of huge energy enterprises and former security apparatchiks (such as Putin), is a betrayal of those who dreamed of democracy in the early 1990s.

Putin's foes are fragmented and run from old-fashioned nationalists to modern liberals; Kasparov, 44, insists he is just a moderator, not a leader, of the movement. But by giving a voice to those who believe that Russia can develop in a way different from the authoritarianism that seems always to have been its fate, the retired grand master shows that he has not yet made his last move.


Blogger transformation said...

recent activity at CTS:

dogWaste just attained 96.3 and now headed to 97.0% at 8,000 for close to 100%.

dkTransform 5f/169= 174 last two and one half sessions, for 97.13% at current 1454.2 elo at CTS. it is VERY tempting to utilize this percentage to bank rating, but i plan to just continue at 92 to 95%++, and take my rating back to >1500, but only by integrating a very high percentage annualized rate there for that ID.

just 90.21% for my next 2,390 tries will put me at exactly 86.000% at 30,000, well within my grasp, and in the course of things, assist me greatly towards my goal of getting back to 1600 icc blitz for 2/12.

ive been doing Reinfields 1001 Sacrifices and Combinations daily, and while many are very easy, at a quick glance only as it were, some at true humdingers that you can stare at for a day or two--and to start you sometimes dont know which they are going to be!

my goal is twenty per week, but, then again, i dont go forward until i have either A. solved the problem to where i am certain of my reSolution withOUT checking the answer, or B. having tried ever possibility and simply cannot do it (there have been five or six among the first seventy like that, so far), and draw a double circle around the problem number to single circle depending, then move on. such an outcome is only a last resort, and two to three days for ONE diagram is sufficient, nor too much. so when i say move on in surrender, i mean only after great efforts. no peaking!

of course, i use no board.

so far, there has only been one problem that i could NOT visualize to the end of the line, even with recourse to the solutions. some are seven, eight, or nine moves and while--again--many are easy, Reinfield 'saw fit' to give us real fits and starts on a few.

new post on my mental burners, Part iii to current discussion, but more about quantity: few versus many and Tolstoy fox or hedgehog cooking in my brain each hour!

himmmmm??? Tolstoy after Adam Smith? Coke, heroin, synthetic mesc? magic mushrooms?

Sun May 06, 01:42:00 AM PDT  
Blogger likesforests said...

Kasparov is an amazing man. After winning every major title and medal in the chess world and holding them longer than anyone before him, he's fighting for his convictions and a better future for his country.

You might say the media is wrong when they call him pro-democracy. After all, he's opposing Russian president Putin, who was elected by 71% of his people and enjoys strong public support for his policies. Americans can't say the same thing about its last few presidents.

But there's no doubt he's crusading against corruption and for the same civil liberties we're guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. When Russians turn on the news they hear what Putin wants them to hear, and see what Putin wants them to see. In that environment, is democracy anything more than illusory?

Good luck to Kasparov!

Sun May 06, 04:37:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Temposchlucker said...

Putin has a few dictatorial characteristics which he develops further overtime. But maybe that's what the land needs to prevent it from chaos and maffia. By now it looks like that Saddam Houssein was the leader the Iraqi's needed to prevent the land from chaos.

I can't imagazine a country lead by Kasparov to be a democracy. Maybe an egocracy?

Mon May 07, 04:27:00 AM PDT  
Blogger transformation said...

likeForests, agreed, he is an amazing man, but with more than ample marlin brandoesque animal machismo, which *himmmm* women find irresistable ("those eyes!", and the fear opponents felt sitting across from him not unrelated, or such as when he took his wrist watch off to signify 'gg'.

my point is, he is not only an intelectual le enfant terrable, but physically embodied as force.

71%? i agree with much of what you say, but the question is, WHO and under what conditions did those votes occur? so as to be a good politbeauro member for your workgroup? that you boss suggests what is helpful? freedom?

but as you also aptly suggest, democracy is but an illusion, and every bit helps. AND as you also suggest, we here in America do not have real democracy, but rather oligopolization underpinned by concentration of wealth in increasing trend monthly and yearly with no end in sight.

tempo. bingo. indeed. exactly. Putin is a Judoka cum KGB training in tandem, and the bushido underpinnings and warriorship pervasive. "dont even think of messing with us", is the modus operendae.

ive not been to europe but need to go and see it, so my opinions have limited depth there, but rather derive from viewing the world around me and accessing human nature, and from there, translating similar patterns to others circumstances, structures, and environments.

agreed there also, A. kasparov is an ego maniac, but who could not in his shoes, and B. i think that his efforts to help are truly selfless and sincere despite that. hit over the head how many times with a chess board, with his power and wealth. he is willing to undergo "voluntary suffering", and that is enought for me to see.

warmly, and eager to hear how you are with your 'X' matter.


Mon May 07, 01:07:00 PM PDT  
Anonymous chessloser said...

David - you have the most interesting, intellectual chess blog that isn't about chess but is...i am humbled by it...(serious, i'm not joking)..

Mon May 07, 07:21:00 PM PDT  
Blogger transformation said...

email Bcc bob, likeForest, blueDevilKnight, tempo: post to CTS, reproduced comment my blog under Kasparov last post, dk

dear wormwood, quietus, Prufrock, and laskoVortex (and haconly), i typically dont add comments to CTS, and really don't read here ever, but checked in a few days ago, since i was eager to make sure i was the first to comment about chessdog as an act of good will after some conversations last year, and was very pleasantly surprised at the comments and the level of conversation.

wormwood and i know each other well from blogger, ICC, and RHP (read hot pawn correspondence chess), so what follows is more intended for the general community, but thank you all. i have relished everything quietus wrote. i prefer not to push myself into this large conversation, but one things i necessary to clarify and might help many a user who reads comments.

some of us set out very intentionally a year ago upon accuracy in lieu of rating. clearly chessdog was first, and did it better and bigger than everyone else, then a few other were there, too, such as trallala, firegarden, alvis, Morkovin, Bahus, and a large user now inactive named spacecowboy, and i elected to focus on this.

early on i was 1400 to 1420 at 76% for about 6,000 tries, then decided the way for me was accuracy, and set out for 80%, which i hit by 10,000. then my goal was to stay at 1500 which >85%, which was a real adjustment, often trying to attain trances of eight problems with never more than one wrong, sometimes a hundred in a row correct. thereafter once i stabilized 1500, i had to make it a habit of ALWAYS attaining 90% or greater.

of course, at first my rating fell back to 1450, but i found if i compromised JUST off 90%, could stay >1500, which became a matter of purpose, for half a year or more, but as it were generating percentage and speeding up or slowing down to NOT go beyond 1520 and not go below 1500. when i fell below 1500, i was always able to push it back at will, so clearly firm there.

in time, i experimented with accuracy, and created a second id dogWaste, but still was only 90%, but 1500 to 1540. i decided to do my utmost to get to 95% (or so, since many goals changed along the way), and fell to 1480. then 1450. i noticed my error rate was substantially higher >1450, so let it fall, but tried for 100, 200 in a row, with MANY times two or three hundred with zero mishap.

at that point, and is so now, the major risk is not the brain or the postion, but my mouse or internet connection, and if every other or every third error out of FIVE HUNDRED is a mechanical error, this is too stressful. with vital energy better used for other study now, given deminishing returns. but at 1300 at my now annualized 1f/299+success = 300tries at close to 100% accuracy there is too much stress related to accidents rather than chess process, so as wormwood well describes, it limits access, so i do only a little a day there, of course, still set out for higher percentile.

inbedded in that, i experimented with forgetting accuracy, and was able at 75 to 79% take dkTransform to 1591, and absolutely certain i could have hit 1600, but it was to upsetting, to fall from 85.2% then to 85.0% etc.

thereafter, i established my current modus operendae, never less than 90% and preferably 95%, and it does limit the number of problems, again, as wormwood well describes. but my chess is better than ever, so at 1470/1460/1450, i can do 97% or so, but might adjust to 90% to consider holding 1500 again, but i really prefer 1450 at 97% to 1500 at 90 to 89%. id say that despite wormwoods suggestion that a drop of percentage results in 100 elo or so here, my skills as one and the same user at 99 to 100% at 1300 to 1340 averaging 96.3%, and 1470 at 92 to 97% aggregated to 85.7%, all correlate. id say that 1550 to 1590 at 77% correlate, too, so the range is more like 250 to 270%.

my live chess keeps improving, and accuracy here, for me, much more approaches real chess, where guessing at moves is derigor, as dan heiseman discusses widely at
i have written widely et al. these subjects at: (see 2nd to last post and 3rd to last post), and bluedevil knight has written amply on 'real chess' and his work with heiseman as direct chess coach at:

thank you and hope that helps some folks.

warm regards, david k

Tue May 08, 11:33:00 AM PDT  

Post a Comment

<< Home