Recent Posts

Or if Chesstempo could ad a similar option like " >1 candidate moves", it would also help. Or maybe an offline tool would be better suited for this. That can be use before importing the pgn into Chesstempo.
I'm sure a good programmer can easily make such a tool.
I think it would be very helpful for building repertoires.

I'm surprised CPT isn't preserving the import order , but if CPT isn't doing what you want, it seems you don't have much choice but to write something yourself to re-organise the repertoire along the frequency you want, given it seems the CPT author isn't making any further releases. We could possibly look at adding an option to chesstempo's opening trainer to reshuffle the repertoire based on opening explorer frequencies, but this isn't likely to be a short term priority for us.

When I import a repertoire into CPT using a PGN file, the frequency of moves played in this PGN aligns with general play patterns. For instance, the most common opening move is 1.e4, followed by 1.d4, then 1.Nf3, 1.c4, 1.b3, and 1.c3.
However, when I export this repertoire from CPT back into a PGN file (across multiple games), the frequency of play is disrupted. For example, 1.Nf3 becomes the main line, which is not reflective of the original repertoire or general play.
This is not only for the first moves.
For instance, the sequence 1.d4 d5 is also affected.

Additionally, the number of games exported is significantly higher than the original imported PGN file.
This issue prevents me from effectively using the export option in CPT.

I think this is becouse of all possible tranpostions are also in the exported pgn.
It is a good thing to see al the possible transpostions when browsing the tree (in CPT or in Chesstempo), but the exported pgn should only contain games with the exact same lines as the imported pgn. (exept for removed lines and replaced moves)

CPT is no longer in development so I can’t ask the programmer to fix this.
I experience the same problem when I import the best moves of a bin book (for one collor), into “Opening lines” in Lucas Chess, and afterwards export these opening lines to PGN.


Apearently that is something manny chess programmers don’t get right.

 I’m hoping to find a solution that maintains the correct order of move frequency when exporting repertoires. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

It is always a good idea to have a backup of you repertoires in pgn format.

Thanks for the reply Richard, it is appreciated. It is good to know it is not me! I think I can use the work around and will try it out. Martin

Sorry, we did attempt to fix this in a subsequent release, but the attempted fix hasn't helped, and it is still not recognising PGN files as loadable. As mentioned in the previous problem report post, you'd need to work around the problem by copying the text of the PGN while viewing it elsewhere, then pasting it into provided text area instead of using the 'upload' button. This is assuming that you can actually see the file but not load it, and you are not already trying to paste in PGN. If it is not working with pasted PGN, please try on the website PGN viewer, and if that also fails, send the pgn to admin@chesstempo.com, as in that case there is likely some non-standard PGN in the file that the Everyman view is happy to load, but our stricter (from a standards point of view) viewer is not.

Got it, thank you

I know this is an old topic, but I cannot find anything more recent. Has this problem been fixed or is it ongoing? I cannot load pgn files from the iphone into the ChessTempo app, suggesting it might be ongoing. The files are ok to load into Chess Viewer (the Everyman Chess app). Can someone advise on whether the problem is fixed or not and, if it is, what I might be doing wrong? Many thanks. Martin

The duplicate reward reduction was removed from all but the very highest rated accounts some time ago. Basically, people with lower ratings were not having literal memory of the positions (and had a larger pool of problems to choose from before seeing duplicates) so it was deemed unfair to reduce rewards for duplicates for most users. It is still in place for the top few players, as they tend to have very good literal memory of positions, and also at the extreme of the problem distribution curve, so have fewer problems to choose from, and without duplicate reward reduction it was hard to control rating inflation in that group, and the top 10 lists would become a memory competition rather than a tactics skill competition.  We've also introduced a lot more problems since then which also helped somewhat alleviate the problem at the higher end of the rating pool.

For those that are still high enough rated to get reward reduction, the answer to 2) is that rating penalty would still apply, 'duplicate' is defined by looking across all sets.

Hi Richard I have two quick questions if you have time:

(1) I've seen very old posts from you explaining that ratings can stagnate because after ~3000 problems solved you tend to get dupes around your platued rating range and the penalty from re-solving correctly lowers the amount you earn for a correct but you still get dinged equally for your fails. Is this still your view? Most of the posts I saw were ~10 yrs old so I wasn't sure if the site/database of problems is still the same or its larger now so the likelihood of dupes is lower until a much higher number of problems.

(2) if I solve a problem correctly in a custom set and then later solve the same problem in a rated set, does the re-solving rating penalty apply, or is it only re-solving multiple times within a given set?

Thank you!

LIREN VS. GUKESH ... Go Gukesh!