There are a couple of reasons why a team in a match might have an average rating above 2400.75. They are:

1. Each team is allowed to use any rating list from September of the previous year through August of the current year. The ratings shown on this page will all be from August though - sometimes resulting in a seemingly higher rating average than would legally be allowed.

2. When a team uses a player rated above 2590, that player only counts as 2600 when determining a lineup's legality. However what is shown on this page will be the actual average which of course might be higher.

There are a couple of reasons why a team in a match might have an average rating above 2400.75. They are:

1. Each team is allowed to use any rating list from January through August of the current year. The ratings shown on this page will all be from August though - sometimes resulting in a seemingly higher rating average than would legally be allowed.

2. When a team uses a player rated above 2600, that player only counts as 2600 when determining a lineup's legality. However what is shown on this page will be the actual average which of course might be higher.

If there is a tie during the regular season as to the finishing order for playoff positioning, the following rules will be used (for instance if two teams are tied for second place with seven match points each). Tiebreak #1 is of course the first tiebreak with the lower ones being used only if all the above tiebreak procedures also result in a tie.

1. Total Team Game Points. Thus winning a match 4 - 0 will give you more tiebreak points than winning a match 3 - 1.

2. Average rating of opponents throughout the season, using the August rating list of that season.

3. Head to Head Results. If you have beaten the opposing team 1.5 - 0.5 during the regular season, you will get the higher seeding.

4. Total Match Points versus Divisional Teams. Thus if Team A went 4.0 - 2.0 in Divisional Matches while Team B went 3.5 - 2.5 then Team A would have the better tiebreaks.

5. Total Game Points versus Divisional Teams

6. Total Game Points from Board 1

7. Total Game Points from Board 2

8. Total Game Points from Board 3

9. Total number of team wins. Thus if one team has a total of twenty five points, with twenty of these points being from wins, whereas another team has a total of twenty five points with only nineteen being from wins, the team with twenty wins has the better tiebreaks.

10. An Armageddon blitz game between chosen members of the teams

If there is a tie between three teams in both match points and game points, we will use the above rules to decide the order amongst the teams. The last resort will be an online blitz game between chosen members of the teams.

If there is a tie during the regular season as to the finishing order for playoff positioning, the following rules will be used (for instance if two teams are tied for second place with seven match points each). Tiebreak #1 is of course the first tiebreak with the lower ones being used only if all the above tiebreak procedures also result in a tie.

1. Total Team Game Points. Thus winning a match 4 - 0 will give you more tiebreak points than winning a match 3 - 1.

2. Strength of Schedule; the team whose opponents have the highest combined record wins the tiebreak.

3. Average rating of opponents throughout the season, using the August rating list of that season.

4. Head to Head Results. If you have beaten the opposing team 1.5 - 0.5 during the regular season, you will get the higher seeding.

5. Total Match Points versus Divisional Teams. Thus if Team A went 5.0 - 3.0 in Divisional Matches while Team B went 4.5 - 3.5 then Team A would have the better tiebreaks.

6. Total Game Points versus Divisional Teams

7. Total Game Points from Board 1

8. Total Game Points from Board 2

9. Total Game Points from Board 3

10. Total number of team wins. Thus if one team has a total of twenty five points, with twenty of these points being from wins, whereas another team has a total of twenty five points with only nineteen being from wins, the team with twenty wins has the better tiebreaks.

11. An Armageddon blitz game between chosen members of the teams

If there is a tie between three teams in both match points and game points, we will use the above rules to decide the order amongst the teams. The last resort will be an online blitz game between chosen members of the teams.

If the regulation match is tied 2 - 2, the following tiebreak procedures will be take place after a ten minute break:

1. The fourth boards from each team will play each other. The team that won on the highest board during the original match will choose their color for the first game. If all regulation games were drawn, the lower rated team gets to choose colors for the first tiebreak game. The time control will be three minutes with a three second increment. The loser of this game will be eliminated, and the winner then faces Board Three of the opposing team.

2. This process continues with the next higher board on each team continually replacing any player of their team who gets eliminated.

3. If a game ends in a draw, both players are eliminated, except if at least one team is using its Board One in which case there is no elimination on a draw, instead colors reverse, and the game is replayed until there is a decisive result.

4. Colors will switch every game for the teams in all circumstances.

5. This process repeats itself until all four players from one team have been eliminated. Thus in order for your opponents to win the match, every one of your team members must be eliminated.

San Francisco Mechanics /

FM Yian Liou


Yian Liou's Games

2014 Games: (0.0/1)

  1. Week 1: FM Yian Liou (SF) vs GM Andrey Stukopin (RIO) 0-1

2014 MVP Points: (-3.5)
2014 Performance Rating: 2231



2013 Games: (2.0/5)

  1. Week 1: FM Yian Liou (SF) vs IM Luke Harmon-Vellotti (LA) 1/2-1/2
  2. Week 2: IM Mark Ginsburg (ARZ) vs FM Yian Liou (SF) 0-1
  3. Week 10: FM Curt Collyer (SEA) vs FM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0
  4. Quarterfinals: NM Madiyar Amerkeshev (LA) vs FM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0
  5. Semifinals: FM Eric Rodriguez (MIA) vs FM Yian Liou (SF) 1/2-1/2

2013 MVP Points: 0.5
2013 Performance Rating: 2287



2012 Games: (2.5/6)

  1. Week 2: FM Yian Liou (SF) vs NM Andrew Shvartsman (MAN) 1/2-1/2
  2. Week 3: FM Yian Liou (SF) vs IM Priyadharshan Kannappan (STL) 1/2-1/2
  3. Week 4: FM Yian Liou (SF) vs FM Michael Bodek (NY) 1/2-1/2
  4. Week 5: IM Mark Ginsburg (ARZ) vs FM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0
  5. Week 7: FM Eugene Yanayt (LA) vs FM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0
  6. Week 10: Miguel Recio (MIA) vs FM Yian Liou (SF) 0-1

2012 MVP Points: (-1.5)
2012 Performance Rating: 2283



2011 Games: (3.0/3)

  1. Week 3: FM Michael Casella (LA) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 0-1
  2. Week 8: FM Pedram Atoufi (ARZ) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 0-1
  3. Week 10: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs FM Doug Eckert (STL) 1-0

2011 MVP Points: 9
2011 Performance Rating: 2700



2010 Games: (3.0/7)

  1. Week 2: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs NM Robert Perez (MIA) 1-0
  2. Week 4: Michael Wang (SEA) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1/2-1/2
  3. Week 5: FM Eugene Yanayt (LA) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1/2-1/2
  4. Week 6: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs NM Ilya Krasik (BOS) 1/2-1/2
  5. Week 7: NM David Adelberg (ARZ) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1/2-1/2
  6. Week 9: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs Alex Guo (SEA) 0-1
  7. Week 10: Nicholas Rosenthal (MIA) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0

2010 MVP Points: 1
2010 Performance Rating: 2116



2009 Games: (6.5/10)

  1. Week 1: NM Joshua Sinanan (SEA) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1/2-1/2
  2. Week 2: Adarsh Jayakumar (DAL) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 0-1
  3. Week 3: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs NM Ernesto Alvarez (MIA) 1-0
  4. Week 4: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs IM Mehmed Pasalic (CHC) 1-0
  5. Week 5: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs NM Yaacov Norowitz (NY) 1/2-1/2
  6. Week 6: Miguel Recio (MIA) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1/2-1/2
  7. Week 9: David Justice (TEN) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0
  8. Week 10: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs WFM Bayaraa Zorigt (DAL) 1-0
  9. Quarterfinals: NM Yian Liou (SF) vs NM Leo Martinez (ARZ) 1-0
  10. Semifinals: NM Eric Rodriguez (MIA) vs NM Yian Liou (SF) 1-0

2009 MVP Points: 9
2009 Performance Rating: 2360



portrait

Stats as of August 2014

Rating2475
MVP Pts14.5
Lifetime Score17.0/32 (53%)
Performance Rating2308
Date of Birth1997