Most prestigious piano competition

[cloches_de_geneve]

What is the most prestigious piano competition out there? Warsaw/Chopin, Tschaikowsky, Busoni, Queen Elisabeth (Belgium), van Cliburn, Haskil, ... others? Put differently: Which piano competition would you feel most proud to have won? Which brings most advantages?

[dnephi]

I believe the Tchaikovsky.  I would like to do the Liszt one just because Liszt floats mah boat 

Anyways, if you win Van Cliburn, you have your career made, basically.

[pianowelsh]

I would say Leeds myself but im biased. But look at the competitors there..most already have careers when they enter the Leeds - to win there IS to win. In fact to make the final is usually enough to have  sufficient media interest to boast your career. Most of the competitiors there have a string of wins behind them already and many have recorded with big labels prior ro taking the competition. It is also know for its toughness, as it requires a huge ammount of repertoire and stamina to win at the Leeds.. pacing is essential as is oodles of experience. There is also a huge string of prestigious engagements as the prize for winning and fairly considerable prize money. Of course Tchaikovsky is a big one  too.

[cloches_de_geneve]

Indeed, forgot that one (Leeds). So let's see...

Tschaikowsky
Leeds
Chopin (Warsaw)
Busoni
Van Cliburn
Queen Elisabeth (Belgium)
Haskil
Geneva

This is not a ranking, just a listing 

[pianowelsh]

Some pretty hot ones in Japan too - forget what they are called and they get like thousands of entries! did we mention the long-Thibaud competition?? U. Michele is quite a tough one too I believe.

[hodi]

arthur rubinstein one !

[mephisto]

Chopin is the most prestigious.

I would be most proud if I won the Queen Elisabeth or Tchaikovsky.

[mephisto]

Winers of the Tchaikovsky.

1958: Van Cliburn, Liu Shi-kun won the second prize.
1962: Vladimir Ashkenazy and John Ogdon shared first prize.
1966: Grigory Sokolov
1970: Vladimir Krainev and John Lill shared first prize.
1974: Andrei Gavrilov
1978: Mikhail Pletnev
1982: No first prize awarded. Peter Donohoe and Vladimir Ovchinnikov shared second prize.
1986: Barry Douglas
1990: Boris Berezovsky
1994: No first prize awarded. Nikolai Lugansky won second prize.
1998: Denis Matsuev
2002: Ayako Uehara

Pretty respectable.

[cloches_de_geneve]

I have looked at the winners of all these competitions since 1950.

Tschaikovsky and Chopin essentially sums it up. A vast majority of the winners of these two comptetions are great stars today (as Mephisto's list shows for the Tschaikovsky).

About 50% of the winners of Leeds and Haskil also have had great careers.

The "hit-rate" of all the other competitions is less impressive, that is, more often than not the juries of the other competitions gave first prizes to pianists that are not well known in global terms today (even though they may be superb pianists and well-known in circumscbribed parts of the world).

So, the "star makers" are really the first two and the second two are "potential star makers".

[franz_]

Because I'm Belgian, the Queen Elisabeth Competition. And it is very prestigious...

[verywellmister]

Chopin is the most prestigious.

I would be proud if I won any competition!

[mike_lang]

The big five are Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Leeds, Queen Elizabeth, and Van Cliburn.  Of these, it seems that Chopin has had the most big-name winners - Argerich, Zimmerman, Uchida, Pollini, Ashkenazy, T'song, Ohlsson, etc.

[henrah]

1982: No first prize awarded. Peter Donohoe and Vladimir Ovchinnikov shared second prize.
1994: No first prize awarded. Nikolai Lugansky won second prize.

No first prize awarded? I don't really understand. Why would they award two people with second place? I understand that they were both of equal talent to be awarded the same prize, but why not first? Surely if they came out as the best, they deserve first. Or were the russians down on money at those times?
Henrah

[cloches_de_geneve]

No first prize awarded? I don't really understand. Why would they award two people with second place? I understand that they were both of equal talent to be awarded the same prize, but why not first? Surely if they came out as the best, they deserve first. Or were the russians down on money at those times?
Henrah

You have to distinguish the relative from the absolute aspect. In relative terms, and within a given year, whoever comes out as the best participant is the best participant.

But this does not in itself lead to a first prize because candidates are also evaluated in absolute terms. Even though a pianist may be best in his class, he may still not fulfill certain criteria of excellence. Then he is not awarded the first prize. I think this is fair also because, in year with largely mediocre candidates, the best may not even be as good as the forth of a previous year, in which many extremely talented pianists competed.

It's like with wines: Some years are better than others.

[henrah]

Ah I see, thanks for clearing that up.
Henrah

[pianowelsh]

I would still place the Leeds on a par with the Chopin competition.  Its more exacting as it demands breadth of repertoire and stamina. the prize money is good and you should check out the previous prize winners and more impressively those who come 2nd and third - some household names!! It might be argued that the Leeds is also a more democratic competition??!? - a contreverial one perhaps!

[thierry13]

I would still place the Leeds on a par with the Chopin competition.  Its more exacting as it demands breadth of repertoire and stamina. the prize money is good and you should check out the previous prize winners and more impressively those who come 2nd and third - some household names!! It might be argued that the Leeds is also a more democratic competition??!? - a contreverial one perhaps!

Leed is probably the hardest ... Chopin is still the most PRESTIGIOUS one, I think.

[nanabush]

Holy crap @ the leeds repertoire!!!

[cloches_de_geneve]

Hmm...interesting. Did you have a look at the Haskil? They must have quite a perceptice jury, because a lot of Haskil winners are truly wonderful pianists and have remarkable careers.

[m]

Holy crap @ the leeds repertoire!!!

What about it? Standard concert repertoire... except of compulsory piece.

Was it one of M. Long J. Thibaud, where the preliminary consisted of two mandatory pieces--Feux Follets and Chopin op.25/11?
Just pick your order.

[cloches_de_geneve]

Fortunately, Cortot, Schnabel, Haskil, Fischer, Kempff and other legendary pianists of the 20th century did not have to make it through Leeds then ...

[gruffalo]

What about it? Standard concert repertoire... except of compulsory piece.

Was it one of M. Long J. Thibaud, where the preliminary consisted of two mandatory pieces--Feux Follets and Chopin op.25/11?
Just pick your order.

its not the repertoire itself, its more to do with the duration.

Gruff

[presto agitato]

Polar Music Prize = Nobel Prize of Music

[franz_]

Holy crap @ the leeds repertoire!!!

Check the Queen Elisabeth one.

[burstroman]

What happened to the Leventritt competition?

[gabetta]

I have been wondering about the Haskil.. The jury are all very famed people and the winners yes... but the repertoire is so small.. They expect a great deal of musical input rather than technique I suppose. I would love to do well there.

[cloches_de_geneve]

What happened to the Leventritt competition?

Can you tell us more about it? And perhaps some of the winners of the past 30 to 40 years?

[kevinatcausa]

Joseph Horowitz gave a fascinating account of the Leventritt Competition in his book "The Ivory Trade".   From the description, it sounded like a competition that was designed to be very small in scale (the public wasn't even invited to the competition recitals for a long time, and the contestants were generally chosen by invitation only), but large in prestige.  It declined shortly after the advent of the Cliburn competition.

In the appendix, he lists the following winners (the competition was held on an irregular basis--those years not listed below are those in which no competition was held).

1940: Sidney Foster
1942: Competition held, no winner
1943: Eugene Istomin
1944: Jeanne Therrien
1945: Louise Meiszner
1947: Alexis Weissenberg
1948: Jean Graham
1949: Gary Graffman
1950: No Winner
1954: Van Cliburn
1955: John Browning
1957: Anton Kuerti
1959: Malcom Frager
1960: No Winner
1962: Michel Block
1965: Tong Il Han
1969: Joseph Kalichstein
1971: No Winner
1976: No Winner (finalists were Lydia Artymiw, Steven De Groote, Marian Hahn, Santiago Rodriguez, and Mitsuko Uchida).

[pianowelsh]

Leeds finalists (nb not nec winners):
Vladimir Krainev (1963)
Radu Lupu (1969)
Georges Plundermacher(1969)
Boris Petrushansky (69)
Anne Queflec (69)
Murray Perhia(72)
Dimitri Alexeev(75)
Mitsuko Uchida(75)
Andras Schiff(75)
Michel Dalberto (78)
Ian Hobson (78)
Kathryn Stott (78)
Bernard D;Ascoli(81)
Peter Donahoe(81)
Jon Kimura Parker(84)
Vladimir Ovchinikov(87)
Noriko Ogawa (87)
Boris Berezovsky(87)
Artur Pizarro (90)
Lars Vogt (90)
Eric Le Sage(90)
Ricardo Castro(93)
Leon McCawley(93)
Ilya Itin (96)
Alexander Madzar(96)
Alessio Bax(00)
Ashley Wass(00)
Antti Siirala (03)
Evgenia Rubinova(03) etc
etc

The jury is equally impressive:
2003 included:
Dimitri Alexeev. Michel Beroff, Philippe Entremont, Klaus Hellwig, Peter Jablonski, Robert Levin, Richard Morrison, Hiroko Nakamura, John O Conner, Jean Loius Steuerman, Melvyn Tan, fou t'song, Zhou Guangren - and of course Fanny Waterman.  This year: Dimitri Alexeev, D.Bashkirov, Choi Sown Le, Bella Davidovich, Klasu Hellwig, ian Hobson, Renna Kellaway, Emanuel Krasovsky, Pitr Plaeczny, Jacques Rouvier, Bela Siki, Xu Zhong, Zhou Guangren

First prize is £14k.  and LOTS of concerts..

Final is also televised and concerto is with Mark Elder and the Halle orchestra...how much more prestigious do you want?!

[prongated]

The jury is equally impressive:
2003 included:
Dimitri Alexeev. Michel Beroff, Philippe Entremont, Klaus Hellwig, Peter Jablonski, Robert Levin, Richard Morrison, Hiroko Nakamura, John O Conner, Jean Loius Steuerman, Melvyn Tan, fou t'song, Zhou Guangren - and of course Fanny Waterman.  This year: Dimitri Alexeev, D.Bashkirov, Choi Sown Le, Bella Davidovich, Klasu Hellwig, ian Hobson, Renna Kellaway, Emanuel Krasovsky, Pitr Plaeczny, Jacques Rouvier, Bela Siki, Xu Zhong, Zhou Guangren

...I'm not making a comment on Rachmaninoff International (CA), but the jury members of 2002 is, IMO, equally daunting: Byron Janis (American Co-Chair), Nikolai Petrov (Russian Co-Chair), Vladimir Ashkenazy, Earl Wild, Dmitri Bashkirov, Takashi Hironaka, Lucy Ishkanian, Nikita Juzhanin, Piotr Paleczny, John Perry, Armen Smbatian and Mikhail Voskressensky.

In terms of competitions that will get you somewhere, I'm sure that the likes of Van Cliburn, Leeds, Chopin, Busoni etc. will do just that - and maybe in this respect, equally prestigious. On the other hand, it's interesting to note the kinds of pianists that have won them. Apparently the winners of Leeds, at least for as long as Waterman is jury, generally have a "british" style of playing, while a semi-finalist of the last Van Cliburn didn't get into the final; dubbed as being "too expressive".

In this light, it is probably impossible to say which competition is the most prestigious - the winners of different prestigious competitions are, well, different!

[pianowelsh]

Id really like you to try and describe a 'british style' of playing! There hasnt been a British-school of playing for decades. If you look at the list above actually most play with a Russian or French style of playing. Most having trained in Russia or france for at least part of their education. With the odd one coming form equally distinguished Germanic backgrounds. I would say most of the winners are truely representative of the best young artists Internationally.  Thats why they have an international jury so they get an international winner.. unlike some russian competitions where the jury are predominantly russian and only pianists with a russian sounding technique are likely to win.  Britain - although you may not be aware of it is blessed in a way that the USA is of having a large proportion of Russian and central european piano teachers installed in significant institutions so we are infact  not really trained in a 'British' way. I agree with you that many competitions have distinguished jury BUT the quality of the Leeds jury and size of it is overwhelming and also competitors must constantly put themselves in front of them for a duration of 3 weeks to get through the rounds and then finish up with a concerto.  It has everything Prestige, prize money, and Difficulty... Contestants are also very well looked after and get Steinways to practice on (often new) and in the upper rounds they practice in peoples homes not horrible practice rooms.
 

[zheer]

  To win the Leeds piano competition your are going to have to be something very special, to enter you must be a student of a famous pianist or famous teacher, a student from a famous music school with recomendation from one or more well known musician, already a performing concert pianist under the age of 30, and you must provide them with a professional recording of a number of advanced pieces. So yes most who do make it to the front door of the Leeds are already concert pianists who have played round the world .

[pianowelsh]

The Jury this year when asked by the press said they were impressed by the exceptionally high standard throughout the competition and also they said themselves that the standard of the competition is of the highest degree equal to anything in the world. thats high praise from the jury of the 06 competition as they sit on many distiguished panels of other 'prestigious' competitions.

[prongated]

Id really like you to try and describe a 'british style' of playing! There hasnt been a British-school of playing for decades.

...of course I don't refer to style as simply learning in conservatories in Britain...for some reason, I associate a British style of playing with the more academic way of playing...it is not academic as such of course, however when I hear this style, I feel 'dry'. I think this is possibly a reason why the Australian pianist Ian Munro did very well in the Leeds about a decade ago, because I think his playing is rather 'dry' - and in this respect, somehow resembling Brendel's. That's my personal opinion though

So yes most who do make it to the front door of the Leeds are already concert pianists who have played round the world .

Well the winner of Leeds 2006 did win the Ettlingen and the Clara Haskill international apparently...so but in terms of competitors...well the Scottish International has similar kinds - competition winners, pianists with recordings contracts with EMI, international concert engagements...and one of the winners there did end up winning the Van Cliburn international.

And no I'm not saying the Scottish International is of equal stature with the Leeds! There are many obvious differences between the two

[iumonito]

Hi,

I love England, I root for them in the world cup and I think London is the coolest place in the planet.  But people, England does not have the piano equivalent of the golf British Open or Wimbledon.

There are four majors in piano:  Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Queen Elizabeth and Van Cliburn.  The rest are warm ups.  Leeds, along with Margarite Long, Busoni, and Hamamatsu are prestigious, but not in the same league.  And then you have a bazillion others that are impossible to win yet meaningless (Gina Bauchauer, Santander, Jaen, CHina, etc., etc., etc.

There are too many pianists going through this painful selection process.  Tennis and golf in that sense are much more civilized.  You have a ranking and it is clear who are amateurs and who are professional and who are one but should be the other.

[csy]

I would say that the Cliburn will be the most difficult to win nowadays.
But the Chopin and the Tchaikovsky still remain the 2 most prestigious piano competitions in the world!
 

[pianowelsh]

Sorry I disagree that Leeds isnt the equal of any of the so called top 4. Especially as the top 4 often insist on very prescribed and narrow repertoire and have the same or similar juries.. It doesnt make sense to say the Leeds isnt as prestigious. People are so dismissive of the UK as a piano playing nation. I think some people dont consider that anyone can play the piano unless the come form Russia or the US! with the possible exception of the odd French genius from the Paris conservatoire. The Leeds has been steadily gaining in importance prestige and quality since its opening and is recognised very highly in the upper echalons of the piano firmament... Why else do you think people like Bashkirov and Davidovich and Alexeev etc etc waste their time sitting on a jury panel for 3 weeks!  Its because they know the standard will be first rate and they are intent on picking a worldclass winner! Which they did AGAIN!!
Perhaps you'd like to describe a 'wet' performance for me!! Honestly a biritsh academic style of playing?!?! what does that mean??? for a start the Bristish arent the only academics in the world. Secondly its been a LONG LONG time since Britain had the reputation of producing pianists with 'technique no passion'. Ive said it once and been ignored but the Bristish conservatoires couldnt be more cosmopolitan places with influences and styles of playing form accross the globe. The is NO Bristish piano style of playing or sound. Anyway you should check the stats there were only 2 british in the competition this year and they went out in the early rounds so there certainly wasnt a wash of 'dry' playing at this years competition.

[iumonito]

I love the passion, nicely done.

Just to make clear, I also disagree that pianists from the UK and Ireland (not really British, which I understand to mean English) are second to anyone.  Hough, Lill, Douglass, Kempf, our own Jonathan Powell, Donohoe, etc. are as exciting, original and full blodied as ... well actually as anyone.  I can't think of a single living Russian pianist that I think is better than those in the short list I gave.

Now, on the competition front, sorry, but Leeds is simply not as competitive to get into as the four majors.  Hey, don't get me wrong, I think the playing of the people in the second and thirs round is just as phenomenal, but time and again I am amazed at how incredibly good everybody is in the majors (even Chopin, which has a much larger first round class than the other three).

[pianowelsh]

but its not about getting into the competition is it... its about surviving and many well established names who have taken part in the 'top4' get knocked out in the early rounds ogf Leeds!  I think we must agree to disagree

[prongated]

Perhaps you'd like to describe a 'wet' performance for me!! Honestly a biritsh academic style of playing?!?! what does that mean??? for a start the Bristish arent the only academics in the world. Secondly its been a LONG LONG time since Britain had the reputation of producing pianists with 'technique no passion'. Ive said it once and been ignored but the Bristish conservatoires couldnt be more cosmopolitan places with influences and styles of playing form accross the globe. The is NO Bristish piano style of playing or sound. Anyway you should check the stats there were only 2 british in the competition this year and they went out in the early rounds so there certainly wasnt a wash of 'dry' playing at this years competition.

...And I guess I must also reiterate that, just because one is British and/or study in Britain, does not mean one has a British style of playing - assuming there is such a style of playing. I mean, just because Debussy and Ravel were French, they didn't always write music in the French style - as you know, Ravel's La Valse is surely not a Minuet?

[And I did not say that Britain perpetuates a British style of playing, even though it is implied. I mean, it could be something that originates from long ago. And as you have said: being the cosmopolitan place that, well, the world is now, I think there are British essences of playing everywhere around the world. How popular it is, or whether it still exists or has evolved is probably for another topic ^^]

On the other hand, I was mistaken in saying one must have a British style of playing in order to win Leeds...it's just something I heard different people say - and at some point, I did think it has more than a grain of truth for reasons I stated before. In any case, I think it is safe to say that the winner of Leeds has to be someone special. In the end, a competition can only be prestigious if the winners and competitors are constantly of the highest standard, and any subsequent pianist careers launched can be credited as much, if not more, to the quality of the pianists as to the competition's reputation itself.

However I do believe there are different "styles of playing"...and it is not isolated to different countries. Different pedagogues and teachers can perpetuate different styles of playing. That said, I never not say the British style of playing as technical and academic (if you check, I merely said "it's somewhat academic, but not academic" )

Also, I think that a performance can have or lack both virtuosity and passion at the same time. Just remember that virtuosity and passion are just 2 essences in a performance...tone colour, approach towards composer's dynamic and expressive markings, rubato style, etc. etc. over various genres of music can also define a "style of playing".

In the end, I think that a "style of playing" is a very complex aesthetic, such that words cannot describe it properly. Or, in other words, yes, I guess I am not particularly good at defining music through words

...to which I simply quote: "when words leave off, music begins"

[pianowelsh]

I may just about let you off then You may have heard about and been refering to the very first competition when the winner was not only british but was in fact on fo fanny watermans students.. There was of course debate on that one with people saying that he only won it because she was on the jury and becasue there had to be a british winner.  I prefer to give Roll the benefit of the doubt - he is a fine artist.  Agreed the standard of the competition is only as good as the winner. I think this shows Leed's ascendancy too as this years winner also won at Ettlingon and the Clara Haskill in Vevey  and it has to be remembered he is only 18!!

[soliloquy]

Liszt International, Chopin International, Cliburn, Tchaikovsky, Messiaen, Juilliard Concerto, Busoni.

[captain cook]

Winers of the Tchaikovsky.

1958: Van Cliburn, Liu Shi-kun won the second prize.
1962: Vladimir Ashkenazy and John Ogdon shared first prize.
1966: Grigory Sokolov
1970: Vladimir Krainev and John Lill shared first prize.
1974: Andrei Gavrilov
1978: Mikhail Pletnev
1982: No first prize awarded. Peter Donohoe and Vladimir Ovchinnikov shared second prize.
1986: Barry Douglas
1990: Boris Berezovsky
1994: No first prize awarded. Nikolai Lugansky won second prize.
1998: Denis Matsuev
2002: Ayako Uehara

Pretty respectable.

Except for 2002

[iumonito]

Let's go about it the opposite direction.  What competitions did the following win (I'll mark the ones I know):

Jorge Bolet (Naumburg, Leventritt?)
Claudio Arrau
Vladimir Horowitz
Emil Gilels (Queen Elizabeth)
Sviatoslav Richter
Ivo Pogorelich (Montreal)
Wilhem Kempff
Emmanuel Ax
Stephen Hough (Naumburg)
Gyorgy Cziffra
Krystian Zimmerman (Chopin)
Martha Argerich (Chopin, Busoni)

[thierry13]

Let's go about it the opposite direction.  What competitions did the following win (I'll mark the ones I know):

Jorge Bolet (Naumburg, Leventritt?)
Claudio Arrau
Vladimir Horowitz
Emil Gilels (Queen Elizabeth)
Sviatoslav Richter
Ivo Pogorelich (Montreal)
Wilhem Kempff
Emmanuel Ax
Stephen Hough (Naumburg)
Gyorgy Cziffra
Krystian Zimmerman (Chopin)
Martha Argerich (Chopin, Busoni)

I don't think Cziffra, Horowitz, nor Richter won competitions. Simply pure talents.

[cloches_de_geneve]

I've made a few additions. Arrau-Geneva, Brendel-Busoni, Pollini-Chopin, Pletnev & Sokolov-Tschaikovsky ....to be continued

Claudio Arrau (Geneva)
Alfred Brendel (Busoni)
Maurizio Pollini (Chopin)
Grigory Sokolov (Tschaikovsky)
Michail Pletnev (Tschaikoksky)
Vladimir Horowitz
Emil Gilels (Queen Elizabeth)
Sviatoslav Richter
Ivo Pogorelich (Montreal)
Wilhem Kempff
Emmanuel Ax
Stephen Hough (Naumburg)
Gyorgy Cziffra
Krystian Zimmerman (Chopin)
Martha Argerich (Chopin, Busoni)

[rob47]

[iumonito]

I've made a few additions. Arrau-Geneva, Brendel-Busoni, Pollini-Chopin, Pletnev & Sokolov-Tschaikovsky ....to be continued

Claudio Arrau (Geneva)
Alfred Brendel (Busoni)
Maurizio Pollini (Chopin)
Vladimir Horowitz
Emil Gilels (Queen Elizabeth)
Sviatoslav Richter
Ivo Pogorelich (Montreal)
Wilhem Kempff
Emmanuel Ax
Stephen Hough (Naumburg)
Gyorgy Cziffra
Krystian Zimmerman (Chopin)
Martha Argerich (Chopin, Busoni)

Well, thanks, but allow me to strike at least Sokolov and Pletnev, who in my opinion are not in the same league as the people in the list I originally put together.  Brendel definitely belongs in the list, thank you.  Pollini, OK, add then Ashkenhazy (Queen Elizabeth, and pretty close at Chopin and Tchaikovsky).  Add also Glenn Gould and Artur Rubinstein, and more more recent vintage Zoltan Kokcis, Lang Lang, Jonathan Biss, Francesco Libetta, Jonathan Powell, and Marc-Andre Hamelin.

My point is that the competition does not make the pianist.  It is almost coincidental that these great artists happened to win a competition during their youth.  Chances are their talent would have shined regardless.

[cloches_de_geneve]

I have to firmly disagree with you concerning G. Sokolov and M. Pletnev. They are probably the most exceptional mid-aged pianists out there, much more gifted and interesting than Hamelin, Libetta, Kocics, Lang-Lang etc. Of course, whether they are historical or legendary as Gould, Rubinstein, Arrau, Horowitz, Richter etc.. already are, and Pollini and Brendel most likely will be, this only time can tell.

[iumonito]

I have to firmly disagree with you concerning G. Sokolov and M. Pletnev. They are probably the most exceptional mid-aged pianists out there, much more gifted and interesting than Hamelin, Libetta, Kocics, Lang-Lang etc. Of course, whether they are historical or legendary as Gould, Rubinstein, Arrau, Horowitz, Richter etc.. already are, and Pollini and Brendel most likely will be, this only time can tell.

Naturally, it is great we can disagree.  Art is such!

Here are ten, not counting those in my list, whom I would put ahead of Pletnev and Sokolov:

Sequeira Costa
Judit Jaimes
James Tocco
Jeffrey Swan
Richard Goode
Angela Hewitt
Joanna MacGregor
Cristina Ortiz
Peter Serkin
Chris Harding

I don't get me wrong, I adore Pletnev's playing and I am a former Lev Vlassenko student.  Sokolov y put together with Volodos in the overrated column.