04 Nov 06
2 edits
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2You don't know how to annotate?
Originally posted by Nordlys
[b]A good player who doesn't play strong players will have a slower rating growth, but won't lose regularly against very weak players.
regularly?
did you even look at my games?
@cmsMaster
for your test, do you want me to comment the past move or the next?
Sorry for my understanding, but I'm not English 😉[/b]
Your choice, annotate both player's moves or just yours, I don't really care. All you have to do is explain the meaning behind your moves. i.e. 14.Ne4 - Dominating central squares, white takes over the initiative and places pressure on the backward pawn at f6. And in critical positions giving tactical variations is also important.
That example isn't from a real game.
EDIT:I think I may have misread your question, past moves seem more natural. I don't think it really matters as long as you can prove you understand the positions and logic behind the moves.
04 Nov 06
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2So? You made a stupid point and I called it out. Not my problem.
Originally posted by cmsMaster
[b]Yeah, you used to suck, and now you play at a very advanced level - all in a shorter time than it took me to get to 1571.
My answer was not for you[/b]
04 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by cmsMasterOK! I understand now.
You don't know how to annotate?
Your choice, annotate both moves or just yours, I don't really care. All you have to do is explain the meaning behind your moves. i.e. 14.Ne4 - Dominating central squares, white takes over the initiative and places pressure on the backward pawn at f6. And in critical positions giving tactical variations is also important.
That example isn't from a real game.
Sorry for my english understanding.
I will do it right now.
04 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2Now you've got me interested. As a game annotator myself I'd like to see what you think of the move choices and what was Black's critical error?
Stop being so nice with me! I thought you was trying to help me prove my case.
I don't need you to burry me more. please, wait for my annotations...
04 Nov 06
Hypothetical question... I started playing here with two friends and we all started at 1200. My RHP record is +29 –5 =6 (all but 1 or 2 games against the same two opponents) which gives me a mid-1500 rating (That part is true). Now, what if I’m really a Master (That part is not true), and I decided to join and started playing in tmts. etc. So now all of a sudden I’m beating players rated from 1600-2100 and my rating shoots up to 2200 where it belongs. Am I going to be accused of cheating because I never beat anybody over 1600 before and my rating suddenly took off?
04 Nov 06
Originally posted by masscatI think this is an extremely different situation. Everyone needs to stop throwing out hypotheticals. If you really are that good you'll not be matching up with engines. Granted you may be accused, but if you aren't using an engine you have absolutely nothing to be worried about because you should have absolutely no problem in proving it. Not to mention that you won't be matching up much.
Hypothetical question... I started playing here with two friends and we all started at 1200. My RHP record is +29 –5 =6 (all but 1 or 2 games against the same two opponents) which gives me a mid-1500 rating (That part is true). Now, what if I’m really a Master (That part is not true), and I decided to join and started playing in tmts. etc. So now all of ...[text shortened]... cused of cheating because I never beat anybody over 1600 before and my rating suddenly took off?
There's no point in throwing out these hypothetical situations, do you ever hear new drivers saying "well every once in a while I'm not paying attention and I might swerve or something, this stuff happens. Can I get a DUI?" Obviously there's not an issue here, because if you arren't drunk, you'll be able to prove it.
04 Nov 06
I somewhat Skeptical of the methods for catching cheats anyway. -- sure, they are good enough to catch the obvoius, and stupid ones -- but what of the smarter ones?
I.e -- with my human Understanding of the game [1600], and with the help of an engine, I'm sure I could boost the rating, bluff anotations, etc.
to make things even harder for the mods, what if I used a uncommon (but strongish) engine? --would make this "match-up" stuff harder?
04 Nov 06
Originally posted by cmsMasterOK. Nobody has explained to me what exactly is meant by moves matching an engine. i.e. Playing exactly what Fritz recommends or letting Fritz analyze a game and it not suggesting any improvements. How much time does it get to analyze?
[b] Everyone needs to stop throwing out hypotheticals. b]
04 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by masscatFritz can play GM level chess only using a few seconds per move. So when analyzing a game it doesn't take long to see computer matches. Of course there's more to catching a cheater than matching moves.
OK. Nobody has explained to me what exactly is meant by moves matching an engine. i.e. Playing exactly what Fritz recommends or letting Fritz analyze a game and it not suggesting any improvements. How much time does it get to analyze?
04 Nov 06
3 edits
Originally posted by cmsMasterOK, so be nice with me (for once) because I never did that before and above all, it's in english 😉
I'm just a member of this site, I'm not anywhere near to admin. status, so there's nothing I can do to take away your ban - and from hearing you talk I fully support them. However, you could convince a couple of forum regulars to perhaps believe you by thoroughly annotating a game. I picked out a decisive win against a high level player for you to annota o absolutely nothing to ensure that you are unbanned, but it may help your public image.
Here is the situation after the 27w move:
black as 3 group of pawn, White as 2
I'm controlling the rows D and H, and my knight is willing to go to d6 to control the center and to support my bishop in the attack of his f tower. But I also need to focus on my weakness before making any moves.
If I move Kd6 after his move, I will have to support my G pawn, and I also have to do something about y A pawn; but their is no need to hurry cause it is far from being attacked.
So now, I will try do see what he will do:
First, I see TF8 to prevent Kd6 move, so it will be h5; gxh5; Txh5 and ke3 or kf6
second, Ke3 to force my king to move on a white case after the bishop/knight exchange. so it will be: ke3; Te1; Kxc2; King x2
third, e5: By this move He may be able to have the full control of row F, if so, kd6; Tf8; fxe5; Tf3 to protect e3 for his knight
so here is what can I say about a position, I hope it will be understandable
04 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2I think cmsmaster wanted you to annotate the whole game not just a position, pointing out the reason behind most of your moves and some of your opponent's moves.
OK, so be nice with me (for once) because I never did that before and above all, it's in english 😉
Here is the situation after the 27w move:
black as 3 group of pawn, White as 2
I'm controlling the rows D and H, and my knight is willing to go to d6 to control the center and to support my bishop in the attack of his f tower. But I also need to fo ...[text shortened]... or his knight
so here is what can I say about a position, I hope it will be understandable
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
04 Nov 06
3 edits
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2Ummm I think he ment do the whole game and to be honest that really didnt sound like a 2000 rated players analysis/understanding of the position.
OK, so be nice with me (for once) because I never did that before and above all, it's in english 😉
Here is the situation after the 27w move:
black as 3 group of pawn, White as 2
I'm controlling the rows D and H, and my knight is willing to go to d6 to control the center and to sup or his knight
so here is what can I say about a position, I hope it will be understandable
"do something about y A pawn; but their is no need to hurry cause it is far from being attacked." This especially sounds odd to me.
This is the position I think hes talking about
04 Nov 06
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2I'm not accusing you of being a cheater, but look at this thread to understand what an annotated game should look like:
OK, so be nice with me (for once) because I never did that before and above all, it's in english 😉
Here is the situation after the 27w move:
black as 3 group of pawn, White as 2
I'm controlling the rows D and H, and my knight is willing to go to d6 to control the center and to support my bishop in the attack of his f tower. But I also need t ...[text shortened]... or his knight
so here is what can I say about a position, I hope it will be understandable
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=55256
04 Nov 06
2 edits
Originally posted by BedlamSorry once again for my english, but it is very hard for me to make comment in English!
Ummm I think he ment do the whole game and to be honest that really didnt sound like a 2000 rated players analysis/understanding of the position.
"do something about y A pawn; but their is no need to hurry cause it is far from being attacked." This especially sounds odd to me.
This is the position I think hes talking about
[fen]8/r2p2kp/b1p1p1p1/p1Pn1r2/4NP1P/PP4P1/2BR4/2K4R w - - 0 28[/fen]
Anyway, now I don't "sound" like a 2000???
OK, Try to explain me a technical thing in an other language... And I'm sure you will "sound" strange to!