14 Mar 15
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemExcept for I've only asked for reccomemended books, analyzed one endgame position posted by Deepthought, posted some facts about why those starting off as adults can't attain super gm chess strength and then this post.
He reminds me of woadman. Every time he posts, it's always "Look at me and how much I know about Chess!!" like he's desperate for people to notice.
My thoughts are that you just desperately want all the "cool kids" on this site to like you so you play the inflammatory troll against anybody who doesnt fit the mold. It's no wonder these forums are all but dead when its filled with trolls like you.
14 Mar 15
2 edits
Originally posted by iChopWoodForFreeIf I'm really a troll, it should be easy enough to ignore me. I see you've judged all of the forums based on a single poster [myself] in a single forum [Only Chess], much like you judged an entire book 'rubbish' because you looked at only one of the problems and deemed it 'too easy' [not incorrect, mind you!].
Except for I've only asked for reccomemended books, analyzed one endgame position posted by Deepthought, posted some facts about why those starting off as adults can't attain super gm chess strength and then this post.
My thoughts are that you just desperately want all the "cool kids" on this site to like you so you play the inflammatory troll a ...[text shortened]... fit the mold. It's no wonder these forums are all but dead when its filled with trolls like you.
I suppose we can expect more posturing and superficial analyses from you in the future, passed off with a phony air of authority that borders on desperate. 🙄
14 Mar 15
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemNo. There you go making assumptions. You're right though, it will be easy to ignore you. I'll just GM you away.
If I'm really a troll, it should be easy enough to ignore me. I see you've judged all of the forums based on a single poster [myself] in a single forum [Only Chess], much like you judged an entire book 'rubbish' because you looked at only one of the problems and deemed it 'too easy' [not incorrect, mind you!].
I suppose we can expect more posturing ...[text shortened]... s from you in the future, passed off with a phony air of authority that borders on desperate. 🙄
14 Mar 15
"By Ray Cheng. Do not purchase this book. Complete rubbish. "
Well I can see where he is coming from, though here he may be a wee bit
off track because the move given is very instructive.
I recall in the early 80's scribbling all over a game because I thought
the game was crap.
I gave the book away because of that one game screaming they only
included it to pad out the pages to rip off chess players.
With engines checking things and writers being able to cut and paste
straight from engines there are very few mistakes in analysis and printing
in modern books. The errors appear when the slap-dash humans like me takes over.
One game ruining a book! Yes. I am a very fussy reader.....and listener.
I really hate Harrison's 'Within Without You' on Sgt Peppers and once
destroyed an LP. by taking a hot needle through that track thinking the
needle would just glide though it and onto 'When I'm 64.'
That was a failure, it buggered up the needle and jumped into the middle
of 'Lovely Rita' the Meter Maid.
Now of course I have my own Sgt Peppers on CD. with the Harrison track
removed putting 'Strawberry Fields' and Penny Lane in it's place.
Maybe the lad should get a copy of the Reti study or something like that
and glue it over the page that offends him.
14 Mar 15
Originally posted by iChopWoodForFreeInternet forums have a strange effect on people. Perfectly rational individuals become these egomaniacs solely interested in showing how the previous poster was WRONG™! If you look in debates or spirituality at any point in the future and look through some threads eventually I guarantee you'll find the words "logical fallacy". You will not find those words in debates in any other medium with anything like the frequency they appear in internet forums.
Except for I've only asked for reccomemended books, analyzed one endgame position posted by Deepthought, posted some facts about why those starting off as adults can't attain super gm chess strength and then this post.
My thoughts are that you just desperately want all the "cool kids" on this site to like you so you play the inflammatory troll a ...[text shortened]... fit the mold. It's no wonder these forums are all but dead when its filled with trolls like you.
It was probably worth pointing out the errors in what I was saying about that endgame in the other thread. Looking back I should have checked with an engine before posting and used a different game where the long range of the bishop was important. The point of my post, that in some circumstances the knight's better and sometimes the bishop is, ended up being obscured though. Your point about patience in the ending was good, but annoying to me as I knew that, doubly so as it was perfectly valid criticism of what I'd done in that ending. It's really easy to irritate people in internet forums and end up in some flame war over nothing.
You're probably dismissing the Cheng book too quickly. It's tremendously difficult to find good examples to illustrate points, as I found when I posted those two game fragments.
The thing about books is that it's tremendously easy to buy lots of chess books and not get much out of them playing strength-wise. My policy with books is not to buy them unless I've got a specific targeted reason. For example, I'd like a copy of Winning Pawn Structures by Alexander Baburin because I want to understand IQP positions and the book is devoted to them. Problem is it costs £155, or £55 second hand, as it's out of print and people try to fleece each other (RRP £15.99). So I'm not buying it unless I come across it at a sane price. I have a targeted good reason for buying that book and an overriding reason not to. Without that one can end up with a huge, but rather pointless, chess library. Which is nice to have, but I've got other things to spend my money on.
So your criticism of the Cheng book may be useful to people, but it's a little premature if it's based on one position. Also it may be targeted at a range of playing strengths so some positions, especially the earlier ones, will be quite simple and as you get into the book you'll find deeper points being made. I don't know I've never looked at it.
14 Mar 15
Originally posted by greenpawn34I always liked that "Within You, Without You" was the first track of side two. That made it easy to start side two with "When I'm 64." There was no need to damage the record.
"By Ray Cheng. Do not purchase this book. Complete rubbish. "
Well I can see where he is coming from, though here he may be a wee bit
off track because the move given is very instructive.
I recall in the early 80's scribbling all over a game because I thought
the game was crap.
I gave the book away because of that one game screaming they on ...[text shortened]... get a copy of the Reti study or something like that
and glue it over the page that offends him.
15 Mar 15
Originally posted by DeepThoughtYou're right. Maybe I overreacted a bit. I still think the book is poop after having worked through more positions but maybe there will be some diamonds in the rough further on.
Internet forums have a strange effect on people. Perfectly rational individuals become these egomaniacs solely interested in showing how the previous poster was WRONG™! If you look in debates or spirituality at any point in the future and look through some threads eventually I guarantee you'll find the words "logical fallacy". You will not find those ...[text shortened]... u get into the book you'll find deeper points being made. I don't know I've never looked at it.
At least you have the decency to not flame me to be a cool kid.
Also, i offer my apologies if my criticisms on your endgame irritated you I was mainly lost in the analysis because I found the position delightful and wasn't thinking how my words might have come across as condescending.
15 Mar 15
Originally posted by iChopWoodForFreeDon't worry about it, it was I who was being irrational when I first read the post, the point I was trying to make was that it's easy to upset people on internet forums.
You're right. Maybe I overreacted a bit. I still think the book is poop after having worked through more positions but maybe there will be some diamonds in the rough further on.
At least you have the decency to not flame me to be a cool kid.
Also, i offer my apologies if my criticisms on your endgame irritated you I was mainly lost in the ana ...[text shortened]... he position delightful and wasn't thinking how my words might have come across as condescending.
Besides, you were right about the charge up the board. The thing is the game was from years ago and I just don't know what was going through my mind. I may have thought the situation was desperate and that I had to do that. Possibly I thought I needed to free the bishop and keep the pawn. Maybe I thought it was a winning plan. I'd typically have 40+ games in progress at the time so there are only a few of them that I really remember.
15 Mar 15
Hi byedidia,
Well I think it's awful, the worst thing they ever did and if you remember
you could not single out the tracks in Sgt Pepper like you could do on a
normal L.P, th tracks blended into each other. so I tried this.
I had about 4 copies of the L.P. then. Still have two.
Was going to add to the endgame debate but has decided to do a new post.