|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: 'Modeling' recent debates using chess | |||||||||||||||||||||||
DNAunion Inactive Member |
quote: I’ve lost all of my best games (long story short, I had no computer and the games were stored on floppy: I took them to my university to create a new copy on a second floppy and left the disks in the drive and somewhere on the lab table when I had to run to my class — when I came back, the disks were gone). Of those games I still have records of, this one probably shows my true abilities best. This is from a USCF postal tournament. The two players, in alphabetical order, were DNAunion (1040 postal rating) and Sam Botshon (1346 postal rating). The ratings are based on the old (now, really old) postal rating system the USCF used, which did not correspond with OTB ratings (trying to compare them is like comparing apples to oranges). White:King on g1 Queen on b1 Rooks on a1, g2 Bishops on d3, g5 Knight on e2 Pawns on a4, c3, c4, d5, e3, e4, h2 Black:King on g8 Queen on a5 Rooks on e8, f8 Bishop on b7 Knights on d7, h5 Pawns on a6, b6, c5, d6, f7, g7 Was Black’s positional pawn sacrifice (an earlier 1. ... e4 2. fxe4) justified? It put White’s pawns in a mess, hemmed in his light-squared bishop, and his e5 square is very weak and ready to be occupied by Black's knight at some point, and it blocked up the center more — which helps elevate the value of knights relative to bishops. Black's plans for the near future include 1. ... Ne5, 2. ... Bc8, and either 3. ... Bh3, 3. ... Bg4, or 3. ... Bd7. On the other hand, Black’s queen’s mobility is extremely limited (not that White’s is extremely better), his pawn structure is less than perfect (though not at bad as White’s), and, he is down a pawn. With White to move in this position, who is better, and why? Lines should be given to support your judgment. PS: I did not use a computer in this game, just my own abilities. Anyone responding should do likewise. [This message has been edited by DNAunion, 04-03-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Amlodhi Inactive Member |
Yes, I do conflate stalemate and draw. And I will probably do it again. To me a stalemate is a drawn contest, a deadlock where neither side can make headway.
For me it just doesn't make any difference whether it's perpetual check, insufficient material, draw by repetition or lone king can't move without moving into check (the precise usage). But to suggest that my loose usage of the term stalemate means I don't understand these precise situations after 35+ years of playing the game is just silly. So yes, in the proper parlance, the computer didn't "stalemate" you, though it could have easily enough. It opted for a "draw" instead. But that was hardly the point. The point was that when it allowed the double attack it gave up its only reasonable chance for a win and from that point on a stalemate or a draw was the best it could hope for. And my general use of the term "stalemate" doesn't change that point. If you are rated at the 2000+ level then you are certainly more proficient at the game than I. With that level of proficiency you should have no trouble understanding that the computer made a poor move. I may not be as good at chess as you are, but I'm good enough to see that. I'm also good enough to solve your puzzle and I don't appreciate being called a liar. I did the work. Get over it. Amlodhi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DNAunion Inactive Member |
quote: Too bad for you that's neither the definition nor usage of the term stalemate in chess. Every beginner learns what stalemate means...I guess you are just now getting to that level.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DNAunion Inactive Member |
quote: Where did I call you a liar? I didn't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
that DNAunion is getting into ugly conflicts with more that one other member?
I must SUSPECT that it is because of some bad methodology on DNAunion's part. I SUGGEST (as in official administrative warning) that you get your massive ego in check (edit: inadvertent pun there). Adminnemooseus [This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 04-11-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DNAunion Inactive Member |
Uhm excuse me, but...he stated I called him a liar, but I didn't.
I must wonder why you would have a problem with me trying to defend myself against an unwarranted and false accusation. ****************************Came back to add... My point has been made. The last statement on the matter was that I had called him a liar, which is not true. I corrected the situation so that the last statement on the matter was the fact that I had not called him a liar. I had originally let the statement slide, but now, with Crashfrog and AbbyLeever - and to some extent Black too - waging a little character assassination war against me in the abiogenesis thread, I felt I needed to make sure no misleading statements were left hanging around. So I'm done in this thread, unless someone responds. [This message has been edited by DNAunion, 04-12-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TechnoCore Inactive Member |
I wonder how much use you have for chess in other areas ?
Do you become more intelligent by playing it, or only good at chess? I'm not a chess player at all. I've just played a few games here and now. But when I was in high school we used to play backwards-chess alot. The aim of the game is to loose your pieces as fast as possible. And if you can "kill" you have to. Really stupid, but fun
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4059 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
DNAunion writes: Uhm excuse me, but...he stated I called him a liar, but I didn't. Actually, you did. In post 57, you wrote:
quote: DNAunion writes: I must wonder why you would have a problem with me trying to defend myself against an unwarranted and false accusation. Even if you want to play the silly game of pointing out that you never directly used the word "liar," the idea that this is an "unwarranted" accusation is simply untenable. It is most certainly warranted based on your statement in post 57. Check and mate. Also, you missed the fact that Percy was not warning you about defending yourself against a true accusation, he was reprimanding you for behaving in such a way as to cause conflicts with numerous board members. In this case, the problem started when you flew off the handle, just because Amlodhi questioned the self-proclaimed brilliance of your play against your son's computer. It would be foolish of you to think that the problem was really his overly general use of the word "stalemate." Your problem was with the stab at your ego, and complaining about his use of the word "stalemate" is more justifiable than complaining because your ego was poked at. If that's not obvious to you, I would guess it is obvious to everyone else, and that sort of behavior is the source of Admin's warning to you. {added by edit: It was Adminemooseus who issued the warning, not Admin Percy; my mistake.} [This message has been edited by truthlover, 04-26-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
DNAunion is under suspension, for (and there is documention of this somewhere) "pissing off" Percy, the owner of this site.
Also, you should use the "Little Red Arrow Reply Button" at the bottom of the message you are replying to, if you are replying to a specific message. Using the "LRARB" causes links to and from to be put in place. Use the big "Post Reply" button, if you are posting a general comment, which is not a response to a specific message. Also, if you see some "coding trick" in a message, you can click on "edit" at the bottom of the message, and thus see the raw text behind the message. You will not actually be able to submit an edit, if the message is not your own. Please, no replies to this message, as it would be off-topic clutter, beyond what my message already is. Thanks,Adminnemooseus WHERE TO GO TO START A NEW TOPIC (For other than "Welcome, Visitors!", "Suggestions and Questions", "Practice Makes Perfect", and "Short Subjects") Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation? or too fast closure of threads
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4059 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
Percy writes: My USCF rating was 1349 in 1969...I once beat a 1700! I reckon we'd be just about the same level. I once got an exchange up on a 2207 player in a 1-hour game tournament. He thought he had an attack on my castled king, but I was pretty sure I could refute it. He underestimated me, because I was 1300 or so at the time, and I forked his Q and R with my Knight. I got in a great position, then made the exact same blunder he did, not paying attention to a Knight in an attacking position, and I gave the exchange back and lost a tight game. Horribly disappointing. I did beat a 1900 player the same day, though.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024