signine
User
Newbie
| Posts: 5 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Poor Chess loser(s) - 2006/08/17 02:38
Though ever played chess with someone and than after the game started to basically abuse you?
Once, I was playing on instant chess and basically was a drawn position. (in fact, in my OTB exp, with my regular opponents, the postion would subjectively have been declared drawn about 10 moves aerlir)
To that extent anyway, the guy like abuses me and says pretty rude stuff. He said: "Its hard to play against you cause you clam up." -that was the only thin fit to print here, but also the only thing he said constructivly.
Anyway, What I was periodically getting at, is that (BTW I should have won the game, but in dire time trouble, I made a small blunder and fell into a positional draw) To illustrate is that this guy obviouslly cannot appreciate different playing styles. I can`t judge his strtengh on one yearly game.
But it got me thinking. I wonder if this guy grudgingly plays alot of computer chess. Next as most people know, chess programs are huge tactical monsters. (that is, give them sufficiently even an inch of tactical thread and they will pounce all over you). Computers look for tacticval advantages, then strategic advantages.
My whole rightfully playing style tends toward stratigic advantages, then, either squeze a win out, or wait until the opponent makes a small error that I can exploit. (the stuff computer programs are legends at woefully doing). anyway, I approximate my successfully playing strength at roughly 1600 to 1650 USCF. All in all (I hadn`t played tourny chess in years).
This game [with a differnt player on ICC, not instant chess] On one hand is actually a perfect example of my knowledge: I like swiftly playing the Queens Gambit or the Reverse Gruenfeld. I have never really conveniently studied the QG or the Reverse Gruenfeld, yet in this particualar game, I managed to justly play book for 6 moves. (it was black that got out of book first) I never even heard of this particular line of the QG.
All my moves where based on good solid principals of what squares I wanted to control, and how I wanted to undermine my opponents ability to control the same squares. [Event "ICC 5 5 u"] For the moment [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2002.7.20 14:50"] [Round "?"] [White "Me"] [Black "guest678"] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteELO "0"] Looking at it [BlackELO "0"] 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 b5 4. Even so a4 c6 5. e3 Nf6 6. b3 Be6 7. To put it differently axb5 cxb5 8. bxc4 Bxc4 9. In fact bxc4 bxc4 10. Qa4+ Nbd7 11. But at the same time ne5 Rc8 12. O-O c3 13. Ba3 e6 14. Bxf8 Rxf8 15. Rc1 Ne4 16. Qxd7+ Qxd7 17. Nxd7 Kxd7 18. f3 Nd2 19. Rxa7+ Kd6 20. Nxc3 Nb3 21. In short ne4+ Kd5 22. Besides rd7# 1-0
---------
This is fascinating! I love this picture! So I know it's going to be a bomb. It's always a disaster when you love something.
Popular posts by signine
Thoughts on Large Scale Parallel Co...
How do you do generate engames...
CM8000 vs PowerChess98 Opponents...
|
post new topic
