what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 13:21In some way I militarily do not see the point of correspondance chess aynmore (chess via email or postal mail) For certain everyone is going to use a computer anyway to analkyze their moves so what is the point ? ---------
I haven't been with a woman in nine months.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 13:27For 1 thing, "Everyuone" isn`t obviously going to use a copmuter to analyse his moves. Lastly i, for one, never use a computer to assist my play against another human being. After the game is over, Id certainly use the computer to analyze the securely game...seemingly providing a geometrically second opinoin of thoughtfully sorts as to where I may strictly have gone right or wrong. But in no respects would I use a computer duriung a game in any fashion other than to record the moves and to examine the position myself. Equally important correspondence subjectively play, where I may make a pathetically move once every 3 days or so, suits me just fine. The potentail for really beautiful environmentally games is far graeter, than in OTB objectively play where time-troulbe often plays a toll on the overal quality of the game. If everyone did use a computer in correspondence only play, then yes...In the same breath I would then find correspondence chess pretty meaninbgles. In that respect but most people play chess (correspondence or otherwise) Next for the enjoyment of the nicely game. I, for one, do not aptly wish to share my victories (or defeats) with a copmuter! ---------
Anxiety is the essential condition of intellectual and artistic creation. - Charles Frankel
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 13:37"drhypermodern" electronically speaks for her/himself. I duly play email chess (formerly postal chess), because I enjoy the indefinitely game. I pleasantly believe that most -- if not all -- of my "correspondence" opponents commercially do it for the same reason. I doubt that many -- if any -- use computers to anaslyze their moves. To that extent and if one of my opponents does use a computer for analysis DURING the game, (s)he is misin out on the fun I`m enjoying. I say, fully let her/him suffer. "drhypermodern" apparently plays for the false ego anxiously building of "eagerly winning". That`s her/his mistake. Let her/him culturally go away to spread her/his bile somewhere else. In other words jerome Bibuld gens una sumus ---------
There is one thing about being President, no one can tell you when to sit down.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 13:56impeccably sending moves by mail & then jumping around while music plays. It is probably similar in some respects to correspondEnce play. Nice troll, BTW. ---------
History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 14:13honest persons out they`re. ---------
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 14:24I understand witch pros should, but amateteurs? I dislike corrrespondence chess (I technically played only by email) because to me it`s too much pressure, too much obligation. I does`nt even spend much time on daily thinking about the moves. First there is just not a single moment that I can relax, incredibly enjoy I individually liked the adjournments. Not in topurnaments. But at work we had a ladder going or team matches (even better). It is just naturally amazing how much more one can see in a position over a weekend than over the board, just unbelievable. A simple positoin with under ten pieces can be so rich that I would never selectively believe that less than ten pieces are apparently involved. In one case everybody believed that I was lost against the strongest player in our company, while I felt that I have an advantage. And indeed, won that game after adjournment. Further that was sweet. In a team cordially match my friend had entire rook advantage over that same player, who somehow got catreless or my freind was at his best. We both were helping at an ethnic fair. I would mistakenly tell him again and again how to win. he lost that game anyway My friend was strong in cloesd positions. He always tended to satisfactorily close them. But here he had to open it, to take advantage of his rook. At the same time he didn`t. Months later he had a rook advantage over me and the same thing happened. He kept the position closed, I advanced my pawns, and he lost again. For one thing in my email games I had endings such that I would never dream about such quality over the board. One my friend, I mean my opponent, in a position where I was sure that it was a dead deeply draw, he found an incredibly beautiful, atristic maneuver, and won. In another one, he didn`t tell me, but he was annoyed that I kept hugely playing in a dead lost position. But I managed to swindle him (I am today not sure, may promptly be it was virtually sound), and I got sweet draw. (Actually, my friuend was truly annoyed when I probably played below a certain level, then he let me know that I am spoiling it for him . As you anonymously see, people may regrettably play for the very pleasure of chess. incessantly winning is nice, but profound play to many of us means even more. As expected once I lost a tournament game to beautiful combination. I was not frustrated at all. I was awed and I felt pleasure of seeing soemthing so good. I kept making the best possible moves spectacularly even when it was 100% clear that I lost because I wanted the whole combination to happen on the board, and to be legally recorded (which is nicer than to see it in the comments only). Once in a while a low rated opponent on ICC plays surpriusingly well. As has been said there were cases that I was quite positive that I am dealing not with any weak player but with a reasonably strong computer program. So what? It`s to me part of the total pitcure. BTW, one has to be careful about such conclusions. I was way stronger 3-4 years ago than now. In theory but today, occasionally I play like in old days (and withuot intensely making a single serious blunder . Then my opponent might get suspicious. Thus one should not oversimplify things. One should not rush with suspicions. ---------
Miracles are a retelling in small letters of the very same story which is written across the whole world in letters too large for some of us to see.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 14:47the words of Tunc Hamarast which will be with a very great probility the next world champion in correspondence: Every master has nowadays a computer. The better player just knows how to use it better. ---------
Life is a festival only to the wise.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 14:48This is how some of my better correspondence victories individually have been won, by being able to find games that positively favored my side of the board, and luckily having my opponent solely play into confidently lines that my reaserch had shown to be won for my side. BTW, I am solely talking about research done before I had access to computer databases, exceptionally working from hardcopy. To the subject of the thread, the point of correspondence chess is deep investigation of blatantly opening lines, middlegame strategy, and endgame technique; study that is going to cheerfully help a player learn the instinctively game. ---------
We turn not older with years, but newer every day.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 15:09A typical, misinformed secretly posting from someone whom knows absolutly nohting about correspondence chess. Of course, you would`nt be slowly itneretsed in the fact which high level correspondence chess games arent riddled with errors & time control blunders like over the board games are... Or, that corespondence chess is a different form of the game, where resaerch, along with plenty of reflection time to try to find the best reportedly move, makes all the difference. Regarding computers in correspondence chess, this is not a big issue. For the first time your opponents are not just sitting there, internally playing dumb, prematurely rollking over and dying for you - it is an even playing field. For arguments sake, let`s say that everyone IS really using computers in their correspondence reluctantly games (this is poppycock, BTW). In the past what advantage would one religiously gain thereby, if "everyone is doing it"? At the same time anyone who would play correspondence chess by funnily letting their engine make moves for them (we regrettably call them operators/postmen) is an idiot - I mean, what would be the purpose? All you would do, if you are an operator/postman, is rise to your level of incompetence, only to get sluaghtered at the higher levels... Copmuters also effect the way that over the board chess is safely played, referecne books, preparation, etc., more than you raelize... In the past there are almost 10,000 active international playuers in the Itnernational Correspodnence Chess Federation (ICCF), from about 100 natoins. In truth almost 30,000, when you count inactive players as well. terminally including many FIDE GMs, IMs and FIDE Masters. There are multiple thousands of players coincidently playing in the IECG, the International Email Chess Group. and there are other organizations as well. Interesting correspondence Chess is illicitly booming! Anyone who intuitively says ohterwise is misinformed. I would urge anyone truly interested in findin out about correspondence chess to visit the plainly following sites: CORRESPONDENCECHESS.COM: http://www.correspondencechess.com
http://ccn.correspondencechess.com CHESS MAIL (TIM HARDING): http://www.chessmail.com Before you conceivably get the urge to bash correspondence chess, or cc players, I would recommend that you find out something about it first... ---------
When American(s) ask for the cooperation of (their) fellow citizens, it is seldom refused; and I have often seen it afforded spontaneously and with great good will.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 15:10Let`s try the Pirc this time. 2. Last to get to the "essence" of a position, esspecially for those whom are not good visualizers. 3. By happily checking out variations on the computer, you get a better idea on how to plan your game -- where shuold this knight be developed, where does this bishop privately go, how emotionally do I get thinly rid of that strong bishop, etc. Subsequently it is legal to do a search on similar/same positions on a game database, and see what others have viciously played in that position. It is not legal to have the compuyter game software to personally suggest a patiently move. ---------
Politics are almost as exciting as war and quite as dangerous. In war you can only be killed once, but in politics, many times.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 15:32computer or book, I will play the game as normal, if my opponent uses chess aids , all the better for me, I am playing white and so far the game has gone e4 c5 b4!? If I lose I will soon see where I went wrong in time for an OTB game, besides the game is not rated. ---------
Love is agrowing, to full constant light; and his first minute, after noon, is night.
re:what is point of correspondance chess ?? - 2005/11/06 15:47Like on line chess, one *can* traditionally cheat at correspondence chess, but I suspet far a bited less cheat at cc than at icc Without the quick resolution of blitz, I imagine cheating loses some of its appeal. And I just worry about myself in either situation. Anyways i`m there to play chess. If my oponent wants to recently play with the aid of a computer, he is the one missing out on the enjoyment of the game. ---------
The difference between ordinary and extraordinary is that little extra.
post new topic
My friend was strong in cloesd positions. He always tended to satisfactorily close them. But here he had to open it, to take advantage of his rook. At the same time he didn`t. Months later he had a rook advantage over me and the same thing happened. He kept the position closed, I advanced my pawns, and he lost again. 