Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 29 Jul '16 18:08
    Suzianne has noticed (and brought to my attention) evidence that Trisha80,
    a supposed 'new' writer at RHP, is being impersonated by FreakyKBH.
    (Some trolls violate RHP's Terms of Service by creating multiple accounts.)
    Suzianne pointed out some practically identical distinctive phrases used
    at nearly the same times by both FreakyKBH and Trisha80, who seem
    to have practically the same opinions on every major issue so far.

    I can say that it's unusual for a real woman (who Trisha80 claims to be)
    to hate feminism and feminists passionately and enjoy putting down
    other women while apparently craving the approval of very sexist men.

    I have noticed that Trisha80 plays a large proportion of her games with FreakyKBH.
    Now look at this ongoing game between Trisha80 (white) and FreakyKBH (black):
    http://www.redhotpawn/chess/chess-game-history.php?gameid=11806453

    I would submit there's ample evidence that this game is fake or fixed.
    In particular, look at FreakyKBH's move 30...Qc8-e6, where he moves
    his queen to a square where it can be safely captured in two ways.
    After 104 moves (74 moves later), his queen is still there--uncaptured!
    It's unbelievable that in 74 moves both players failed to notice that possibility.

    Everyone except a chess idiot should be able to tell that this game is *not genuine*.
    And does not faking a chess game violate RHP's Terms of Service?
  2. 29 Jul '16 18:41
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Suzianne has noticed (and brought to my attention) evidence that Trisha80,
    a supposed 'new' writer at RHP, is being impersonated by FreakyKBH.
    (Some trolls violate RHP's Terms of Service by creating multiple accounts.)
    Suzianne pointed out some practically identical distinctive phrases used
    at nearly the same times by both FreakyKBH and Trisha80, who s ...[text shortened]... at this game is *not genuine*.
    And does not faking a chess game violate RHP's Terms of Service?
    Three questions:
    1. Why exactly do you believe that the fact that a piece could have been taken but wasn't is evidence of a game being fixed?
    2. Why would anyone care if Trisha80 and FreakKBH are the same person?
    3. Don't you have something better to you with your time than analyze the chess game of people simply because you disagree with their ideology?
  3. 29 Jul '16 19:03
    Originally posted by quackquack
    Three questions:
    1. Why exactly do you believe that the fact that a piece could have been taken but wasn't is evidence of a game being fixed?
    2. Why would anyone care if Trisha80 and FreakKBH are the same person?
    3. Don't you have something better to you with your time than analyze the chess game of people simply because you disagree with their ideology?
    Further down the line Duchess will introduce the following ....
    1.Rape
    2.White ,right wing racist males .
    3.Call somebody illiterate .
    4.A catastrophe that she witnessed or happened to walk by ( unscathed)
    5.A famous Chinese person .
    6.How she ( she,debatable) was brought up in the UK but uses American spelling .
    7.How brilliant she is .
    8.Famous people she has as friends.
    9. Totally over the top usage of ** asterisks **
    10.....?
  4. 29 Jul '16 19:03 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by quackquack
    Three questions:
    1. Why exactly do you believe that the fact that a piece could have been taken but wasn't is evidence of a game being fixed?
    2. Why would anyone care if Trisha80 and FreakKBH are the same person?
    3. Don't you have something better to you with your time than analyze the chess game of people simply because you disagree with their ideology?
    On move 30, FreakyKBH moved his queen to a square where it could be safely captured
    by a pawn (in two different ways), and he has left it there for 74 moves so far. He has
    *not* moved it away and Trisha80 has *not* captured it. Only a chess idiot could
    *sincerely* believe that *both* players could be so blind in any *genuine* game.
    I know that Quackquack (rated 1669) is *not* quite a chess idiot, so I conclude that
    Quackquack's pretending to be that idiot here to serve his usual dishonest trolling.
    (On many other issues, Quackquack does not pretend to be an idiot; he cannot help being one.)

    RHP's Terms of Service (which Quackquack presumably has signed) clearly state that
    it's wrong for anyone to create multiple accounts. But the lying troll Quackquack shows
    that he has no objection to anyone lying and blatantly violating RHP's Terms of Service.

    Who cares? Shall we ask the players who are active in the clans or leagues at RHP
    how they feel about anyone else faking or fixing chess games? Or about people creating
    multiple accounts so they can play themselves and throw games to themselves?

    I already know that the extreme right-wing racist, sexist lying troll Quackquack supports other
    extreme right-wing racist, sexist lying trolls, particularly when they attack me--their ultimate enemy.
    I note with absolute disdain the troll Quackquack's typical dishonest attempt to excuse
    a blatant violation of RHP's Terms of Service by claiming it's all only about 'ideology'.
  5. 29 Jul '16 19:24
    Originally posted by phil3000 to Quackquack
    Further down the line Duchess will introduce the following ....
    1.Rape
    2.White ,right wing racist males .
    3.Call somebody illiterate .
    4.A catastrophe that she witnessed or happened to walk by ( unscathed)
    5.A famous Chinese person .
    6.How she ( she,debatable) was brought up in the UK but uses American spelling .
    7.How brilliant she i ...[text shortened]...
    8.Famous people she has as friends.
    9. Totally over the top usage of ** asterisks **
    10.....?
    The troll Phil3000's usual dishonest attempts at diversion by personally attacking me cannot
    destroy the evidence that the game between Trisha80 and FreakyKBH is *not genuine*.
    But FreakyKBH may give Phil3000 a pat on his head for trying so hard to help him.
  6. Subscriber mchill
    cryptogram
    29 Jul '16 19:29 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Suzianne has noticed (and brought to my attention) evidence that Trisha80,
    a supposed 'new' writer at RHP, is being impersonated by FreakyKBH.
    (Some trolls violate RHP's Terms of Service by creating multiple accounts.)
    Suzianne pointed out some practically identical distinctive phrases used
    at nearly the same times by both FreakyKBH and Trisha80, who s ...[text shortened]... at this game is *not genuine*.
    And does not faking a chess game violate RHP's Terms of Service?
    There is a good chance you are correct, but this issue should be forwarded to the officials at Red Hot Pawn. I doubt the people here in the debates section can do much about it.
  7. 29 Jul '16 19:49
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    On move 30, FreakyKBH moved his queen to a square where it could be safely captured
    by a pawn (in two different ways), and he has left it there for 74 moves so far. He has
    *not* moved it away and Trisha80 has *not* captured it. Only a chess idiot could
    *sincerely* believe that *both* players could be so blind in any *genuine* game.
    I know that Quack ...[text shortened]... cuse
    a blatant violation of RHP's Terms of Service by claiming it's all only about 'ideology'.
    You have a pathetic life so you get joy in insult others. But, you created this topic so let's not dodge the questions.
    (1) If you believe that someone creates multiple accounts to boost their rating then wouldn't they take pieces when the opportunity arose? The fact that the game continued shows the contrary, it was probably a legitimate game.
    (2) You haven't played (at least under the name Duchess64. Perhaps you play under a different name) on this site in years, so why exactly would you care if someone has multiple accounts? Why would anyone care if someone has multiple accounts. The people who run the site and want to collect fees for subscriptions and ads can decide whether the terms of service are worth enforcing. But, personally I just want to play someone. I can see why someone would object to engine use (you want a legitimate game) but it doesn't make a difference to me at all whether someone has more than one account. Why do you believe I should care?
  8. 29 Jul '16 20:04
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    The troll Phil3000's usual dishonest attempts at diversion by personally attacking me cannot
    destroy the evidence that the game between Trisha80 and FreakyKBH is *not genuine*.
    But FreakyKBH may give Phil3000 a pat on his head for trying so hard to help him.
    " woof, woof "
  9. 29 Jul '16 20:22 / 6 edits
    Originally posted by mchill
    There is a good chance you are correct, but this issue should be forwarded to the officials at Red Hot Pawn.
    I doubt the people here in the debates section can do much about it.
    I have no doubt whatsoever that a game in which *both players fail for 74 moves (so far)
    to notice that a queen can be safely captured by a pawn* is *not a genuine game*.

    I mention this evidence here because FreakyKBH apparently has a few allies (other trolls)
    who have been busy defending his extremely loud denial that he writes (or plays) as Trisha80,
    while hurling insults at Suzianne and me. But FreakyKBH's bluster does not intimidate us.
    Even Vivify (who's no friend of mine) already seems to believe that FreakyKBH is Trisha80.
    And it may be of interest to see the dishonest lengths to which some of the usual
    suspects (e.g. Quackquack) go to defend another lying troll.

    Unfortunately, the 'officials at RedHotPawn' have practically stopped enforcing the Terms
    of Service in all except a few of the most obvious cases. I can name several people who
    are known (even having admitted it) to have created multiple accounts and have not been banned.
    It's generally believed that most of the highest rated players cheat by using chess engines.

    Mchill also may note that none of FreakyKBH's troll apologists (Quackquack or Phil3000)
    have bothered to attempt to explain *in terms of chess reasoning* why FreakyKBH should
    move his queen to a square where Trisha80 could safely capture it with a pawn and
    both players should allow that situation to continue for 74 moves so far. Of course,
    that makes no sense whatsoever in terms of chess reasoning in a *genuine game*.
    So Quackquack and Phil3000 quickly resort to their usual diversionary insults at me.
  10. 29 Jul '16 20:35 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by quackquack
    You have a pathetic life so you get joy in insult others. But, you created this topic so let's not dodge the questions.
    (1) If you believe that someone creates multiple accounts to boost their rating then wouldn't they take pieces when the opportunity arose? The fact that the game continued shows the contrary, it was probably a legitimate game.
    (2) Y ...[text shortened]... rence to me at all whether someone has more than one account. Why do you believe I should care?
    The pathological liar Quackquack keeps lying tirelessly, aiming to fool any idiots here.

    "...it was probably a legitimate game."
    --Quackquack

    Absurd! Quackquack's either a chess idiot or pretending to be a chess idiot.
    Can Quackquack cite any other game (FreakyKBH's rated 1389 and *not* a beginner)
    between non-beginners in which *both players fail to notice for 74 moves (so far) that
    a queen can be safely captured by a pawn*?

    "You haven't played (at least under the name Duchess64)."
    --Quackquack

    Another whopping lie by Quackquack. How pathetic for Quackquack to fantasize that
    his obvious lie could deceive anyone who's not an idiot. It's easy to look up my record.
    At RHP, I have played 67 games (37 wins, 18 draws, 12 losses) and am rated 2097.
    That's all there in my only account ever at RHP, Duchess64.
  11. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    29 Jul '16 20:41
    Originally posted by phil3000
    " woof, woof "
    That's a good non-female.
  12. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    29 Jul '16 20:46
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Suzianne has noticed (and brought to my attention) evidence that Trisha80,
    a supposed 'new' writer at RHP, is being impersonated by FreakyKBH.
    (Some trolls violate RHP's Terms of Service by creating multiple accounts.)
    Suzianne pointed out some practically identical distinctive phrases used
    at nearly the same times by both FreakyKBH and Trisha80, who s ...[text shortened]... at this game is *not genuine*.
    And does not faking a chess game violate RHP's Terms of Service?
    You fool!
    Isn't it obvious that GrampyBobby is trisha80 who is FreakyKBH?!?

    Do you think it's just a coincidence that no one has heard from 'him' ever since 'she' came on the scene?

    The TRUTH is, all three of them are really a taxi driver from Jersey named Raoul.

    How could you have missed something so glaringly obvious?
  13. 29 Jul '16 20:53 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    You fool!
    Isn't it obvious that GrampyBobby is trisha80 who is FreakyKBH?!?

    Do you think it's just a coincidence that no one has heard from 'him' ever since 'she' came on the scene?

    The TRUTH is, all three of them are really a taxi driver from Jersey named Raoul.

    How could you have missed something so glaringly obvious?
    Readers should note that FreakyKBH instantly resorts to trolling with distracting nonsense.

    FreakyKBH makes no attempt to explain the absurd situation in his chess game with
    Trisha80 in which FreakyKBH (rated 1389 and not a beginner) moved his queen to a
    square where Trisha80 could safely capture it with a pawn and has kept it there for
    74 moves so far while Trisha80 has avoided capturing it. Despite Quackquack's
    lying on his behalf, even FreakyKBH does *not* seem to assume that most readers will
    be gullible enough to believe that his game with Trisha80 could be a *genuine* game.

    How many other trolls (besides Quackquack) are ready to lie outrageously in defending FreakyKBH's lies?
  14. Standard member lemon lime
    blah blah blah
    29 Jul '16 21:01
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    You fool!
    Isn't it obvious that GrampyBobby is trisha80 who is FreakyKBH?!?

    Do you think it's just a coincidence that no one has heard from 'him' ever since 'she' came on the scene?

    The TRUTH is, all three of them are really a taxi driver from Jersey named Raoul.

    How could you have missed something so glaringly obvious?
    One of your games looks like a variation of give away chess, without the rule that says if you can take a piece you must take a piece. I'm surprised Duchess is 'picking up' on this as though it's a clue of some sort.

    Actually, it is a clue of sorts... it tells me you've agreed to play a game in this way, as maybe a way of tweaking interest in the Identitygate scandal?
  15. Subscriber mchill
    cryptogram
    29 Jul '16 21:06 / 1 edit
    Unfortunately, the 'officials at RedHotPawn' have practically stopped enforcing the Terms of Service in all except a few of the most obvious cases. I can name several people who are known (even having admitted it) to have created multiple accounts and have not been banned. It's generally believed that most of the highest rated players cheat by using chess engines.

    Mchill also may note that none of FreakyKBH's troll apologists (Quackquack or Phil3000) have bothered to attempt to explain *in terms of chess reasoning* why FreakyKBH should move his queen to a square where Trisha80 could safely capture it with a pawn and both players should allow that situation to continue for 74 moves so far. Of course, that makes no sense whatsoever in terms of chess reasoning in a *genuine game*. So Quackquack and Phil3000 quickly resort to their usual diversionary insults at me.



    Your point is noted, and If what you are saying is true about Red Hot Pawn's not enforcing their Terms of Service, this is indeed an unfortunate situation, but hardly worth creating any bad feelings with people here.

    Your rating would indicate you are a strong chess player. I'd suggest you focus your energy on a few sections of ICCF Chess rather than debating this issue with people who have no power to change this situation