red hot pawn vs OTB chess

red hot pawn vs OTB chess


Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.


03 Apr 02
03 Apr 02

a week ago i had the pleasure of meeting 1 of your players OTB (over
the board) he was bragging about the playing strength of i beilieve an
1800 player here on this site.after we had played i had come to the
conclusion that red hot pawn must be an over rated site as his abillity
to assess positions would have been equal to a player rated of 1200
in a national rating.the player even had the nerve to try and inform
me of chess program strentghs and which were strongest and so on
the problem with all that is he had no idea on what he was talking
about i understand he told me that correspondence chess is much
more difficult then OTB this is in no way true the difference it makes
and can only make on the internet is that a computer program user
has less chance of winning a game as a player has all the time in the
world to annylise ones next move playing a completely positional know i had no idea TAL2 was the strongest chess engine in
the world today....LMAOand its a bargain price too of $59.95


29 Nov 01
03 Apr 02

Well, I wish I knew what you where talking about.

Sentences do end with periods and start with a capital letter. Try that
sometime and we might all understand you better.

If you want a ranking of some of the strongest chess playing
programs currently available, try this site:

Of course, TAL2 might actually be a chess playing computer and not a
software program - sorry, can't help with those.

As far as correspondence chess and OTB are concerned, one can
easily play a stronger game via correspondence, but it takes a lot of
work to out do a strong opponent!


03 Apr 02
04 Apr 02

My point was just that the player in question in no way was rated 1800
and if he was?He would have at least shown some decent ability of
knowledge and knowledge in practice even a lil opening knowledge
would have been good!!!I man by calculating national or FIDE ratings
against the rating system here i would be rated about prove
my point i have started to games here on the site.In one of the
games im playing polish opening rated by GM G Kasparov as the
weakest opening for white and the other im going to transpose black
sicilian defence to accelerated dragon then QGD meran variation which
is another of whites weaker lines.


Leeds, England

09 Feb 02
05 Apr 02

To summarise the main point of your messages. Does RHP state that
their ratings are equivalent to standard FIDE type ratings?. I am not
sure that RHP claim that.
Certainly I think that it is possible to analyze a move better on RHP
than OTB because you do not have an opponent tapping his fingers
whilst waiting for you to move when playing on RHP.
Also I suspect (although do not know) that you can enhance your RHP
rating by playing weaker players all the time. I appreciate that you will
gain points slower than by beating stronger players but you will still
lenhance your ratings.


15 Jan 02
07 Apr 02

You talk about an opponent "tapping his fingers on the table"...
That's annoying and distracting. Does FIDE tolerate that? I don't know.
You know, some years ago I was playing an older man, quite
experienced player, but he got on my nerves. You see, he was
HUMMING all the time. If I remember wel it was Verdi's 'Triumph
March' from his opera Aida. In the end I couldn't concentrate anymore
and I trapped myself in a silly stalemate, in a position where I had
quite an edge. But...
Just imagine, months and months later I was playing in my first
tpurnament in a crammed playing hall. I played, as usual with White,
1.d4 followed by 1.-/f5 (the Dutch of which I knew so little) and all of a
sudden, somewhere nearby , a humming started. Yes, definitely,
the 'Triump March' again' at another board. I was so upset and angry
with the (for the rest so lovable and friendly old Polish man with a
Luxemburg passport) I couldn't possibly concentrate any longer. I was
checkmated in... 8 moves. Went to the bar for (too) many beers, took
a cab home. Set up the position again and saw the (short) drama
before me once more. Ever since I hate opponents playing the Dutch
and will never, never play it myself! Oh well, it's all in the game I


a bit closer please

08 Dec 01
06 Apr 02

Perhaps your chess skills are great, but it appears that in general neither your ability to coherently
express thought, nor your general logical skill level is sound.

The closest I could get to making any sense of your ramblings is that:
1) You met someone whose abilites and sensibilities in chess you do not hold in great esteem.
2) This person is enthusiastic about red hot pawn in general, and one player in particular.
3) You conclude from your assessment of this one persons ability that all players at RHP must be
weak, and that some RHP player rated over 1800 - who is NOT the person you have met - cannot
therefore actually be a good player.
4) You further confuses different rating systems, foolishly trying to directly compare RHP rankings
with those of national and international chess orgnizations, which is an apples to oranges type of
comparison. The RHP rating system could just have easily been between 0 and 100 or between
-1,000,000 to +1,000,000. Because the numeric ratings at RHP are about the same size as FIDE
ratings, you incorrectly decide to equate them.
5) You then feel you will prove something (I'm not sure what - perhaps that players here with
ratings over 1800 are not good players?) by playing weak openings against two random players
who have played few games here and hence are of unknown strength and ability. The exact nature
of what you are trying to show by this is unfathomable. For instance, I know next to nothing about
openings besides the names of a few. You could play whatever opening you chose against me and
probably beat me, assuming you are as good a player as you say. All you are going to show is that
you were able to beat that particular player; somehow you seem conclude that winning these
games will prove something about RHP or its high ranked players..

Putting all this together, I'm going to make a hypothesis or two.
One hypothesis is that in anything beyond chess playing you are a gibbering idiot.
An alternate hypothesis is that you post without the slightest attention to what you've actually
written. Perhaps try making a bit more sense in the future.

But hey, while you are here at RHP, enjoy your games!
It's a lovely site, and don't forget to see how you too can get a fancy star next to your name!


The Diplomat

Slightly Left :D

22 Jun 01
06 Apr 02

And too funny! I have noticed as of late a few "new" people hopping
on the forums and bragging that they are just awesome...and that
they are better than the most established players here.

A lot of crap!

A real chess player will walk in..not brag and prove himself before he
judges others and their abilities.

I never said a bad thing about the top players...and well still
won't...but I feel I have earned the right to talk about what is going
on in the top twenty since I have proved I have a right to be there.

If this idiot feels that a person over 1800 (and there are only three)
here is not good...well let him beat one...then he can talk!

As for the rating crap...he cannot compare USCF or FIDE OTB ratings
to CORRESPONDANCE CHESS ratings! Complete different system and

I am USCF 2219...but only 1670 here...big deal. Plus there is no
(damn I can't think of the starts with a P...but you play 20
games before you are given a real rating) here you start @ 1200 and
have to work yourself up.

He has no if he wants to learn...let him.

And as for Garry Kasparov's "rating" on the Polish defense...Tony
Miles kicked Karpov's ass with it when Anatoly was WC. There are alot
worse defenses than it.



03 Apr 02
06 Apr 02

RHP Member No.16

25 Feb 01
06 Apr 02

P.... provisional

The Diplomat

Slightly Left :D

22 Jun 01
06 Apr 02 totally escaped there...major brain lock.