27 Dec 05
1 edit
Originally posted by ItsYouThatIAdoreIt's a shame an amazing talent who could rescue a draw from this hopeless position left the site.Game 1441869
I just checked his profile and it says empty, i was wondering if he gave a reason why??? or just decided to leave???
Thanks.
It's too bad we won't be able to learn from his games anymore.
27 Dec 05
1 edit
Originally posted by Ravello100% match in that game and when called on it he claimed he forced the draw because of his bad pawn weakness which he earned with his first move? It's more than fishy.
So,what do you know about him that I (and the rest of the site) don't know?
Edit:ok,ok,looked at the game and I admit it's fishy.........
27 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderThread 28797
It is a shame; we got along soooooooooooooo well.
http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=28797
27 Dec 05
Originally posted by XanthosNZOther than the fact that he began like a retard that game doesn't seem too fishy to me. A 100% match with a game that short is very weak evidence. Maybe on a longer game or something where he had an amazing combo, but I have had people mess me up like he did that other guy, but in OTB chess, so I know they weren't cheating. It doesn't seem like something that would be a stretch for a player of his supposed caliber. I think it would call for some investigation of his other games since he went from patzer to master, but there are plenty of other explanations for that. It creates suspcion, but this game is no real evidence in itself.
100% match in that game and when called on it he claimed he forced the draw because of his bad pawn weakness which he earned with his first move? It's more than fishy.
27 Dec 05
Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnowForcing a draw in an almost even position against someone 800 points your lesser? Claiming your decision to do so was based on something you opted for on the first move?
Other than the fact that he began like a retard that game doesn't seem too fishy to me. A 100% match with a game that short is very weak evidence. Maybe on a longer game or something where he had an amazing combo, but I have had people mess me up like he did that other guy, but in OTB chess, so I know they weren't cheating. It doesn't seem like some ...[text shortened]... her explanations for that. It creates suspcion, but this game is no real evidence in itself.
An engine would do so but no real person.
27 Dec 05
Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnowThe point is no strong human player would force an early draw in those circumstances against a player rated so far below them.
Other than the fact that he began like a retard that game doesn't seem too fishy to me. A 100% match with a game that short is very weak evidence. Maybe on a longer game or something where he had an amazing combo, but I have had people mess me up like he did that other guy, but in OTB chess, so I know they weren't cheating. It doesn't seem like some ...[text shortened]... her explanations for that. It creates suspcion, but this game is no real evidence in itself.
27 Dec 05
Originally posted by XanthosNZOkay, I see your point now, at first I thought the problem was with how he did it, not that he did it. It does seem very unlikely in that case, but I still wouldn't call it conclusive evidence, just very good reason to look deeper.
Forcing a draw in an almost even position against someone 800 points your lesser? Claiming your decision to do so was based on something you opted for on the first move?
An engine would do so but no real person.