Originally posted by Shinidoki Nonetheless - is it necessary to spam the forums with the same URL over and over again?
There is a really simple solution to your problem Shinidoki. Don't read it. From your posts that I have read so far in this forum, it seems like you get really cranky then come on the forums.
Originally posted by Bowmann No serious chess enthusiast is going to spend one minute there. No beginner ought to.
Misspellings, misalignment, self-indulgence...
Rubbish 😞
Misspellings? Ha i cant see any and nobody would give a damn about spelling except some old cringe like you maybe.
Misalignment? Yeh sure, show me or shut up.
Self-indulgence? Ha where?
Conclusion: you talk rubbish.
OH and lets see you trying to atleast help players. Lets see your website. Dont have one? Then shut it because I atleast try to help people rather than act like the spelling police.
Originally posted by Caro Kann can be found at michael-boyd.net/positions
Just a couple of points. Hopefully constructive.
1. You have a couple of chess problems on the site. I love a good chess problem. I don't know if yours were good problems or easy problems or hard problems or worthless problems. I don't know, because the answer is right there in BIG BOLD LETTERS. You can't miss it. I didn't feel like looking at the problems because I couldn't avoid seeing the answer in advance.
2. The annotated game is difficult to follow without a board. I wasn't going to go to the trouble of setting up a board because it appears to be your own game. Most of the time, chess players wait until they get famous before they start publishing their own annotated games.
I dont want to sound like an a-hole (but, inevitably, I am). There are only 3 problems, so obviously, this isnt very useful. I only checked out the first 2, and they were fairly obvious. For the second problem making an outpost for the knight is a concern, but im more worried about keeping a presence in the center (e5 does both, but i'd play that for different reasons). Now the ahole part. Annotating your own games is great, but for someone else to learn anything from annotated games, they should be master games. Now I didnt check out your games, but im pretty sure youre not master level, so studying your games will most likely be detrimental to anyone.
Originally posted by Menso I dont want to sound like an a-hole (but, inevitably, I am). There are only 3 problems, so obviously, this isnt very useful. I only checked out the first 2, and they were fairly obvious. For the second problem making an outpost for the knight is a concern, but im more worried about keeping a presence in the center (e5 does both, but i'd play that for different ...[text shortened]... sure youre not master level, so studying your games will most likely be detrimental to anyone.
I disagree.
If your 1400 on RHP I think Studying 1600 vs. 1600 RHP games would be much more helpful to you than Studying Kasparov (2800) vs Adams (2700?)
why? well, the 1600's wouldn't be far off your own level which means you could UNDERSTAND the mistakes, blunders and good moves far better than you could with a master game, yet at the same time, the games would be quality enough to learn from
Advice on positons, planning and analysing
09 Jun '06 15:30
Back to Top