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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 05 Aug '08 03:44
    I'm not insinuating anything...please don't take it that way. I just find this really surprising from a player rated in the 1300s: Game 5229133
  2. 05 Aug '08 03:57
    Originally posted by amolv06
    I'm not insinuating anything...please don't take it that way. I just find this really surprising from a player rated in the 1300s: Game 5229133
    How do you think User 447913 feels about you humiliating him in the public forums?
  3. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    05 Aug '08 03:59
    Originally posted by amolv06
    I'm not insinuating anything...please don't take it that way. I just find this really surprising from a player rated in the 1300s: Game 5229133
    its very possible. first off 1300s isnt that good, im a little higher and still did something almost as stupid.
    Game 5190153
    this is my worst game ever. i thought i had a square to run as that odd setup isnt what i usually do. i dont do my better setup as much anymore as i think it made me less flexible to other ideas
  4. 05 Aug '08 04:00
    It's a public game. If they are against the rules to discuss, then I apologize. Otherwise, I think it's a legitimate question. It's not meant to humiliate. If he sees this I'd like to know -- was it just a brief mental lapse, or did he have some plan with that opening, yet he overlooked the fools mate?
  5. 05 Aug '08 04:02 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by irontigran
    its very possible. first off 1300s isnt that good, im a little higher and still did something almost as stupid.
    Game 5190153
    this is my worst game ever. i thought i had a square to run as that odd setup isnt what i usually do. i dont do my better setup as much anymore as i think it made me less flexible to other ideas
    I see. I mean I do fall for mate in 1s all the time, which is just as bad, I just didn't think it would be very often you'd find anyone in 4 digits falling for a variation of the fools mate -- especially in 2 moves. I can see missing it later on in the game, but I would have suspected that most everyone knows of the fools mate that's over 1100 or so. I guess I was wrong.

    That said, I'd like to know if there was some more devious plan to his moves. What was he thinking that made him overlook the fool's mate?

    Here's the game, by the way:

  6. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    05 Aug '08 05:06
    Its funny, I beat greenpawn in a blitz game though.
  7. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    05 Aug '08 05:08
    Originally posted by irontigran
    its very possible. first off 1300s isnt that good, im a little higher and still did something almost as stupid.
    Game 5190153
    this is my worst game ever. i thought i had a square to run as that odd setup isnt what i usually do. i dont do my better setup as much anymore as i think it made me less flexible to other ideas
    I guess now you know to take with the OTHER pawn, eh. At least a game like that is a good mnenomic aid
  8. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    05 Aug '08 05:32
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    I guess now you know to take with the OTHER pawn, eh. At least a game like that is a good mnenomic aid
    thats why i hate general principles
  9. 05 Aug '08 05:36 / 1 edit
    Here's the second game posted in this thread from irontigran:
  10. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    05 Aug '08 05:36
    Originally posted by amolv06
    I see. I mean I do fall for mate in 1s all the time, which is just as bad, I just didn't think it would be very often you'd find anyone in 4 digits falling for a variation of the fools mate -- especially in 2 moves. I can see missing it later on in the game, but I would have suspected that most everyone knows of the fools mate that's over 1100 or so. I gues ...[text shortened]... the fool's mate?

    Here's the game, by the way:

    [pgn]
    1. f4 e5 2. g4 Qd8h4 0-1[/pgn]
    btw, in my opinion the froms gambit doesnt have as much venom as people think. sure, there are cheap tricks to it but dont all gambits? so i think 2.fxe5 much better than the other popular choice, going to a kings gambit. (which is still a nice spot to get to, or at least the option of, when avoiding the sicilian)
    -j
  11. Standard member max92
    let's play CHESS
    05 Aug '08 06:04
    at least If he learns from his mistakes he wont do it again.
  12. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    05 Aug '08 07:22
    Originally posted by amolv06
    I'm not insinuating anything...please don't take it that way. I just find this really surprising from a player rated in the 1300s: Game 5229133
    We all make mistakes. Here is my quickest win and against a 2200 player in Game 3533889.

    For myself I have missed a mate in 1 (by my opponent).

    Any player who tells you they have never been caught after pushing the f & g pawns when they were learning is probably lying.
  13. 05 Aug '08 08:24
    Nice to see one my brilliancies being discussed.

    I posted this game on our club forum saying I've being
    playing tournament chess since 1972 and this was my first ever
    'Fools Mate' even in skittle games.

    I noted in the original post that the poster said he was not 'hinting' at anything.

    What could this possibly be hinting at?
    Is there something dodgy about winning in 2 moves?

    Remember I'm still quite new here so if 2 move or quick wins
    are somehow viewed as dodgy then I'd like to know why.

    All I can think of is someone who sets up two accounts and plays
    self to get grade higher. (has anyone been caught doing that?).

    Quote:
    Its funny, I beat greenpawn in a blitz game though.

    Lost five on the trot the other night - you have bad days, you have good days.

    Hope I said GG - I usually do.
  14. 05 Aug '08 09:01
    I noted in the original post that the poster said he was not 'hinting' at anything.

    What could this possibly be hinting at?
    Is there something dodgy about winning in 2 moves?

    Remember I'm still quite new here so if 2 move or quick wins
    are somehow viewed as dodgy then I'd like to know why.

    All I can think of is someone who sets up two accounts and plays
    self to get grade higher. (has anyone been caught doing that?).
    I just wanted to clarify that I was not hinting at the possibility that you had a second account and were playing yourself for points. It was quite an impressive and quick win, so I thought it was possible that me bringing that particular game up may be seen as me trying to accuse you of cheating. Accusations of cheating seem pretty prevalent lately, so I didn't think this was an unsafe assumption. Based on that, I wanted to clarify from the get-go that I was not hinting at anything. Based on what I've seen from your games and from your posts you certainly seem to know your stuff (which is why I'd like a game with you). Based on that, I'd say you were above such forms of cheating.
  15. 05 Aug '08 09:33
    Originally posted by greenpawn34

    What could this possibly be hinting at?
    Is there something dodgy about winning in 2 moves?

    Remember I'm still quite new here so if 2 move or quick wins
    are somehow viewed as dodgy then I'd like to know why.

    All I can think of is someone who sets up two accounts and plays
    self to get grade higher. (has anyone been caught doing that?).
    This is actually remarkably common. Here is the most successful example ever seen on this site:
    User 285560