Is all of this social networking so common in the Chess forum? Instead I'm going to grab a game that my friend Mr. Leggett played with K&P. Paul looking at this game, I'm wondering if you resigned for fear of the rook lift...
Originally posted by Lex Rex [b] DanTriola has proven to be one of the worst. Openly befriending me only to try to trap me with words (which he then admits he did) and then posts how Kings and Pawns is apparently college kids (thanksgiving break and christmas break). I am surprised that someone with his intelligence would do such a thing.
If this gets me banned I really don't care as I ...[text shortened]... e time to play chess on an internet site-besides real chess is in the friends you make in life. /b]
That's rather harsh. All I can see, post wise, is that you've made an obvious 'study statement' that is incorrect, you corrected then removed the profile after he'd pointed it out, is this trapping you with words ? I'm not privy to your own PM's of course, perhaps there is more to all this than meets the eye but having had many of my own exchanges with him, fear you may be mistaking candeur with deceit. Perhaps also, it'd be wise to just not post further, nor accept any messages, if you feel folk have been too invasive or you've taken offence to the fact that 'your thread' didn't go down quite as you'd liked. The interest is obvious here, what many are talking about..the individuals over 2400, it's been so previously rare that it'll always be a curiosity here.
Originally posted by Lex Rex I really don't care what egotistical players think. DanTriola has proven to be one of the worst. Openly befriending me only to try to trap me with words (which he then admits he did) and then posts how Kings and Pawns is apparently college kids (thanksgiving break and christmas break). I am surprised that someone with his intelligence would do such a thing friends skeeter has and how many friends DanTriola has 'befriended' just to manipulate them!
Would you like a packet of crisps with your pint of bitter, sir?
Originally posted by PhySiQ Is all of this social networking so common in the Chess forum? Instead I'm going to grab a game that my friend Mr. Leggett played with K&P. Paul looking at this game, I'm wondering if you resigned for fear of the rook lift...
[pgn]
[Event "Challenge"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2011.05.15"]
[EndDate "2011.08.05"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Ki ...[text shortened]... . Nxe4 26. Bxf7+ Rxf7 27. Qxf7+ Kh8 28. Rf4 Ng3 *
[/pgn]
Q
A computer pointed that out to me after the fact. I just did not see it while the game was in progress. and I thought I was busted. Lesson learned!
Originally posted by Lex Rex I know people say, thaughbear, it happened because of association with K&P and myself. The assertions that we are the same I find humorous at best. I am honored that people think I can play to his level. I simply cannot.
Start laughing then... I am. You're a 2238 and rising player.. you hadn't peaked before you resigned all your games. You don't seem to have an explanation for all the "coincidences" and why the picture of K&P which you confirmed was K&P and that you knew him personally is actually Mokra's grandad.
Personally, I am in awe of a 22 year old (ipod generation) using such poetic turns of phrase like "blackhearts". Perhaps Lex should retire from Neurology and start writing in the vein of Thomas Hardy.
Originally posted by nimzo5 Personally, I am in awe of a 22 year old (ipod generation) using such poetic turns of phrase like "blackhearts". Perhaps Lex should retire from Neurology and start writing in the vein of Thomas Hardy.
I saw the Blackhearts when they were the backing band for Joan Jett in the 80's. I still have them on vinyl!
Can someone explain to me why black resigned in this game?
Looks like white must play 2. Rxh4 and then black had a fine game.
I was wondering the same thing when i saw it last night. At that point, I would have played on.
I suspect they wanted a loss to take some of the pressure off.
Makes them look more "human".
But, I could be wrong.
May be a clear loss for Black to a "Master's" eyes.
Originally posted by DanTriola I was wondering the same thing when i saw it last night. At that point, I would have played on.
May be a clear loss for Black to a "Master's" eyes.
My initial judgment says that unless black has "something" with g4 and discovered check, then white is totally winning (it’s an easy positional judgment because of blacks trapped bishop, whites extra pawn and his connected free pawns ready to move).
After I have looked a bit at the position, I can't find anything for black after 44.Rxd5 Bc3!. Now Blacks tricks with 45.g4 have to work or he is simply positional lost. I find that after Qe3 black have no discovered checks that works because of the beautiful move d5+! and black finds himself in check or with the rock in a pin.
I think black could have fought on for a while and personally I think that I would, but his position is clearly lost and some (often very good) corresponding chess players just resign facing these clearly lost positions, because with time enough, any descent opponent will bring home a clearly winning position.
Originally posted by Kaoslos My initial judgment says that unless black has "something" with g4 and discovered check, then white is totally winning (it’s an easy positional judgment because of blacks trapped bishop, whites extra pawn and his connected free pawns ready to move).
After I have looked a bit at the position, I can't find anything for black after 44.Rxd5 Bc3!. Now Blacks tr ...[text shortened]... s, because with time enough, any descent opponent will bring home a clearly winning position.
His opponent is only 40 or so points above my pay grade. Believe me.. in the same position against me you should play on.
Originally posted by thaughbaer His opponent is only 40 or so points above my pay grade. Believe me.. in the same position against me you should play on.
I would even continue to play this position vs Magnus Carlsen. You can always resign when it is really hopeless.
Originally posted by thaughbaer His opponent is only 40 or so points above my pay grade. Believe me.. in the same position against me you should play on.
I said that I would have played on :-) - (also against players at my own strenght - hoping for a miracle), but I know and understand why others resign. I also know that the opponent is much better than his rating in here ;-).
Edit: I'm in the same spirit as Gambit05 on the resign option ;-)
Originally posted by Kaoslos My initial judgment says that unless black has "something" with g4 and discovered check, then white is totally winning (it’s an easy positional judgment because of blacks trapped bishop, whites extra pawn and his connected free pawns ready to move).
After I have looked a bit at the position, I can't find anything for black after 44.Rxd5 Bc3!. Now Blacks tr ...[text shortened]... s, because with time enough, any descent opponent will bring home a clearly winning position.
Thanks for that.
I missed those d5 tricks. Even though I put the bishop on the right square in my analysis 😵
Originally posted by Paul Leggett A computer pointed that out to me after the fact. I just did not see it while the game was in progress. and I thought I was busted. Lesson learned!
Paul
Aha! Its the devil when that happens is it not? Those two movers to seal up a position with a knight like that - horribly difficult to find. It makes me think puzzle composers should make "find the right defense" type puzzles with this type of design.
30 Nov '11 07:43
King and Pawns coming up, 4 now over 2400!
Back to Top