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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 30 Oct '09 16:39 / 2 edits
    Just noticed that Weyerstrass is no longer a subscriber.

    He has just two games on the go, - the one against woodworm that many of us are watching closely: Game 4054880 and one against Nowakowski (User 446247): Game 6698090.

    Nowakowski is on a very long non-losing streak (as is Weyerstrass, of course) and has improved enormously in the last year (e.g. see Game 5378643).
  2. 30 Oct '09 16:47
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Game 5378643
    Newbie alert
  3. Standard member Exuma
    Anansi
    30 Oct '09 16:58
    The agony of de feet perhaps? Perhaps an immaculate draw gets those sub guldens flowing again.
  4. 30 Oct '09 17:15
    How tall is Weyerstrass?
  5. 30 Oct '09 17:15
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    How tall is Weyerstrass?
    About 24'52".
  6. 30 Oct '09 17:22
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    How tall is Weyerstrass?
    Heinzkat is just being facetious.

    I can't find a picture of Weyerstrass on the net, but judging by his play on this site I think he must be at least two feet taller than Kramnik, so perhaps 8'6"?
  7. 30 Oct '09 17:41
    "Chess players are all the same size when sitting down at the board.
    Both in height and in grade."
  8. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    30 Oct '09 17:55
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    "Chess players are all the same size when sitting down at the board.
    Both in height and in grade."
    speak for yourself, shorty!
  9. 30 Oct '09 18:17 / 2 edits
    I'm nearly right. Human adult bodies are all the same size, tall people have
    longer legs. So sitting down we are the same size.

    As for gradings, they don't make you play any better.

    Everyone is equal. pick a number, any number....we are all 1400 and 5 foot, 10'.
  10. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    30 Oct '09 19:13
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    I'm nearly right. Human adult bodies are all the same size, tall people have
    longer legs. So sitting down we are the same size.

    As for gradings, they don't make you play any better.

    Everyone is equal. pick a number, any number....we are all 1400 and 5 foot, 10'.
    I'm a giant sitting down. I used to have a girlfriend who was about the same height standing as I was sitting.

    but I fully agree about ratings, numbers don't give you a single move in the game.
  11. 30 Oct '09 22:16
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Just noticed that Weyerstrass is no longer a subscriber.

    He has just two games on the go, - the one against woodworm that many of us are watching closely: Game 4054880 and one against Nowakowski (User 446247): Game 6698090.

    Nowakowski is on a very long non-losing streak (as is Weyerstrass, of course) and has improved enormously in the last year (e.g. see Game 5378643).
    Thanks for posting these! Interesting games indeed! One's a done deal. How do you see Nowakowski's chances without giving away any moves, of course.
  12. 30 Oct '09 22:24
    Originally posted by scacchipazzo
    Thanks for posting these! Interesting games indeed! One's a done deal. How do you see Nowakowski's chances without giving away any moves, of course.
    Not allowed to comment on games in progress, even if you don't give analysis. Once the games are over I will comment though!
  13. 31 Oct '09 01:11 / 1 edit
    woodworms games are awesome, he is a true gambiteer! the ones that i recognise are the smith morra, the elephant, scotch gambit. perhaps someone can identify some more?
  14. 01 Nov '09 22:41
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    woodworms games are awesome, he is a true gambiteer! the ones that i recognise are the smith morra, the elephant, scotch gambit. perhaps someone can identify some more?
    once you mentionned gambits i immediately went to see those games, and an interesting thing is that he seems to play a bit carelessly against lower rated players, allowing them to get an advantage.

    for example Game 3248275, not only does he play the risky morra gambit, but then he plays the inferior 7.e5?!, after which his opponent could have got an advantage with 7...Ng4 8.Bf4 f6! (according to my book on the morra by langrock)

    So go on, underrated players : challenge him and refute his overoptimistic play!
  15. 03 Nov '09 20:48
    If e5 is inferior, i do not think it seems losing

    True he should think twice against a high rated player but the i am a firm believer that the best moves are not always the most sound or best objectively, but should be subjective depending on your opponenets strengths

    IE, here, a 1400 player will probably struggle against the restrictive nature of the e5 move, how will he handle the advanced and invasive pawn, restricting mobility where white already has a massive advantage in development through the nature of the gambit? To take even slight advantage of such an inferior move you have to be playing, for at least a game, on 2000 plus standard surely