2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsNot a cat in hell's chance.
But I may be able to get a draw or even win a game against him, if I played
by RHP rules and he continued to play by FIDE OTB rules.
(You remember hell, it is where you think all the people who have abortions, and you would like to execute, would go. You and Dasa, eh? Its a wonder you have any time to worship your respective gods with all the killing you want to get on with.)
Originally posted by RJHindsIt's not apples and oranges, humans don't play like machines, how many times does that have to be spelled out to you. Human GM's playing correspondence chess, pre computer engines, do not cross the thresholds you have. I'll repeat that, GM's playing CORRESPONDENCE CHESS, just like we do here at RHP haven't achieved the engine match-ups you have. So your point is mute.
You are comparing apples to oranges. Magnus Carlsen doe not play under
RHP rules. He can not consult his old games are other grandmaster games
as he plays. Magnus Carlsen does not have the benefit of an analyze
board. He can not consult chess books to refresh his memory on certain
positions. He can not stop when he is tired of thinking and come bac ...[text shortened]... mplicated the postion gets. You
are one of the most stupid and assine persons I have ever met.
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsBut I may be able to get a draw or even win a game against him, if I played by RHP rules and he continued to play by FIDE OTB rules.
I am not near as good a player as Magnus Carlsen. I would say, when
he is at his best he is better than any computer, just like Kasparov.
However nobody can play OTB at their very best all the time. But I
may be able to get a draw or even win a game against him, if I played
by RHP rules and he continued to play by FIDE OTB rules.
LOL!!!!! Talk about delusions of grandeur. 🙄🙄
edit - fixed
3 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou have no data on grandmasters playing correspondence chess. Most
It's not apples and oranges, humans don't play like machines, how many times does that have to be spelled out to you. Human GM's playing correspondence chess, pre computer engines, do not cross the thresholds you have. I'll repeat that, GM's playing CORRESPONDENCE CHESS, just like we do here at RHP haven't achieved the engine match-ups you have. So your point is mute.
grandmasters do not play correspondence chess. Computers are sometimes
allowed in correspondence chess for your information.
P.S. Hans Berliner was only a master OTB chess player when he became the
World Correspondence Chess Champion.
http://www.dfki.de/~busemann/cc-computers.html
Originally posted by RJHindsthere are correspondence world champions RJH, your on to a hiding to nothing here.
You have no data on grandmasters playing correspondence chess. Most
grandmasters do not play correspondence chess. Computers are sometimes
allowed in correspondence chess for your information.
P.S. Hans Berliner was only a master OTB chess player when he became the
World Correspondence Chess Champion.
http://www.dfki.de/~busemann/cc-computers.html
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 22264
Originally posted by RJHindsCheater, cheater... pumpkin eater.
I am thinking about going back to my old way of playing like I would
OTB. This will give me practice since I have joined a Chess Club about
75 miles away. I want be able to consult opening books or be able to
move the pieces around on another board to analyze the position. I
may even time my thinking time on each game and make sure I do
not think lon ...[text shortened]... as much time to spend on these games anyway for I
have some work I must start doing next week.
Originally posted by RJHindsViacheslav Vasilyevich Ragozin was a Soviet GM, he also was the second World Correspondence Chess Champion in 1956-59 thus becoming a GM at that form of the game. The Ragozin Defence line of the Queens Gambit Declined is named after him. Not too shabby a player.
You have no data on grandmasters playing correspondence chess. Most
grandmasters do not play correspondence chess. Computers are sometimes
allowed in correspondence chess for your information.
P.S. Hans Berliner was only a master OTB chess player when he became the
World Correspondence Chess Champion.
http://www.dfki.de/~busemann/cc-computers.html
Here are the results of eight games analysed from his 1959 triumph, with two games to still be analysed (4 games didn't have enough moves out of book) -
1st choice (130/215) - 60.4%
2nd choice (165/215) - 76.7%
3rd choice (184/215) - 85.5%
The matchups are at the high end of what has been achieved by humans and it is a small sample, but even so, they are still not as high as yours. So how come you have significantly higher engine matchup rates than a GM playing, and winning, the ICCF World Championship. How does someone with an 1817 OTB rating do that? The floor is yours.
How exactly does this thread fit into the 'Spirituality' forum? It would go better in the debates section, however that would be too generous as I see very little formal argumentation on here- it looks more like school yard pricks cussing and arguing. I have only seen a couple posts on here, a few by Proper Knob and a few others, that made any sense.
Originally posted by Kings and PawnsPerhaps that's why it fits exactly into the 'Spirituality forum'.
...I see very little formal argumentation on here- it looks more like school yard pricks cussing and arguing. I have only seen a couple posts on here, a few by Proper Knob and a few others, that made any sense.
Originally posted by Kings and PawnsBut being religious in the normal sense of the big three religions means you give up the right to question authority, that authority being their god and the hierarchy that religious leaders inevitably build up around them. That is the whole point of religions, to build up hierarchies where the leaders are conveniently living large while the run of the mill deluded congregation continues millennium after millennium.
Nicely put, it does seem that religion is surrounded and plagued by an anti-intellectualism.
However, I think it is rather ungenerous to suggest that religion itself as a science is anti-intellectual, that is another topic for another thread though.
This deluded congregation supports those at the top who call the shots based on some kind of 'communications' with their almighty. So they can conveniently put women on a lower plane, as the bible clearly states, a man is worth 50 shekels, a woman 35. Now THAT has to be SUCH a great motivator for women to hear such drivel coming from a book supposedly inspired by some kind of a pathetic deity.