|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Jun-11-04 |
| Larsker: <I hope me being a premium member will help to keep most of the stuff free for others who can't pay or don't want to.> Well, others might not use the site as much as you do. I only use the puzzle of the day - and little else. Having said that, I sort of agree with you. The CG people have paid for servers, programming, etc over the years. I was prepared to pay for chess.fm - I really liked that site - but sadly it just faded away. |
 |
Jun-11-04
 |
| kevin86: <cuBsfan,and Larsker> and others: I was at two minds about this change,until I realized that it is important to keep this site open-whatever means possible. I play the GOTD and daily puzzle-and I play other games as well. Because of conditions beyond my control,I cannot become a premium member :( Hopefully,thanks to others -like cubsfan-this site will remain open to all members,free or paid. |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| russell: do you have any one avalible that i can play with |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| pawn2E4: i think a lot of guys are just like me,we love the game,study a little,and will never become grandmasters lol...every time i lose a game on yahoo or playchess.com,i come right here to see what i did wrong! and i'm here every day,too! lol... |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| misguidedaggression: yeah, now I'll have to pay to see where I went wrong in the opening when someone pulls out something wierd like the ponziani or bird's opening. But I'm losing my ISP soon and I don't know how often I'll be on here if I have to use dialup. That and the fact that my cash flow has been tight since my transmission went--on the other hand it is only $22 and the endgame explorer should help my horrible endgame. |
|
Jun-11-04
 |
| Gypsy: <<A bit too routine?> Maybe, but very instructive and pretty.> Thank you <Honza> for responding. I was not criticising the puzzle, but asking for such feedback as yours. I get worried when king-side castle position tactics start looking routine to me. |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| ruylopez900: Nice puzzle. It took me forever to see it, but once I did it was crystal clear :D. |
|
Jun-11-04
|
| Gypsy: Forgive me now a small indulgence. This post is mainly for those who, same as me, are interested in our mental processes and in typical errors we make. Observing my results with these (and other) puzzles, I noticed one consistent type of mental error I make: In the initial analysis, I tend to overlook some fairly simple resource on a third (plus/minus) move of the second side-variation. (It would be like missing one of the two moves 16.f3 Qg3+ in this puzzle, except here they are in the main line and I saw both clearly.) This error does not appear related to visulizing the positions (I can compute accurately long variations), nor to a mental blindspot for the resource (the overlooked moves were indeed simple). The eror seems somehow anchored in the branching process into variations. My conjecture is that these errors come as side effects of our mental resources being spent on management of short-term memory. (Managing the recursive stack, if you will.) |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| misguidedaggression: In the case of 16.f3, It could just be that you're looking only for the ideal position for the white and not focusing enough attention to the black pieces best defense. you need to be a good attacker AND defender to calculate sound tactics. I miss things like that all the time, and it's due to my weak defensive play. I tend to win beautifly against other players who aren't great defenders, but I'll put the variation through a computer and find it unsound. Your best bet may be playing more closed games or trying to win with a single pawn advantage in the endgame. I know, it sounds aweful, but it may just help. |
|
Jun-11-04
|
| Gypsy: <you need to be a good attacker AND defender to calculate sound tactics> Absolutely, <misguidedaggression>, objectivity in evaluating opponent's resources is an essential ingredient of good chess! But that is a somewhat different can of worms. What I am trying to put a finger on here is that the same move that I would not miss in the main variation, or in its 1-st branch; I sometimes overlook if it is in the 2-nd (or higher) branch. I speculate that this is less a function of objectivity or character, and more a function of mental resources being spent on background book-keeping. Of course, this is all speculative and I am most grateful to you and others for any and all insight! <Your best bet may be playing more closed games or trying to win with a single pawn advantage in the endgame.> I grew up on such games, they came with my father's love of the game! :-)) |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| Brian Watson: <Papablanca> <Cyphelium> As I remember it, Chessgames clearly advertised all along that the Explorer would be a free feature only temporarily. Your comments seem just a tad uncharitable . . . |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| Brian Watson: Sorry for being pious, but I was flabergasted when I first came across this site and found it was free, with absolutely minimal advertising. |
|
Jun-11-04
 |
| midknightblue: Well at risk of sounding uncharitable as well, I agree with Papab. If chessbase.com begins to offer daily puzzles, I will try not to be too much of a stranger to this site. |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| alexlikeschess: what the @#$% is this bull@#$%? i have to pay to use the opening explorer? it was helping me a lot. well im not going to screw around with this. bye chessgames |
|
Jun-11-04
 |
| acirce: There ARE lots of puzzles on http://www.chessbase.com/puzzle/ - not daily but for the one who haven't been there before they should take a while to plow through. And of course there are other sites. |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| Brian Watson: bye <alexlikeschess>. You will be sorely missed. May the sun shine in your face, and the wind blow at your back . . . and may God hold you in the very palm of His hand . . . |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| Papablanca: <Brian Watson> My point was not to critisize Chessgames, I agree they put great effort in making kick-ass applications for consulting openings, endgames etc. My point was making a 'tongue in cheek' remark on the 'attracting value' of only allowing premium members to enlight themselves with his Ferocious Beastness wisdoms.
w.r.t. asking money for opening explorer etc., it is fair to ask a price for a good product in which you invested money and effort. Just like it is fair to choose to buy it or not. |
|
Jun-11-04
 |
| Sneaky: This reminds me of a restaurant near where I live. They gave free food away for years. Everybody went there and ate every day and told them what a fine restaurant they were. Then one day the management said "Good news, now we serve beer and wine! Only one thing, you have to pay for it." The clientele was so outraged they all said "What the @#$% is this bull@#$%?? I can't believe they would do this to us, their best customers!" and they all stormed out never to return. Of course that story is total fiction but I think it illustrates a point. |
|
Jun-11-04
 |
| iron maiden: Well said, Sneaky. As long as chessgames.com continues its free accessibility to its current features (database, kibitzing, etc) they will remain the greatest chess site in my book and I won't hear a word against them. |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| Checkmate123: This is a business world. Besides, chessgames spent a lot of effort into these premium features. So a bit of fee is reasonable. And for the rest of us, it is still good. We still have vast number of databases available. |
|
| Jun-11-04 |
| square dance: <sneaky> very nicely put!!!! |
|
| Jun-12-04 |
| Cyphelium: <northernsoul & Brian Watson> I understand that my kib could be taken as 'uncharitable' towards chessgames.com. However, I didn't say that I think they are 'wrong' in some way when they introduce fees. It is their server, they have put in a lot of work and naturally they have every right to do whatever they want with it. I have enjoyed this site tremendously and I've been happy to use it for free - I just expected that old 'gradual trick' to turn up. Actually I started to smile when I saw it - it has happened to many other sites I've enjoyed in the past and I meant what I said - it's a classic! And if I sounded a little bitter....well, not just a coincidence I guess, as I said I have enjoyed this site very much. =) |
|
Jun-12-04
 |
| Benzol: <Cyphelium> Are you saying you're going to leave? |
|
| Jun-14-04 |
| Cyphelium: <Benzol> Not for the moment. We'll see what happens. (Actually I might even pay, if that's necessary. I guess I just have to whine a little before I do.) |
|
| Oct-26-09 |
| JimmyVermeer: 18 Bf4 Qxf4 19 Rf2 Nxf2+ 20 Kg2 Nxd1 21 Bxd1 Nb4 22 Nc3 Nd3 23 Rc1 Qxc1 24 Be2 Qe3 25 Nd5 Bxd5 26 cxd5 Nf4+ 27 Kg3 Nxe2+ 28 Kh3 Qxf3+ 29 Kh4 Qg3+ 30 Kh5 Nf4# |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
sac: 14...Rxh3
