< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Apr-02-16|| ||morfishine: Hi <Sally>! I sure do enjoy your posts. I was wondering if you had any interest in Chess960 or FischerRandom or if had any thoughts on this subject? I have been playing extensively and really enjoy Chess960. |
Interest in this format, in general, seems to be catching on though some GM's seem lukewarm
This is curious since the format requires one to think on one's feet, so to speak, regarding the original set up, so one must rely on one's positional awareness, which seems to be right up a GM's alley, I would think
Happy Chess Sir!
|Apr-04-16|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi 1971,
Honestly I cannot recall any outburst. What ever it was I've forgotten all about it.
If I appear in any way condescending then it's been misread or very badly written. That's the trouble with the written word, no tone and you cannot see the expression on the writers face.
Also in most cases we have no idea who we are replying to. I know in person 5 maybe 6 people who post on the site, misunderstandings happen.
No I have not even tried to play it. It's not chess as we know it.
I have 50 years worth of opening traps up my sleeve. I'm not going to throw them out the window or learn new ones for the different set up's.
|Apr-05-16|| ||morfishine: <Sally Simpson> Thanks for the reply, on your comment: <...It's not chess as we know it> No doubt, but the pieces move the same, the themes and mates are the same, patterns are the same...everything's the same, EXCEPT you better be extremely careful in the opening LOL|
as for me, I've never had so much fun
|Apr-10-16|| ||offramp: Dear Geoff,
Just a note to say that you are not now, have never been, and will never be on my ignore list!
I was only joking in that morfishine/c-infinite exchange!
Very best wishes
|Apr-11-16|| ||Sally Simpson: I knew that. Just playing along. All good fun.
I of course have nobody on my ignore list. There are some I ignore (space bar) but none on the list.
|Apr-18-16|| ||luftforlife: Hi, Geoff. I'm striving for the true gen on the 24th Canadian Championships, Montreal 1899, and Larry is helping me, as is <Tab>. I'm working up a treatment of the tournament and of other contemporaneous events in Canadian chess. |
Just today, I contacted John Saunders (no relation to any known chess players called Saunders), and he wrote back with some kind words and some helpful information on Harold Saunders (q.v.). <Tab> and I have done much work on Alexander Saunders and his sons Edward, Ernest, and Harold, as an outgrowth of our work on Canadian chess players of the era, including Ernest Saunders, who of course played at Montreal 1899. <Tab> has been tackling the biographical end, and I've been tackling the tournament end. Larry has been helpful in forwarding Charles F. Stubbs's chess columns from St. John Globe (which I can't seem to find online) and articles from other newspapers, together with many games from notable Canadian players of the era. His contributions provide useful context and interstitial detail. Together, we have moved the ball forward.
I kindly invite you to stop by my forum; I think you will enjoy what you find there. Feel free to contribute! Your comments, as always, are most welcome. Best wishes and kindest regards.
|Apr-19-16|| ||luftforlife: Hi, Geoff. When you awake on the other side of the Big Pond, you will find this surprise under the tree (too big to wrap!). Please note that it may take some tinkering to get this contraption to play properly; Santa assembled this in the wee hours. :)|
Before you dive in, please note the following caveat from the instruction booklet.
Though The British Chess Magazine, The Montreal Gazette, and Steven Wright have the player with the black pieces as "Flack," David Cohen (who is usually accurate in these matters) and Rod Edwards (who relies on correspondence from David Cohen) have him as "Flach." The player's full name as I know it is "Ulysses J. Flach." As there is no entry here on <cg> for this player under either spelling -- a defect I hope soon to remedy ;-) -- I'm going with David Cohen's spelling on a provisional basis.
Here is my transcription of Ernest Saunders v. Ulysses J. Flach, French Defense, Eighth Round, 24th Canadian Championships, Montreal, April 5, 1899:
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 d5xe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Bc4 Nf6 6. Ng5 h6 7. Ng5f3 Nb6 8. Bb3 c5 9. c3 c5xd4 10. Nxd4 Be7 11. Qe2 a6 12. Ng1f3 Nb6d5 13. O-O Qc7 14. Re1 O-O 15. Qd3 Bd6 16. Bc2 e5 17. Nf5 e4 18. Rxe4 BxNf5 19. Qd1 BxRe4 20. BxBe4 NxBe4 21. QxNd5 Nf6 22. Qf5 Qd7 23. Qd3 Bxh2+ 0-1.
The Montreal Gazette, April 6, 1899, p.5 (annotations omitted).
Please let me know if this needs fixing in any way, and I'll put one of Santa's elves on the job. ;-) Better than coals in your stocking for sure!
|Apr-19-16|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi luftforlife,
The game score took a wee bit of correcting but I'm sure I have it. It fits the description. Black's 16th move. 16...e5 as suggested. White did indeed end up losing a Rook and a Queen.
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Bc4 Ngf6 6. Ng5 h6 7. N5f3 Nb6 8.Bb3 c5 9. c3 cxd4 10. Nxd4 Be7 11. Qe2 a6 12. Ngf3 Nbd5 13. O-O Qc7 14. Re1 O-O 15. Qd3 Bd6 16. Bc2 e5 17. Nf5 e4 18. Rxe4 Bxf5 19. Qd1 Bxe4 20. Bxe4 Nxe4 21.Qxd5 Nf6 22. Qf5 Qd7 23. Qd3 Bxh2+
|Apr-19-16|| ||luftforlife: <Sally>: You're welcome. :)|
I'm used to transcribing from descriptive into minimal algebraic; I've just begun transcribing into standard algebraic (sorry my move notations were a bit clumsy) because I've just learned minimal algebraic is only seen here as prevalently as it is because <pgn4web> is the default viewer here on <cg>. Another member suggested I switch to standard algebraic, as that is standard here, and so I'm still getting the hang of it.
I gather all the moves were correct, yes? Looks that way.
I'll submit this game shortly, along with others I've transcribed from this tournament and from this era. I'll prepare the PGN header and moves, and submit the game for upload to the database.
I should be posting my transcriptions on my forum as they emerge.
|Apr-20-16|| ||luftforlife: Thanks, <Sally>, for your kind comments under Magnus Smith. I figured I'd reply here.|
I always transcribe games by hand at the board, so as to identify and to keep track of which pieces started queenside and which pieces started kingside, and I write out the algebraic notation next to the descriptive (on a photocopy or printout of the original, say), and then play back the game from the algebraic to ensure the same result as from the descriptive. Then I type the transcribed algebraic moves into Notepad, save them with a header as a text file and as a PGN, and check the score in a PGN viewer such as ChessBase. If it plays through without highlighted moves, and yields the same result as the descriptive and the algebraic moves did, then I know I'm in business. This all takes time, though, and I've learned the hard way that without PGN-engine check, typos and errors may creep in despite my best efforts.
I find making the mental shift from relative to absolute notation much more fatiguing than I do analyzing the game. It's like playing music: I find it much more tedious and exacting to write out the notes on the stave, or to translate them into vocal or instrumental performance, than I do simply to sing or to play a score or performance by ear or from memory and then, if necessary, to analyze it in musical terms. I enjoy playing chess and playing music (and I've done the latter professionally, but not the former, as you've done), but both systems involve notation with letters and numbers and translation, and that can prove tricky sometimes for some of us. So thanks again for your understanding and support. :)
|Apr-20-16|| ||luftforlife: <Sally>: Not trying to be a pest. I submitted Saunders-Flach (8) (0-1) (24th Can. Ch., Montreal, 1899.04.05) for upload. Thanks again for your help, which I acknowledged on my forum.|
I just posted several late-nineteenth-century excerpts on my forum that I believe you would enjoy. Best regards.
|May-08-16|| ||morfishine: <Sally> Nice try trying to get through to <Overbloatedhead> I admire your effort|
|May-12-16|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Morf,
The lad is harmless, a bit opinionated but aren't we all and he is sometimes funny. Be nice to people...argue with them..but be nice.
|May-12-16|| ||morfishine: <Sally> Your advice reminds me of Patrick Swayze in 'Road House'. He was teaching his young crew of bouncers and would end his butt-kicking instructions with "...but be nice"|
I always liked that :)
|May-14-16|| ||luftforlife: <Sally>: You are a cross-genre, multigenerational ambassador of goodwill; a roving commissioner of rational discourse; an ombudsman to the stars. I must say you are one of the most patient, accommodating, understanding, helpful, and delightful posters here. I always learn from your posts, no matter the subject. Your kindness, decency, and geniality set the standard here, and do you and CG proud. Your intelligent, informed, and insightful commentaries and dialogues always sharpen my wits, improve my understanding, and lift my spirits. Thank you for being you, and for sharing your knowledge and wisdom and great good humor with so many of us, of all stripes. All the best from across the Big Pond. :)|
|May-14-16|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Guys,
Thank you for your kind words.
The knack, if there one, is to remember we are all chess players. (children that never quite grew up - thankfully.)
We all share a mutual love the game. Keep that in mind and everything becomes simple.
|May-21-16|| ||Clemens Scheitz: Hi <Sally>,
I'm sorry about Crystal Palace not winning the FA Cup, you probably deserve to be celebrating ( though I'm not sure about going out in the street with those pajamas of yours ).
I see that last week <luftforlife> put into nice words what I'm sure many of us think about you and your contributions to the forum. Well earned !
|May-21-16|| ||Clemens Scheitz: Hi again,
I recently notice that some of the members have a personal forum. Can you tell me how to access those directly without having to find a comment made by that user somewhere first, or is that option reserved for premium members only?
|May-28-16|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Clem,
You are posting on here so I do not think it is for subs only.
At the top of the page there is 'chess forum' link. Try that on other pages.
|Nov-22-16|| ||AKMoss: "Fortress's are good things."
Jesus Christ! "Fortress's"??!!
Why do people think adding apostrophe s is the universal way to make plurals!? 99.99% of the time it's wrong.
|Nov-23-16|| ||Sally Simpson: Thank you.|
|Jan-02-17|| ||dm1991: It's basically a repost from Aronian vs W So, 2016.|
<Sally Simpson> I don't know if it's a good place for this but i guess You would maybe like it. I have a couple of diagrams for you. In all of them it's white to move. What would you play?
click for larger view
click for larger view
click for larger view
|Jan-03-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi,
I answered in the Aronian vs W So, 2016 thread.
|Apr-10-17|| ||AylerKupp: <Sally Simpson> In case you are still curious and for some reason interested in a second round of phew!, I've posted some corrections to my original A Pilgrim's Progress post here: Magnus Carlsen (kibitz #82583). The most (and perhaps only) interesting result is the impact of removing the Rule of 400. If you do that, it increases the time needed by Carlsen to reach 2800 from around 15 years to more than 80!|
|Apr-11-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Thanks, I'll look at it.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Take the Premium Membership Tour