< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 23 ·
|Feb-15-11|| ||morfishine: I have the honor of being the first kbitzer...I hope <supermexico> is not too upset!|
I appreciate the compliment and the good advice. Stepping away every now and then is a must. This is a unique format since there is so much more involved than just playing a game of chess. I would like to get more organized on multiple fronts but one musn't take it all too seriously or else we lose the fun and enjoyment in chess.
I noticed you work in the financial services industry as a CPA. I too work in financial services as a fraud investigator for a large bank so we have something in common. We also admire Fischer. Have you ever read Robert Wade's book "Bobby Fisher's Chess Games"? Its a must: over 900 games covering his entire career.
Soon, I'll be seeking your advice as I learn my first engine: the latest TOGA
Oh, and thanks about the Packers! Its like a dream. They've done very well the past few years, but haven't broken through. And now, in their worst year for injuries, they prevail. I'm still in a daze. I sent my sister a Clay Matthews jersey and she just loves it. She's a die-hard Packer fan too!
Take care, Morf
|Feb-15-11|| ||technical draw: El primero en Español.....|
|Feb-16-11|| ||Waitaka: Good to see your forum up!
<technical draw> E o meu será o primeiro em Português. ;)
|Feb-16-11|| ||cro777: Buena suerte <Golden executive>!|
A revised conceptual definition:
The term SPACEBAR MASTER (Maître de barre d’espace, Leertastenmeister, Maestro de barra espaciadora, Maestro di barra spaziatrice) –
in its strict signification, denotes an advanced chess player guiding and interpreting computer analysis in a skillfully masterful manner.
Chess engines have much to learn from spacebar masters way of thinking.
|Feb-16-11|| ||cro777: <Waitaka> Spacebar master em Português ?|
|Feb-16-11|| ||Waitaka: <cro777: <Waitaka> Spacebar master em Português ?>|
That would be litteraly "Mestre em barra de espaços".
But if you interpret "spacebar" as a bar on space, in Portuguese it would be "Mestre do bar espacial".
|Feb-16-11|| ||cro777: <Waitaka> Thanks. Originally, the phrase was used in its strict sense (literally). Therefore, "Mestre em barra de espaços". It will be added to my definition.|
The Team has coined another new phrase too:
The term ENDGAME CREW –
denotes a group of advanced chess players, regarded as part of a larger world team, gathered together temporarily to find a win in the endgame stage of the game (often in positions when there is no obvious way of winning).
|Feb-16-11|| ||Waitaka: <cro777> "Endgame crew" would be "tripulação do fim-de-jogo" or "tripulação do final".|
|Feb-16-11|| ||cro777: <Waitaka: "Endgame crew" "tripulação do final".> Nice.|
Équipage des finales, Endspielbesatzung,
Tripulación de finales, Equipaggio dei finali.
|Feb-16-11|| ||Golden Executive: <morfishine> Thank you very much for coming here. Nice to know that we have some things in common (with exception of NFL favourite teams ! lol). I really like football, my first SB was number V when i was a 9 year old kid and my Cowboys lost 16-13 vs the Baltimore Colts…sigh. Since then, I have seen all the SB´s.|
I did not (yet) read the book you mention, here in Mexico is not an easy thing to get chess books. I have only one about Bobby, i found it last year in a “used old books library” for just 30 pesos (about 2.50 Dlls) !! Its “Fischer/Spassky The New York Times report on the chess match of the century “ by Richard Roberts published September 1972 . It´s one of my treasures.
BTW, i heard about the newest Bobby Fischer related book: “Endgame” by Frank Brady, this is the link for the review
About TOGA I must say ouch ! I have zero experience.
Your ideas about get more organized on multiple fronts are cool, keep pushing, i will support you.
|Feb-16-11|| ||Golden Executive: <technical draw> You are welcome ! |
Always i smile before start reading your posts, after doing that, my smile is bigger. (except when you announced you were leaving).
Thanks for coming here !
p.s. you are the second of the three first´s
|Feb-16-11|| ||Golden Executive: <Waitaka> I am so glad to see you here.!|
Particularly i liked a lot your post some months ago about your thinkings between team dynamics, chess and human behavior.
The game vs NP was full of drama, so i would really like to know your thinkings after the game ended.
This was my first World Team Game and i know you participated in previous challenges, so your feed-back will be appreciated a lot.
You are very welcome here Brazilian (Brasileiro is correct?) Brother.
|Feb-17-11|| ||morfishine: <...here in Mexico is not an easy thing to get chess books...>...If you want, I'll try to find whatever book you like and mail it to you. There are excellent bookstores around here, especially a used-book store where I make lots of purchases. The Wade book is a must (plus Gligoric's book on the 1972 match vs Spassky) if you are trying to build up your Fischer collection. |
I do have one Brady book on Fischer "Profile of a Prodigy". Paperbacks aren't too heavy so shouldn't be too expensive to mail. :) Morf
|Feb-17-11|| ||Waitaka: <Golden Executive>
Thanks for asking. This will be a long post.
You know, I believe in the human being. When I saw the first Challenge, against GM AN, I was very excited, because I always believed that one plus one is more than two. And that a team with 100 people would easily beat a GM on a chess board.
It was very exciting to see the end of this first game with the World team winning.
When you compare this last game with the first one, you will see a totally different dynamics. To be honest, I see lots of similarities between the first game and the NP game after the endgame crew took over.
I can only speculate what happened.
Surely, the NP husband was a really problem, since it is very bad to play without confidence on your opponent. Good people exited the match, but I don't think this was the cause of the problem.
In fact, I felt a bit of disappointment because there was a feeling that this was too much used as an excuse for not winning this game.
Second, we had the one day per move issue. Yes, this is more a real problem, because in a team, in a large team, you must have communications, good communications, to go on the right direction.
But I don’t think this was the main problem, but it contributed to the main problem.
The main problem, for me, was the lack of patient from the more experienced players.
I do believe that CC is a totally different animal than OTB Chess. You cannot use the same logic, you cannot think the same way. And the experience that the "old" ch.com team gained on the first games was not shared with the "new" ch.com team. In part because of the one day pace. But mostly because of a bat attitude of many experienced players of dismissing the new players good will, and basically they said "you are wrong, you are new here, CC is different" and they did not take the time to explain why and how.
From me, and I believe that from others too, there was joy of the new approach of the new players, to dismiss hard engine work and voting on "human" moves. It is kind of boring to "scratch for centipawns", as Tabanus said. I was very bored from the two challenges before this last one, where the game became so computer driven, and so technical, that spoiled all the fun from me. The level was so high, that I could not enjoy, neither understand most of the discussion. Then this new group of people came, sharing the voice with the "experienced" world team and dared to think more by their own brains instead of following the old ones. I was excited again, and I supported it.
Well, I was wrong.
The centipawn scratchers were right. CC is a complete different animal than OTB. Lucky for us, our opponent was not an experienced CC player, so we did not lose. But... it was fun, I did learned a lot about chess, and about human beings, again.
This is just a point of view. I have a lot of points of view, not every one of them is coherent. :)
|Feb-17-11|| ||OhioChessFan: <waitaka: From me, and I believe that from others too, there was joy of the new approach of the new players, to dismiss hard engine work and voting on "human" moves. It is kind of boring to "scratch for centipawns", as Tabanus said.>|
Boring and necessary.
<Then this new group of people came, sharing the voice with the "experienced" world team and dared to think more by their own brains instead of following the old ones. I was excited again, and I supported it.>
The excitement was palpable. But as <Domdaniel> said in a related discussion, there's something to be said for not kicking the door in when you're a new member of any group, be it a church or a drug lair.
<Well, I was wrong. >
LOL. Took the words right out of my mind as I was reading along. I was thinking, "He's making some decent points, but he's just plain wrong." And we will have a group of new people next game who go through the same process. I don't know why this time was so much worse. I think it's when I decided the problem was incurable.
<The centipawn scratchers were right. CC is a complete different animal than OTB. Lucky for us, our opponent was not an experienced CC player, so we did not lose. But... it was fun, I did learned a lot about chess, and about human beings, again.>
All true, all true. I think maybe we got lucky to win a couple and should be happy with comfortable draws.
|Feb-17-11|| ||Waitaka: <OhioChessFan> I am happy that you agreed with my assessment, part or most of it at least. Sometimes I think I am the only one to have certain points of view. It is a very lonely feeling.|
|Feb-17-11|| ||OhioChessFan: I agree with most of it. I think <morfishine> had the feeling the old crew abandoned the game too early, and I can't say he's wrong. I guess we need to keep trying to work against the tide.|
|Feb-17-11|| ||Waitaka: Agree.|
|Feb-17-11|| ||Golden Executive: <cro777> You are very welcome !|
I am going to update my forum with your revised conceptual definition of spacebar master:
<in its strict signification, denotes an advanced chess player guiding and interpreting computer analysis in a skillfully masterful manner.>
<Check It Out> was the one that coined the <Endgame Crew> phrase and i liked your description.
Your posts clearly show that you have high skills in order to properly communicate your ideas (<AylerKupp> is another one of that kind). Also, you have a great knowledge about Correspondence Chess. Your idea of constructing our “playbook” sounds great to me.
|Feb-17-11|| ||Golden Executive: <morfishine> Thank you very much for your kind offer. I really appreciate it, so as this is a big shot, i will take some time in order to use it properly.|
|Feb-17-11|| ||Golden Executive: <Waitaka> As usual, your posts are very interesting. I am already taking some notes in order to give you and <OhioChessFan> my comments. My english is not so good so i need some time to write my posts.|
|Feb-17-11|| ||cro777: <Golden Executive> Thank you for your support. I have worked on a model of analysis to be used in the opening phase.
Here is a sketch. I'd appretiate your comments and suggestions.|
|Feb-17-11|| ||cro777: PRE-GAME OPENING PREPARATION –
A MODEL OF ANALYSIS
“It is more important to lead the games into positions we feel confortable with rather than finding the best move at any cost” (Ivar Bern, the 17th CC World champion).
Looking at the previous attempts of the World team to improve the opening phase of the game, Kurt Widmann suggested “to look at POTENTIAL POSITIONS achievable via solid opening lines...We must find an approach how to set goals based on positions, rather than moves, very early in the opening phase already“.
Model “A“ strategic goal is to get the games into complex positions where there are many options to play.
Gert Jan Timmerman vs The World
(A simulation of a re-match)
Having thoroughly analysed Timmerman's games, we may expect to reach this position:
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.f3 Be7
click for larger view
This position must be carefully analysed before selecting 1...c5 as an answer to usual Timmermann's 1.e4. According to Model “A“, we should try to lead the game into this position:
9.Qd2 0-0 10.0-0-0 Nbd7 11.g4 b5 12.g5 b4 13.Ne2 Ne8 14.f4 a5 15.f5 a4
click for larger view
Having a plan helps us to predict the game continuation for many moves forward.
|Feb-18-11|| ||morfishine: <cro777> I very much enjoyed this post on the simulation vs Timmerman. Your focus on the openings has brought to light 2 very important ideas I think the WT should work within: (a) Sound, solid development and (b) not releasing the tension too soon. The Najdorf, which becomes very sharp very quickly, is an ideal system to work within these parameters. |
Too often, and I'm not referring just to the WT, when tension is released too soon, a game can drift and become drawish. We should trust our sound, solid development, not fear complications and be happy to take on some risk. The "risk - reward" theory applied to chess so to speak.
While some may think there is little benefit in what you are doing, I am not in that camp. Keep at it. Sometimes it takes time for even the best of ideas to sink-in and cause someone to think to themself: "Now I know what you are talking about, I got it!" :) Morf
|Feb-18-11|| ||cro777: <morfishine> Thanks. Your and <Golden Executive>'s support means a lot to me. I'm planning to work on a sort of "catalog" of potential positions based on a thorough analysis of the opponents playing style.|
One of our weaknesses is that we play mostly move by move. We are lacking more positional planning. In one of the earlier World team games <kwid> pointed out: ". We need to place emphasis on the importance to adopt methods with a high success rate. Most important of all is an acceptance that correspondence play demands an absolute sound strategy to be successful at this playing level. Playing as a team may require guidance or stuartship to assure that consensus for move selection is based on sound evaluation not only derived from computer lines but also from an agreed long range strategy plan." That's why your ideas about some sort of coordination are most important.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 23 ·
from the Chessgames Store