< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jan-02-06|| ||ahmadov: <Karpova:><...some people's search for a punching bag with <chessgames.com> not being the cause for this permanent bashing.> Please, can you write this in Russian. I cannot understand the point in this part of your sentence (I need to improve my English with your help).|
|Jan-02-06|| ||Karpova: <ahmadov>
sorry, i don't speak russian.
but what i wanted to express was that some people need a punching bag - someone to make fun of and to project hatred onto.
and now <chessgames.com> gives them the opportunity to bash kramnik. but this is not <chessgames.com>'s fault because that's what <chessgames.com> is - a site to talk about players and chessgames.
|Jan-02-06|| ||ahmadov: Ooops, I thought you are Russian for your nick name. I even could guess that you are related to Anatoly Karpov. As for your sentence, I think it makes sense now. I think it is human unappreciation that they sometimes misuse good things that are offered to them.|
|Jan-02-06|| ||thathwamasi: <Karpova> I would second your opinion on this. I actually donno why people tend to hate the likes of kramnik and botvinnik so much in spite of thier wins in the past. I think its a bias. People always tries to identify themselves subconciously to some great players and hates others. All said and done, Kramnik would defintely go on to the list of capablanca, alekhine, fischer, karpov and kasparov. So there is no point in bashing him. Lets learn how to play from his good games and lets learn how not to play from his blunders.|
|Jan-02-06|| ||Karpova: <tathwamasi: People always tries to identify themselves subconciously to some great players and hates others.>|
yes, that's true. while it's everybody's own decision if he spends his whole time slagging someone off or not, i think it's quite sad that you can't discuss interesting facts on the Vladimir Kramnik page anymore. you have to decide whether to bash kramnik or defend him.
|Jan-02-06|| ||hintza: <Even trolls are right some time> Yes, you'd know.|
|Jan-02-06|| ||thathwamasi: <Karpova : you can't discuss interesting facts on the Vladimir Kramnik page anymore. you have to decide whether to bash kramnik or defend him.> Correct !!! I view this whole issue in a very personal way....All said and done, both topalov and kramnik are better players than me. So I am more interested in improving my game rather than taking a side and bashing one and defending the other.|
|Jan-03-06|| ||Karpova: <thathwamasi>
take kramnik's homepage for example, there are many interesting interviews (on his predecessors, art, etc.) but this is completely ignored if posted on Vladimir Kramnik.
it's almost cynical when one of the main kramnik bashers writes someting like: <This is tiring. Why must we keep on repeating the same stuff over and over again?> (page 537)
|Jan-03-06|| ||alicefujimori: <Karpova>If you can find ONE post of mine that I'd said anything unjustly bad about Kramnik, then point it out. Or else take those biased, pathetic words of yours back and eat them.|
|Jan-03-06|| ||Karpova: <alicefujimori>
lol, what a coincidence that you deleted your gamecollections on kramnik (kramnik's destiny...getting crushed if i remember it correctly would have given me loads of examples but now that they are gone.
anyway, you are one of the guys keeping the discussion about the legitimacy of kramnik's title alive so that nothing else can be discussed there. okay, your posts are always very careful so that nobody can really blame you of insulting or bashing kramnik though you display creativity in nitpicking making others wonder if there could be doubts about kramnik's claim for the title (<Kasparov got stripped off his FIDE World Champion title in 1993, so he holds no official title since then.>).
sorry if i hurt your feelings because i seemed to compare you to the less subtle kramnik-bashers you have such a good relationship to on the kramnik-page.
|Jan-03-06|| ||alicefujimori: <Karpova> If you've ever cared to look at the posts, you would've realised that they are not there to question Kramnik's legitimacy to the title. They were there because they were facts. (ie. The truth that had actually occurred) I don't blame you for being so blind on the issue because you're just one of those typical Kramnik-fan that couldn't even differentiate between Kramnik-bashing and discussing about facts.|
Anyway, I hope that I haven't hurt your feelings, because you are basically showing everybody here that you don't even have the guts to go to the Kramnik page and factually refute any of the points that I'd raised. In stead, you resorted to talking behind people's back in another page. How pathetic...and low-class.
PS: A gamecollection is what a gamecollection supposed to be (ie. For personal references). <danielpi> and some other posters have similiar gamecollections where they include all the losses by Topalov between all the Kramnik-Topalov encounters. (Basically trying to degrade Topalov comparing to Kramnik). So are you calling them Topalov-bashers as well??
|Jan-03-06|| ||Karpova: obviously you didn't understand that there was another discussion going on here that transposed into a discussion about the kramnik-page so i didn't talk behind your back 8i didn't even say your name). i have to admit that this wasn't so easy to find out, so i don't blame you for that.|
in fact i read some of your posts and know the way you are presenting facts. i even said that you are not comparable to the kramnik-bashers that take possession of the kramnik-page, though you post quite a lot.
so why not going to the kramnik-page and refuting the kramnik-bashers? well, i don't post there quite often and there are enough other posters who fare quite well in unmasking kramnik-bashers (of course not you, you are no kramnik-basher ;-)).
another thing is that i have a life aside from <chessgames.com> and cannot post long articles on the kramnik-page every twenty minutes.
<How pathetic...and low-class.>
the only thing that fits this description is your parlance. seems like every breath of air was enough to unsettle you.
maybe that's why you present only <facts> on the kramnik-page and let others do the donkeywork?
bashing is bashing, regardless of the person being bashed. so if someone bashes topalov he's a topalov-basher imho.
but should i complain about topalov-bashing on the kramnik-page? lol
|Jan-03-06|| ||alicefujimori: <Karpova><didn't even say your name> Come on now. You took a quote of mine and accused me of Kramnik-bashing. Why making pathetic excuses like this?|
<maybe that's why you present only facts on the kramnik-page and let others do the donkeywork> Oh. So it is wrong to talk about the truth? If you haven't being lazy and did some reading, the facts that I'd presented were actually accompanied by analysis of those facts. Oops, I just forgot that you're one of those blind Kramnik-supporters that lacks total objectivity when it comes to the truth.
<post long articles on the kramnik-page>Long posts doesn't mean time-consumming. It has to do with your brain and your fingers.
<the only thing that fits this description is your parlance. seems like every breath of air was enough to unsettle you. maybe that's why you present only..> Come on now. You just accused me of Kramnik-bashing without any evidence/facts to support your claim. How low can you sink to?
<bashing is bashing>Can you even differentiate between bashing and debating with facts? Show me an example where I had "bashed" Kramnik. (That's if you can..) If you can't proof something that you've claimed, then you're definitely no different to those real Kramnik-bashers in the Kramnik page. Low and pathetic.
|Jan-03-06|| ||Karpova: <You just accused me of Kramnik-bashing without any evidence/facts to support your claim.>|
well, i had evidence and you know that as good as i do but you deleted the evidence. so <How low can you sink to?>
<Oops, I just forgot that you're one of those blind Kramnik-supporters that lacks total objectivity when it comes to the truth.>
i doubt it doesn't have to do with brain but with fingers only to write something like this.
<<bashing is bashing>Can you even differentiate between bashing and debating with facts? Show me an example where I had "bashed" Kramnik. (That's if you can..) If you can't proof something that you've claimed, then you're definitely no different to those real Kramnik-bashers in the Kramnik page. Low and pathetic.>
now you give a false colour. is that what you call <presenting facts and accompanying them with facts>?
this was actually an answer to <alicefujimori: <danielpi> and some other posters have similiar gamecollections where they include all the losses by Topalov between all the Kramnik-Topalov encounters. (Basically trying to degrade Topalov comparing to Kramnik). So are you calling them Topalov-bashers as well??>
but you don't seem to recognize what you wrote short time ago.
i still don't know why you act so belligerent but i'm not a psychologist so how should i know that?
sorry, but you can't provoke me.
|Jan-03-06|| ||alicefujimori: <well, i had evidence and you know that as good as i do but you deleted the evidence> So you admit finally that you're being a low-class, pathetic loser that couldn't find a single fact to support your accusations. Thanks for admitting your mistake.|
<i doubt it doesn't have to do with brain> The fact that you don't use one when you write your posts doesn't mean that other people don't use them too.
<now you give a false colour>I think the one that is confused is you. The point was, even if <danielpi> had such a gamecollection that still doesn't mean that he is bashing Topalov. The purpose of a gamecollection is for PERSONAL referencing. What <danielpi> personally "thinks" (ie. a gamecollection) about Topalov is different to if he had actually openly posted statements that bashed Kramnik.
For example: You can think about killing someone. But as long as you haven't kill that person, you still haven't commit a murder.
Get the picture? What one thinks personally and how one openly make statements are two totally different things. That is why I questioned your understanding of the word, "bashing". It seems that you cannot differentiate whether someone is bashing or not. The fact that you chose to ignore my question and couldn't find any facts to support your accusations towards me just goes on to show that you're no different to those real Kramnik-bashers in the Kramnk page.
|Jan-03-06|| ||ughaibu: There are various motivations for games collecting and I dont see why collections for "personal referencing" would employ sensational headings for the individual games(?)|
|Jan-03-06|| ||Karpova: <alicefujimori: So you admit finally that you're being a low-class, pathetic loser that couldn't find a single fact to support your accusations. Thanks for admitting your mistake.>|
okay, i'll answer you though you are far from being objective.
you had a game collection with comments in it that were clearly insulting kramnik as a person. you deleted this collection and now you act as if you never had one but you know you did that and i know you did that so all you can obviously do is trying to insult me.
that's not what you need a brain for.
<The fact that you don't use one when you write your posts doesn't mean that other people don't use them too.>
your niveau hit rock bottom.
<I think the one that is confused is you. The point was, even if <danielpi> had such a gamecollection that still doesn't mean that he is bashing Topalov.>
no, you know what your game collection looked like since you made it and deleted it (you remember?). now, creating a game collection doesn't mean bashing but using the description of the games included to insult the player who played (lost) that game means bashing him. that's my opinion.
<For example: You can think about killing someone. But as long as you haven't kill that person, you still haven't commit a murder.>
you can kill a person an blot all evidence out but that the evidence isn't there anymore doesn't mean you didn't kill that person.
get the picture?
<What one thinks personally and how one openly make statements are two totally different things. It seems that you cannot differentiate whether someone is bashing or not. The fact that you chose to ignore my question and couldn't find any facts to support your accusations towards me just goes on to show that you're no different to those real Kramnik-bashers in the Kramnk page.>
well, your game collection as long as it existed was open to everybody (i read the comments to the game). do you really want to say that the comments on the games weren't an open statement? lol, that's hilarious!
anyway, denying the existence of the game collection doesn't make sense here since that's a discussion between you and me only or do you really think that six billion human beings are following our discussion and say <i doubt alicefujimori ever had that collection...>.
i have to admit that i was near taking you seriously after your recent posts on the kramnik-page but now all you do is misinterpreting my posts, denying facts and insulting me but i have to disappoint you since i'm above of that.
|Jan-03-06|| ||alicefujimori: <ughaibu>Good question. I am sure you can remember how your teachers used to teach you how to learn for exams, right? Teachers commonly tells you of 2 effective ways to learn for exams.|
1) Mind mapping (ie. drawing pictures, etc)
2) Using keywords that could recall your memory.
The use of sensational headings is exactly because of (2) above. When I see those headings, I could immediately recall what happened or which phase of the game did the error occurred.
For example, I've used phrases like "Kramnik just doesn't know how to play the endgame properly" in one of the games as its heading. When I saw that phrase, I could immediately recall that the cause of Kramnik's loss was due to his bad endgame play in that game. Headings like "Enough Najdorf, Kramnik" will remind me that that was the last game that Kramnik had tried the Najdorf. Another example is the heading "Kramnik's bad reaction to suprises". When I see that heading, I could then immediately recall that Kramnik lost that game because he reacted badly to a suprise from his opponent.
Get the picture? Want more examples? Or are you going to keep biting my head off on this?
|Jan-03-06|| ||Karpova: <alicefujimori>
please calm down a bit! we don't want you to die from a heartattack.
to quote you again: <Why making pathetic excuses like this?>
|Jan-03-06|| ||alicefujimori: <okay, i'll answer you though you are far from being objective. you had a game collection with comments...etc> |
1) You kept denying the fact that a gamecollection was suppose to be for personal referencing.
2) The comments didn't insult Kramnik as a "person". The comments were at most harsh on his play during that particular game. I've never personally attacked him as a "person" in those game descriptions with statements like "he sucks", "he's pathetic", "he's boring". For more info on the gamecollection, see my reply to <ughaibu>
<...but using the description of the games included to insult the player who played (lost) that game means bashing him. that's my opinion>
Again. You failed to take into account that a gamecollection is supposed to be for personal referencing. What I think and how I felt about a game is totally different to whether I had openly made insulting statements about him.
<you can kill a person an blot all evidence out but that the evidence isn't there anymore doesn't mean you didn't kill that person. get the picture> But the problem is if you haven't done any killing in the first place, no matter what happens you still haven't done any killing. Get the picture?
<well, your game collection as long as it existed was open to everybody...etc> You're contradicting yourself. You clearly acknowledged that <creating a game collection doesn't mean bashing>. The headings/description is actually part of the gamecollection, you know?
Besides, I've made a gamecollection, but that does not mean that you're forced to click it. The gamecollection was actually "closed" (ie. for my personal viewing) until someone decided to get curious to see how I "think" about the games by clicking into the gamecollection. Surely you can differentiate between how one feels and whether one has actually bashed someone openly, right?
<denying the existence of the game collection doesn't make sense here> I never denied anything. It was YOU that has been putting words into my mouth.
Basically, you're just getting pissed here for unable to backup your accusations. It's useless for you to keep referring to the gamecollection when the purpose of a gamecollection was just for my own personal referencing in the first place. At the end of the day, you not only avoided all my questions, but also made yourself lower and more pathetic than what you already were.
|Jan-03-06|| ||thathwamasi: <Karpova> I just dont understand why people are so ready to criticise...why cant people live with mediocrity????My dad used to say "life is like this..If a bus driver arrives late, people would bash him, but if he arrives on time no one would appreciate him as it becomes his duty......" similairly, people are willing to bash kramnik when he loses, but they dont appreciate much when he wins as they feel whts the big deal in a gm winning...I dont mean to say, i am a kramnik supporter cos I identify myself only with the game and not the players...|
|Jan-03-06|| ||alicefujimori: <Karpova>Whether you believe it or not is really none of anyone's business. And your believes does not affect its truthfulness either. The fact that you cannot even find anything to support your accusations is enough to suggest that you're one pathetic loser that is no different to the real Kramnik-bashers.|
|Jan-03-06|| ||AgentRgent: Regarding this game (as opposed to the blathering that's spilled over from the Kramnik page), are certain people really reduced to criticizing Kramnik for missing a tactic on move 34 of a rapid game? Note that his opponent missed the same tactic two moves prior?|
|Jan-04-06|| ||Karpova: <alicefujimori>
you are still give a wrong colour.
i said that creating a gamecollection itself doesn't mean bashing even if it includes only losses from a special player. but creating a gamecollection with libellous comments on a special player is indeed bashing.
that's what you did and everybody could have had a look at the gamecollection even if you just made it for <personal reference>.
so that's my point of view and i kept it short so if you prevaricate anyone else can read what i wrote and anyone else can get an idea of you verbally harassing me and trying to pick a fight with me.
i won't discuss this subject anymore. you disgraced yourself enough already by your constant discourteousness.
i agree with you. it's the games that matter and not the player. who knows kramnik or whomever personally? <Ray Keene> maybe but who else?
some statements can be discussed (like short's on female chessplayers) or facts but i don't see how anyone could develop hatred towards kramnik or maybe topalov.
|Jan-04-06|| ||goldthread: Shirov missed 32.Ng6+, winning immediately.
Kramnik missed 33... Qxe3, which would have enabled him to keep on fighting for the draw.
Looks like this was a time scramble.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·