Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing User Profile Chessforum

al wazir
Member since Feb-20-05 · Last seen Feb-19-20
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.
>> Click here to see al wazir's game collections. Full Member

   al wazir has kibitzed 26098 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Feb-19-20 Kenneth S Rogoff (replies)
al wazir: If "Trump at 1.6" means that he has 5 chances out of eight of winning (a probability of 5/8 = 0.625), then Sanders at 4.5 means he has a probability of 0.222..., Bloomberg at 5.0 means he has a probability of 0.2, etc. Add them up: 0.625 0.222... 0.2 0.05 0.05 0.02 ...
   Feb-19-20 I A Nataf vs L Roos, 2001 (replies)
al wazir: Easy.
   Feb-17-20 Louis Stumpers (replies)
al wazir: <LameJokes: I will post the answer and explanation on 17th Feb.> I didn't see this post until today. You should have waited a week before posting the answer. I solved it without looking at your answer. I'll post my solution before looking at yours. (You'll have to take my ...
   Feb-16-20 R Domenech vs Flohr, 1935 (replies)
al wazir: My idea, to simplify with 20...Rxd2 21. Rxd2 Rxd2 22. Kxd2 Nb3+ 23. Kc2 Nxc1 24. Kxc1 Kd6 25. Kc2 Kc5 26. Kc3, was similar, but it doesn't seem to work. I'm not sure why.
   Feb-12-20 D Foord vs E Kirk, 2010 (replies)
al wazir: An obvious ♕ sac.
   Feb-07-20 A H T dos Santos Fier vs R Aloma Vidal, 2018 (replies)
al wazir: Easy. (It helps that <CG> has posted other puzzles previously where this combination was employed.)
   Feb-05-20 K Petzold vs A Dreev, 2008 (replies)
al wazir: 26. Ne3 would have given white some counterplay: 26...Nxe3 27. Qxe3 Qxe3 28. fxe3 fxg2, and now white's connected passed ♙s are hard to stop.
   Feb-04-20 Zhao Jun vs R Preotu, 2019 (replies)
al wazir: 48. Nf5+ Kc4 49. Nd6+ Kd4 50. Ne6# would have ended the game two moves sooner. That would have made it even more beautiful. Did Jun overlook the combination the first time around?
   Jan-31-20 B Predojevic vs D Andreikin, 2016 (replies)
al wazir: I saw 11...Bg7, but not the rest of the 25-move combination.
   Jan-26-20 W Wayte vs E M Jackson, 1892 (replies)
al wazir: There were lots of ways for white to finish. For example, 19. Bg5 Qxd5 (19...Qxh3 20. Be7+ Ke8 21. Nxc7#) 20. Qxd5 Ba6 21. Rf1+ Ke8 22. Qe6#. Or 19. Qe7+ Kg8 20. Nf6+ gxf6 21. Qe6+ Kg7 22. Bh6+ Kxh6 23. Qxf6+ Kh5 24. Qg5#.
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

The Joy of LEX

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: <Shams> (or should I address you as <Rep. Shams>?): Is that a rule you are proposing? If not, you have lost your turn and <AgentRgent> is coming up to bat.

These are the rules of LEX:

1. Any number can play.

2. Players take turns in alphabetical order.

3. On his or her turn, a player can propose a new rule or a change or repeal of an existing rule.

4. A proposal for a new rule or for change or repeal of an existing rule is adopted if and only if it is approved by a majority of the participants.

5: A player who fails to propose a new rule or rule change or repeal in accordance with rule #3 on his or her turn within 24 hours loses that turn; and a proposed new rule or rule change or repeal is ratified if and only if it is approved by a majority of the players voting within 24 hours after it is proposed.

6. [I]n the next world game with white pieces, all LEX players vow to vote 1. c4.

It is now 3:35 pm, EDT.

Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: Whether what <Shams> has proposed is a rule or not, it conflicts with rule #5. If we were to adopt it, it would bring on a constitutional crisis. I'm afraid I have to vote "no."
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: I find crises exciting, so I vote yes.
May-29-10  AgentRgent: I vote Yes
May-29-10  SamAtoms1980: I vote "no."
May-29-10  Shams: WA State Open this weekend. I'll probably just pop in here once or twice and vote yes on whatever absurdities you all are proposing.
Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: <Shams>: Unless I have miscounted, it's a 2-2 tie. Your bill of urgencies will have to wait for another season.

<AgentRgent>: It's up to you now.

It is now 9:39 pm, EDT.

Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: It is now 9:55 pm, EDT. Since we have heard nothing from <AgentRgent>, his turn is over and my turn has begun.

By now all of you must have at least a glimmering of what LEX is about. It's a model of the democratic legislative and political processes. Or if you wish, it is a model of the British constitution. As you probably know, the U.K. doesn't have a written constitution. Their constitution consists of the entire corpus of British law since Magna Carta. Thus, every time Parliament passes a law, it is in fact amending the constitution, but it must do so within the framework of previously existing law. They do have a sort of supreme court, the "Law Lords," but their role in ruling on the constitutionality of laws is much more circumscribed than that of our Supreme Court.

As I said a few days ago, this is the first time I've tried playing LEX online, so this has been in the nature of an experiment. The conclusion I've drawn from the experiment is that in this mode LEX doesn't work very well. In my experience the game works best when everyone meets in a single room to vote or propose new legislation. (I like to use a whiteboard to keep a written record of the current status of the "constitution" and of proposed changes.) But in order to mimic the real-life legislative process, the participants should be able to get together in private to make deals and to form caucuses and conspiracies. (In a sense it is the ultimate "party game.") Because all communication here has been open, we have not been able to do that. When players are able to meet privately and join in cabals, however, that introduces an element of competition that has been lacking in the present game, and the action becomes quite cutthroat. Some individuals can acquire more power than the rest and the democracy can be replaced by a tyranny. (I think you realized that.)

Another conclusion I have drawn is that the game is far too slow when played this way. That too was a consequence of the way we communicated, since the only way to find out if someone had done something was to log into this forum, and none of us stayed logged in continuously.

But to sum it up, I think it's time to end the experiment. I therefore propose the following new rule:

6. This game is now over.

All who vote in favor are winners. I vote "yes."

May-31-10  SamAtoms1980: I vote "Yes"

From very early on I could see two things:

(1) There would likely be "pork-barrel politics" involved and that would probably be needed to get anything done

(2) A good illustration of why, in our actual Congress, it is so hard to get things done

But on an open forum, where everybody can see everything that gets proposed, it keeps the "pork-barrel politics" and backroom deals from getting going

I also propose the amendment that all winners go out for a barbecue. But, please, let's stay away from the pork barrels...

Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: <SamAtoms1980: I vote "Yes"> Damn, I was hoping to be the only winner . . .

Aut Caesar aut nihil. (Maybe that should be "Et Caesar et nihil.")

Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: It's 11:49 pm, EDT. Finitus est ludus.
Jun-01-10  AgentRgent: <al wazir: It is now 9:55 pm, EDT. Since we have heard nothing from <AgentRgent>, his turn is over and my turn has begun.> Was out of town for several days on vacation, hence why I voted against the silly 24hr rule... ;-P

As for ending the game.. I vote NO (mostly to be contrarian).

Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: Well, now that I know the point of the game......

I vote yes.

Jun-03-10  SamAtoms1980: <al wazir: Finitus est ludus.>

Ludus? Or iocus?

Dec-01-11  theodor: <<al wazir>: It's 11:49 pm, EDT. Finitus est ludus.> I think it's better to say: ''ora venientibus - ossa!''
May-03-19  Nisjesram: Apologies for my rude behaviour long ago, <al wazir>.

That was a long time ago . I am a different person now and treat sane , polite/decent people with respect.

Thank you for listening.



May-06-19  Nisjesram: Well , one question , <al wazir> , if you please , provided you promise not to laugh .

What did you say ? You promise ?

Thank you , mate :)

What if I become infinitely intelligent through some miracle . Infinitely more intelligent than Einstein or whoever.

Now what ? What do I do now to make money real fast?

Thank you



May-07-19  Nisjesram: 'X' , my friend , CEO of artificial intelligence company . Here is my conversation with him :

Me :
1)When I worked as a computer programmer years ago , I was java and sql programmer. There were lots and lots of people in this area

I want now a field in which I don't have to compete with so many people. And therefore I want to work in a field which is difficult to master so that I don't have to compete with lots and lots of people.

2)now , machine learning / artificial intelligence/deep learning - again lots and lots of people would be there.

3)However, if they are not difficult , then soon enough , lots and lots of people would be there in this area too.

2)for example , quantum theory is tough so there will never be too many people who can master quantum theory. Many programmers can not master quantum theory. Whereas java , sql and such - even a guy whose intellect is of a 10th grader , could learn these.

Correct ?

'X' : correct.

Me : That is what I am looking for. Some problem , some customer need which requires high intellect for solution


May-22-19  Nisjesram: One thing that really, really bothered me that I was on the ignore list of <al wazir>.

I used to think "Oh, man , how stupid I have been to be on the ignore list of <al wazir> - one of the nicest persons after <saffuna>. Polite , sane , intelligent.

I have wronged him. Shame on me"

I behaved badly with him - I was a jerk , though that was long , long ago but still .

And I apologized to him many, many times over a long , long span of time.

I repented.

And when <al wazir> took me off ignore , some weight was off my chest .

He may put me on ignore again but if he does , it will not be because I messed with him , insulted him.

Always be nice to nice people - that is my rule. Never, never, never insult nice , polite, sane , intelligent people.


Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: <Nisjesram: One thing that really, really bothered me that I was on the ignore list of <al wazir>.> I took you off Ignore because you sometimes post worthwhile comments.

Do you know why I put you on my I-list in the first place?

Part of the reason was your food faddism (I don't care if you're a vegan, but why do you have to go on and on about it?) and part was your harping about the benefits of meditation. Also, I don't care for indoctrination in ancient Vedic lore.

But the main reason was that you keep flooding the site with your complaints and personal spats with other kibitzers. You must be one of the world's fastest typists, or do little else but post here. From time to time I have -- gently, I think -- suggested that you should stop taking everything so personally, since any comment posted by an anonymous kibitzer is, ipso facto, depersonalized. I never read them, but they occupy a lot of space on the page. By putting you on Ignore I eliminated all that distraction and achieved a much higher SNR.

But you're still doing it.

Aug-02-19  Nisjesram: Indoctrination about Vedic lore ?

What the hell you talking about , mate ?

I don't care about any lore.

For me it is all about empiricism and falsifiability.

Vedic lore ?


That is why I left this site because the quality of conversation is very low here.

Well , que sera sera :)


Premium Chessgames Member
  Diademas: At least he took your advice and stopped taking everything so personally...
Aug-03-19  Nisjesram: <Diademas: At least he took your advice and stopped taking everything so personally>


Hey <al wazir> , don't take it personally and I don't intend to sound arrogant but most all of you are kindergarteners compared to me.

There is one user here who I consider my teacher , I learned a lot from him. But soon I am going to overtake him too.

And there was this clown "<nisjesram> , I am going to cause your meltdown "


There is no way I can take anything you kindergarteners say personally.

I humored you kindergarteners for a long time....One of the kindergarteners was like "earlier <nisjesram> had very nice words to say for me and now he is saying....I can not tolerate this ...I will thrown tantrums in member support forum "

Hahaha. Yeah , I humored you kindergarteners for a long time and you lost touch with reality even more. Hahaha

Do I give a damn about you kindergarteners ? I can stop posting here any moment. And I showed that.

I am a very very advanced meditator who is always blissful without needing anything . I can stop any thought any moment so no question of taking any thing personally because anything that one tajes personally is in one's thoughts....No thoughts , no hassles.

Compared to nisargadatta/ramana/Jesus, I am still a fifth grader , I hasten to add (earlier I was kindergartener compared to them.....And you all are not yet kindergarteners on that scale )

No offense....just playing :)

Cheers :)


Aug-03-19  Nisjesram: A smart person would say something like "Hey <nisjesram> , these materialistic kindergarteners would not grasp what nisargadatta saying , there is no way they are ready for what you saying. You throwing pearls in front of swine. Are they capable of understanding meditation ? What are they doing in this site anyway ? They come here to kill time , to deal with their boredom. But what is a meditator doing with such people. Meditator always raising his level up , so no question of boredom and no time to kill. Use the time to meditate instead "

I would say "good advice"

No offense ....just saying :)

Cheers :)


Aug-03-19  Nisjesram: Anyone who read post of <diademas> here , please forgive him.

He has been obsessed with me for quite sometime . And his obsession has worsened since admins heaped humiliation on him. He was like "you did not answer my question did admins heap humiliation on me ..."

And I was like "I have answered but your intelligence level is very low and therefore I have to spell out everything for you. I am going to spell it out for you again "

I spelt it out and he understood apparently. But his obsession with me worsened. Very immature person - taking everything personally.

Just saying :)

Cheers :)


Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 3)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>

A free online guide presented by
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any gratuitous name-calling of any members—including Admin and Owners—or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific user and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

You are not logged in to
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us

Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC