|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 812 OF 963 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Mar-03-12
 | | Annie K.: Wuss. |
|
Mar-03-12
| | Annie K.: Heh, sorry, I just had to - I trust <hms> will handle the copyright infringement case with <Ohio>. ;) |
|
Mar-03-12
 | | Domdaniel: If a 'wuss' is one who prefers slightly unbalanced people to extremely unbalanced people, then I'm a ... oops, sorry, I fell over, must be a levitational anomaly. ;) |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | quantum.conscious: slightly unbalanced, extremely unbalanced?
ambiguities or labels?
i guess whatever word/concept is comfortable at a particular time , people tend to use and not just ordinary people - even extraordinary people (the ones practicising lavitaion even ;) ) |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | frogbert: here's the wotd - wuss of the day - puzzle, btw.
click for larger viewi'm white in a team match, played this game on wednesday - and had just noticed that after black's rather inevitable Qxd4 he also threatens Rxg3+ due to the bind on my queen. i had 12 minutes left for 8 moves when this position occured. my initial idea had been Rb1-b7 here, and i also considered Bc2/Bb1 which i dismissed after noticing the double threat of Rxg3+ and Qxa7. the question is, what did the wuzz play and what should he have played? especially for you, annie! |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | frogbert: i forgot to mention that this extremely dull position arose from the super-sharp qgd exchange variation. |
|
Mar-03-12
| | Annie K.: It was a joke and tribute to <Ohio>'s famous one-word responses, <frogbert>. Relax. :) |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | frogbert: annie - totally relaxed :o) and absolutely no offence taken. :o) but you're allowed to solve the puzzle anyway! |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | frogbert: (and i did play something i was able to calculate correctly, choosing the safest way out of the complications - so naming it 'wuzz of the day' was entirely appropriate and no sarcasm at all.) |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | hms123: <frogbert> My guess is that you played <1.Ra8>. My other guess is that you should have played the somewhat <annoying> (a term that Greg Shahade uses a lot in his videos) <Rb1>. It does clear the <f1> square for the king in case of <Rg3+>, and it is annoying. Beyond that, It's hard to say. <Annie> Copyright infringement is my specialty. My first case was to sue <Batted Elk> pro bono on behalf of my favorite beverage. |
|
Mar-03-12
 | | OhioChessFan: <Dom: Some may even radiate *negative* information.> A few of us at work use the term "brain vampires" for those people who leave you more stupid after you've met them than before. |
|
Mar-03-12
| | OhioChessFan: <Annie: reading the book> <hms: What a quaint concept that is these days. Very refreshing to hear that it is still done in some parts of the world. It is a lost art here.> I just started <reading a book> that quotes <personal letters>, (handwritten, sent through the mail) all of that, between Presidents and First Ladies. Double quaint. FWIW, I didn't realize that "balm" was a risque word back in the day. |
|
Mar-03-12
| | OhioChessFan: <Annie: Heh, sorry, I just had to - I trust <hms> will handle the copyright infringement case with <Ohio>.> Sounds more like a copyright infringement on Rush. |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | mworld: Ocf: when it comes to the mean, I mean qc. |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | hms123: <OCF>
<brain vampires>
I am adding it to my vocabulary. |
|
| Mar-03-12 | | frogbert: hms123, if the idea of Ra8 had even visited and said hello, i hopefully would've played it - but i entirely missed that strong option. much stronger than the move i chose, which only offered (safe) equality. and indeed Rb1 turns out to work out splendidly, but as too often is the case, i stopped my calculations of the line too early: in my head i went 31. Rb1 Qxd4 32. Rbb7 Rxg3+ 33. Kf1 - "wait, this looks way too scary - now he can even take on d3, can't he?" eh, no...
click for larger viewi didn't even consider white's options here, only noting that Nf6 covers h7, making the 7th-row doubling pretty harmless - or so i thought. in reality, for instance 33... Rxd3?? is mate in two after 34. Rxg7+ and 35. Nxg6+ mate. and for instance 33... Ree3 (giving the black king a square on e8) loses by force to 34. Rxg7+ Kh8 35. Ra8+! Kxg7 36. Ne6+ and off comes the black queen. in the line 31. Bb1 Qxd4 i simply concluded that both g3 and a7 hang, and and i can't possibly cover both, right? 
click for larger viewwrong. the rook covers g3 from a3 - through the rook on e3. so 32. Ra3! is perfectly fine; the e3-rook can't capture on a3 for obvious reasons - but overlooked that it would be useful/desirable to move the rook there. summing up, i didn't play Rb1-b7 (the best), Ra8 (also good) or the perfectly fine Bb1/Bc2. are there playable moves left?
click for larger viewi guess it depends on one's definition of playable. there were wussy moves available, for certain! |
|
| Mar-04-12 | | hms123: <frogbert> I thought that when you said
<and i did play something i was able to calculate correctly> that you meant you played a good shot (Ra8) instead of a better one. If you really wimped out, then did you play something like <Ra7> maybe? |
|
Mar-04-12
| | Domdaniel: <Ohio> -- <A few of us at work use the term "brain vampires" ...> I'm guessing that your work involves hunting down these brain vampires and driving a stake through their cerebellums? There's a movie in that. I'm sure Brad will want to play you. |
|
Mar-04-12
| | Domdaniel: < I didn't realize that "balm" was a risque word back in the day.> Me neither. I blame Edgar Allan Poe and his infamous question, "Is there balm in Gilead?". Latterly, users of Anglo-English have begun to confuse 'barmy' and 'balmy'. Even on a barmy day, it can be irritating. |
|
| Mar-04-12 | | hms123: <Dom> I thought the original quotation was: "Is there balm in Guillaume?" A bit more risque, n'est-ce pas? |
|
Mar-04-12
| | Domdaniel: < i forgot to mention that this extremely dull position arose from the super-sharp qgd exchange variation.> Significant, ackshly. Observation of other people's games at tournaments etc leads me to the awful conclusion that most games are decided in heavy piece confusion during time trouble, when anything goes and frequently does. Openings don't matter, unless you play one so badly that you lose quickly. Or your opponent blunders. Any opening will lead eventually to a chaotic position, with no time to think. Endings are not often reached. The only solution is to exchange queens early and play like the Kramnik of ten years ago. Or to grind away in the manner of Carlsen and Adams. |
|
Mar-04-12
| | Domdaniel: <frogbert> I am, alas, all too familiar with the "wait, this looks way too scary for me" line of thought. Reading Tal is a possible corrective, as it helps to develop the "heh, this should scare the shinola out of my opponent" attitude. Which is more positive and uplifting -- though not, of course, always successful. |
|
| Mar-04-12 | | frogbert: hms123, what did you mean? the rook already is on a7... like i said, i wish i'd seen the option of Ra8, but for some reason i missed that tactical theme entirely. and i messed up when calculating 3 other prrfectly good alternatives, as already explained. anyway, i wimped out with Kh2? Qxd4 Ra2 to cover against all 2nd row threats. then, after g5 Nxd5 Rxd3 Nxf6+ gxf6 Qxf5 it should've been a draw, but i actually managed to swindle my opponent to win even that position. |
|
| Mar-04-12 | | frogbert: <too familiar with the "wait, this looks way too scary for me" line of thought> it kind of depends: when i'm the presumedly (clearly) stronger player, i'm more likely to prefer avoiding "chaos" since the chance is that i'll be able to outsmart my opponent later on, even with no objective advantage - simply due to better understanding or seeing some tactical trick that s/he misses. however, when i'm the underdog or otherwise feel that there isn't too much to lose on complicating matters, i don't mind sharp stuff too much. but of course (?) i don't usually enter lines that i consider to be bad for me. the problem, however, is when i abort calculations too early based on a premature "this looks too scary" or "this looks bad" evaluation. this is a recurring theme when i go wrong in my games, like in the cited example. if i were working seriously on my chess i guess that doing something to correct this single issue might raise my rating by maybe as much as 100 points. the latter being kind of irrelevant in itself - the annoyance lies with the missed opportunities - but it's a measure of how much it impacts my results, per my estimation. |
|
| Mar-04-12 | | frogbert: <hms123, what did you mean? the rook already is on a7...> oh, you probably meant Ra2 - which essentially is what i did, but moving the king first and then the rook to a2. Ra2 and then Kh2 is the same, of course. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 812 OF 963 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
