|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 55 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Oct-16-06
 | | OhioChessFan: Percy Blakeney on The World Vs. Nickel page:
<I suspect hjhjhjh is just one of our Martian players...>We should play as The Universe next time not to risk disqualification... |
|
| Oct-16-06 | | Rocafella: <OhioChessFan: There is a new website called "I_____OnVladimir: The Six Degrees of Kramnik".
You used a restroom that someone else used, and that person used a restroom that someone else used........> |
|
| Oct-25-06 | | Brettwith2ts: I don't remember who, but in ChessGames challenge (AN vs World), somebody posted the following joke: |
|
| Oct-25-06 | | Brettwith2ts: Q: How many people at a chess tournament does it take to change a lightbulb? A: Here is the current state of research... You need one to complain about the lighting. A second will say he thinks the light is fine. A third suggests the tournament director be called, and number four fetches him. An aged player (5) reminisces about the lighting levels at Nottingham 1936. The director (6) can't be found, but his deputy (7) arrives. Player eight says that if they increase the lighting levels it will reflect into his eyes. Number nine says they should have fluorescent lighting. Player ten says it's just a question of replacing the dead lightbulb, but player 11 thinks the bulb hasn't been working properly since the tournament began. The deputy arbiter asks an assistant arbiter (12) to make up a sign : 'Bulb defective.' A democrat (13) suggests taking a vote on whether to change the bulb and a businessman (14) forms the lightbulb changing association (LCA) as a pressure group to argue for better lighting. The world champion (15) is elected chairman. The FIDE president (16) sets up a working party (17-20) to establish agreed lighting levels with the LCA. The LCA chairman then has a row with its other members about direct/indirect lighting, and storms off with his lawyer (21) to found the Association for Changing Lightbulbs (ACL). The challenger for the world title (22) suddenly says he will not play under FIDE lighting. Three sponsors (23-25) emerge to hold the FIDE (direct light), LCA (fluorescent) and ACL (reflected light) championships, but none can match the interest attracted by Fischer (26) playing Spassky (27) with the new Fischer lightbulb, whose incandescence increases the longer you think. The last sane player on earth (28) sneaks into the playing room to change the defective bulb, but his replacement has the wrong fitting. His scream of anguish reveals him, and he is expelled from world chess for creating a disturbance. |
|
| Oct-25-06 | | Brettwith2ts: Ah, I found it! Tomlinsky, World vs Arno Nikel, page 474! |
|
| Nov-01-06 | | fgh: <fgh>: Toilet for dummies :-) |
|
| Nov-01-06 | | fgh: <fgh>: The Toiletberg variations by Silvio Bachailov :-) |
|
Nov-02-06
 | | TheAlchemist: <Open Defence, Nov-02-06, Chessgames Challenge >: ...guess being ranked the #1 Hottest Girl isn't enough to get some attention here :( |
|
Nov-02-06
| | TheAlchemist: <Open Defence>'s further commentary regarding the previous quote: "I guess it was to be expected considering I am surrounded by Chess Nerds who probably think Rybka is sexier than Fritz..." |
|
Nov-04-06
| | TheAlchemist: <Ilgiz Tashkhodzhaev, Nov-04-06, Gary W Lane >: User: BIDMONFA ONFA, Bid M.
http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/... |
|
Nov-06-06
| | TheAlchemist: <Chessgames Challenge, Nov-06-06> <azaris>: For those who missed it 500 pages back, Thorsson's Law of Pragmatism states: "Play what works, even if it violates maxims and truisms." <Marco65>: <Thorsson> May I ask you and other people believing in the Law of Pragmatism a simple question that forces a yes/no answer? If a deep computer analysis evaluates move A at +0.50 and move B at +0.35, but A appears to be an anti-positional move violating general principle while B seems perfectly ok on this regard, what would you choose? <azaris>: <May I ask you and other people believing in the Law of Pragmatism a simple question that forces a yes/no answer? If a deep computer analysis evaluates move A at +0.50 and move B at +0.35, but A appears to be an anti-positional move violating general principle while B seems perfectly ok on this regard, what would you choose?> Yes.
<Tabanus>: http://www.googlebattle.com/index.p... |
|
| Nov-09-06 | | Towershield: On the Topalov page:
ikipemiko: <RAY> "if" is a great word but you use it uncorrectly. |
|
| Nov-21-06 | | Scarecrow: These were consecutive posts, they made me laugh:
<Nov-20-06, Chessgames Challenge: The World vs A Nickel, 2006:Chessgames Challenge: 27...Rac8 [diagram]
twinlark: @#$% me!> |
|
| Nov-21-06 | | Stevens: <Towershield: On the Topalov page: ikipemiko: <RAY> "if" is a great word but you use it uncorrectly.> that is an absolute beauty! |
|
| Nov-25-06 | | Rocafella: azaris: <I wouldn't be surprised if there is a hidden clause in the contract>
Of course you wouldn't be surprised because you'd never know it was there since it was hidden. |
|
| Nov-30-06 | | acirce: <azaris>: <Bent Larsen was wrong. Apparently, with a knight on f8 you CAN get mated.> Deep Fritz vs Kramnik, 2006 |
|
Nov-30-06
| | TheAlchemist: <notsodeepthought, Nov-11-05, Zaw Win Lay >: <Zaw Win Lay - a name to remember>
Certainly <Win Lay> sounds like a successful night in two important departments. |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | themadhair: On User: Open Defence limericking about the Kramnik blunder to Fritz: <tpstar>:
<Vlad must have had too much liquor
He couldn't have lost any quicker
Swift mate on h7
Fritz stock goes to Heaven
Conspiracy theories get thicker> |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | Archives: Wow, <tpstar> should put out a rap album ;) |
|
Dec-03-06
 | | Domdaniel: This:
<babakova>: "Mein kampf" should be amended to this:
"Mein Kampf... or Yours?" |
|
| Dec-05-06 | | Rocafella: <Read Aug-11-04 cu8sfan--Daniel Freeman> Read Cogano's response too. Was that guy on crack or somethin? |
|
Dec-15-06
 | | chancho: From the Kasparov page
<Archives: "kasparov" spelt backwards is "patzer". If you got "vorapsak" then you did it wrong.> |
|
Dec-17-06
| | TheAlchemist: Thanks to <OhioChessFan> for notifying me of the following post: <tpstar, Jan-21-06, Topalov vs I Sokolov, 2006 > : I held a quick seance to determine the next move:
Alekhine = 18. f4
Botvinnik = 18. Ba3!?
Capablanca = 18. exd5
Tal = 18. Nxc7!?
Nakamura = 18. Qh5!?
Kramnik = 1/2-1/2 |
|
| Dec-18-06 | | TheBB: <twinlark, Dec-16-06, User: OhioChessFan > : I don't promise not to never misoverestimate you and nor shall I never promise not to use multiple double negatives. |
|
Dec-22-06
| | TheAlchemist: <yoozum, Feb-13-05, Dmitry Jakovenko >: LOL. When I wrote <Slaves> I meant to write Slavs. Nice typo. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 55 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
