User Profile: Phony Benoni

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

Kibitzing

Phony Benoni
Member since Feb-10-06 · Last seen Jun-11-22

Greetings, O Seeker After Knowledge! You have arrived in Dearborn, Michigan (whether you like it or not), and are reading words of wisdom from a player rated 2938--plus or minus 1000 points.
However, I've retired from serious play--not that I ever took playing chess all that seriously. You only have to look at my games to see that. These days I pursue the simple pleasures of finding games that are bizarre or just plain funny. I'd rather enjoy a game than analyze it.
For the record, my name is David Moody. This probably means nothing to you unless you're a longtime player from Michigan, though it's possible that if you attended any US Opens from 1975-1999 we might have crossed paths. Lucky you.
If you know me at all, you'll realize that most of my remarks are meant to be humorous. I do this deliberately, so that if my analysis stinks to High Heaven I can always say that I was just joking.
As you can undoubtedly tell from my sparkling wit, I'm a librarian in my spare time. Even worse, I'm a cataloger, which means I keep log books for cattle. Also, I'm not one of those extroverts who sit at the Reference Desk and help you with research. Instead, I spend all day staring at a computer screen updating and maintaining information in the library's catalog. The general public thinks Reference Librarians are dull. Reference Librarians think Catalogers are dull.
My greatest achievement in chess, other than tricking you into reading this, was probably mating with king, bishop and knight against king in a tournament game. I have to admit that this happened after an adjournment, and that I booked up like crazy before resuming. By the way, the fact I have had adjourned games shows you I've been around too long.
My funniest moment occurred when I finally got a chance to pull off a smothered mate in actual play. You know, 1.Nf7+ Kg8 2.Nh6+ Kh8 3.Qg8+ Rxg8 4.Nf7#. When I played the climactic queen check my opponent looked at the board in shocked disbelief and said, "But that's not mate! I can take the queen!"

Finally, I must confess that I once played a positional move, back around 1982. I'll try not to let that happen again.

>> Click here to see Phony Benoni's game collections.

   Phony Benoni has kibitzed 18634 times to chessgames [more...]

   Jun-11-22 M Blau vs Keres, 1959

Phony Benoni: Not a good recommendation for the DERLD. Out of 59 moves, White makes only three in Black's half of the board. And two of those conist of 3.Bb5 and 6.Bxc6.

   Jun-11-22 chessgames.com chessforum

Phony Benoni: Er, it's back. Karpov vs Timman, 1988

   Jun-10-22 Orlo Milo Rolo

Phony Benoni: Marco!

   Jun-10-22 Lilienthal vs Bondarevsky, 1947

Phony Benoni: Another one for you King Hunters. Black's monarch travels fron g8 to b8, then takes the Great Circle Route back to h3 before calling it a day.

   Jun-10-22 GrahamClayton chessforum

Phony Benoni: <GrahamClayton> I've posted a question for you at L T Magee vs J Holland, 1948

   Jun-10-22 L T Magee vs E L Holland, 1948

Phony Benoni: <GrahamClayton> The source you cite, <Chess Review, May 1948, p. 24>, gives Black's name as <E Holland> "Chess Life" (June 5, 1948, p. 1) has a table of results giving <E L Holland>. That form also appears in USCF rating supplements for a player fro ...

   Jun-09-22 Biographer Bistro

Phony Benoni: SkinnVer Here Among the Fold?

   Jun-09-22 Flohr vs Bondarevsky, 1947

Phony Benoni: Black's bishop makes me think of Godzilla emerging from the depths of the ocean to wreak havoc. However, in the end it's his Two Little Friends who steal the show. Well, maybe not so litt.

   Jun-06-22 W Ritson-Morry vs G T Crown, 1947

Phony Benoni: it was the last round. Rison-Morry was mired in last place. These things happen.

   Jun-06-22 W Adams vs M Kagan, 1947

Phony Benoni: Some more informztion. The game was published in <Chess Review>, March 1948, p. 23. Black's name is given as "M Kagan", and the location as "Massachusetts". There is no other game data, but I think we can now safely assume Black is <Milton Kagan>. Earlier in the ...

indicates a reply to the comment.

Living in the Past

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 831 OF 914 · Later Kibitzing>
Sep-07-16		WannaBe: One NFL team that I missed, MIA/SEA (-10.5) East Coast team playing a very good West Coast team.

Sep-07-16		keypusher: <WannaBe: One NFL team that I missed, MIA/SEA (-10.5) East Coast team playing a very good West Coast team.> Very curious about that game, since the Fish have a new coach. Hope springs eternal, but I don't see Miami being very good this year.

Sep-07-16		WannaBe: Thanks <keypusher> I'm gonna bet the house on SEA and retire Friday morning.

Sep-08-16		WannaBe: Re: Phony Benoni chessforum I sure know how to pick them.

Sep-08-16		OhioChessFan: <Rice football: Calvin Anderson solves Rubik's cube behind his back in 25 seconds> http://www.ncaa.com/news/football/a...

Sep-08-16		Phony Benoni: I don't know why such a fuss is made about solving Rubik's Cube. The solution is quite simple: http://image.shutterstock.com/z/sto...

Sep-08-16		WannaBe: Took NYY tonight, need to win by 2 runs, or more. Took first half of CAR/DEN over 21 pts, then it dropped to 20.5, so took the over again. All bets $10.00

Sep-08-16		Penguincw: <Rice football: Calvin Anderson solves Rubik's cube behind his back in 25 seconds> Not bad (my best ever was non-blindfold, about 21 seconds). 21 seconds is also the World Record, blindfolded.

Sep-08-16		OhioChessFan: Based on past history, I'm going to mortgage Graceland and put it on the CAR/DEN under.

Sep-08-16		Penguincw: Jim Joyce, back at it again: http://m.mlb.com/news/article/20024.... Not a fan of either team, but when I first saw it, I thought it was a WP/PB (but in slo-mo, saw it was clearly fouled). Sucks that the Astros couldn't review or protest the call, although it didn't look like it cost them the game (well, who knows).

Sep-09-16		WannaBe: Got lucky with the first half over (two bets), also won that NYY/TB bet, not sure if the book maker made a mistake with my bet. I was so sure that I took the money line and the -1.5 runs. Must not heard my "-1.5" Leaving Reno tomorrow, thus far, down $40 bucks.

Sep-09-16		WannaBe: Found out what I said wrong, I said "Money Line", instead of "Run Line". Before I left, I took ChiCubs (-1.5) and DET (-1.5). Also took Seattle (-10.5) and Arizona (-6) for NFL.

Sep-09-16		WannaBe: C'mon Detroit! Daddy need some more runs!

Sep-09-16		WannaBe: Another thing I noticed, all MLB games were either 8.5 or 9 for Over/Under, Colorado was around 12 (vs SFG, in Denver). Tonight's LAD/MIA featuring Kershaw and Fernandez was 6.5 Wait, Kershaw just got pulled?!!? Coleman is now pitching for LAD? Whatonearthhappened?

Sep-09-16		WannaBe: OK, nothing serious for Kershaw, just pitch count (66 after 3 innings). Phew. Back to O/U in baseball, I remember back in late '90s, even possibly into the early 2000s, (before umpires for NL/AL merged) AL always had 9 or 10 for O/U, NL was more 'reasonable', 7, 8. Or I am just remembering wrong. =))

Sep-09-16		Phony Benoni: I'm thinking about a scoring change in the baseball rules. Call it the Phil Regan Rule if you like. in tonight's Tigers game, Michael Fullmer goes seven innings, leaving with a 3-2 lead. Alex Wilson pitches the eighth, and the Orioles tit the game. The Tigers retake the lead in the bottom of the eighth and go on to win without further scoring, Wilson is awarded the victory. What I'd like to see is that a pitcher who blows a save in this situation does not automatically get the win if his team retakes the lead in their next at-bat. Instead, it becomes one of those situations where no pitcher technically qualifies for the win, and the Official Scorer decides who pitched "most effectively". Now, this pnly comes up when a starter leaves with the lead, but pitches less than five innings. But I'm getting tired of relievers getting rewarded for blowing saves. Of course, there would be some technicalities to iron it. For instance, what is one reliever puts the tying run on base, but another allows him to score. And maybe I'm just feeling unhappy about the situation. There's no chance this will happen of course.

Sep-09-16		WannaBe: <Phony Benoni> If the official scoring rules have not changed, and if I am right (which is usually not). Official scorer decides the pitcher (deserving) of win. As long as it's after 5 innings pitched, even if reliever blows it, you still can be the "WP". It's like Championship losing team's player named MVP. (e.g. Jean-Sebatian Giguere for the Ducks in their loss to New Jersey) I'll have to go back to the official MLB rule book. But I think the rule still is on the book. It's like the HBP rule, MLB does not enforce it like NCAA. (I've listened to enough Ucla games to know it's true...)

Sep-09-16		Penguincw: If it were up to me, I would make it so that the LP is the one that gives up the <eventual> losing run, not necessary the eventual go-ahead run. Example: "A" (home SP) gives up 1 run in 8 innings, "B" gives up 9 runs in the top of the 9th, home team gets back 3 runs in the bottom of the 9th, lose 10-3, "B" gets the loss, not "A". Whether or not the winning run was scored by an inherited runner, that's kinda a debate for another time. WP goes to the pitcher who got the last out in the half-inning before the winning run was scored no matter what, unless it was scored in the top of the 1st, then the pitcher who got an (first, second, third?) out in the bottom of the 1st gets the win. Of course, W-L record is not too meaningful of how good a pitcher is, but I'm sure it still feels nice to them to get a "W", and sucks to get an "L".

Sep-09-16		WannaBe: <Penguincw> That have been discussed before, but in a slightly different way... What if the losing run was allowed by a fielder (via error)? will we be giving W/L record by hitting/scoring the winning run?

Sep-10-16		Phony Benoni: I realize the rules probably won't be changed, sinply because situations can be conceived where any given ruling would be "unfair". For instance: Team A's SP gives up nine runs in the first inning, and is replaced. A success of relievers gives up one run the rest of the way. Team A rallies but never catches up, eventually losing 10-9. Clearly the SP deserves the loss, not the unlucky relieve -- particularly because there are so many situations where a team, when far behind, will concede a seemingly meaningless run for an out for two.. Rather than trying to fairly judge an infinity of situations, it is no doubt simpler to just make an arbitrary rule and stick and with. The result may seem unfair in a given situation, but it's impossible to please everybody al the time. So I guess I was just a bit frustrated tonight. And if I'm like this when the tigers win...

Sep-10-16		Penguincw: Well, it could go either way. The 3rd option would be well, let the scorekeeper decide who gets the win/loss. --- In other news, the Jays' pitching staff, who lead the league in IP by SP, and also fewest in IP by RP (well, until yesterday), have not had a CG yet... Don't know if this has ever happened before; the Jays' have had at least 1 CG every season in franchise history, so far.

Sep-10-16		WannaBe: <Penguincw: ... have not had a CG yet...> They play chess, too?? Buy them a premium membership! Utah St/USC 11AM Pacific, UNLV/UCLA 5PM Pacific, good day for DH in LA. Guess that'll be my listening pleasure today, if any of the football games gets to be route, there's SFG, too. =) Tomorrow we'll have Raaaaaaiders. MNF's second game will be 4th & 9ers and the "New L.A. Lovable Ewes". Glorious weekend, back to work Monday.

Sep-10-16		WannaBe: Typical of 'SC: <Kyle Bonagura ESPN Staff Writer USC LT Chuma Edoga was ejected during the first series against Utah State after he pushed an official.> Last game vs Alabama, 'SC had a player ejected for stomping on an opponent. Why am I not surprised?!

Sep-10-16		saffuna: Big showdown today: Wofford vs. Ole Miss.

Sep-10-16		WannaBe: Georgia beat Nicholls State 26-24. UG was favoured by 55 pts. Fifty-five!! All those 4th stringers who thought they'd play? Ha!!

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 914)
search thread:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 831 OF 914 · Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific user only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

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