Well it's no trouble, my dear RAGHHHHHHHHHHH.

Speaking of the <wRAGHth of Khan>, did you see the new Star Trek movie?

heh and triple heh.

Ok let's face it- the <Scandinavian> is a pretty funny idea to begin with. And it's easy to go wrong for either color- really easy- if you don't know the theory.

But cripe what is that guy's rating who you are currently pounding?

Zero?

I mean it's Correspondence. You are allowed to use "outside resources" such as a database, or a book. Like, in his case, maybe a book on how the pieces move.

<Chess Improvement>

Well yes that's the 9 million dollar question.

That and "how to use your time" that you do have for chess.

I believe this to be true:

1. Some people will never improve much the rest of their life - not even if they had 24 hours a day to study and play. Period. That's just how it is sometimes.

2. What "method" might help someone improve varies WILDLY from person to person.

3. I think that any chess activity- study, play, or just reading "about chess"- is HUGELY enjoyable.

If I pinned my "enjoyment" of this to improvement- short term or long term- then how could I enjoy my chess experience right now?

Man as my very good pal <Woody Wood Pusher> said- "It's meant to be recreation, not work."

And- let's face it- it is recreation for all of us here. There are no GMs or future GMs at this website.

Well Ok except for the GMs and future GMs. Like <Grandmaster and Chairman Wesely So>, for example, who has just been posting messages on his own player page.

<Grandmaster Nigel Short> and several others also post on their player pages.

Anyways, you know what- I like to think about the game I'm actually playing at the moment. I like to think that if I play well enough, I can beat anyone I'm playing.

It's not true obviously- but what do I lose by thinking that?

When I move the pieces I'm looking to kill the other guy. To obliterate him. To sow salt in the ground so nothing ever grows again. Ever.

How high can you fly?

You'll never, never, never,

Reach the sky...

Thanks for the tip!!

Is that a Chinese name? Is Chinese the most commonly spoken language there?

How many Singaporeans can speak English?

Is Indonesian a language?

How many Koreans are there?

That's like thinking at a poker game- "Hey if we all play carefully tonight, we can all win a little money."

Big shark eats the little shark. Then, after the big shark gets too old, <Magnus Carlsen> eats him.

This is part of the grand "scheme of nature" we've been reading about.

"You should play with confidence- but that confidence must be based on fact."

"Height" is also a zero sum game.

Viz- a given 9 year old cannot gain an inch unless a 90 year old shrinks an inch.

This has to do with "symmetry" and the "fiber nacho numbers" that describe this, our reality.

I think you have hit on the problem--those <fiber nacho numbers> start adding up quickly.

I guess height was a bad example--you are right about the 90 year olds. I wondered where those lost inches went. Now I know--to the little kids. I will add this to my increasing fund of knowledge.

On average, our conscripts has got taller and dumber.

Hmm... so it then follows, that some other conscripts get smaller and smarter, right?

Monster - Steppenwolf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDFK...

His rating isn't that low, in the 1900s. I won't say which site to help protect the temporarily blind. He's got to play 10...Nd6 instead of 10...Nf6? It's not the kind of position I'd particularly relish as Black, but it doesn't lose by force either.

Having made one mistake and dropped the b7 pawn with an exchange to follow, he probably thought "Well, I'll recapture with the Queen and try to get some play along the diagonal" without looking for secondary threats.

There'e no excuse for that game. Your opponent should be expelled immediately from Scandinavia.

On the other hand, I like his approach to Correspondence- many players have multiple games on the go and take upwards of 30 seconds for each move.

In fact, it is this excellent (for me) phenomenon that allowed me to beat <Kingscrusher> in our first encounter.

Humorously, he took his time with his moves in the two rematches and dismantled me slowly, brain cell by brain cell, in sadistic fashion-

Well yes agreed, on a serious note- I think maybe even older than that even.

But depends on the starting level.

If the starting level is zero, then a 300 year old player will improve dramatically if she plays and studies for any length of time.

At the other extreme even- if your starting level is <World Champion>- like Anand- apparently you can improve into your forties.

Aronian has also improved noticeably in the last two years, which should be a sobering thought for <Anand, Topalov, and Carlsen>, if you ask me.

Well yes- and again on a rare serious note, as I'm sure you know, according to the "Conservation of Energy" LAW, energy transfer is indeed a zero sum game.

Except then how do you reconcile this law with the idea that the universe will expand until all of the energy/mass is gone?

Yes! The <fiber nacho> numbers give- and they take away- literally.

You've reminded me of my very early chess career there-

My Dad never once "played me soft."

Meaning that I had to suffer continuous defeat from age 5 to 13.

And this is what he said to me after one particularly agonizing debacle- I was almost in tears and <Dad: Chess Coach> says to me

<Dad>: "Well, you know what they say in the Mexican Marines..."

<Me>: (sniff) "What"?

<Dad>: "El Tuffo Crappo."

Good grief.

Of course, thanks to the <fiber nacho> numbers, by the end of year 13 I was able to beat him each and every time out.

Shortly after, he refused to play me any more.

Nobody does anyone a favor by "playing them soft".