Originally posted by JudasPriestIt's not exclusively for advanced chess players.
... I did not realise this site was exclusively for advanced chess players. ...
Keep on asking 'stupid questions' and ignore 'stupid answers' or report them to the moderators.
Fortunately, most people on rhp try to help each other out instead of insulting each other.
Gotti
Originally posted by FisichFortunately my Dad taught me how to play chess by playing AND asking stupid questions.
Bowmann is right, if the guy can't figure out that he DIDN'T checkmated his opponent but still think he won............well,it's better for the guy to go read some rules of the game........
I won't play chess if I have had to learn it out of a book.
btw. Do YOU know all the rules of chess?
At least it was new to me that mobile phones are explicitely forbidden according to FIDE.
"It is forbidden for anybody to use a mobile phone in the playing venue and any area designated by the arbiter"
http://www.fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=EE101
Anyway, I doesn't matter for correspondence chess. All I wanted to say is that even for advanced players the complete rules are not clear. There have been huge discussions in the past on rhp forums whether books or databases are allowed in correspondence chess just to mention one of those questions. If mobile phones are regulated in the Laws of Chess you can consider the usage of databases and books to be a rule of correspondence chess, too. At least if you want to follow USCF.
"You may consult chess books and periodicals but not other players. You cannot use a computer or computer program to evaluate a game but you may use computers for record keeping."
http://www.uschess.org/cc/ccrules.php
Well, I get bored now and feel my time wasted but I hope you've got the message:
LET PEOPLE ASK FOR HELP IN THE HELP FORUM, PLEASE.
Gotti
Chess is one of the easiest games to learn. Asking "silly" questions is fine when you're a beginner, trying to get to grips with better playing techniques. But NOT if you want to know one of the basic rules. You should know these.
"Advanced" players are those who play better. They are NOT simply those who know all the rules.
I would never dream, for example, of registering on a Poker site then visiting the forums in order to learn how to play.
Originally posted by BowmannThere was a time when you did not know the difference too. It was just at a different time. You may have been much younger but still, you had to ask the question at one time or another.
If he is, then that's the wrong way to go about it.
At what point will he know when to stop asking since he's learnt them all?
I'll offer the same advice as ark13 - Shut up Bowmann.
You're a common ass.
1 edit
Originally posted by Frank BurnsI asked no one, as I taught myself by reading a book.
There was a time when you did not know the difference too. It was just at a different time. You may have been much younger but still, you had to ask the question at one time or another.
But there would have been nothing wrong with asking someone. So long as it was the person I wanted to teach me chess, and not my opponents.
So smeg off.
Originally posted by Frank BurnsI just love all of this. Rec'd too.
There was a time when you did not know the difference too. It was just at a different time. You may have been much younger but still, you had to ask the question at one time or another.
I'll offer the same advice as ark13 - Shut up Bowmann.
You're a common ass.
skeeter
Originally posted by Frank BurnsWhat I write is of no value if no one reads it and, more importantly, thinks about what I say. Looking at your posts, you seem more interested in being popular than right. But that's OK. You're far from alone.
Wonderful response smegly.
You are our forum Idiot Savant...
Your spelling is always correct but what you write is of no value.
Get back in your double-wide you mindless, classless, socially inept twit.
One last question, do the kids in school still beat you up on a regular basis?
I, however, choose to say what I believe is sensible with the benefit of consideration, and I'm not interested in winning votes from the masses (don't let my number of "recs." fool you).
If you'd been one of the kids at my school, I think I'd have become a bully myself.
Originally posted by BowmannYou're actually the one bullying the guy, don't pretend there was something more to your post.
What I write is of no value if no one reads it and, more importantly, thinks about what I say. Looking at your posts, you seem more interested in being popular than right. But that's OK. You're far from alone.
I, however, choose to say what I believe is sensible with the benefit of consideration, and I'm not interested in winning votes from the ...[text shortened]... l you).
If you'd been one of the kids at my school, I think I'd have become a bully myself.
Originally posted by PalynkaThere was a lot more to it. In fact, it had nothing whatsoever to do with bullying.
You're actually the one bullying the guy, don't pretend there was something more to your post.
So far, no one has put forward a good argument to counter what I have said on this matter. So I stand by my posts. I can't help it if you lot are just a bunch of nancy-boys.