Correspondance is great for learning.

Originally posted by TommyC
This is a lie. You said that WinBoard was banned by RHP. The implication was clear: that WinBoard in your view was an engine for generating chess moves via a computer programme.

No, I NEVER WROTE THAT. I said, "I thought engines were illegal on RHP" and then I continued "If not, no wonder I'm having so much trouble with 1700s." I did think that Winboard was mainly used due to its chess engine, but I never said that it was banned from RHP. (which is clearly not the case.) Be careful next time you use such strong words like "lie" and I'll be more careful with my cheating suspicions.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
I'm glad you are here to tell us what people most likely do based on how much work it is. Next time try actually reading the forums for a decent length of time before going off the deep end with cheat accusations.

You're doing a good job at being an @ and there's no need to go over the top. I did not tell anyone how likely it is for Winboard to be used purely for engine analysis, I was only explaining my thought process. This should be clear since I started with "in my mind." Please read the post next time you have something rude to write. Or better yet, don't write anything rude.

Originally posted by z00t
Given that in correspondence chess you are allowed an analysis board, can look up openings in books, have excessive time to think, you will find cc chess "masters" flop when they play a simple 2 hour game (where FIDE conditions do not allow those things allowed in CC chess).

that must be why tebb did beat kasparov. no, wait, it's just the opposite!

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1311655

I believe CC masters still beat even the strongest machines, but classical masters don't. too bad their chess is not proper. 😕

Originally posted by exigentsky
You're doing a good job at being an @ and there's no need to go over the top. I did not tell anyone how likely it is for Winboard to be used purely for engine analysis, I was only explaining my thought process. This should be clear since I started with "in my mind." Please read the post next time you have something rude to write. Or better yet, don't write anything rude.

"Furthermore, I know using Winboard is not equivalent to engine use, but that is clearly the most obvious function. Sure, you could try numerous lines, but to me it seems like too much work and thus less likely."

Originally posted by exigentsky
You're doing a good job at being an @ and there's no need to go over the top. I did not tell anyone how likely it is for Winboard to be used purely for engine analysis, I was only explaining my thought process. This should be clear since I started with "in my mind." Please read the post next time you have something rude to write. Or better yet, don't write anything rude.

"I am accusing TommyC of engine use".

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
"Furthermore, I know using Winboard is not equivalent to engine use, but that is clearly the most obvious function. Sure, you could try numerous lines, but to me it seems like too much work and thus less likely."

Yes, XANTHOS, "TO ME." and in the other post "IN MY MIND." Do you want to continue to waste time?

Originally posted by Freddie2006
"I am accusing TommyC of engine use".

Still, this does not mean that I thought Winboard was an engine. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to prove. Perhaps, you both should start a new thread titled "Wasting Time: Two People's Journey to Self-Importance Through Attack and Ignorance" - how to disrespect others and feel well doing it It

Originally posted by exigentsky
- how to disrespect others and feel well doing it It

You mean, by changing your story and not apologising?

Originally posted by TommyC
You mean, by changing your story and not apologising?

Rec'd.

Step 1: Insinuate cheating.
Step 2: Clarify when asked.
Step 3: Deny it happened, and make excuses.

Perhaps the subject would drop if a user would just admit they didn't know what they were talking about. This happens all the time, and someone should take responsibility for what they did. Be accountable for your actions, I've admitted several times at RHP when I WAS WRONG.

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Rec'd.

Step 1: Insinuate cheating.
Step 2: Clarify when asked.
Step 3: Deny it happened, and make excuses.

Perhaps the subject would drop if a user would just admit they didn't know what they were talking about. This happens all the time, and someone should take responsibility for what they did. Be accountable for your actions, I've admitted several times at RHP when I WAS WRONG.

Advice to TommyC: Take Phlab's post as a warning.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Advice to TommyC: Take Phlab's post as a warning.

Fantastic job of 'not knowing what you are talking about'.

P-

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Advice to TommyC: Take Phlab's post as a warning.

I'll try, but I'm finding it easier to take your post as a joke!

Originally posted by TommyC
You mean, by changing your story and not apologising?

I didn't change any "story." All I changed is my opinion of you and other people on RHP. And yes, I'm sorry, like I said earlier, I should have been much more careful before suggesting the possibility that you were cheating. Sorry for the trouble and ill will this has caused.

Originally posted by exigentsky
yes, I'm sorry, like I said earlier, I should have been much more careful before suggesting the possibility that you were cheating. Sorry for the trouble and ill will this has caused.

Ok. I must have missed your earlier apology (speed-reading probably or it got deleted too quick.) Anyway, thanks for that.

Originally posted by exigentsky
And yes, I'm sorry, like I said earlier

That's funny because I can see no trace of such an earlier apology.