09 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by mcstankbootyDear Mc,
You know what, Joan: I get it. I get the rule. I get it.
It is my OPINION that rushing to the perpetual check instead of taking any of the other options to try and win that he had at his disposal, was essentially giving up on a game that he had a fair chance of winning, and that is the VERY DEFINITION of bad sportsmanship. It is still my OPINION r enjoy getting all riled up about this kind of thing. But let's be fair, Joan, shall we?
I'm glad you get it. That's a good first step.
In normal condition I would be very interested in knowing what winning line are you seeing that you're opponent should have played instead. From where I sit, it seems that the best move for black has a value of +0.00, to put it as engines like to do, and that is the perpet. All other moves seem to me inferior by a good deal - but my analysis have been proven wrong so many times in the past, I'm ready to stand corrected once more.
But in the context of this philosophical discussion about draws, it seems a bit beyond the point to even bother with such an exercise. Based on a very personal, and if you let me add it, quite peculiar opinion about how your opponent should be playing on the board (why you even have an opinion about it is beyond me, but let's move on), you called your opponent a coward and a joker. You brought the personal messages you exchanged to the forum. If you did not want to know what we think about it, and only care about the opinion of the site admins, perhaps it would have been wiser to not post here - after all your opponent had started a very general thread with no hint at your game or at you.
I do think your behavior was abusive, and what the site admins will do about it will not change my opinion. If you're proud or not about what you did, you can only know - you seemed like that to me. But it's possible I'm wrong, and you're actually ashamed of it (as you should be).
And about us enjoying getting riled up about this kind of things - you decided to bring this here, now deal with it.
take care
J34
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by Joan341. You really can't help being patronizing, can you?
Dear Mc,
I'm glad you get it. That's a good first step.
In normal condition I would be very interested in knowing what winning line are you seeing that you're opponent should have played instead. From where I sit, it seems that the best move for black has a value of +0.00, to put it as engines like to do, and that is the perpet. All other moves seem to ...[text shortened]... kind of things - you decided to bring this here, now deal with it.
take care
J34
2. It seems to me he decided to go for the perpetual check on move 38. I'm sure you would agree at that point he had plenty of options, the least of which would be to exchange pieces and try to exchange a pawn for a queen.
3. You definitely have a point about being wiser not to post here. But I guess I'll have to learn from that.
4. I think you're wrong about the abusiveness. I think there's a huge difference between that post and bullying or harassment. But, again, I'll defer to someone who knows more about that than you or I.
5. I am neither ashamed nor proud of my actions. snjortp did what I would have done if the situation had been reversed, and I agree with what he did.
6. As far as my being ashamed of myself, I think you're sitting up on a rather high horse there, miss missy, as are many of your comrades. I think you'd do well to take a look at that.
7. I thought that this was dealing with it. Or did you mean I should just sit back and let you all berate me? I'll admit I made some mistakes here, absolutely. But I'm not just going to sit back and let you guys pat yourselves on the back for namecalling and patronizing and pointing fingers at me when most of you are not above reproach.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyI suspect that snjortp just didn't want to deal with you anymore. I'm guessing that he figured all the abuse he was getting from you wasn't worth the half point. (I would have taken the half point and done what I could to stop the abuse. But then, I can be real stubborn when I think I'm being dumped on for no reason. 😏 )
Maybe snjortp just didn't want to deal with me anymore. Or maybe I said something that made sense to him.
And, actually, by taking your opinion on this issue to the forums, I think you've done many players here a favor. I suspect that because of this thread, you're now on the ignore list of a number of players on RHP. Don't get me wrong, I'm not ripping on you; I'm just mentioning how I think this issue may be playing out.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by no1marauderYou know what? YOUR conduct is and was reprehensible and would deserve sanctions for the breaking the exact same rule in the TOS you accuse me of breaking. So simmer down, cowboy.
mcstankbooty: Maybe snjortp just didn't want to deal with me anymore.
Your conduct was reprehensible and deserves sanctions. You, not snjortp, violated the rules of chess and the rules of RHP.
09 Sep 08
1 edit
I think the main thing that "the people" are worried about here, is that your "ignorance" (not in the bad meaning, but there appears to be no other word for it in English) of the Chess rules led to your unfounded and unbased harassment of a fellow player of the game. Again: no need to get wound up.
[edit]is unbased and unfounded the same?[/edit]
09 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by mcstankbootyBS. Alert my posts if you want, but I don't send abusive in-game messages. I'd say your conduct borders on a 3(c) banning.
You know what? YOUR conduct is and was reprehensible and would deserve sanctions for the breaking the exact same rule in the TOS you accuse me of breaking. So simmer down, cowboy.
If you hate perpetual checks so much, you could have played 41 Qxb5. That would have avoided the perpetual and assured that your opponent wouldn't play for a draw.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyI have to say that I commend you for hanging in there. If everyone ganged up on me like that, I'd probably just ignore the thread and wait until it disappears forever. It does show a certain level of guts to (basically) own up to your mistake on the boards.
You know what, Joan: I get it. I get the rule. I get it.
It is my OPINION that rushing to the perpetual check instead of taking any of the other options to try and win that he had at his disposal, was essentially giving up on a game that he had a fair chance of winning, and that is the VERY DEFINITION of bad sportsmanship. It is still my OPINION ...[text shortened]... r enjoy getting all riled up about this kind of thing. But let's be fair, Joan, shall we?
I'm not sure if everyone felt this way, but I don't have a problem with your opinion about perpetual check. The opinion is very wrong in my view, but it's just that- an opinion. You have the right to think whatever you want. What I did have a problem with was the way you pressured your opponent into resigning by using invectives against him; and I'd have a problem with that even if I thought your underlying opinion were right.
As for the logic behind the perpetual check, it's very simple actually. In chess, as long as you move the pieces correctly and don't put your own king in check with a move, you are allowed to make any move you like. Perpetual check is just the result of the fact that as long as your opponent keeps putting you in check every move, the game can go on for a million moves and nothing will happen; so why not just stop the game now rather than waiting for the 50 move rule to kick in? It would take a massive changing of the fundamental chess rules to avoid or cancel the perpetual check method of drawing.
09 Sep 08
This is a really stupid thread, I must say. The draw rules exist in chess for a reason -- simply put, winning wouldn't be as much of an achievement if it were easier. (Imagine, for example, if you could win by stalemating your opponent's king rather than checkmating it.) A victory won by making it impossible not only for your opponent to win, but also to draw, e.g., by stalemate or perpetual, is all the sweeter for that fact.
So the real cowardice is of the player with an advantage who objects to the risk of slipping into a drawn position.
Here's a blitz game I recently played to illustrate the point. I forced the draw with a three-move repetition because I was down a pawn and in a dangerous position, and my opponent had to go along with it because if he avoided the triple rep, I'd get to trap his queen (24. ... Kf7?? Bxf5 1-0). The draw here was the only sane outcome, and a perfectly honorable one for both parties.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by paultopiaYour opponent should have sent you a
This is a really stupid thread, I must say. The draw rules exist in chess for a reason -- simply put, winning wouldn't be as much of an achievement if it were easier. (Imagine, for example, if you could win by stalemating your opponent's king rather than checkmating it.) A victory won by making it impossible not only for your opponent to win, but also t ...[text shortened]... 5+ Kh7 23. Qh5+ Kg7 24. Qg5+ Kh7 25. Qh5+ Kg7 26. Qg5+ Kh7 27. Qh5+ Kg7 28. Qg5+ Kh7
[/pgn]
"Your a coward message." (joke).
You can win the Black Queen with 28 Bf6+ but it's an expensive Queen.
Good decision and a good game.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't really want to alert your posts, because that's just not how I roll. I'll address this whole abuse thing in the next post.
BS. Alert my posts if you want, but I don't send abusive in-game messages. I'd say your conduct borders on a 3(c) banning.
If you hate perpetual checks so much, you could have played 41 Qxb5. That would have avoided the perpetual and assured that your opponent wouldn't play for a draw.
And actually, I imagine that that play is probably usefull advice. I'll check it out.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyObviously you're not married Mcstankbooty, or you would have crawled in a corner with a six pack of beer by now and let the storm pass. Oh by the way that's my suggestion. No response expected 😉
I don't really want to alert your posts, because that's just not how I roll. I'll address this whole abuse thing in the next post.
And actually, I imagine that that play is probably usefull advice. I'll check it out.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by no1marauderrec'd
You're an imbecile. And a poor sport. Shut up and play rather than bothering your opponent with your nonsensical ideas about how they should play. If I'm losing and I see a way to force a draw, I do every time and so does every player who has any knowledge of the game.
10 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyYou imagine wrong; it's sarcastic advice that would give up your Queen for a Bishop. So you'd lose. Just like snjortp would have lost if he didn't go for the perpetual.
I don't really want to alert your posts, because that's just not how I roll. I'll address this whole abuse thing in the next post.
And actually, I imagine that that play is probably usefull advice. I'll check it out.