Only Chess
23 Oct 04
06 Dec 04
Originally posted by mateuloseWhy don't you take up Poker like everyone else? It is eminently fair. The better player always wins.
http://www.redhotpawn.com/core/playchess.php?gameid=727273
I know you shouldn't comment on a game in progress, but man, can I just hit resign on this game after that beyond terrible knight move? Chess is so unfair, I outplayed my opponent in every facet of the game until then, and I do ONE bad move, an obvious one at that, GAME OVER, he gets an UNDERSE ...[text shortened]... knight of his beats my whole army after that move. God this game is frustrating and unfair. . .
06 Dec 04
1 edit
Originally posted by mateuloseExcuse me, but when exactly did you outplay him?
It's unfair in a sense I outplayed him in 99% of the game till this point, and he outplayed me in ONE move.
At 12. ... d6 or at 15. ... Ne8 perhaps?
and even after you won a pawn you still didn't have a clear win so perhaps your dominance in this game is just imaginary 🙄
For some reason I couldn't link to the game, but the id is: 727273
06 Dec 04
Originally posted by Testrider
Excuse me, but when exactly did you outplay him?
At 12. ... d6 or at 15. ... Ne8 perhaps?
and even after you won a pawn you still didn't have a clear win so perhaps your dominance in this game is just imaginary 🙄
For some reason I couldn't link to the game, but the id is: Game 727273
06 Dec 04
It happens in sports all the time. I am sure there is at least one one hitter that lost the game. Maybe even a loser that threw a no hitter. I have seen the best team lose a few times. That is why they play the game. When the 1980 U.S.A, Ice Hockey team won the gold medel the best team lost.
07 Dec 04
take a look at this i was probably in a worse position Game 760579, but one wrong move has cost him the game. it happens, i obviously didn't mind as it was the first time i beat him😛 . but the only way to avoid it is to play till the end.
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by lucifershammeri totally agree white had plenty of chances to win the game, mateulose was lucky to survive to the thirtieth move
white had three specific chances to win and he finally punished mateulose lose tactics the third time.
after 17... bxc4
18. Bxc4! wins a decisive advantage
black cannot recapture because
18... dxc4
19. Qxd7 Rxd7
20. Rxd7 and white wins a rook
and white also had 29. Rxb8! Rxb8
30. Nc6
forking the queen and knight regardless of the "beyond terrible knight move"
and of course mateulose's 29th move was the last straw and his opponent skillfully exploited his mistake.
dont pretend mateulose that you deserved to win that game, you did not, you gave your opponent several chances and finally you got punished, you deserved to lose, that is a fact. i have no sympathy for whiners like you!
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by GambitzoidOMFG, where to start? First of all, he had an attacking advantage in the opening, whooptie dooo, it's called being white! Means absolutely crap. . .
i totally agree white had plenty of chances to win the game, mateulose was lucky to survive to the thirtieth move
white had three specific chances to win and he finally punished mateulose lose tactics the third time.
after 17... bxc4
18. Bxc4! wins a decisive advantage
black cannot recapture because
18... dxc4
19. Qxd7 Rxd7
20. Rxd7 and whit ...[text shortened]... u got punished, you deserved to lose, that is a fact. i have no sympathy for whiners like you!
18. Bxc4 is simply gaining back material already lost, material is even, I had already forseen this, this is hardly white winning, he is in a game with material even and has to deal with a passed pawn on the far wing, if you call this "decisive" winning, then you are full of a pile of dogma, just be honest, you enjoy bashing mateulose whenever you get the chance. . . I was in fact shocked my opponent did not play Bxc4, and missed an obvious tactic/trade of pawns, at this point, my opponent deserved crap, no matter what you say. . .
As for 29. Rxb8!, well, I think it's a little obvious why he couldn't do that on move 29 and had to move his queen away, after that, a good defense would be to simply take his rook, although that wasn't the best move, the knight move I did was beyond terrible though. His little scholar's fork isn't exactly hard to defend, just typical white knight attacking outpost stuff, see it in 100% of my games as black, and I am a good black player. . .
BTW, this post is well, OLD. Who bumped it back up?
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by mateuloseYou're obviously so good at chess that you should be a GM. I wonder why you're not.
OMFG, where to start? First of all, he had an attacking advantage in the opening, whooptie dooo, it's called being white! Means absolutely crap. . .
18. Bxc4 is simply gaining back material already lost, material is even, I had already forseen this, this is hardly white winning, he is in a game with material even and has to deal with a passed pawn on t ...[text shortened]... lack, and I am a good black player. . .
BTW, this post is well, OLD. Who bumped it back up?
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by ivangriceFunny, that same reply could be used to many, some even a lower rating then me, who state, "mateulose you were losing all along!"
You're obviously so good at chess that you should be a GM. I wonder why you're not.
Anyways, it's quite humourous in a sense, when other players brag about beating good players over say, blundering a queen, ppl are quick to shut them up, but when I do a blunder, it's "your opponent was amazing, what a strategy, what a move!", quite a double standard there.
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by mateuloseI disagree. You lost the game because you made a really obtuse move. You have admitted that. You made a *laughably* bad move, and yet you complain about it. Taking the long view of the game, you played really badly because of that bad move.
Funny, that same reply could be used to many, some even a lower rating then me, who state, "mateulose you were losing all along!"
Anyways, it's quite humourous in a sense, when other players brag about beating good players over say, blundering a queen, ppl are quick to shut them up, but when I do a blunder, it's "your opponent was amazing, what a strategy, what a move!", quite a double standard there.
You have then stated on a number of occasions that your opponent has 'played like crap'. Not only is this unforgiveably rude, it should be followed by '...but I have played crapper'.
I think people are responding negatively to your post because of your scarcely believable crassness. Are your posts a wind up?
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by ivangriceMy point is, my opponent won off a ONE MOVE MISTAKE, he did nothing brilliant at all. Hence, a win by type blunder, so for others to simply call the dude a genius who is outplaying me the whole game is beyond laughable in itself. What's next? I'm I going to brag about beating Dustin because he blunders a queen in the 500 plus games he plays? Don't be silly, my opponent won because I blundered a peice in a winning game, that's it, that's the facts, thread closed. . .
I disagree. You lost the game because you made a really obtuse move. You have admitted that. You made a *laughably* bad move, and yet you complain about it. Taking the long view of the game, you played really badly because of that bad move.
You have then stated on a number of occasions that your opponent has 'played like crap'. Not only is this u ...[text shortened]... egatively to your post because of your scarcely believable crassness. Are your posts a wind up?
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by mateuloseYes, your opponent won off one enormous mistake on your part. The sort of mistake that could cost lives. Your opponent didn't make a mistake like that. Over the course of the game, who's the better player? Er...the one who won.
My point is, my opponent won off a ONE MOVE MISTAKE, he did nothing brilliant at all. Hence, a win by type blunder, so for others to simply call the dude a genius who is outplaying me the whole game is beyond laughable in itself. What's next? I'm I going to brag about beating Dustin because he blunders a queen in the 500 plus games he plays? Don't be si ...[text shortened]... because I blundered a peice in a winning game, that's it, that's the facts, thread closed. . .
Also, you don't answer the fact that you behaved with astonishing crassness in openly stating your opponent 'played like crap'. Simply unforgiveable.
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by mateuloseSeveral one move mistakes. 29.Rxb8 wins for White, as has been pointed out before (the discovered attack on the Q is not a threat).
My point is, my opponent won off a ONE MOVE MISTAKE, he did nothing brilliant at all. Hence, a win by type blunder, so for others to simply call the dude a genius who is outplaying me the whole game is beyond laughable in itself. What's next? I'm I going to brag about beating Dustin because he blunders a queen in the 500 plus games he plays? Don't be si ...[text shortened]... because I blundered a peice in a winning game, that's it, that's the facts, thread closed. . .
I also don't see how Bxc4 in the opening leaves material level. Looks like White is a pawn up doesn't it?
No-one is calling your opponent a genius, but White was simply better in the position at which you blundered.
08 Dec 04
Originally posted by mateuloseactually mateulose, count the pawns, after 18. Bxc4 he is has seven pawns and you only have six and he has more active pieces, imho. all he has to do is trade down to a favorable endgame a pawn up, and btw, you have no passed pawn at that point.
OMFG, where to start? First of all, he had an attacking advantage in the opening, whooptie dooo, it's called being white! Means absolutely crap. . .
18. Bxc4 is simply gaining back material already lost, material is even, I had already forseen this, this is hardly white winning, he is in a game with material even and has to deal with a passed pawn on t ...[text shortened]... lack, and I am a good black player. . .
BTW, this post is well, OLD. Who bumped it back up?
second there is no defense to my suggested 29th move
29. Rxb8 Rxb8 (forced or mateulose goes down a whole rook)
30. Nc6 Qc7
31. Nxb8 +-
(notice that the "blunder" knight move was not the cause of the fork, it was mateulose inability to understand the position and prevent knight forks, the loss of the exchange would have happened regardless of the knight move so mateulose has deeper issues than simpy blundering once in a while. and i forgot to mention 39... Ba6??
if you played 39...Qc6 you have a playable game but after 39...Ba6 your game was totally lost. )
So mateulose, stop blaming your losses on single individual "blunders"
i dont feel sorry for you because you have deeper tactical and strategic weakness that you refuse to accept!