New banning(s)

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Let's see, who adopts the cowardly lion approach and who doesn't, who is responsible and who isn't, whose rating does drop by several hundred points OTB and whose doesn't? Try again.

I'd like to smak you around OTB, maybe teach you some manners.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
could you expand on this, i'm always eager to learn new openings.

I've mentioned it before somewhere.
I play the Pirc and there is an h3 variation that was given me
bother. Gallagher has a suggestion against it in his book.

Now as I cannot ask my opponent to play the h3 line. I played it.
and was going to play the main line hoping my opponent would
step into it. And I could see just how good/bad it was.

If an opening is giving you trouble - then play it - someone will
give you ideas.

My opponent did not play mainline and drifted into a bad positon
with plausible moves. I'll not do what he did.

So I'll do it again next time I face a Pirc.

I faced a Philidor, quite rare for me to play against.
So I used Evan's booklet on the Philidor (1979)
to get me past the tricks - I was expecting an early f5.
It never came.

That's it - all legal and above board.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I've mentioned it before somewhere.
I play the Pirc and there is an h3 variation that was given me
bother. Gallagher has a suggestion against it in his book.

Now as I cannot ask my opponent to play the h3 line. I played it.
and was going to play the main line hoping my opponent would
step into it. And I could see just how good/bad it was.

If a ...[text shortened]... ks - I was expecting an early f5.
It never came.

That's it - all legal and above board.

Yeah, it's called preparation. I guess Elderflybye wants to always play by the seat of his pants and just blunder into anything thrown at him, or it, not sure which one it is. Just take a look a his profile chart, like a mountain cluttered with trees.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Yeah, it's called preparation. I guess Elderflybye wants to always play by the seat of his pants and just blunder into anything thrown at him, or it, not sure which one it is. Just take a look a his profile chart, like a mountain cluttered with trees.

There's certainly nothing wrong with playing on timed sites which ban databases and books for a closer approximation of OTB play; I have accounts on ICC, PlayChess and FICS as well. But to me CC sites are for deep opening study with whatever aids are available; the more you actually play the variations, the more you'll understand them and the resultant middlegame positions.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I've mentioned it before somewhere.
I play the Pirc and there is an h3 variation that was given me
bother. Gallagher has a suggestion against it in his book.

Now as I cannot ask my opponent to play the h3 line. I played it.
and was going to play the main line hoping my opponent would
step into it. And I could see just how good/bad it was.

If a ks - I was expecting an early f5.
It never came.

That's it - all legal and above board.

Just jumping in without reading the earlier posts (so apologies if this isn't what you're on about!)but isn't h3 in the Pirc the defining move of the accelerated classical:

1.e4...d6
2.d4...Nf6
3.Nc3...g6
4.Nf3...Bg7
5.h3....0-0
6.Be3

There's a chapter on it in "The Pirc in Black and White" by James Vigus.

This is a game in progress (no helpful comments until it's over - but feel free to admire black pawn structure for its aesthetic value). Here my opponent has played the line for the benefit of our mutual training. Game 5224762 We go in book for a long way and head of down a line that looks really bad for black but the book describes as "a ferociously complicated line on which I'd prefer not to venture a verdict" I think we play on our own after move 19 or so....

Originally posted by Mahout
Just jumping in without reading the earlier posts (so apologies if this isn't what you're on about!)but isn't h3 in the Pirc the defining move of the accelerated classical:

1.e4...d6
2.d4...Nf6
3.Nc3...g6
4.Nf3...Bg7
5.h3....0-0
6.Be3

There's a chapter on it in "The Pirc in Black and White" by James Vigus.

This is a game in progress (no helpful d prefer not to venture a verdict" I think we play on our own after move 19 or so....

That's the one - I like to swap my QB for the f3 Knight.
I know all these centre tricks and traps without the f3 Knight
which has big time influence on the centre.

So my Bishop was hanging around like a lump of wood just
getting in the way. I will not double fianchetto. (stubborn streak).

Gallagher has 7.d6-d5 idea with a position he himself says is hard
to access but he would play it.

Also never played the h3 line v the Pirc so I might have found
something I liked (it sucks - not me at all - but i'll try it again).
In the actual game I played we passed the interesting bit so
although a pawn up I offered a draw - my opponent refused
and I won.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
i can prove otherwise, those that are not interested in opening theory, as you say would be the first to use databases and opening books. You can't be serious my man.

Yeah, you 'proved' that alright. 🙄

Originally posted by no1marauder
As I said, if you are dissatisfied with the traditional rules of CC, then you shouldn't play on a CC site. It is selfish and childish of you to constantly whine about rules that are an integral part of CC.

Or you can try to find in the site people that share your views about not using opening books and databases and play against them.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
Absolute nonsense! In CC a player is allowed to use books and DBs and the ICCF even allows the use of Chess Engines (although here the laytter is against the TOS). That is not a dark side, it is simply a differing set of rules.

Really? Then remind me again why seadevil was banned. Afterall he is allowed to use books and DBs so the huge discrepancy between his OTB and here can be explained that way. That would also explain why his games at the British were not at the "same level".

Originally posted by Jie
Really? Then remind me again why seadevil was banned. Afterall he is allowed to use books and DBs so the huge discrepancy between his OTB and here can be explained that way. That would also explain why his games at the British were not at the "same level".

Seadevil was banned for using an engine, not for using books and / or DBs.

Originally posted by smaia
Well, you could check the opening moves against databases but not printed books, But I have to admit it is indeed very hard to catch opening cheats. Assume someone played all theory up to move 20 and yet, this player may well know the opening very well, i.e. played the moves from his/her own memory and knowledge.
But you have to admit that players with access ...[text shortened]... that do not have access to these resources or simply are not interested in using opening theory.

I don't see it as being unfair. I might as well claim that my 20 year old son has an unfair advantage because he has a better memory and has youth on his side.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
good point you make, but still i'm down for my real world OTB chess skills not selfishly and incourageously cheating at every possible turn. As for this mysterious "dumping out" into an unknown and unfamiliar position, that is not the whole story.

Following your reasoning it would be unreasonable for a Doctor to consult a DB of drugs to treat an obscure condition, a Lawyer could not consult his tomes of past decisions and the Judge couldn't either so must make an instant decision and myself as an Accountant would not be allowed to look up tax tables but must commit them all to memory.

Wake up and move into the real world. These tools exist to be used in all walks of life. Using them is not cheating nor is it gaining an unfair advantage as everyone has access to the same resources should they desire to do so. Knowing how and when to use these things is not easy and reckless and ill-informed use can do more harm than good.

Your rationale sounds that the same excuses touted out by all of lifes failures in all walks of life on why someone else does better than them. Hard work, study and determination help you suceed, reinventing the wheel time and time again causes you to stand still and results in failure.

This applies in chess as much as anywhere else. Using DBs is not easy as you need to understand the resultant position and how to play it. Books explain things better but can be harder to work through when there are transpositions. Such tools do not provide an easy and instant solution to better play and such research takes far longer and more effort than avoiding it but it is the only way to improve. There is no unfair advantage to be had using tools available to everyone but knowing when and how to use those tools is not easy.

I have followed a number of book lines in games here, carelessly, to certain defeat as have my opponents. I learnt from that and take more care now but doing the research is hard work. Your problem is simple, you want an easy solution and don't want to put in the effort so you will not improve. That is your decision but don't then accuse those who are prepared to make the effort of cheating when they are doing no such thing. Instead accept that your laziness is the sole reason why you cannot improve and stop looking for excuses.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Let's see, who adopts the cowardly lion approach and who doesn't, who is responsible and who isn't, whose rating does drop by several hundred points OTB and whose doesn't? Try again.

What if a person doesn't play OTB? What if they are actually committed CC players?

Originally posted by Kepler
What if a person doesn't play OTB? What if they are actually committed CC players?

Has anyone learned from previous posts? Here's what happens when eldragonfly enters a post, I'll use some characters from this play to make it realistic:

eldragonfly: "I'm going to take a completely nonsensical stance on some topic in the chess forums."

no1marauder: "I'm going to show you look like an idiot and are being unreasonable."

eldragonfly: "I'm going to look up some words I think are going to make me sound smarter than everyone else in a dictionary or thesaurus, post them in a stream of insults, and I'm not going to address your points. Oh yeah, and I'm going to try to belittle you because you want to help your chess, whilst completely following said rules of CC."

Ignore him.

Originally posted by !~TONY~!
Has anyone learned from previous posts? Here's what happens when eldragonfly enters a post, I'll use some characters from this play to make it realistic:

eldragonfly: "I'm going to take a completely nonsensical stance on some topic in the chess forums."

no1marauder: "I'm going to show you look like an idiot and are being unreasonable."

eldragonfly: ...[text shortened]... t to help your chess, whilst completely following said rules of CC."

Ignore him.

amen.