- Joined
- 16 Feb 07
- Moves
- 27653
Originally posted by SaviellyIts your forum post that's the problem, not the level of your play.
...And it doesn't speak well for this site when a new member is attacked by for being "too good."
The trouble is, we get a lot of players who seem not to know too much about chess that beat everyone on the site. They almost all turn up as cheating at some point (note - I'm not accusing you of this, just trying to explain why we're sensitive to folks whose play doesn't seem to match what they say).
Don't you see why we find your story very unlikely?
A beginner who "knows how the pieces move and played only a few games" wins five times with some nice mates and tricks.
You are implying you started chess last week, what you obviously didn't OR you did but had help finding your moves on RHP.
Originally posted by yashinI didn't imply that I learned chess last week, or if I did, that was by no means my intention.
Don't you see why we find your story very unlikely?
A beginner who "knows how the pieces move and played only a few games" wins five times with some nice mates and tricks.
You are implying you started chess last week, what you obviously didn't OR you did but had help finding your moves on RHP.
I'm 22, and my grandpa taught me that "horsie does an "L"" when I was 10, 🙂
What I meant to say was that I have never studied chess or played it competively - all I've done is play casual games at family reunions and the likes a couple times a year.
And I understand that there may be a problem with people cheating, but I can assure you that I would never use a chess computer in my games. Doing so kindda defeats the purpose of playing chess.
Originally posted by SaviellyI'll bet while watching his father and learning how the "horsie" (sic) moves even Capa didn't pick up the term 'en prise'.
Seriously? Have you looked at my games?
Every single game I've complete on here has been decided by a one move blunder; by my opponents leaving a piece en prise. ...
Could be though, Winter is unclear in his volume on Capablanca. 🙄
Originally posted by SaviellyGlance through the thread listings here in the "only chess" forum, and if you see a thread started by Greenpawn34, read through it.
Morning all,
I'm very new to the game of chess. I know how the pieces move, and I've played a few games with my brother (who is just as new as I am), but besides that, it's all quite foreign.
I want to learn the game so I become an intellectual. (Half joking here.)
Could anyone give me some basic pointers? They would be much appreciated!
Savielly
This is obviously some 'kindda' joke.
All I can say is thank the good Lord that your brother does
not join RHP as well. What a talented family you come from if
this is way you play and are:
"......new to the game of chess."
The Polgar Brothers!
Rook and Knight mating patterns, clean developemt, no blunders.
The give away is admitting you know about chess databases.
New players do not know such things.
This my friend is how people who are new to the game play
or stumble into a Danish Gambit. (White has a near perfect Danish by mistake).
Look out for the tell tale signs of two very inexperineced players.
random opening moves, Blunders, Queens hanging, missed tactical chances,
missed mates and learning the game very slowly from past games.
Black throws back his Queen near the end of the game given below
because he was frightened about stalemating White.
A few weeks before the full game given this happened to the same Black player.
Game 8320878
Stalemate. So he was sure that was not going to happen again.
It's obvious you know your way about the chessboard and
although it's joke, it's a dangerous joke to play on here.
So you will understand why the hostile response.
We should be asking you for pointers and what books you have read, not the reverse.
This is a "......new to the game of chess." game. No notes needed.
Hi Paul... I rec'd that last post. 😏
Originally posted by Erekose22.Nxd5 looks interesting imo
This is the game I spent the most time looking at:
Game 8504614
What's most interesting is the combination that begins on move 19 (19 ... Bxe5). My copy of Rybka assures me that this isn't an awesome move (white should just play 19 ... Bxe5 20 dxe5 Nxe5 21 Ba3), but I supsect most people on this site wouldn't even have considered it.
And th ...[text shortened]... elp)
Regardless, its not credible that you've just played a few games with your brother
Greenpawn34 - First off, thanks for those two amusing games.
Secondly, it's not a joke. I legitimately wanted to know how to become a better chess player - but most people didn't take me seriously because I didn't begin my games by moving my rook pawn forward two spaces.
BTW, I know about databases because about five posts about them can be found on the first page of this forum.
Savielly
Well, Savielly did make some tactical and counting errors, but probably not as many as one would expect of a newbie to chess. Maybe his big mistake was being too humble. I think everyone saw his good sense of piece development and his playing gambit openings, and they just reacted with, "Aw, come on, this ain't no newbie."
🙂
And how do you, 'who is new to chess.' (your words). Know....
"I didn't begin my games by moving my rook pawn forward two spaces. "
That 1.h4 and 1.a4 are not good moves and that is what real beginners play?
They are OK but are condemned by players who have a certain knowledge
about the game. With every post (and the games) you have convinced me
that a book has been read and somewhere you have studied and played
the game before.
If not then you are the 4th best male 'newbie' I've seen.
Morphy, Capablanca, Reshevsky and now Savielly. 🙂
I'm up for a joke as much as the next chap. But don't drag it on.
If it is just natural talent, then carry on and keep away from chess books
and any advice anyone who posts on here can give you.
You are doing just fine without it.
Nobody has yet considered the possibility of reincarnation.Doesn't the name Savielly ring any bells?
Let's at least give the benefit of doubt.Savielly's obviously not new to chess (or a genius) but he may consider himself a newbie.For instance,I don't consider myself a good tactician yet some (but sadly not many) think I'm a wizard.It's about perspective.
Also a difference in interpretation of certain words.When do you stop being new to chess?20 games?50?100?1 book?10?perhaps after your first tourney?
It'll be different for everyone.
Originally posted by SaviellyOk, Lets try this again and what I say is not intended to offend you so please take it as written.
Morning all,
I'm very new to the game of chess. I know how the pieces move, and I've played a few games with my brother (who is just as new as I am), but besides that, it's all quite foreign.
I want to learn the game so I become an intellectual. (Half joking here.)
Could anyone give me some basic pointers? They would be much appreciated!
Savielly
You have come on to a site of many strong players and have asked for assistance which no one here has a problem with. You have then played games against players on this site and won convincingly with moves and openings that are considered to complex for beginners as you so claim to be.
No one has outright accused you of lying(about your strength) and cheating(with an engine etc.) but from the evidence that many people have seen believe is must be one or the other.
The only explanation which I see that is not lying and/or cheating is that you are ignorant to the extent of your abilities but even that does not explain how you have gained such skill from "a few games with my brother".
I hope this helps you understand why you have brought such attention on yourself and since there have been many instances where people have done similar things to you have resulted in being caught with cheating.
If you want to revise I your original post I have no doubt that people would be more accepting and willing to assist even if you are a strong player but you have to understand it from others point of view.
tk
Edit - Probably should have refreshed this thread before posting. Been open quite a while and was only one page when I saw it.
Hi Savielly, welcome to RHP.
OK, you came on here claiming to be a newbie, you were clearly better than that, and you got beaten up for it. (I suspect Greenpawn34 was just piling on for fun, at least in part. 🙂 )
But I think you've corrected what you meant. I think your ability could be consistent with playing some casual games a few times a year over a decade; If you played anyone who knew anything about chess, you could have easily picked up a little knowledge. (And you might really have some talent, unlike me.) And you've explained the database/gambit opening thing. Some people are starting to back off now from their initial indignation, so I hope the feeding frenzy has run its course.
As far as advice: You might already be better than I am, so who am I to throw out advice? But that's never stopped me before, so...
You've clearly got a handle on piece development. And your tactics are pretty good. Even so, you could probably benefit from a quick review of tactics and counting. My standard advice to novices is to visit Dan Heisman's web site. He's written a number of Novice Nook columns, which are just super. Make sure you go over all of the tactics articles and the four articles on counting. Dan also has a page for recommended chess books.
http://home.comcast.net/~danheisman/Main_Chess/chess.htm
http://home.comcast.net/~danheisman/Articles/Novice_Nook_Links.htm
P.S. Your only comment that really insulted me was the one about wanting to learn chess to become an intellectual. It should have been a full joke. 🙂