RJHind's Rating

Originally posted by RJHinds
Hmmm. I wonder who is using chess software. I wonder where the other
fingers are pointing. Very curious.

Come talk us through the game.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
So how come when i analysed your game against kingshill you had a 90% matchup with Rybka? When your game went out of the database on move 7, 35 out of the next 39 moves match with my chess engine.

Let's go to the chess forum and you can talk us through it. I'm gonna post the games PGN. See you there.

Well at least that proves we are not using Rybka.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well at least that proves we are not using Rybka.

How does that prove your not using Rybka? How do you work that one out?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Uhuh, I see, game was a bit of a slugfest, not really strategic in any way, but that can
happen with these sharp openings, like the Schlieman version of the Ruy Lopez, never
the less, its quite remarkable that according to Chessmaster you made NO error at all,
praise da Lord indeed!

Kingshill said after he offered me the draw with a point up that he had
made an error about 10 moves earlier. Why don't you message him
and tell him that he played a perfect game after all, since you have all
this information?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Kingshill said after he offered me the draw with a point up that he had
made an error about 10 moves earlier. Why don't you message him
and tell him that he played a perfect game after all, since you have all
this information?

i posted the game in the chess only forum RJH, its a remarkable achievement to
survive a four on one queenside pawn majority, hopefully the other chess enthusiasts
shall also find it equally as inspiring 🙂

Originally posted by RJHinds
Are you jealous? Maybe, you need to study more and not
be afraid of hard work.

P.S. You might try a little prayer ever now and then.

Ah, you mean like, Pray For The Success Of Atheism?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
How does that prove your not using Rybka? How do you work that one out?

Well, robbie carobbie says we match Chessmaster 10th Edition 100% and
your match for Rybka is only 90%, so I think robbie has a better case
than you. Ask Kingshill what he is using. I think we are using chess
literature and many of the moves were almost forced unless you did not
care about losing. Like I said, why don't you ask for his opinion if you
are that concerned about it. But I do not intend to help you learn how
to beat me. Maybe, he will.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well, robbie carobbie says we match Chessmaster 10th Edition 100% and
your match for Rybka is only 90%, so I think robbie has a better case
than you. Ask Kingshill what he is using. I think we are using chess
literature and many of the moves were almost forced unless you did not
care about losing. Like I said, why don't you ask for his opinion if you ...[text shortened]... at concerned about it. But I do not intend to help you learn how
to beat me. Maybe, he will.

I don't want to know how to beat you, i wouldn't waste my time playing you. But do you not think it would be nice to show the rest of the chess community here how you managed a draw against the leading player of RHP?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I don't want to know how to beat you, i wouldn't waste my time playing you. But do you not think it would be nice to show the rest of the chess community here how you managed a draw against the leading player of RHP?

Kingshill is rated number 1 and has 5 loses and 28 draws. I think I am
rated about 45 and I have 10 loses and 27 draws. I also had a draw
with the number 3 (not at the time) player who has only 1 loss. In
both games they were a pawn (1 point) ahead when I got the draws.
Now if I had won the games, that would be worthy of note, however
I only got a draw and Kingshill believes he should have beaten me if
he had not made that mistake he mentioned. I don't wish to brag
about getting draws.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well, robbie carobbie says we match Chessmaster 10th Edition 100% and
your match for Rybka is only 90%, so I think robbie has a better case
than you. Ask Kingshill what he is using. I think we are using chess
literature and many of the moves were almost forced unless you did not
care about losing. Like I said, why don't you ask for his opinion if you ...[text shortened]... at concerned about it. But I do not intend to help you learn how
to beat me. Maybe, he will.

not really, i am more interested in how you survived a four on one queenside pawn
deficit by active counter play against the opponents King, truly remarkable. It must be
noted that Chessmaster engine is not the strongest so my case is less than PK's.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
not really, i am more interested in how you survived a four on one queenside pawn
deficit by active counter play against the opponents King, truly remarkable. It must be
noted that Chessmaster engine is not the strongest so my case is less than PK's.

It was the only chance I had. I believe it was forced because his rook had
gotten in the wrong position when he went pawn grabbing and if he had
continued to try to advance his pawn to queen, I would have gotten in
positon for a checkmate. He saw this and decided to settle for the draw
since we would both be forced to repeat moves or else lose. He thinks
he overlooked something earlier that would have allowed him to win but
he did not say what it was.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It was the only chance I had. I believe it was forced because his rook had
gotten in the wrong position when he went pawn grabbing and if he had
continued to try to advance his pawn to queen, I would have gotten in
positon for a checkmate. He saw this and decided to settle for the draw
since we would both be forced to repeat moves or else lose. He th ...[text shortened]... overlooked something earlier that would have allowed him to win but
he did not say what it was.

yes i understood that Ronald, but never the less, its reeks not so much of chess , rather, as witchcraft! 😛

Originally posted by Agerg
How do we explain it?

1) Engine use?
2) Savantism?
3) He's only pretending to be a hillbilly fundamentalist cretin?

Thoughts, alternatives?

it's one thing to be good/bad at chess. another thing to be or not to be ignorant. or good in another field

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes i understood that Ronald, but never the less, its reeks not so much of chess , rather, as witchcraft! 😛

It seems to me that sometimes there is a little luck involved. Sometimes
one sees it and other times it is hidden from his eyes. Go figure.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It seems to me that sometimes there is a little luck involved. Sometimes
one sees it and other times it is hidden from his eyes. Go figure.

Just out of curiosity i put one of Magnus Calrsen's (the best ches player in the world) latest games through my machine, he had a 54% match up.