13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Main

Date: 16 May 2005 12:01:49
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

This kid was rated maybe 1800 a few short years ago. Now he's strong enough
to compete with GMs and dusts them regularly on ICC. This may be the real
reason Kasparov decided to quit (too many talented kids from the
computer-era getting ready to dust him).

His opening repertoire is shoddy, his middlegame is spectacular (like a
computer's), and his endgames are pretty good, especially for someone so
young.

His games are definitely worth studying for future trends in chess,
especially in the openings. I've seen some wild ideas from this kid,
including sacrificing a pawn on b4 in the main line of the Center Counter,
and playing 6. Rg1 against the Najdorf.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 18 May 2005 13:01:21
From:
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Hi,

Ray Gordon schrieb:
>
> I already play the first 15-20 moves like a GM.
>
LOL. That was a good one. Memorizing some (or even a lot of)
opening lines 15 moves deep does not entail playing "15-20 moves"
"like" a GM.
Even in "theoretical" openings such as the Botvinnik Semi-Slav you'll
get killed in some supersharp sideline you didn't even know existed.
If, on the other hand, the GM plays some "non-theoretical" opening
(like Nakamura did against you with his e3-b3-g3 stuff) he'll kill you
because he can play chess and you cannot.

Date: 18 May 2005 12:35:33
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> >Yeah, I bought my rating for $1.98 at Walt.

> You were ripped off. "A" player ratings go for $1.28 at my local
> Walt.

>FUCK!

Thank you, I do, on a much more regular basis than you do.

Date: 18 May 2005 03:16:17
From: Mark Houlsby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>FUCK!

Hey watch it!

*I'M* supposed to be "the king of the single entendre" around here...

Date: 17 May 2005 16:23:58
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Ray Gordon wrote:
<SNIPPED Gordo ranting on his "superior" opening knowledge. >
> >
> > I have seen beginners who have made similar mistakes but with a
very
> > different attitude: they posted here their games to improve his
skills.
>
> I don't need to improve my skills from this group. I lost the thread
in the
> game and got clobbered by the US champion. There is nothing to learn
from
> that. What was worth studying was how I held a superior position as
Black
> against him for 22 moves (he had a 45-37 second edge in time).

Nothing to learn from a game you lost, but somehow you learn something
from one-minute blitz games you supposedly win on ICC?? You haven't a
clue, have you?

> >> That time. Give me five years to build a middlgame as strong as
my
> >> opening and see what happens.
> >
> > You can NOT improve very much without playing OTB chess.
>
> Maybe YOU can't improve that way, but I know how to self-train.

So how's all that self-training working for ya, Gordy? Won a game over
the board lately? Or are you so diluted that you get satisfaction out
of winning lightning games played on the internet against anonymous
players?

> How can anyone improve by playing OTB chess against a small number of

> opponents with a limited repertoire, having to travel for hours and
waste an
> entire weekend at a major tournament, waste another $20-200 on the
entry
> fee, plus lodging, meals,

I happen to agree with the idea that chess is too expensive.

> and lost study time.

LOL! Anyone who doesn't learn from his OTB games (especially games
they lose) doesn't know HOW to study.

> Meanwhile, someone training
> on the net has none of these distractions and can run his games
through his
> PC as they occur.

Didn't you just say you don't need computers?

> The training is far more intense now than it ever was.
> At least for me. I hope for the sake of other players that they are
not
> slacking off.

What other players are you referring to, Gordo? It's not like you play
PEOPLE over the board. But I'm sure all the guests on FICS and ICC are
shaking in their boots to hear you say you're gunning for them.

> >To improve is needed a balance between study and practice, ... and
it seems
> >you do not play OTB chess.
>
> I got to play Nakamura on ICC. Not like that will happen OTB, now is
it?

Right. It NEVER will because you don't have the skill OR talent to get
invited to play against him in any event, international or otherwise,
despite your claims to the contrary.

> >And about your "study plan", we have no games to check if it seems
> >successfully or not.
>
> "We?" LOL.
>
> You don't get it: I trained so hard, for so long, and digested so
much
> theory so long ago that

"I became a Class A player as rated by the USCF."

Thanks for letting me finish that for you TRUTHFULLY.

> I wouldn't bother playing this game again if I didn't
> know I'd be kicking some international butt in short order.

Well, you've been talking about it for a couple years now and you have
yet to show your face in ONE SINGLE TOURNAMENT in the country. Where
ya at, Gordy? Should we wait the five years (when you're 43) you ask
to train before we can expect to see payment on the check your mouth
has been writing here for oh-so-long?

> The second I am
> over the hill, I will be the first to know. That day is many years
away,
> and when it does come, then a youngster takes over and has less work
to do
> because I blazed the trail for him.

Yeah. You're a real trail-blazer. Name three things you've done in
the last year to "blaze the trail" for younger players.

> Last year I played a perfect 22-move opening against a GM

"And lost the game despite my perfect opening."

Thanks for letting me finish that one, too.

> What happens
> when it goes to 25 moves, then 30, then 35 and 40? Even the 3000+
computers
> now have to wait until move 20-25 to get an edge on me. It's like a
video
> game where you master level one, then level two, three, etc., until
you can
> play all year on a quarter (I used to do that on Pac Man and
Asteroids).

What happens when it doesn't? Can we expect an apology from you? (But
FYI, nobody's holding their breath.)

> I can't be the only player who has figured this out.

Figured what out? How to memorize MCO and become an 'A' player?

> As for the "guests" on ICC, I'd estimate that
> about half or more of them are master strength, with several IMs and
a few
> GMs thrown in.

Yes, you'd like to think so, wouldn't you?

> > I find difficult to trust you without viewing any of those games.
>
> I'm too busy training with these supercomputers to worry about what
anyone
> thinks of my games. When I'm ready to destroy a tournament, I shall.

But not too busy trying to prove your manhood on a newsgroup to people
who don't give two shits about your absurd claims anyway.

Be gone, little man. Don't you have a lawsuit to file?

MN

Date: 17 May 2005 14:31:02
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>Yeah, I bought my rating for $1.98 at Walt.

You were ripped off. "A" player ratings go for $1.28 at my local
Walt.

Date: 18 May 2005 03:57:26
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> >Yeah, I bought my rating for $1.98 at Walt.
>
> You were ripped off. "A" player ratings go for $1.28 at my local
> Walt.

FUCK!

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 11:19:46
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Ray Gordon wrote:
> > Spoken like the true Openings Grandmaster he proclaims himself to
be.
> >
> > Here's some free advice, Gordy: Even if you play like a GM for the
> > first 15-20 moves, if you lose the game you still get a big, fat
ZERO
> > on the wallchart.
>
> Yeah, most GMs are born knowing the first 20 moves of book no matter
what
> line you throw at them. I forgot. I also forgot that if you don't
make GM
> with five years of serious study you never will. Silly me.

I smell sarcasm.

Gordo, I know a few 1100-rated players who know the first 20 moves to
99% of the openings out there and their still pulling down fourth and
fifth places in the class tournaments. You're attempt to be aloof and
appear to "know better" to those who scoff at your claims of being an
"Opening GM" is so ridiculous it's beyond laughable. It's pathetic,
really, all your attempts to impress those who might be new around here
or might not know any better with your pompous attitude and
preposterous statements of superiority at this game.

> It's not like I'd ever bother learning the endgame just as
thoroughly, even
> though I have the time, the books, and the brain to do it.

Yeah, why bother with the most complicated part of the game when you
can study all the subtleties and nuances of a 13-year old's openings in
a one-minute blitz game?

You're a dumbass.

> Silly me.

Mmmhmmm. That just about sums up what everyone thinks of your posts
when they read them.

"Silly Gordy."

MN

Date: 17 May 2005 11:12:03
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Ray Gordon wrote:
> > Oooooh. Gordo feels threatened. Better watch my mailbox for a
> > subpoena.
>
> No need. You're governed differently.

No, I'm not. I'm still a citizen.

> > There's nothing wrong with saying I'd be onboard with a policy that
> > would guarantee your removal from the gene-pool. It's the truth.
>
> Does the term "Conduct unbecoming" ring a bell with you?

LOL. You'd be extremely hard-pressed to get me a good talking-to from
my chief for what I've said to you, let alone court-tial.

> >And
> > last I heard, courts (military AND civilian) were big fans of the
> > truth.
>
> There's no "truth" for them to be a fan of; only you advocating that
I be
> shot.
>
> > Learn the difference between a threat and an opinion,
>
> Didn't say the statement was illegal (though if I said that about
another
> you can be sure they'd whine), but you're not governed by civilian
> standards.

Looks like you know as much about the military court system as you do
about libel and slander laws, Gordo. Keep banging those rocks
together.

MN

Date: 17 May 2005 06:07:03
From: Mark Houlsby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> That explains your seeming deranged, then.

>I'm not deranged, and unless you like defending libel lawsuits, I'd
suggest
you retract that without a hint of sarcasm.

I'm retracting nothing, o illiterate fuckwit. I wrote: "your *seeming*
deranged". That suggests not that you *are* deranged, only that you
*seem* (i.e. convey the APPEARANCE of being) deranged.

Oh, and all that other stuff, like about the one or two of those
prodigies who make you come in your sleep, that was all subjunctive.
Oh, and I wrote "*Maybe* it's time for your medication?" which clearly
implies that I acknowledged that I could be completely wrong.

In short, I see no basis for litigation, there. If you *do*, then
litigate away. A man of your talent ought to be able to find me easily
enough.

I'm bored with this conversation, now. Go fuck yourself.

Date: 17 May 2005 14:41:19
From: Terry
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"k Houlsby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>> That explains your seeming deranged, then.
>
>
>
>>I'm not deranged, and unless you like defending libel lawsuits, I'd
> suggest
> you retract that without a hint of sarcasm.
>
> I'm retracting nothing, o illiterate fuckwit. I wrote: "your *seeming*
> deranged". That suggests not that you *are* deranged, only that you
> *seem* (i.e. convey the APPEARANCE of being) deranged.
>
> Oh, and all that other stuff, like about the one or two of those
> prodigies who make you come in your sleep, that was all subjunctive.
> Oh, and I wrote "*Maybe* it's time for your medication?" which clearly
> implies that I acknowledged that I could be completely wrong.
>
> In short, I see no basis for litigation, there. If you *do*, then
> litigate away. A man of your talent ought to be able to find me easily
> enough.
>
> I'm bored with this conversation, now. Go fuck yourself.
>

LOL

You tell him what you think.

Regards

Date: 16 May 2005 19:38:40
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Spoken like the true Openings Grandmaster he proclaims himself to be.

Here's some free advice, Gordy: Even if you play like a GM for the
first 15-20 moves, if you lose the game you still get a big, fat ZERO
on the wallchart.

Just thought you should know, OGM Gordo.

MN

Date: 17 May 2005 03:14:37
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> Spoken like the true Openings Grandmaster he proclaims himself to be.
>
> Here's some free advice, Gordy: Even if you play like a GM for the
> first 15-20 moves, if you lose the game you still get a big, fat ZERO
> on the wallchart.

Yeah, most GMs are born knowing the first 20 moves of book no matter what
line you throw at them. I forgot. I also forgot that if you don't make GM
with five years of serious study you never will. Silly me.

It's not like I'd ever bother learning the endgame just as thoroughly, even
though I have the time, the books, and the brain to do it.

Silly me.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 02:37:41
From: me
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

On Mon, 16 May 2005 05:01:49 -0700, Ray Gordon wrote:

> This kid was rated maybe 1800 a few short years ago. Now he's strong
> enough to compete with GMs and dusts them regularly on ICC. This may be
> the real reason Kasparov decided to quit (too many talented kids from
> the computer-era getting ready to dust him).
>
> His opening repertoire is shoddy, his middlegame is spectacular (like a
> computer's), and his endgames are pretty good, especially for someone so
> young.
>
> His games are definitely worth studying for future trends in chess,
> especially in the openings. I've seen some wild ideas from this kid,
> including sacrificing a pawn on b4 in the main line of the Center
> Counter, and playing 6. Rg1 against the Najdorf.

isnt this they guy with the famous 1/x rule??? (sorry newbie to this
group) doesn't this kid fly in the face of that supposed rule? hmmm
shoddy openings... he shouldnt be rated past 1000 then??? what happened
to this magic rule of training??? doesn't make much sense to me :)

ICC 'Inconnux' :) <- started only last Aug :)

Date: 17 May 2005 03:26:47
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> This kid was rated maybe 1800 a few short years ago. Now he's strong
>> enough to compete with GMs and dusts them regularly on ICC. This may be
>> the real reason Kasparov decided to quit (too many talented kids from
>> the computer-era getting ready to dust him).
>>
>> His opening repertoire is shoddy, his middlegame is spectacular (like a
>> computer's), and his endgames are pretty good, especially for someone so
>> young.
>>
>> His games are definitely worth studying for future trends in chess,
>> especially in the openings. I've seen some wild ideas from this kid,
>> including sacrificing a pawn on b4 in the main line of the Center
>> Counter, and playing 6. Rg1 against the Najdorf.
>
> isnt this they guy with the famous 1/x rule??? (sorry newbie to this
> group) doesn't this kid fly in the face of that supposed rule?

No, he proves it. He's always digging himself out of a half-pawn hole he
creates for himself in the opening, plus he doesn't give away so much that
he loses in the opening, and with a vastly superior middlegame, he
compensates. Against a player with an equal level of middlegame, however,
he wouldn't have a prayer. The reason I study all of his games now is to
develop my own middlegame based on what he reveals through his play. He's
kind enough to train in public rather than hiding under Guest IDs and I'm
happy to get the free lessons!

Nakamura does the same thing: plays the opening like an expert, the
middlegame like a 3000, and the endgame like an IM. Since most chessgames
are won in the middlegame, it's quite possible to overcome a slight
disadvantage in the opening. I remember last year on ICC when Nakamura was
playing that kid in South America, he was up a pawn in a rook ending and
everyone (including GMs) was saying it was drawn.

The reason I have continued my training is that I see a tremendous weakness
even in our world's top players that can be exploited by someone who knows
how to book up. If I give up my path -- very likely given my age -- then a
protege just carries on with my method. I train only to further the method,
in the hope that I can use what's left of my "youth" to get the high rating
I should have gotten before I quit.

Nimzovich never became world champion either, but I'd say he left his k
on the game.

>hmmm
> shoddy openings... he shouldnt be rated past 1000 then??? what happened
> to this magic rule of training??? doesn't make much sense to me :)

It does if one would rather be 2800 FIDE than 2650. How do you think
Fischer and Kasparov did it? A 2650 FIDE rated player can play almost
anything in the opening and win against weaker or even equal competition.

Shaq is a great basketball player, but does that excuse his shoddy
free-throw shooting? That has cost his team many times over the years, in
fact (Orlando 1994, and LA 2004 for example, in the finals).

How good would Shaq be if he learned how to shoot 90 percent from the line?

>
> ICC 'Inconnux' :) <- started only last Aug :)

Many of the "guests" on ICC seem to be a lot stronger than the members from
what I've seen. I remember one session I scored like 50 percent against the
guests, then crushed three masters in a row when I played bullet games
against them, including one who was a GM and another who was an IM.

I only know one way to train at chess: the correct way. My being 38 years
old doesn't change that. If I sit down at the board I will train the
correct way, because that is all I know. I've put all of about five years
of serious study into the game, and to get to GM, even if you are extremely
talented, usually takes at least ten and sometimes fifteen. The way I
train, the rating improvement comes last, because my play is very lopsided
in favor of the opening...for now.

The theory is that once I perfect the opening, the middlegames and endgames
I get will be much more relevant and easier to target for studying, since
they won't be positions which are "poisoned" by early mistakes. Take
Nakamura's 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5!? for example: is the analysis of anything that
results from that "opening" relevant? I say the position is theoretically
poisoned at move two and not worth examination.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 08:14:00
From: Terry
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>> This kid was rated maybe 1800 a few short years ago. Now he's strong
>>> enough to compete with GMs and dusts them regularly on ICC. This may be
>>> the real reason Kasparov decided to quit (too many talented kids from
>>> the computer-era getting ready to dust him).
>>>
>>> His opening repertoire is shoddy, his middlegame is spectacular (like a
>>> computer's), and his endgames are pretty good, especially for someone so
>>> young.
>>>
>>> His games are definitely worth studying for future trends in chess,
>>> especially in the openings. I've seen some wild ideas from this kid,
>>> including sacrificing a pawn on b4 in the main line of the Center
>>> Counter, and playing 6. Rg1 against the Najdorf.
>>
>> isnt this they guy with the famous 1/x rule??? (sorry newbie to this
>> group) doesn't this kid fly in the face of that supposed rule?
>
> No, he proves it. He's always digging himself out of a half-pawn hole he
> creates for himself in the opening, plus he doesn't give away so much that
> he loses in the opening, and with a vastly superior middlegame, he
> compensates. Against a player with an equal level of middlegame, however,
> he wouldn't have a prayer. The reason I study all of his games now is to
> develop my own middlegame based on what he reveals through his play. He's
> kind enough to train in public rather than hiding under Guest IDs and I'm
> happy to get the free lessons!
>
> Nakamura does the same thing: plays the opening like an expert, the
> middlegame like a 3000, and the endgame like an IM. Since most chessgames
> are won in the middlegame, it's quite possible to overcome a slight
> disadvantage in the opening. I remember last year on ICC when Nakamura
> was playing that kid in South America, he was up a pawn in a rook ending
> and everyone (including GMs) was saying it was drawn.
>
> The reason I have continued my training is that I see a tremendous
> weakness even in our world's top players that can be exploited by someone
> who knows how to book up. If I give up my path -- very likely given my
> age -- then a protege just carries on with my method. I train only to
> further the method, in the hope that I can use what's left of my "youth"
> to get the high rating I should have gotten before I quit.
>
> Nimzovich never became world champion either, but I'd say he left his k
> on the game.
>
>
>>hmmm
>> shoddy openings... he shouldnt be rated past 1000 then??? what happened
>> to this magic rule of training??? doesn't make much sense to me :)
>
> It does if one would rather be 2800 FIDE than 2650. How do you think
> Fischer and Kasparov did it? A 2650 FIDE rated player can play almost
> anything in the opening and win against weaker or even equal competition.
>
> Shaq is a great basketball player, but does that excuse his shoddy
> free-throw shooting? That has cost his team many times over the years, in
> fact (Orlando 1994, and LA 2004 for example, in the finals).
>
> How good would Shaq be if he learned how to shoot 90 percent from the
> line?
>
>>
>> ICC 'Inconnux' :) <- started only last Aug :)
>
> Many of the "guests" on ICC seem to be a lot stronger than the members
> from what I've seen. I remember one session I scored like 50 percent
> against the guests, then crushed three masters in a row when I played
> bullet games against them, including one who was a GM and another who was
> an IM.
>
> I only know one way to train at chess: the correct way. My being 38 years
> old doesn't change that. If I sit down at the board I will train the
> correct way, because that is all I know. I've put all of about five years
> of serious study into the game, and to get to GM, even if you are
> extremely talented, usually takes at least ten and sometimes fifteen. The
> way I train, the rating improvement comes last, because my play is very
> lopsided in favor of the opening...for now.
>
> The theory is that once I perfect the opening, the middlegames and
> endgames I get will be much more relevant and easier to target for
> studying, since they won't be positions which are "poisoned" by early
> mistakes. Take Nakamura's 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5!? for example: is the analysis
> of anything that results from that "opening" relevant? I say the position
> is theoretically poisoned at move two and not worth examination.
>

What a load of bollocks. You know very little about chess.

Date: 17 May 2005 08:43:34
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> What a load of bollocks. You know very little about chess.

Yeah, I bought my rating for $1.98 at Walt.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 16 May 2005 19:34:06
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Ray Gordon wrote:
> >> Yeah, old people should be taken out back and shot, right?
They're
> > SO
> >> useless.
> >
> > Never said that. Although if the "old people" in question are you
and
> > perhaps Jerry Bibuld, I could get onboard with that policy.
>
> Watch those threatening reks, pal. You're held to a much higher
standard
> than civilians.

Oooooh. Gordo feels threatened. Better watch my mailbox for a
subpoena.

There's nothing wrong with saying I'd be onboard with a policy that
would guarantee your removal from the gene-pool. It's the truth. And
last I heard, courts (military AND civilian) were big fans of the
truth.

Learn the difference between a threat and an opinion, Gordo, and you
might -- *MIGHT* -- win one of the many lawsuits you file. Maybe.

MN

Date: 17 May 2005 03:13:14
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> > Never said that. Although if the "old people" in question are you
> and
>> > perhaps Jerry Bibuld, I could get onboard with that policy.
>>
>> Watch those threatening reks, pal. You're held to a much higher
> standard
>> than civilians.
>
> Oooooh. Gordo feels threatened. Better watch my mailbox for a
> subpoena.

No need. You're governed differently.

> There's nothing wrong with saying I'd be onboard with a policy that
> would guarantee your removal from the gene-pool. It's the truth.

Does the term "Conduct unbecoming" ring a bell with you?

>And
> last I heard, courts (military AND civilian) were big fans of the
> truth.

There's no "truth" for them to be a fan of; only you advocating that I be
shot.

> Learn the difference between a threat and an opinion,

Didn't say the statement was illegal (though if I said that about another
you can be sure they'd whine), but you're not governed by civilian
standards.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 16 May 2005 15:00:24
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> Yeah, old people should be taken out back and shot, right? They're
SO
> useless.

Never said that. Although if the "old people" in question are you and
perhaps Jerry Bibuld, I could get onboard with that policy.

>
> I'm the first to admit I'm way past the age where I should be able to
make
> it, but I'd like to see some evidence over the board before I pass
the torch
> (and all my knowledge) to my proteges.

LOL! There are a LOT of Class A players out there who're willing to
teach budding players, 99.99% of which are a LOT less arrogant than
you.

> Even if I don't make it, I am
> blazing the trail for those who will one day.

Yeah. And everyone's listening. We're all impressed with all the
"work" you're doing, Gordo. Really. I hear people talking.
Seriously. No, really.

> I just find it very
> hypocritical that so many "chess teachers" think that a 20-year old
rating
> of 2300 gives them an excuse not to train anymore.

Nobody here talks about how much they supposedly train except you. As
if you get a badge or a medal or something for proclaiming yourself
"the hardest working chessplayer in America," like it was something you
could prove. I can't speak for everybody here, but it seems to me that
"the hardest working chessplayer in America" -- especially one who
fancied himself a potential contender for the world title! -- would've
played in at least *one* OTB tournament in the last 15 years. You
haven't. And spare me the
I-play-blitz-on-ICC-all-the-time-and-study-13-year-olds shit. It's
weak and it just sounds stupid. Though I guess we could expect no less
from the likes of you.

> You can be sure that your posting will be quoted in the event that
anyone in
> this country ever urges me to "do the right thing" and represent the
USA
> over a chessboard.

Prediction: Nobody EVER -- *EVER* -- even SUGGESTS that you play for
the United States in an international event. EVER. Last I heard you
had to be above Class A to get your foot in the door. You're not and
you won't.

> I also refuse to teach kids in this country as part of
> my protest. The ones in other countries are so much better mannered.

We're all very impressed with your protest. We noticed it, really.
I'm sure there are a bunch of kids out there who are ster not to
have listened to your ego-trips OTB.

You're no prize, Gordo. You're not even movie-of-the-week caliber in
the chess world's grand scheme. Just a drop in the bucket of the flood
of class-players out there who're trying to improve. You only differ
from the majority in that you've got a death-grip on the provisional
expert rating you had for ONE MONTH ump-teen years ago and seem to
think that qualifies you to talk as if you were a contendah for the WC.
Newsflash....you're not and never will be.

Get over yourself, Gordy. You've given nobody here ANY reason to
believe you're anything but a loud-mouthed hack who enjoys one-minute
chess and litigation. That said, don't you have some "studying" to do,
Dr. Kasparov?

Toodles, bitch.

MN

Date: 17 May 2005 01:46:58
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> Yeah, old people should be taken out back and shot, right? They're
> SO
>> useless.
>
> Never said that. Although if the "old people" in question are you and
> perhaps Jerry Bibuld, I could get onboard with that policy.

Watch those threatening reks, pal. You're held to a much higher standard
than civilians.

Date: 16 May 2005 12:38:57
From: Mark Houlsby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>>>I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America.

>> You mean, *including* Central and South America *and Canada* (which
is
>> that country between Alaska and the rest of the mainland United
>> States)?

>I train with an intensity similar to Fischer's.

That explains your seeming deranged, then.

>It's how I made expert within two years of joining the USCF.

No doubt it is. That's an impressive achievement.

>>Do you include, say, Rhode Island, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin
>> Islands...?

<yawn >

Well I see that your training keeps you awake, at least.

>>>It's why I find kids like this one. I do my homework.

>> Something tells me that you might possibly be *working hard* on the
>> *wrong priorities*. Call it a hunch.

>Studying the games of 13 year-olds who make 2700 at chess is hardly a
poor
use of my time.

I hate to disillusion you, moron, but studying the BLITZ games of
ANYONE who is rated under 3000 on ICC most certainly is a waste of
anyone's time. In your becoming an expert, did you ever encounter the
concept of a "time trouble blunder"?

>>>> You don't *have* to help him, but it might be nice.

>>>I helped the group by breaking the news that a 13 year-old kid had a

> 2700 bullet rating on ICC.

>> I'm sorry...how did that help the group? In effect, all you've said
is:
>> "I, Ray Gordon, am a Superfly hero detective-type guy, and I know
>> something you don't..."

>I posted it to let the group know that the post-computer generation of

chessplayers is a lot stronger than the pre-computer one.

Ummm........ I don't see what playing blitz on ICC proves. If these new
players perform well in a Category XX event, I shall be suitably
impressed. Until then....

>>> He's the one who got personal.

>> Run that one by me again.... in what way did Sr. Torrecillas get
> "personal"?

>Asked for the kid's nic.

That's not being personal. That's asking for some information which you
have about someone who fills your wet dreams.

If I said: "Ray Gordon is a moron" that would be personal, but Sr.
Torrecillas wrote nothing personal.

Moron.

>> All he did was ask you who this is. It's a simple question.

>A *personal* question.

Keep banging those rocks together, jackass.

>>>> Just think, at some point in the future, you might post a request
> with
>>>> which Antonio might be able to help, or, indeed, I might, but
> because
>>>> you have behaved like such a jerk, we may decide *not* to help you

>>>> after all....

>>>Well I better work doubly hard to get all that help for myself now!

>> Well... be sure to work doubly hard on *improving your game* instead
of
>> just working doubly hard on finding some wunderkind-or-other on ICC
>> (where wunderkinder are a-dime-a-dozen, it seems).

>Oh, I work triply hard at that.

There are 72 hours in your day?!

>>>> Other people who read this thread may decide the same.

>>>Got news for you pal: I've never received a dime of help or support
> from the
>>> chess establishment, even when I was young and had a much longer
future
> than
> I do now.

>> This is relevant to the possibility that in the future you may need
>> help from the group... how... exactly?

>I gave up on third-party help at chess a long time ago. Chess funding
is
only for prodigies who will quit the game or adults who goof off, make
IM,
and call that a good investment.

Uh huh.

>>> I did see a bunch of spoiled brats declared "future champions"
> and have their lessons paid for, with the side effect of having
anyone
> over
> age 18 who took the game seriously being dismissed as "too old."
Funny
> how,
> without exception, all those "promising juniors" from the 1980s all
> QUIT the
> game and I'm training once again.

>> Absolutely. I'm splitting my sides, here.

>Yeah, too bad no one laughed at them in the 1980s before all that
money was
wasted on their chess lessons.

Are you sure it was wasted? Are you sure that those kids didn't become
*better, ster people* as a result of their having learned the
discipline of studying chess?

>>>If people were st, they'd let me run the chess show in this
> country,
> because if I'm no longer capable of becoming a world champion,

>> That may depend upon *which world*.....you seem to have "Planet
Gordo"
> sewn up.

>The people running the chess world in the US don't seem to be doing
the
greatest job.

No shit, Sherlock.

>Where's that next Fischer we were promised 20 years ago. Those
prodigies
were *so* promising!

>>>Let me state once again that should I ever wind up asked to play for

> this
> country in *any* international tournament, including any world
> championship,
> that I will refuse representation unless *all* of my training along
the
> way
> there is paid for, and I will advise any of my proteges to do the
same.

> This country should get only what it gives, and not try to rewrite
> history
> after the fact.

>> In other words:

>> "Ask *NOT* what *you can do for your country*. Ask *what your
country
>> can do for YOU*."

>Ask that your country do for you what it did for a hundred prodigies
20
years ago who QUIT. They had funded lessons out the wazoo and got
respect
just for being young (I had the same rating they did but was all of
nine
years older, and had been playing for less time).

That's a strange obsession of yours. WTF does it matter what happened
to anybody else?

If you spent as much time studying chess *effectively* as you seem to
do worrying about those kids who quit, who knows..? You might actually
be pretty good by now...

>>>I already published a game where I crushed a 3000-rated computer on
a
> major
> internet server with BLACK, and the computer had only lost less than
50
> games against 7000+ wins. I've since been beating masters rather
> regularly
> at blitz and bullet, and my repertoire is starting to expand past
move
> 20 in
> my main lines.

>> Great.

> For me, not my opponents.

No shit, Sherlock.

>>>Next up is three to five years of ferocious endgame study, and
> whatever's
> left over -- if anything -- will be the "middlegame." It'll be real
> comforting to know that once I reach my goals, that many will pretend

> to
> have supported me all along in my endeavor.

>> That may prove to be true, but you can be sure that if it does, *I
> shall not be one of the "many"*. I wish you success on whichever
planet
> you choose to occupy.

>Wishes don't pay for training costs, all they are is a "free lottery
ticket"
for the person making the wish, since it's free, and they can claim
down the
road that they were "supportive."

Don't worry. I'm not going to do that. I may wish you well, but really
I don't give a shit about you. My only concern was your having trolled
Sr. Torrecillas, who, it seems to me, did not deserve to be trolled.

>Too bad Fischer wasn't st enough to demand $20 million from the US
government for being its Cold Warrior back in 1972. Love the way he
was
repaid for being such a patriot.

Yeah, love the way he did *so* much for chess after becoming World
Champion, as well...

>At least I didn't quit the game like the cowardly prodigies from 20
years
ago did *after* they took thousands of dollars in lessons and stipends
to
get them through high school.

Yeah, you already said that. Maybe it's time for your medication?

> Perhaps they can return that money so it can
go to the training of players willing to make a lifetime commitment to
the
game?

Perhaps. I suggest that you *shouldn't* try to ask any of them
personally, however... by now, one or two of them might be MEAN
motherfuckers who'll cheerfully kick seven shades of shit out of you,
at least...

Have a nice day, now...

Date: 16 May 2005 20:33:22
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>>I train with an intensity similar to Fischer's.
>
> That explains your seeming deranged, then.

I'm not deranged, and unless you like defending libel lawsuits, I'd suggest
you retract that without a hint of sarcasm.

Fischer was attacked similarly by those who were jealous of his chess
abilities.

>>It's how I made expert within two years of joining the USCF.
>
> No doubt it is. That's an impressive achievement.

Apparently not.

>>>Do you include, say, Rhode Island, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin
>>> Islands...?
>
>
> <yawn>
>
> Well I see that your training keeps you awake, at least.

My training is still officially a joke: I mean no one can get serious about
the game at 38 and get anywhere if they were only an "expert" when they quit
at 24, can they? Nah. Impossible.

>>Studying the games of 13 year-olds who make 2700 at chess is hardly a
> poor
> use of my time.
>
> I hate to disillusion you, moron,

You'd shit in your pants before you'd ever say that to my face, pussy.

>but studying the BLITZ games of
> ANYONE who is rated under 3000 on ICC most certainly is a waste of
> anyone's time.

His BULLET rating was over 2700, not his BLITZ rating. He was ranked in the
top 10 at one point.

>In your becoming an expert, did you ever encounter the
> concept of a "time trouble blunder"?

You think the better player suddenly loses because the time control is
short? Studies prove the opposite.

>>I posted it to let the group know that the post-computer generation of
>
> chessplayers is a lot stronger than the pre-computer one.
>
> Ummm........ I don't see what playing blitz on ICC proves. If these new
> players perform well in a Category XX event, I shall be suitably
> impressed. Until then....

In other words, you'll want to bet the winning horse the second it crosses
the wire in front.

>>>> He's the one who got personal.
>
>>> Run that one by me again.... in what way did Sr. Torrecillas get
>> "personal"?
>
>
>
>>Asked for the kid's nic.
>
> That's not being personal. That's asking for some information which you
> have about someone who fills your wet dreams.

I have no wet dreams about anyone. Just found the kid to be very strong.

> If I said: "Ray Gordon is a moron" that would be personal, but Sr.
> Torrecillas wrote nothing personal.

He asked for personal information.

> Moron.

You'd shit your pants before you'd ever say that to my face.

>>> All he did was ask you who this is. It's a simple question.
>
>
>>A *personal* question.
>
> Keep banging those rocks together, jackass.

See above me, pussy.

>>>>Well I better work doubly hard to get all that help for myself now!
>
>
>>> Well... be sure to work doubly hard on *improving your game* instead
> of
>>> just working doubly hard on finding some wunderkind-or-other on ICC
>>> (where wunderkinder are a-dime-a-dozen, it seems).
>
>
>
>>Oh, I work triply hard at that.
>
> There are 72 hours in your day?!

Triple intensity.

>>I gave up on third-party help at chess a long time ago. Chess funding
> is
> only for prodigies who will quit the game or adults who goof off, make
> IM,
> and call that a good investment.
>
> Uh huh.

It's the truth. Name one funded chessplayer from the last 20 years who was
*born in America* and who even came close to winning the world championship.

>>>> I did see a bunch of spoiled brats declared "future champions"
>> and have their lessons paid for, with the side effect of having
> anyone
>> over
>> age 18 who took the game seriously being dismissed as "too old."
> Funny
>> how,
>> without exception, all those "promising juniors" from the 1980s all
>> QUIT the
>> game and I'm training once again.
>
>>> Absolutely. I'm splitting my sides, here.
>
>>Yeah, too bad no one laughed at them in the 1980s before all that
> money was
> wasted on their chess lessons.
>
> Are you sure it was wasted? Are you sure that those kids didn't become
> *better, ster people* as a result of their having learned the
> discipline of studying chess?

Is it the goal of USCF and the ACF to use funds devoted to promoting our
future chess talent to instead produce "good citizens?"

My mistake: I thought they wanted chess to be on TV like poker now is, and
to have one of our own play for the world championship.

>>The people running the chess world in the US don't seem to be doing
> the
> greatest job.
>
> No shit, Sherlock.

Then they have no standing to mock any alternatives.

>>Where's that next Fischer we were promised 20 years ago. Those
> prodigies
> were *so* promising!

Took the pussy's breath away.

>> This country should get only what it gives, and not try to rewrite
>> history
>> after the fact.
>>> In other words:
>>> "Ask *NOT* what *you can do for your country*. Ask *what your
> country
>>> can do for YOU*."
>
>>Ask that your country do for you what it did for a hundred prodigies
> 20
> years ago who QUIT. They had funded lessons out the wazoo and got
> respect
> just for being young (I had the same rating they did but was all of
> nine
> years older, and had been playing for less time).
>
> That's a strange obsession of yours. WTF does it matter what happened
> to anybody else?

Note the overstatement: "obsession." Can anyone make a comment on anything
without being accused of being "obsessed" by it?

See, back in the day, what happened to others affected what happened to me.
Those kids took center stage as the "future of American chess." That
effectively ginalized the more serious older players my age (there were
several dozen of us, in fact). A definite statement was made yesterday that
these kids would become the torchbearers of today, and that the game was in
good hands.

As Dr. Phil might ask: "How's that working for you, American chess?"

> If you spent as much time studying chess *effectively* as you seem to
> do worrying about those kids who quit, who knows..? You might actually
> be pretty good by now...

If the money spent on them to train had been spent on me instead, I'd
definitely be as good or better than all of them by now, but I never thought
I'd have a reason to, since it was "common knowledge" that they had the
future title slots locked up. Imagine my surprise to find none of them on
the top rating lists today.

I study chess more efficiently than any human on the planet. I even
published most of my method for FREE just to laugh at those who will take
10-15 years to realize just how brilliant my training method is.

Thank god I'm still eligible for under-2000!

>>>>I already published a game where I crushed a 3000-rated computer on
> a
>> major
>> internet server with BLACK, and the computer had only lost less than
> 50
>> games against 7000+ wins. I've since been beating masters rather
>> regularly
>> at blitz and bullet, and my repertoire is starting to expand past
> move
>> 20 in
>> my main lines.
>
>>> Great.
>
>
>
>> For me, not my opponents.
>
> No shit, Sherlock.

Yep. That win, by itself, is an accomplishment that is beyond the reach of
most GMs. I played a perfect game from start to finish; it was the direct
result of my opening book and knowledge extending so far out that I can
literally run an opponent into the ground from move one, even if he tries to
"avoid" my book knowledge (I spend as much time on the "avoidance" lines as
I do the regular ones, as they are just as common).

For example, when a guy opens up with 1. g3, he's saying "I am a total idiot
about chess who is willing to give Black equality at move one."

>>>>Next up is three to five years of ferocious endgame study, and
>> whatever's
>> left over -- if anything -- will be the "middlegame." It'll be real
>> comforting to know that once I reach my goals, that many will pretend
>
>> to
>> have supported me all along in my endeavor.
>
>>> That may prove to be true, but you can be sure that if it does, *I
>> shall not be one of the "many"*. I wish you success on whichever
> planet
>> you choose to occupy.
>
>>Wishes don't pay for training costs, all they are is a "free lottery
> ticket"
> for the person making the wish, since it's free, and they can claim
> down the
> road that they were "supportive."
>
> Don't worry. I'm not going to do that. I may wish you well, but really
> I don't give a shit about you. My only concern was your having trolled
> Sr. Torrecillas, who, it seems to me, did not deserve to be trolled.

He asked a personal question.

>>Too bad Fischer wasn't st enough to demand $20 million from the US
> government for being its Cold Warrior back in 1972. Love the way he
> was
> repaid for being such a patriot.
>
> Yeah, love the way he did *so* much for chess after becoming World
> Champion, as well...

The Nixon white house BEGGED him to play that match in 1972.

>>At least I didn't quit the game like the cowardly prodigies from 20
> years
> ago did *after* they took thousands of dollars in lessons and stipends
> to
> get them through high school.
>
> Yeah, you already said that. Maybe it's time for your medication?

Maybe it's time you got a lawyer, or better yet, a clue?

I don't take kindly to medical defamation, and there are disability law
firms that specialize in helping people deal with such bigotry.

>> Perhaps they can return that money so it can
> go to the training of players willing to make a lifetime commitment to
> the
> game?
>
> Perhaps. I suggest that you *shouldn't* try to ask any of them
> personally, however... by now, one or two of them might be MEAN
> motherfuckers who'll cheerfully kick seven shades of shit out of you,
> at least...

Your rek is being construed as an attempt to use references to violence
to threaten me. Perhaps I should subpoena you and ask exactly who you are
referring to. If it's "no one," then it's just you being threatening.

Did you know it's a hate crime in PA to harass someone by communication on
the basis of perceived disability? Combining the words "take your
medication" with "someone "might" want to kick your ass" isn't exactly wise.

> Have a nice day, now...

I'd like to know which prodigy said they might want to kick my ass, or
whether or not you're just inventing that as a means to be threatening
towards me yourself.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 00:23:24
From: Lee Harris
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>>I train with an intensity similar to Fischer's.
>>
>> That explains your seeming deranged, then.
>
> I'm not deranged, and unless you like defending libel lawsuits, I'd
> suggest you retract that without a hint of sarcasm.
>
I think you're deranged. In fact, I think you may be insane. Either way,
you're certainly a gibbon.

Date: 16 May 2005 11:36:04
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Delusions of grandeur. ALL of it. Not the least of which is Gordo
saying he's "no jerk."

Any 30/40-something Class A player who fancies himself "the hardest
working chessplayer in the country" and apparently actually *thinks* he
has a shot at the world title or that someone like HIM could even get
more votes than Sam Sloan in a USCF election is truly deranged. But we
established that a long time ago, didn't we?

Regards,

Matt

Date: 16 May 2005 20:41:55
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> Delusions of grandeur. ALL of it. Not the least of which is Gordo
> saying he's "no jerk."
>
> Any 30/40-something Class A player who fancies himself "the hardest
> working chessplayer in the country" and apparently actually *thinks* he
> has a shot at the world title or that someone like HIM could even get
> more votes than Sam Sloan in a USCF election is truly deranged. But we
> established that a long time ago, didn't we?

Yeah, old people should be taken out back and shot, right? They're SO
useless.

I'm the first to admit I'm way past the age where I should be able to make
it, but I'd like to see some evidence over the board before I pass the torch
(and all my knowledge) to my proteges. Even if I don't make it, I am
blazing the trail for those who will one day. I just find it very
hypocritical that so many "chess teachers" think that a 20-year old rating
of 2300 gives them an excuse not to train anymore.

You can be sure that your posting will be quoted in the event that anyone in
this country ever urges me to "do the right thing" and represent the USA
over a chessboard. I also refuse to teach kids in this country as part of
my protest. The ones in other countries are so much better mannered.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 16 May 2005 23:05:09
From: John J.
Subject: "I cudda been a contendah." lol n/t

Date: 16 May 2005 20:55:16
From: John J.
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"I also refuse to teach kids in this country as part of
my protest."

You sound like a heck of a citizen with a chip on your shoulder. I just
found a chess club close by with an abundance of very well mannered
children.

It also sounds like you hate this country.

John

Date: 16 May 2005 11:33:58
From: Mark Houlsby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> >Why would I tell anyone stuff like that?

>> Why *indeed* would a *jerk* like you do *anything* to help out *his
own
>> mother*?

>I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America.

You mean, *including* Central and South America *and Canada* (which is
that country between Alaska and the rest of the mainland United
States)? Do you include, say, Rhode Island, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin
Islands...?

>It's why I find kids like this one. I do my homework.

Something tells me that you might possibly be *working hard* on the
*wrong priorities*. Call it a hunch.

>> Sr. Torrecillas has, for many years, been one of the most
consistently
>> intelligent and helpful members of the group. I have been the
>> beneficiary of a great deal of that help, I'm happy to say.

>> You don't *have* to help him, but it might be nice.

>I helped the group by breaking the news that a 13 year-old kid had a
2700 bullet rating on ICC.

I'm sorry...how did that help the group? In effect, all you've said is:
"I, Gordon Parker, am a Superfly hero detective-type guy, and I know
something you don't..."

> He's the one who got personal.

Run that one by me again.... in what way did Sr. Torrecillas get
"personal"?

All he did was ask you who this is. It's a simple question.

>> Just think, at some point in the future, you might post a request
with
>> which Antonio might be able to help, or, indeed, I might, but
because
>> you have behaved like such a jerk, we may decide *not* to help you
>> after all....

>Well I better work doubly hard to get all that help for myself now!

Well... be sure to work doubly hard on *improving your game* instead of
just working doubly hard on finding some wunderkind-or-other on ICC
(where wunderkinder are a-dime-a-dozen, it seems).

>> Other people who read this thread may decide the same.

>Got news for you pal: I've never received a dime of help or support
from the
chess establishment, even when I was young and had a much longer future
than
I do now.

This is relevant to the possibility that in the future you may need
help from the group... how... exactly?

> I did see a bunch of spoiled brats declared "future champions"
and have their lessons paid for, with the side effect of having anyone
over
age 18 who took the game seriously being dismissed as "too old." Funny
how,
without exception, all those "promising juniors" from the 1980s all
QUIT the
game and I'm training once again.

Absolutely. I'm splitting my sides, here.

>If people were st, they'd let me run the chess show in this
country,
because if I'm no longer capable of becoming a world champion,

That may depend upon *which world*.....you seem to have "Planet Gordo"
sewn up.

>I'd be able
to set the stage for whichever American has the talent to do so. I
also
don't keep quiet about wrongdoing, and I see a lot of complaining about
that
from those who claim to care about chess.

I think that many people might be able to say the same. Certainly I
can.

>Let me state once again that should I ever wind up asked to play for
this
country in *any* international tournament, including any world
championship,
that I will refuse representation unless *all* of my training along the
way
there is paid for, and I will advise any of my proteges to do the same.

This country should get only what it gives, and not try to rewrite
history
after the fact.

In other words:

"Ask *NOT* what *you can do for your country*. Ask *what your country
can do for YOU*."
--Joe Bowie/Defunkt ("In America", after John F. Kennedy, 35th
President of the USA)

>I already published a game where I crushed a 3000-rated computer on a
major
internet server with BLACK, and the computer had only lost less than 50

games against 7000+ wins. I've since been beating masters rather
regularly
at blitz and bullet, and my repertoire is starting to expand past move
20 in
my main lines.

Great.

>Next up is three to five years of ferocious endgame study, and
whatever's
left over -- if anything -- will be the "middlegame." It'll be real
comforting to know that once I reach my goals, that many will pretend
to
have supported me all along in my endeavor.

That may prove to be true, but you can be sure that if it does, *I
shall not be one of the "many"*. I wish you success on whichever planet
you choose to occupy.

k Houlsby

Date: 16 May 2005 20:30:20
From: Frisco Del Rosario
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

In article <[email protected] >, "k
Houlsby" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Well... be sure to work doubly hard on *improving your game* instead of
> just working doubly hard on finding some wunderkind-or-other on ICC
> (where wunderkinder are a-dime-a-dozen, it seems).

For what it's worth, I know a kid who achieved an ICC bullet rating of
2709 when he was 15 or 16 (handle is Speedster). His USCF rating is around
2000.

Bullet ratings are what they are.

--
Frisco Del Rosario
A First Book of Morphy -- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1412039061

Date: 16 May 2005 19:02:46
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>>I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America.
>
> You mean, *including* Central and South America *and Canada* (which is
> that country between Alaska and the rest of the mainland United
> States)?

I train with an intensity similar to Fischer's. It's how I made expert
within two years of joining the USCF.

>Do you include, say, Rhode Island, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin
> Islands...?

<yawn >

>>It's why I find kids like this one. I do my homework.
>
>
> Something tells me that you might possibly be *working hard* on the
> *wrong priorities*. Call it a hunch.

Studying the games of 13 year-olds who make 2700 at chess is hardly a poor
use of my time.

>>> You don't *have* to help him, but it might be nice.
>
>>I helped the group by breaking the news that a 13 year-old kid had a
> 2700 bullet rating on ICC.
>
> I'm sorry...how did that help the group? In effect, all you've said is:
> "I, <snip>, am a Superfly hero detective-type guy, and I know
> something you don't..."

I posted it to let the group know that the post-computer generation of
chessplayers is a lot stronger than the pre-computer one.

>> He's the one who got personal.
>
> Run that one by me again.... in what way did Sr. Torrecillas get
> "personal"?

Asked for the kid's nic.

> All he did was ask you who this is. It's a simple question.

A *personal* question.

>>> Just think, at some point in the future, you might post a request
> with
>>> which Antonio might be able to help, or, indeed, I might, but
> because
>>> you have behaved like such a jerk, we may decide *not* to help you
>>> after all....
>
>
>>Well I better work doubly hard to get all that help for myself now!
>
> Well... be sure to work doubly hard on *improving your game* instead of
> just working doubly hard on finding some wunderkind-or-other on ICC
> (where wunderkinder are a-dime-a-dozen, it seems).

Oh, I work triply hard at that.

>>> Other people who read this thread may decide the same.
>
>
>>Got news for you pal: I've never received a dime of help or support
> from the
> chess establishment, even when I was young and had a much longer future
> than
> I do now.
>
> This is relevant to the possibility that in the future you may need
> help from the group... how... exactly?

I gave up on third-party help at chess a long time ago. Chess funding is
only for prodigies who will quit the game or adults who goof off, make IM,
and call that a good investment.

>> I did see a bunch of spoiled brats declared "future champions"
> and have their lessons paid for, with the side effect of having anyone
> over
> age 18 who took the game seriously being dismissed as "too old." Funny
> how,
> without exception, all those "promising juniors" from the 1980s all
> QUIT the
> game and I'm training once again.
>
> Absolutely. I'm splitting my sides, here.

Yeah, too bad no one laughed at them in the 1980s before all that money was
wasted on their chess lessons.

>>If people were st, they'd let me run the chess show in this
> country,
> because if I'm no longer capable of becoming a world champion,
>
> That may depend upon *which world*.....you seem to have "Planet Gordo"
> sewn up.

The people running the chess world in the US don't seem to be doing the
greatest job.

Where's that next Fischer we were promised 20 years ago. Those prodigies
were *so* promising!

>>Let me state once again that should I ever wind up asked to play for
> this
> country in *any* international tournament, including any world
> championship,
> that I will refuse representation unless *all* of my training along the
> way
> there is paid for, and I will advise any of my proteges to do the same.
>
> This country should get only what it gives, and not try to rewrite
> history
> after the fact.
>
> In other words:
>
> "Ask *NOT* what *you can do for your country*. Ask *what your country
> can do for YOU*."

Ask that your country do for you what it did for a hundred prodigies 20
years ago who QUIT. They had funded lessons out the wazoo and got respect
just for being young (I had the same rating they did but was all of nine
years older, and had been playing for less time).

>>I already published a game where I crushed a 3000-rated computer on a
> major
> internet server with BLACK, and the computer had only lost less than 50
> games against 7000+ wins. I've since been beating masters rather
> regularly
> at blitz and bullet, and my repertoire is starting to expand past move
> 20 in
> my main lines.
>
> Great.

For me, not my opponents.

>>Next up is three to five years of ferocious endgame study, and
> whatever's
> left over -- if anything -- will be the "middlegame." It'll be real
> comforting to know that once I reach my goals, that many will pretend
> to
> have supported me all along in my endeavor.
>
> That may prove to be true, but you can be sure that if it does, *I
> shall not be one of the "many"*. I wish you success on whichever planet
> you choose to occupy.

Wishes don't pay for training costs, all they are is a "free lottery ticket"
for the person making the wish, since it's free, and they can claim down the
road that they were "supportive."

Too bad Fischer wasn't st enough to demand $20 million from the US
government for being its Cold Warrior back in 1972. Love the way he was
repaid for being such a patriot.

At least I didn't quit the game like the cowardly prodigies from 20 years
ago did *after* they took thousands of dollars in lessons and stipends to
get them through high school. Perhaps they can return that money so it can
go to the training of players willing to make a lifetime commitment to the
game?

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 00:21:54
From: Lee Harris
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>>>I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America.
>>
>> You mean, *including* Central and South America *and Canada* (which is
>> that country between Alaska and the rest of the mainland United
>> States)?
>
> I train with an intensity similar to Fischer's. It's how I made expert
> within two years of joining the USCF.
>
>

Ray, you can't be that st considering the shit you keep coming out with.

Date: 17 May 2005 04:57:32
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>>>>I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America.
>>>
>>> You mean, *including* Central and South America *and Canada* (which is
>>> that country between Alaska and the rest of the mainland United
>>> States)?
>>
>> I train with an intensity similar to Fischer's. It's how I made expert
>> within two years of joining the USCF.
>
> Ray, you can't be that st considering the shit you keep coming out
> with.

Makes you wonder who's coming out with the "shit."
--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 16 May 2005 20:16:49
From: Frisco Del Rosario
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

In article <[email protected] >, "Ray Gordon"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America.

> I train with an intensity similar to Fischer's. It's how I made expert
> within two years of joining the USCF.

Rating history for Gordon R. Parker

Date of USCF rating supplement Rating
July 1987 1380/4
Sept. 1987 none
Nov. 1987 1810
Jan. 1988 1828
ch 1988 1867
May 1988 1940
July 1988 1907
Sept. 1988 1958
Nov. 1988 1877
Jan. 1989 1967
ch 1989 1912
May 1989 1877
July 1989 1888
Sept. 1989 1897
Nov. 1989 1890
Jan. 1990 1904
ch 1990 1956
May 1990 1888
July 1990 1974
Sept. 1990 1912
1990 annual 1912
Feb. 1991 none
April 1991 1956
June 1991 1988
Aug. 1991 1903
Oct. 1991 1903
1991 annual 1900
Feb. 1992 none
April 1992 none

Even though research does not show an expert rating for Gordon R. Parker,
his 2000+ rating was perhaps published on his Chess Life mailing label in
one of those months when the USCF did not publish a ratings supplement.

--
Frisco Del Rosario
A First Book of Morphy -- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1412039061

Date: 16 May 2005 20:36:13
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> Rating history

I have a "P" after my name, or used to.

I peaked at 2000 on the nose.

Five years ago people were trying to claim that I had never even played
chess.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 16 May 2005 23:05:25
From: Frisco Del Rosario
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

In article <[email protected] >, "Ray Gordon"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> > Rating history
>
> I have a "P" after my name, or used to.
>
> I peaked at 2000 on the nose.

Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
picture of yourself standing next to a woman. You say you're a chess
expert, but three years of USCF rating supplements say you peaked at 1988.
Yes, it is true that a Chess Life mailing label could show your rating as
"2000P", but only you could provide such evidence.

My guess is that if you had achieved a 2000 rating, you'd be saying you
are a "former master".

Congratulations on reaching 2036 at bullet on the playchess server. Do let
us know if you ever manage to play more than one minute at chess or with a
woman.

--
Frisco Del Rosario
A First Book of Morphy -- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1412039061

Date: 18 May 2005 08:11:39
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> I have a "P" after my name, or used to.
>>
>> I peaked at 2000 on the nose.
>
> Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
> picture of yourself standing next to a woman.

I'm not a picture guru. Guys look to get laid, not have their picture taken
with hot chicks. Chicks also tend to value privacy.

>You say you're a chess
> expert, but three years of USCF rating supplements say you peaked at 1988.

My Chess Life labels had a "P" after the name, indicating I had peaked at
Expert.

> Yes, it is true that a Chess Life mailing label could show your rating as
> "2000P", but only you could provide such evidence.

Actually, the rating supplements also had the P. Anyone who still has the
old ones can look it up.

> My guess is that if you had achieved a 2000 rating, you'd be saying you
> are a "former master".

2200 is master, so no.

> Congratulations on reaching 2036 at bullet on the playchess server. Do let
> us know if you ever manage to play more than one minute at chess or with a
> woman.

"Us?" Pretty sad.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 19 Aug 2005 00:58:41
From: Krus T. Olfard
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

On 18-May-2005, "Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote:

> > Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
> > picture of yourself standing next to a woman.
>
> I'm not a picture guru. Guys look to get laid, not have their picture
> taken
> with hot chicks. Chicks also tend to value privacy.

The thing he fails to point out is that if he really seduced a woman she
would be happy to have a photo taken of her with him... nothing nude or
engaging in sex, just with his arm around her and her obviously enjoying it.

But since I truly do not believe, based on his posts to this newsgroup, that
he's ever had sex, in person, body to body, with a real live woman I do not
at all find it unusual for him to consistently use the same excuse as above
to justify his lack of success.

--
Everything in this message is simply my opinion.
If you don't like my opinions then killfile me.
Yeah, that means YOU!

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------- >>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Date: 18 May 2005
From: Cyberdog2.0
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
>> picture of yourself standing next to a woman.
>
> I'm not a picture guru. Guys look to get laid, not have their picture taken
> with hot chicks. Chicks also tend to value privacy.

Read: "One doesn't exist because I've never been next to a woman, let a lone
seduce one."

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Date: 18 May 2005 19:50:50
From: JJTj
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> I'm not a picture guru.

BUT, you gutless coward. You forget the pix
of the porn slag (s) on your site. "..hotties.."
you claimed to of boinked some how in "..rayworld.." :

...AFTER you explained yer STD to them.

THEN..as all liars are found out, others showed proof
of the SAME EXACT PIX on some porn slag's site. I have
the pix, and if I remember right, she WAS one sad slag.

Tell us all now how that is a lie. BETTER YET..

..tell it to a "..fuckin' judge.." as U call them..

Till then, let's all sing..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"goll-ei, Fuz,..U gonna go there! ?"
Fuz 'da Bun: "..I'm gonna spill me some beans ! : "

ROUND 'em UP !!

Well they're ASF shilling..
Big Bad RICO villains
And we scam everyone, ya know
(that sounds like us ? )

We sing about seduction
And we sing about gurlz
as we put on a little show
(yeah, ca-ching! Kiss me, hun..)

We have all kind-a girls
who live out all kind-a thrills
But the 1 thrill we WANNA known
Is the thrill of that true fame
When you get your real name
On the docket with Gordon Roy

Gordon Roy
"..fucking court.." gonna call out my name..
Parker-boy !
"..fucking judge.." gonna make him explain..
ROY !
Nothing ever gonna be the same..
On the docket with Gordon Roy

He got a scary mommie named Baseball Bat Penny..
who pays all his ways and means..hahahaha
He got his own collection of dollies
Re-Writing his "ray-world" dreams...

Now it's all a crime, cause he's so blind:..,
But U gotta say it's pretty lame..
unLike the thrill of the true fame
When you get your real name
On the docket with Gordon Roy

Gordon Roy
He's gonna throw all his Meds away....
Parker-boy !
Post in Drag all night and day....
ROY !
But he'll have to fully explain ..
On the docket with Gordon Roy

mASF: hey, i know all about his failures..!!!
<insert teenage guitar solo HERE ! >
(spoken)
JJT: "..hey, I'm John Doe #17 !!!"
THE WORLD:: Counter sue his ass, Google !!!..

He dreams of underaged gymnasts "..sexual performers.."
& that fuels up his wet dreams: "..if it were legal."
He's got a made up a hooker named, um, 'hellen'..
Earning money to get him laid... ha ha ha ha ha

He gets all the jobs $10k n failures provide.,
Still he whines cause he's all alone..
Yet we keep gettin' richer,
..still he can't get our signature
On the docket with Gordon Roy

Gordon Roy
He'll make all the "cunts" and "whores" pay...
Parker-boy !
"..if it were legal.." children, he would slay !..
Gordon ROY !
I just wonder what the Judge will say....
On the docket with Gordon Roy

Talking:
I don't know why we ain't in no courtroom, baby!
He's an "..inexcusable failure.." at it, ya know..!
I ain't kiddin' you man, we'd make a great defendant.
I mean, I can see it right now--we be up front,
Oh, we be laughing so hard......beautiful!

Date: 16 May 2005 22:19:18
From: LSD
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"Frisco Del Rosario" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:frisco-1605051602360001@meriweather...
> In article <[email protected]>, "Ray Gordon"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Rating history
>>
>> I have a "P" after my name, or used to.
>>
>> I peaked at 2000 on the nose.
>
> Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
> picture of yourself standing next to a woman. You say you're a chess
> expert, but three years of USCF rating supplements say you peaked at 1988.
> Yes, it is true that a Chess Life mailing label could show your rating as
> "2000P", but only you could provide such evidence.
>
> My guess is that if you had achieved a 2000 rating, you'd be saying you
> are a "former master".
>
> Congratulations on reaching 2036 at bullet on the playchess server. Do let
> us know if you ever manage to play more than one minute at chess or with a
> woman.

No response yet? His legal team must still be reviewing your message for
actionable content.

Date: 16 May 2005 23:04:58
From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

On Tue, 17 May 2005 at 02:19 GMT, LSD wrote:
> "Frisco Del Rosario" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:frisco-1605051602360001@meriweather...
>> In article <[email protected]>, "Ray Gordon"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> > Rating history
>>>
>>> I have a "P" after my name, or used to.
>>>
>>> I peaked at 2000 on the nose.
>>
>> Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
>> picture of yourself standing next to a woman. You say you're a chess
>> expert, but three years of USCF rating supplements say you peaked at 1988.
>> Yes, it is true that a Chess Life mailing label could show your rating as
>> "2000P", but only you could provide such evidence.
>>
>> My guess is that if you had achieved a 2000 rating, you'd be saying you
>> are a "former master".
>>
>> Congratulations on reaching 2036 at bullet on the playchess server. Do let
>> us know if you ever manage to play more than one minute at chess or with a
>> woman.
>
> No response yet? His legal team must still be reviewing your message for
> actionable content.

While humming, "I Think I'm A Sloan, Now". ;)

--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org >
==================================================================
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach, 2005, Apress
<http://www.torfree.net/~chris/books/cfaj/ssr.html >

Date: 17 May 2005 00:03:12
From: LSD
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"Chris F.A. Johnson" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 17 May 2005 at 02:19 GMT, LSD wrote:
>> "Frisco Del Rosario" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:frisco-1605051602360001@meriweather...
>>> In article <[email protected]>, "Ray Gordon"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Rating history
>>>>
>>>> I have a "P" after my name, or used to.
>>>>
>>>> I peaked at 2000 on the nose.
>>>
>>> Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
>>> picture of yourself standing next to a woman. You say you're a chess
>>> expert, but three years of USCF rating supplements say you peaked at 1988.
>>> Yes, it is true that a Chess Life mailing label could show your rating as
>>> "2000P", but only you could provide such evidence.
>>>
>>> My guess is that if you had achieved a 2000 rating, you'd be saying you
>>> are a "former master".
>>>
>>> Congratulations on reaching 2036 at bullet on the playchess server. Do let
>>> us know if you ever manage to play more than one minute at chess or with a
>>> woman.
>>
>> No response yet? His legal team must still be reviewing your message for
>> actionable content.
>
> While humming, "I Think I'm A Sloan, Now". ;)

LOL, brilliant!

Date: 16 May 2005 23:11:54
From: John J.
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

That's the funniest post I've read today! Bahahahaha...

Who says chess player don't have a sense of humor!!

John
"Frisco Del Rosario" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:frisco-1605051602360001@meriweather...
> In article <[email protected]>, "Ray Gordon"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Rating history
>>
>> I have a "P" after my name, or used to.
>>
>> I peaked at 2000 on the nose.
>
> Mr. Parker, you say you're a seduction guru, but you can't produce a
> picture of yourself standing next to a woman. You say you're a chess
> expert, but three years of USCF rating supplements say you peaked at 1988.
> Yes, it is true that a Chess Life mailing label could show your rating as
> "2000P", but only you could provide such evidence.
>
> My guess is that if you had achieved a 2000 rating, you'd be saying you
> are a "former master".
>
> Congratulations on reaching 2036 at bullet on the playchess server. Do let
> us know if you ever manage to play more than one minute at chess or with a
> woman.
>
> --
> Frisco Del Rosario
> A First Book of Morphy --
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1412039061

Date: 16 May 2005 11:23:34
From: Mark Houlsby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Date: 19 May 2005 16:59:10
From: John J.
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

After reading most of the available information on his web site, I conclude
that his advice on dating beautiful women is far more accurate than his
advice on anything pertaining to chess.

The dating advice he doles out is very much on the k according to my vast
experience with the subject matter. :)

John
"k Houlsby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>> >Why would I tell anyone stuff like that?
>
>>> Why *indeed* would a *jerk* like you do *anything* to help out *his
> own
>>> mother*?
>
>
>
>>I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America.
>
> You mean, *including* Central and South America *and Canada* (which is
> that country between Alaska and the rest of the mainland United
> States)? Do you include, say, Rhode Island, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin
> Islands...?
>
>
>>It's why I find kids like this one. I do my homework.
>
>
> Something tells me that you might possibly be *working hard* on the
> *wrong priorities*. Call it a hunch.
>
>>> Sr. Torrecillas has, for many years, been one of the most
> consistently
>>> intelligent and helpful members of the group. I have been the
>>> beneficiary of a great deal of that help, I'm happy to say.
>
>>> You don't *have* to help him, but it might be nice.
>
>
>>I helped the group by breaking the news that a 13 year-old kid had a
> 2700 bullet rating on ICC.
>
> I'm sorry...how did that help the group? In effect, all you've said is:
> "I, Gordon Parker, am a Superfly hero detective-type guy, and I know
> something you don't..."
>
>> He's the one who got personal.
>
> Run that one by me again.... in what way did Sr. Torrecillas get
> "personal"?
>
> All he did was ask you who this is. It's a simple question.
>
>
>>> Just think, at some point in the future, you might post a request
> with
>>> which Antonio might be able to help, or, indeed, I might, but
> because
>>> you have behaved like such a jerk, we may decide *not* to help you
>>> after all....
>
>
>>Well I better work doubly hard to get all that help for myself now!
>
> Well... be sure to work doubly hard on *improving your game* instead of
> just working doubly hard on finding some wunderkind-or-other on ICC
> (where wunderkinder are a-dime-a-dozen, it seems).
>
>>> Other people who read this thread may decide the same.
>
>
>>Got news for you pal: I've never received a dime of help or support
> from the
> chess establishment, even when I was young and had a much longer future
> than
> I do now.
>
> This is relevant to the possibility that in the future you may need
> help from the group... how... exactly?
>
>> I did see a bunch of spoiled brats declared "future champions"
> and have their lessons paid for, with the side effect of having anyone
> over
> age 18 who took the game seriously being dismissed as "too old." Funny
> how,
> without exception, all those "promising juniors" from the 1980s all
> QUIT the
> game and I'm training once again.
>
> Absolutely. I'm splitting my sides, here.
>
>>If people were st, they'd let me run the chess show in this
> country,
> because if I'm no longer capable of becoming a world champion,
>
> That may depend upon *which world*.....you seem to have "Planet Gordo"
> sewn up.
>
>>I'd be able
> to set the stage for whichever American has the talent to do so. I
> also
> don't keep quiet about wrongdoing, and I see a lot of complaining about
> that
> from those who claim to care about chess.
>
> I think that many people might be able to say the same. Certainly I
> can.
>
>>Let me state once again that should I ever wind up asked to play for
> this
> country in *any* international tournament, including any world
> championship,
> that I will refuse representation unless *all* of my training along the
> way
> there is paid for, and I will advise any of my proteges to do the same.
>
> This country should get only what it gives, and not try to rewrite
> history
> after the fact.
>
> In other words:
>
> "Ask *NOT* what *you can do for your country*. Ask *what your country
> can do for YOU*."
> --Joe Bowie/Defunkt ("In America", after John F. Kennedy, 35th
> President of the USA)
>
>>I already published a game where I crushed a 3000-rated computer on a
> major
> internet server with BLACK, and the computer had only lost less than 50
>
> games against 7000+ wins. I've since been beating masters rather
> regularly
> at blitz and bullet, and my repertoire is starting to expand past move
> 20 in
> my main lines.
>
> Great.
>
>>Next up is three to five years of ferocious endgame study, and
> whatever's
> left over -- if anything -- will be the "middlegame." It'll be real
> comforting to know that once I reach my goals, that many will pretend
> to
> have supported me all along in my endeavor.
>
> That may prove to be true, but you can be sure that if it does, *I
> shall not be one of the "many"*. I wish you success on whichever planet
> you choose to occupy.
>
> k Houlsby
>

Date: 16 May 2005 09:13:41
From: Mark Houlsby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Yes, good point John

Whaddyasay Gordo? Why not enter Dortmund or Linares or something?

k

Date: 16 May 2005 16:35:38
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> Yes, good point John
>
> Whaddyasay Gordo? Why not enter Dortmund or Linares or something?

Why not enter some 12 year-old "prodigy" with a rating near mine in the same
event? Or maybe I should keep studying 65 hours a week for another 6-8
years before I try that one.

I know, if I win one like that, you guys were my buddies all along.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 16 May 2005 18:10:52
From: John J.
Subject: Meaningless reply.

Ray,

I, personally, am studying for next years World open and/or HBC. I find it
amazing that you won't answer a simple question, shades of Sam Sloan.

I hope to do well in in Class C. My present rating is 1589.
Why aren't you going to play in the HBC open? Class prizes are at leat 20K.
If that doesn't motivate you , what will?

If you won't answer the tournament question maybe you can tell us what you
are studying so hard for...

John

"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> Yes, good point John
>>
>> Whaddyasay Gordo? Why not enter Dortmund or Linares or something?
>
> Why not enter some 12 year-old "prodigy" with a rating near mine in the
> same event? Or maybe I should keep studying 65 hours a week for another
> 6-8 years before I try that one.
>
> I know, if I win one like that, you guys were my buddies all along.
>
> --
> Ray Gordon, Author
> http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
> Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women
>
> http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
> Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion
>
> Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
>

Date: 16 May 2005 08:55:37
From: Mark Houlsby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>Why would I tell anyone stuff like that?

Why *indeed* would a *jerk* like you do *anything* to help out *his own
mother*?

Sr. Torrecillas has, for many years, been one of the most consistently
intelligent and helpful members of the group. I have been the
beneficiary of a great deal of that help, I'm happy to say.

You don't *have* to help him, but it might be nice.

Just think, at some point in the future, you might post a request with
which Antonio might be able to help, or, indeed, I might, but because
you have behaved like such a jerk, we may decide *not* to help you
after all....

Other people who read this thread may decide the same.

Date: 16 May 2005 16:19:14
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> >Why would I tell anyone stuff like that?
>
> Why *indeed* would a *jerk* like you do *anything* to help out *his own
> mother*?

I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America. It's why I
find kids like this one. I do my homework.

> Sr. Torrecillas has, for many years, been one of the most consistently
> intelligent and helpful members of the group. I have been the
> beneficiary of a great deal of that help, I'm happy to say.
>
> You don't *have* to help him, but it might be nice.

I helped the group by breaking the news that a 13 year-old kid had a 2700
bullet rating on ICC. He's the one who got personal.

> Just think, at some point in the future, you might post a request with
> which Antonio might be able to help, or, indeed, I might, but because
> you have behaved like such a jerk, we may decide *not* to help you
> after all....

Well I better work doubly hard to get all that help for myself now!

> Other people who read this thread may decide the same.

Got news for you pal: I've never received a dime of help or support from the
chess establishment, even when I was young and had a much longer future than
I do now. I did see a bunch of spoiled brats declared "future champions"
and have their lessons paid for, with the side effect of having anyone over
age 18 who took the game seriously being dismissed as "too old." Funny how,
without exception, all those "promising juniors" from the 1980s all QUIT the
game and I'm training once again.

If people were st, they'd let me run the chess show in this country,
because if I'm no longer capable of becoming a world champion, I'd be able
to set the stage for whichever American has the talent to do so. I also
don't keep quiet about wrongdoing, and I see a lot of complaining about that
from those who claim to care about chess.

Let me state once again that should I ever wind up asked to play for this
country in *any* international tournament, including any world championship,
that I will refuse representation unless *all* of my training along the way
there is paid for, and I will advise any of my proteges to do the same.
This country should get only what it gives, and not try to rewrite history
after the fact.

I already published a game where I crushed a 3000-rated computer on a major
internet server with BLACK, and the computer had only lost less than 50
games against 7000+ wins. I've since been beating masters rather regularly
at blitz and bullet, and my repertoire is starting to expand past move 20 in
my main lines.

Next up is three to five years of ferocious endgame study, and whatever's
left over -- if anything -- will be the "middlegame." It'll be real
comforting to know that once I reach my goals, that many will pretend to
have supported me all along in my endeavor.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 01:13:28
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
> (...)
> I'm no jerk, just the hardest-working chessplayer in America. It's why I
> find kids like this one. I do my homework.
> (...)
> I already published a game where I crushed a 3000-rated computer on a major
> internet server with BLACK, and the computer had only lost less than 50
> games against 7000+ wins. I've since been beating masters rather regularly
> at blitz and bullet, and my repertoire is starting to expand past move 20 in
> my main lines.

All that is nonsense, it's like a user of FIFA-2004 claiming to be the
best player of soccer in the world without playing in any team.

The only games of Ray Gordon I know are the following two:

[Event "ICC blitz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2004.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nakamura, Hikara"]
[Black "Gordon, Ray"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A00"]
[WhiteElo "2699"]
[BlackElo "1563"]
[PlyCount "55"]
[EventDate "2004.??.??"]

1. e3 e5 2. b3 d5 3. Bb2 Nc6 4. g3 f6 5. Bg2 Be6 6. Ne2 Qd7 7. d4 O-O-O
8. Nbc3 e4 9. Qd2 Bh3 10. Bxh3 Qxh3 11. O-O-O Qd7 12. Nf4 Nge7 13. h4 g6
14. Kb1 Bg7 15. Na4 b6 16. c4 f5 17. c5 b5 18. Nc3 a6 19. a4 Na7 20. Qe2
c6 21. Kc2 Qb7 22.Ra1 Rd7 23. axb5 axb5 24. Ra5 b4 25. Na4 Rc7 26. Nb6+
Kd8 27. Rha1 Nec8 28.Ne6+ 1-0

[Event "ICC blitz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2005.03.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Gordon, Ray"]
[Black "Fish"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B77"]
[Annotator "Gordon,R"]
[PlyCount "31"]
[EventDate "2005.??.??"]

{Could one of you losers with time on your hands please analyze this
mini of mine? White: Me Black: A Fish }
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O
8. Qd2 Nc6 9. Bc4 {The other "modern" line is 9.0-0-0, with the idea of
skipping Bc4, but this allows d5. I try a modern approach of skipping
castling to get a quick attack going on the queenside.
Strong players tend to do well against this line, but by "strong" I mean
2400 and higher. Weaker players who don't exploit the prematurity of it
all can have problems.} 9... Bd7 10. h4 Rc8 11. Bb3 Ne5 12. h5 Nc4
13.Bxc4 Rxc4 14. Nf5 gxf5 15. h6 Bh8 16. Bb6 $1 {Black loses the game or
the cunt. ...
R:P.Warren comment: Not only ignorant, but a lout. But then everyone
already knew that. 14.Nf5?? gxf5 15.h6 Nxe4! and White is as busted as
a used water balloon. With 14.hxg6 or 14.g4 you might have had
something.} 1-0

AT

Date: 17 May 2005 01:50:19
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

> [Event "ICC blitz"]
> [Site "?"]
> [Date "2004.??.??"]
> [Round "?"]
> [White "Nakamura, Hikara"]
> [Black "Gordon, Ray"]
> [Result "1-0"]
> [ECO "A00"]
> [WhiteElo "2699"]
> [BlackElo "1563"]
> [PlyCount "55"]
> [EventDate "2004.??.??"]
>
> 1. e3 e5 2. b3 d5 3. Bb2 Nc6 4. g3 f6 5. Bg2 Be6 6. Ne2 Qd7 7. d4 O-O-O 8.
> Nbc3 e4 9. Qd2 Bh3 10. Bxh3 Qxh3 11. O-O-O Qd7 12. Nf4 Nge7 13. h4 g6 14.
> Kb1 Bg7 15. Na4 b6 16. c4 f5 17. c5 b5 18. Nc3 a6 19. a4 Na7 20. Qe2 c6
> 21. Kc2 Qb7 22.Ra1

Check Fritz and see if you find an error in the first 22 moves for me. That
was a year ago, against what is now the current US champion.

I already play the first 15-20 moves like a GM. Another 5-10 moves to my
book there won't be anyone who can get an edge against me in the opening.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 14:37:06
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Ray Gordon <[email protected] > wrote:
>> [Event "ICC blitz"]
>> [Site "?"]
>> [Date "2004.??.??"]
>> [Round "?"]
>> [White "Nakamura, Hikara"]
>> [Black "Gordon, Ray"]
>> [Result "1-0"]
>>
>> 1. e3 e5 2. b3 d5 3. Bb2 Nc6 4. g3 f6 5. Bg2 Be6 6. Ne2 Qd7 7. d4 O-O-O 8.
>> Nbc3 e4 9. Qd2 Bh3 10. Bxh3 Qxh3 11. O-O-O Qd7 12. Nf4 Nge7 13. h4 g6 14.
>> Kb1 Bg7 15. Na4 b6 16. c4 f5 17. c5 b5 18. Nc3 a6 19. a4 Na7 20. Qe2 c6
>> 21. Kc2 Qb7 22.Ra1
>
> Check Fritz and see if you find an error in the first 22 moves for me.
> That was a year ago, against what is now the current US champion.
>
>> Rd7 23. axb5 axb5 24. Ra5 b4 25. Na4 Rc7 26. Nb6+ Kd8 27. Rha1 Nec8
>> 28.Ne6+ 1-0

What's the point of playing the first 22 moves like a grandmaster if you
end up resigning six moves later? If you'd really played those moves like
a grandmaster, you'd have understood the position well enough to hang
around just a leetle bit longer than that.

Dave.

--
David Richerby Old-Fashioned Tool (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ handy household tool but it's perfect
for your grandparents!

Date: 17 May 2005 10:36:49
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>>[Event "ICC blitz"]
>>[Site "?"]
>>[Date "2004.??.??"]
>>[Round "?"]
>>[White "Nakamura, Hikara"]
>>[Black "Gordon, Ray"]
>>[Result "1-0"]
>>[ECO "A00"]
>>[WhiteElo "2699"]
>>[BlackElo "1563"]
>>[PlyCount "55"]
>>[EventDate "2004.??.??"]
>>
>>1. e3 e5 2. b3 d5 3. Bb2 Nc6 4. g3 f6 5. Bg2 Be6 6. Ne2 Qd7 7. d4 O-O-O 8.
>>Nbc3 e4 9. Qd2 Bh3 10. Bxh3 Qxh3 11. O-O-O Qd7 12. Nf4 Nge7 13. h4 g6 14.
>>Kb1 Bg7 15. Na4 b6 16. c4 f5 17. c5 b5 18. Nc3 a6 19. a4 Na7 20. Qe2 c6
>>21. Kc2 Qb7 22.Ra1
>
> Check Fritz and see if you find an error in the first 22 moves for me. That
> was a year ago, against what is now the current US champion.
>
> I already play the first 15-20 moves like a GM. Another 5-10 moves to my
> book there won't be anyone who can get an edge against me in the opening.

Hello Ray,

I do not need to use Fritz, it's an easy example: in closed positions is
very easy to play without clear errors.

But in your following 6 moves (22 to 27) you allowed white to open line
"a", to activate an unuseful knight in c3 via a4-b6 and to lose a rook.

I understand you to be happy being able to maintain the balance in a
rare opening for white (4.g3?!) with an strong GM, but when blattle
actually started you lost easily.

And I think too that showing that game (being proud of it), mean you
have no better games. Please confirm I'm wrong posting here your wins.

AT

Date: 17 May 2005 08:40:19
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> I already play the first 15-20 moves like a GM. Another 5-10 moves to my
>> book there won't be anyone who can get an edge against me in the opening.
>
> Hello Ray,
>
> I do not need to use Fritz, it's an easy example: in closed positions is
> very easy to play without clear errors.

It's even easier in open positions if one is booked up because the moves are
usually forced. Those who try to avoid my book preparation have to
sacrifice the advantage that comes with White, whether they are 1700 or
2700.

> But in your following 6 moves (22 to 27) you allowed white to open line
> "a", to activate an unuseful knight in c3 via a4-b6 and to lose a rook.

Yes, I got killed by a GM in the middlegame. I could show you other GMs who
did far worse.

The game was a one-minute time control.

> I understand you to be happy being able to maintain the balance in a rare
> opening for white (4.g3?!) with an strong GM, but when blattle actually
> started you lost easily.

That time. Give me five years to build a middlgame as strong as my opening
and see what happens.

> And I think too that showing that game (being proud of it), mean you have
> no better games. Please confirm I'm wrong posting here your wins.

I had been playing a month after a 13-year layoff and was on ICC one Sunday
morning. I enter one of their flash tournaments and get Nakamura in the
first round, with Black. I had woken up about 10 minutes prior and it was
my first game of the day.

In 1989, at the World Open Blitz, I was paired with Gata Kamsky in the first
round and ran out his book in the Pelikan (now the most popular sicilian).

Being able to play a perfect opening every time ensures better middlegame
and endgame study, because the positions aren't poisoned.

My best game ever so far was against the 3000-rated blitz computer that I
won with Black. OTB, it was the draw I got against Asa Hoffman at the
Manhattan about 15 years ago to tie for first in a quad and cost him $12.50
(we each got $37.50 instead of him getting $50.00 and if you know Asa you
know that's no easy task).

Most chess champions SUCK for 95 percent of their careers compared to their
best play.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 17 May 2005 18:49:58
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>>>I already play the first 15-20 moves like a GM. Another 5-10 moves to my
>>>book there won't be anyone who can get an edge against me in the opening.
>>
>>Hello Ray,
>>
>>I do not need to use Fritz, it's an easy example: in closed positions is
>>very easy to play without clear errors.
>
> It's even easier in open positions if one is booked up because the moves are
> usually forced. Those who try to avoid my book preparation have to
> sacrifice the advantage that comes with White, whether they are 1700 or
> 2700.

In my humble opinion, you do not understand what mean "book" in GM play.
Those GM never play "book moves", ... they try to "create" new moves for
a new edition of books.
I can asure you that, for ex. Judit Polgar is not studying last XXX book
about Sicilian to prepare the next world champioship but trying to
create new ideas to develop.
Those books are only for amateurs like us! :-(

(Apart of that 1 minute game with e3, b3, g3 for white) The only example
you give us, was a Dragon Sicilian you where played an inferior line and
your adversaire made a mistake who lost his queen.
That do not prove much about your opening force.

>>But in your following 6 moves (22 to 27) you allowed white to open line
>>"a", to activate an unuseful knight in c3 via a4-b6 and to lose a rook.
>
> Yes, I got killed by a GM in the middlegame.
> I could show you other GMs who did far worse.
>
> The game was a one-minute time control.

I have seen beginners who have made similar mistakes but with a very
different attitude: they posted here their games to improve his skills.

>>I understand you to be happy being able to maintain the balance in a rare
>>opening for white (4.g3?!) with an strong GM, but when blattle actually
>>started you lost easily.
>
> That time. Give me five years to build a middlgame as strong as my opening
> and see what happens.

You can NOT improve very much without playing OTB chess. To improve is
needed a balance between study and practice, ... and it seems you do not
play OTB chess. And about your "study plan", we have no games to check
if it seems successfully or not.

>>And I think too that showing that game (being proud of it), mean you have
>>no better games. Please confirm I'm wrong posting here your wins.

> (...)
> My best game ever so far was against the 3000-rated blitz computer that I
> won with Black. OTB, it was the draw I got against Asa Hoffman at the
> Manhattan about 15 years ago to tie for first in a quad and cost him $12.50
> (we each got $37.50 instead of him getting $50.00 and if you know Asa you
> know that's no easy task).

Chess is so rich that all we can have our moment of glory, ... but we
need to be careful obtaining conclusions. I have friends who have won
strong GM like Polugaievski, Reshevski, Ivkov, Jansa, Sax, ...

I do not know "Asa" (I'm european) but searching him in lists I found
his rating has been around 2300. To draw with him is a good achievement
for people rated 1900, ... but you wrote you play at that level
2200-2300 and you won many games with stronger opposition.

I find difficult to trust you without viewing any of those games.

AT

Date: 17 May 2005 19:42:16
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>>>I do not need to use Fritz, it's an easy example: in closed positions is
>>>very easy to play without clear errors.
>>
>> It's even easier in open positions if one is booked up because the moves
>> are usually forced. Those who try to avoid my book preparation have to
>> sacrifice the advantage that comes with White, whether they are 1700 or
>> 2700.
>
> In my humble opinion, you do not understand what mean "book" in GM play.
> Those GM never play "book moves", ... they try to "create" new moves for a
> new edition of books.

That's extending the existing book. Most GM games actually leave the main
line before the theory is exhausted, so while the moves appear original,
they are still deviant.

One such example is Anand's mental masturbation on the White side of the
Pelikan, having tried 11. c3 (unsound) and 11. Qd3 (also unsound), getting
his ass kicked at least once and possibly both times. By deviating from the
*correct* 11. Bd3, he loses too many options and makes it too easy for Black
to equalize and complicate.

Another example I saw was Kasparov-Anand, where Anand played the Center
Counter. Kasparov should have emerged from the opening with a score of
about +1.00 but instead was actually about a quarter-pawn down. No
meaningful theory was generated, yet an entire generation of players now
plays that piece-of-shit defense for Black because of that one game.

> I can asure you that, for ex. Judit Polgar is not studying last XXX book
> about Sicilian to prepare the next world champioship but trying to create
> new ideas to develop.

Those new ideas jump off of the main line at some point. How many "Polgar"
variations are there? I can name you about a dozen Rubinsteins, Steinitzs,
and Nimzos, and several Alekhine's, among others. By contrast, you won't
find many Capablanca variations.

> Those books are only for amateurs like us! :-(

I am not an amateur. Don't let those ELO numbers fool you. If someone is
rated under 2000 it means they could be up to 2400 in playing strength and
too lazy or frugal to bother to get the rating. Once you can score an IM or
GM norm, it pays to give up the class eligibility.

> (Apart of that 1 minute game with e3, b3, g3 for white) The only example
> you give us, was a Dragon Sicilian you where played an inferior line and
> your adversaire made a mistake who lost his queen.

How many months ago was that?

> That do not prove much about your opening force.

I have weak spots in my repertoire but very few.

>>>But in your following 6 moves (22 to 27) you allowed white to open line
>>>"a", to activate an unuseful knight in c3 via a4-b6 and to lose a rook.
>>
>> Yes, I got killed by a GM in the middlegame. I could show you other GMs
>> who did far worse.
>>
>> The game was a one-minute time control.
>
> I have seen beginners who have made similar mistakes but with a very
> different attitude: they posted here their games to improve his skills.

I don't need to improve my skills from this group. I lost the thread in the
game and got clobbered by the US champion. There is nothing to learn from
that. What was worth studying was how I held a superior position as Black
against him for 22 moves (he had a 45-37 second edge in time). My opening
book won't be getting any smaller. I know how to build a repertoire, as the
one I had at the time I played that game was 13 years old and something I
had built from scratch in four years. I had to spend the past year catching
up on all the "new theory," most of which is not an improvement on the old
theory, but it is more confusing.

>>>I understand you to be happy being able to maintain the balance in a rare
>>>opening for white (4.g3?!) with an strong GM, but when blattle actually
>>>started you lost easily.
>>
>> That time. Give me five years to build a middlgame as strong as my
>> opening and see what happens.
>
> You can NOT improve very much without playing OTB chess.

Maybe YOU can't improve that way, but I know how to self-train. I can see a
computer make a move and figure out why it was made without anyone needing
to explain it to me. I often get accused of using computer assistance
because people don't believe that someone can rattle off 20-25 perfect moves
to start the game, but I also play a lot of sacrificial stuff that the
machines won't touch.

How can anyone improve by playing OTB chess against a small number of
opponents with a limited repertoire, having to travel for hours and waste an
entire weekend at a major tournament, waste another $20-200 on the entry
fee, plus lodging, meals, and lost study time. Meanwhile, someone training
on the net has none of these distractions and can run his games through his
PC as they occur. The training is far more intense now than it ever was.
At least for me. I hope for the sake of other players that they are not
slacking off. It's like in the other sports where you have to work out all
year rather than getting in shape for the season.

>To improve is needed a balance between study and practice, ... and it seems
>you do not play OTB chess.

I got to play Nakamura on ICC. Not like that will happen OTB, now is it?

>And about your "study plan", we have no games to check if it seems
>successfully or not.

"We?" LOL.

You don't get it: I trained so hard, for so long, and digested so much
theory so long ago that I know exactly where my game stands at all times. I
trained in an era where we didn't have computers proofreading our moves (the
"dark ages"), and now I have these wonderful tools to aid me and misinform
the public (ever know you are winning when the computer says you are -2.79?
fun experience). I wouldn't bother playing this game again if I didn't
know I'd be kicking some international butt in short order. The second I am
over the hill, I will be the first to know. That day is many years away,
and when it does come, then a youngster takes over and has less work to do
because I blazed the trail for him.

Last year I played a perfect 22-move opening against a GM. What happens
when it goes to 25 moves, then 30, then 35 and 40? Even the 3000+ computers
now have to wait until move 20-25 to get an edge on me. It's like a video
game where you master level one, then level two, three, etc., until you can
play all year on a quarter (I used to do that on Pac Man and Asteroids).

I can't be the only player who has figured this out. I've seen kids on ICC
who are improving just as rapidly and who will be the championship
contenders in the future. As for the "guests" on ICC, I'd estimate that
about half or more of them are master strength, with several IMs and a few
GMs thrown in.

>>>And I think too that showing that game (being proud of it), mean you have
>>>no better games. Please confirm I'm wrong posting here your wins.
>
>> (...)
>> My best game ever so far was against the 3000-rated blitz computer that I
>> won with Black. OTB, it was the draw I got against Asa Hoffman at the
>> Manhattan about 15 years ago to tie for first in a quad and cost him
>> $12.50 (we each got $37.50 instead of him getting $50.00 and if you know
>> Asa you know that's no easy task).
>
> Chess is so rich that all we can have our moment of glory, ... but we need
> to be careful obtaining conclusions. I have friends who have won strong GM
> like Polugaievski, Reshevski, Ivkov, Jansa, Sax, ...

They are good players, no doubt.

> I do not know "Asa" (I'm european) but searching him in lists I found his
> rating has been around 2300.

Asa Hoffman is 2550 USCF, and one of the strongest hustlers in NYC. He beat
Bobby Fischer once at Blitz (then lost the next 20 because Fischer was mad).

>To draw with him is a good achievement for people rated 1900, ... but you
>wrote you play at that level 2200-2300 and you won many games with stronger
>opposition.

Only recently.

> I find difficult to trust you without viewing any of those games.

I'm too busy training with these supercomputers to worry about what anyone
thinks of my games. When I'm ready to destroy a tournament, I shall.

Date: 18 May 2005 11:56:13
From: Adrian MacNair
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > Those books are only for amateurs like us! :-(
>
> I am not an amateur. Don't let those ELO numbers fool you. If someone is
> rated under 2000 it means they could be up to 2400 in playing strength and
> too lazy or frugal to bother to get the rating. Once you can score an IM
or
> GM norm, it pays to give up the class eligibility.

Enough verbal masturbation I say. Let's take this fight outside! I would bet
hard cash that Antonio will wipe the floor with Ray + his computer in a
correspondence match played with 10/40 time controls (10 moves in 40 days)
to be played here on rec.games.chess.analysis. I'll bet Antonio will even
give Ray the white pieces. Come on Ray, give Antonio a lesson on all your
Super GM moves. It would be instructional for all of us.

[Event "Ray Gordon shows his Super GM skills"]
[Site "rec.games.chess.analysis"]
[Date "2005.05.18"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Gordon, Ray & his chess computer program"]
[Black "Torrecillas, Antonio"]
[White ELO "2000 USCF"]
[Black ELO "2368 FIDE"]
[Result "*"]

1.*

Date: 17 May 2005 23:58:13
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

On Tue, 17 May 2005 19:42:16 GMT, "Ray Gordon" <[email protected] >
wrote:

>>>>I do not need to use Fritz, it's an easy example: in closed positions is
>>>>very easy to play without clear errors.
>>>
>>> It's even easier in open positions if one is booked up because the moves
>>> are usually forced. Those who try to avoid my book preparation have to
>>> sacrifice the advantage that comes with White, whether they are 1700 or
>>> 2700.
>>
>> In my humble opinion, you do not understand what mean "book" in GM play.
>> Those GM never play "book moves", ... they try to "create" new moves for a
>> new edition of books.
>
>That's extending the existing book. Most GM games actually leave the main
>line before the theory is exhausted, so while the moves appear original,
>they are still deviant.

Are there many, if any openings out there that are too upsettable to
mention?

>
>One such example is Anand's mental masturbation on the White side of the
>Pelikan, having tried 11. c3 (unsound) and 11. Qd3 (also unsound), getting
>his ass kicked at least once and possibly both times. By deviating from the
>*correct* 11. Bd3, he loses too many options and makes it too easy for Black
>to equalize and complicate.
>
>Another example I saw was Kasparov-Anand, where Anand played the Center
>Counter. Kasparov should have emerged from the opening with a score of
>about +1.00 but instead was actually about a quarter-pawn down. No
>meaningful theory was generated, yet an entire generation of players now
>plays that piece-of-shit defense for Black because of that one game.
>
>> I can asure you that, for ex. Judit Polgar is not studying last XXX book
>> about Sicilian to prepare the next world champioship but trying to create
>> new ideas to develop.
>
>Those new ideas jump off of the main line at some point. How many "Polgar"
>variations are there? I can name you about a dozen Rubinsteins, Steinitzs,
>and Nimzos, and several Alekhine's, among others. By contrast, you won't
>find many Capablanca variations.
>
>
>> Those books are only for amateurs like us! :-(
>
>I am not an amateur. Don't let those ELO numbers fool you. If someone is
>rated under 2000 it means they could be up to 2400 in playing strength and
>too lazy or frugal to bother to get the rating. Once you can score an IM or
>GM norm, it pays to give up the class eligibility.

Don't believe your ratings.. ok...?

>
>
>> (Apart of that 1 minute game with e3, b3, g3 for white) The only example
>> you give us, was a Dragon Sicilian you where played an inferior line and
>> your adversaire made a mistake who lost his queen.
>
>How many months ago was that?
>
>
>> That do not prove much about your opening force.
>
>I have weak spots in my repertoire but very few.

Interesting statement... I'll elaborate in a few lines.

>
>
>>>>But in your following 6 moves (22 to 27) you allowed white to open line
>>>>"a", to activate an unuseful knight in c3 via a4-b6 and to lose a rook.
>>>
>>> Yes, I got killed by a GM in the middlegame. I could show you other GMs
>>> who did far worse.
>>>
>>> The game was a one-minute time control.
>>
>> I have seen beginners who have made similar mistakes but with a very
>> different attitude: they posted here their games to improve his skills.
>
>I don't need to improve my skills from this group. I lost the thread in the
>game and got clobbered by the US champion. There is nothing to learn from
>that. What was worth studying was how I held a superior position as Black
>against him for 22 moves (he had a 45-37 second edge in time). My opening
>book won't be getting any smaller. I know how to build a repertoire, as the
>one I had at the time I played that game was 13 years old and something I
>had built from scratch in four years. I had to spend the past year catching
>up on all the "new theory," most of which is not an improvement on the old
>theory, but it is more confusing.

I'm a really weak chess player. I'll admit that up front. If I was to
categorize my poker play, probably B level.
I'm a weak chess player because I get too caught up in tactics, and
as a result I'll miss strategies.

Chess, I know I'm better online. I don't run any programs to analyze
my moves in the background (which I think I've run into), but I also
know when I play either online, I'm in my element. I'm in my basement,
can run out to the garage to smoke if I want to, check on the baby,
etc.
Poker taught me it is a different experience being face-to-face.
Depending on your temprament, it can make a difference, either way.
Another thing I learned from poker is, you can't just play your game.
Your opponent has a game they bring as well, and are trying to do the
same thing you are.
To quote Sun Tzu "Knowing yourself and not knowing your enemy, your
chances are about half. Knowing your enemy and not yourself, your
chances are about half."
That applies to chess moreso than poker. More moves to process, and
more possibilities with each move.

I don't think about the wins I get... I process the losses. I make
note of when I didn't follow my strategy, and how it either helped or
hurt me, and adjust my game. Know what you do right, correct what you
do wrong.
What you descibe sounds like you think it's a bad beat. That doesn't
happen in chess... Luck.

>
>>>>I understand you to be happy being able to maintain the balance in a rare
>>>>opening for white (4.g3?!) with an strong GM, but when blattle actually
>>>>started you lost easily.
>>>
>>> That time. Give me five years to build a middlgame as strong as my
>>> opening and see what happens.
>>
>> You can NOT improve very much without playing OTB chess.
>
>Maybe YOU can't improve that way, but I know how to self-train. I can see a
>computer make a move and figure out why it was made without anyone needing
>to explain it to me. I often get accused of using computer assistance
>because people don't believe that someone can rattle off 20-25 perfect moves
>to start the game, but I also play a lot of sacrificial stuff that the
>machines won't touch.
>
>How can anyone improve by playing OTB chess against a small number of
>opponents with a limited repertoire, having to travel for hours and waste an
>entire weekend at a major tournament, waste another $20-200 on the entry
>fee, plus lodging, meals, and lost study time. Meanwhile, someone training
>on the net has none of these distractions and can run his games through his
>PC as they occur. The training is far more intense now than it ever was.
>At least for me. I hope for the sake of other players that they are not
>slacking off. It's like in the other sports where you have to work out all
>year rather than getting in shape for the season.

Exactly for the reasons you say it is bad! Those will be excuses for
when you decide you're ready to dominate the world, and don't. I was
worried about the money/wore out from the travel/the guy I was playing
had an 'odor' that distracted me/I had a headache from the
distractions.
Perfectionists don't fare as well in such competition. Wannabes less
so.

>
>
>>To improve is needed a balance between study and practice, ... and it seems
>>you do not play OTB chess.
>
>I got to play Nakamura on ICC. Not like that will happen OTB, now is it?
>
>>And about your "study plan", we have no games to check if it seems
>>successfully or not.
>
>"We?" LOL.
>
>You don't get it: I trained so hard, for so long, and digested so much
>theory so long ago that I know exactly where my game stands at all times. I
>trained in an era where we didn't have computers proofreading our moves (the
>"dark ages"), and now I have these wonderful tools to aid me and misinform
>the public (ever know you are winning when the computer says you are -2.79?
>fun experience). I wouldn't bother playing this game again if I didn't
>know I'd be kicking some international butt in short order. The second I am
>over the hill, I will be the first to know. That day is many years away,
>and when it does come, then a youngster takes over and has less work to do
>because I blazed the trail for him.
>
>Last year I played a perfect 22-move opening against a GM. What happens
>when it goes to 25 moves, then 30, then 35 and 40? Even the 3000+ computers
>now have to wait until move 20-25 to get an edge on me. It's like a video
>game where you master level one, then level two, three, etc., until you can
>play all year on a quarter (I used to do that on Pac Man and Asteroids).

It isn't like that at all. You don't get bonuses in either video game
if you used a less-efficient means of clearing the critters. I would
subimt that your 22-move perfect opening isn't that perfect if it gets
undone so quickly. I would suspect you're seeing and playing
advantages, but your opponent sees holes.
Another thing I noticed is my momentum level doesn't jibe well with
chess. Playing blitz, you might get the same blinders.

Also, I know Pac-Man is a rote game; it had patterns if you followed,
you could play it all night. It also topped out after like 12 levels.

I don't like chess because I'm good at it, and can dominate people...
Quite the opposite. I like chess because I feel if I get good at it,
I've figured something out (probably moreso within me, like some
boundary in my thinking). A computer is enough competition for me
there.
But, on the whole, I like games for that reason. I don't really have
the ambition in games to dominate the US or the world, but to at least
have a decent game... Sports, table, card, or video. I save the world
domination for work, or music :)

>
>I can't be the only player who has figured this out. I've seen kids on ICC
>who are improving just as rapidly and who will be the championship
>contenders in the future. As for the "guests" on ICC, I'd estimate that
>about half or more of them are master strength, with several IMs and a few
>GMs thrown in.
>

If they stick with it. Some will, and the game will continue to
evolve.

>

Date: 17 May 2005 23:21:24
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
> Those new ideas jump off of the main line at some point. How many "Polgar"
> variations are there? I can name you about a dozen Rubinsteins, Steinitzs,
> and Nimzos, and several Alekhine's, among others. By contrast, you won't
> find many Capablanca variations.

Only to correct you, ... Capablanca as all the genius was a very
talented player and his intuition helped him to "invent" many systems
who are in the TOP lines today.

There are a Capablanca line in many systems (for example 4.Qc2 in
Nimzoindan and 4...Bf5 in Caro Kan are two of the main variations in
actual play). Capablanca found OTB very good systems when his opponents
surprised him with unknown novelties like shall gambit.

>>Those books are only for amateurs like us! :-(
>
> I am not an amateur. Don't let those ELO numbers fool you. If someone is
> rated under 2000 it means they could be up to 2400 in playing strength and
> too lazy or frugal to bother to get the rating. Once you can score an IM or
> GM norm, it pays to give up the class eligibility.

My FIDE rating have been varying between 2368 and 2398 in the past 5
years. I scored that IM norm winning a tournament in 1992 (Zaragoza, you
can find the games in Mega Database).
But that does not change I'm an amateur. ... as I think you are!

>>I have seen beginners who have made similar mistakes but with a very
>>different attitude: they posted here their games to improve his skills.
>
> I don't need to improve my skills from this group. I lost the thread in the
> game and got clobbered by the US champion. There is nothing to learn from
> that. (...)

I disagree, there is a lot to learn from that games, but if you do not
try it, sure you will not learn much.

>>You can NOT improve very much without playing OTB chess.
>
> Maybe YOU can't improve that way, but I know how to self-train. (...)
>
> How can anyone improve by playing OTB chess against a small number of
> opponents with a limited repertoire, having to travel for hours and waste an
> entire weekend at a major tournament, waste another $20-200 on the entry
> fee, plus lodging, meals, and lost study time. Meanwhile, someone training
> on the net has none of these distractions and can run his games through his
> PC as they occur. The training is far more intense now than it ever was.
> At least for me. I hope for the sake of other players that they are not
> slacking off. It's like in the other sports where you have to work out all
> year rather than getting in shape for the season.

Well, no problem, if you can find strong players (IM, GM) interested in
playing classical control games with you, it would be similar, ok.
The only problem is that players only play blitz in that sites.

>>To improve is needed a balance between study and practice, ... and it seems
>>you do not play OTB chess.
>
> I got to play Nakamura on ICC. Not like that will happen OTB, now is it?

I have played OTB with stronger players than Nakamura and in clasical
time control. Many OTB players no matter what rating have played
sometimes with that kind of players.
Actually you only need to play with people stronger than you.

> (..) I trained so hard, for so long, and digested so much theory so long
> ago that I know exactly where my game stands at all times.
> (...)

In that case, you "know" more than many GM. Nothing to add.

>> (...) you wrote you play at that level 2200-2300 and you won many
>> games with stronger opposition.
> Only recently.
>
>>I find difficult to trust you without viewing any of those games.
> I'm too busy training with these supercomputers to worry about what anyone
> thinks of my games. When I'm ready to destroy a tournament, I shall.

You do not seem very busy writing here about the 1/x rule and similars.

I'm sceptical about you destrying any tournament, ... but I can be
wrong, of course.

AT.

Date: 18 May 2005 03:52:18
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> Those new ideas jump off of the main line at some point. How many
>> "Polgar" variations are there? I can name you about a dozen Rubinsteins,
>> Steinitzs, and Nimzos, and several Alekhine's, among others. By
>> contrast, you won't find many Capablanca variations.
>
> Only to correct you, ... Capablanca as all the genius was a very talented
> player and his intuition helped him to "invent" many systems who are in
> the TOP lines today.

Which variations are the "Capablanca variation?" I think he has one in the
QGD (a retreat of the bishop to d7 to stop an early queenside thrust), but I
know of few others. Then again, I don't play 1. d4. On the other hand,
Nimzovich has entire systems named after him and practically invented
hypermodern play.

> There are a Capablanca line in many systems (for example 4.Qc2 in
> Nimzoindan and 4...Bf5 in Caro Kan are two of the main variations in
> actual play). Capablanca found OTB very good systems when his opponents
> surprised him with unknown novelties like shall gambit.

Yes, because he knew how to play the opening. Nevertheless, memorization is
the first step to reaching that level of understanding.

To me, the opening in chess is like the starting gate in a horse race: I
want a two-length lead every time.

>>>Those books are only for amateurs like us! :-(
>>
>> I am not an amateur. Don't let those ELO numbers fool you. If someone
>> is rated under 2000 it means they could be up to 2400 in playing strength
>> and too lazy or frugal to bother to get the rating. Once you can score
>> an IM or GM norm, it pays to give up the class eligibility.
>
> My FIDE rating have been varying between 2368 and 2398 in the past 5
> years. I scored that IM norm winning a tournament in 1992 (Zaragoza, you
> can find the games in Mega Database).
> But that does not change I'm an amateur. ... as I think you are!

2400 FIDE is not an amateur.

>>>I have seen beginners who have made similar mistakes but with a very
>>>different attitude: they posted here their games to improve his skills.
>>
>> I don't need to improve my skills from this group. I lost the thread in
>> the game and got clobbered by the US champion. There is nothing to learn
>> from that. (...)
>
> I disagree, there is a lot to learn from that games, but if you do not try
> it, sure you will not learn much.

I learned where I made the first mistake. Once that is made, the position
is poisoned.

>>>You can NOT improve very much without playing OTB chess.
>>
>> Maybe YOU can't improve that way, but I know how to self-train. (...) How
>> can anyone improve by playing OTB chess against a small number of
>> opponents with a limited repertoire, having to travel for hours and waste
>> an entire weekend at a major tournament, waste another $20-200 on the
>> entry fee, plus lodging, meals, and lost study time. Meanwhile, someone
>> training on the net has none of these distractions and can run his games
>> through his PC as they occur. The training is far more intense now than
>> it ever was. At least for me. I hope for the sake of other players that
>> they are not slacking off. It's like in the other sports where you have
>> to work out all year rather than getting in shape for the season.
>
> Well, no problem, if you can find strong players (IM, GM) interested in
> playing classical control games with you, it would be similar, ok.
> The only problem is that players only play blitz in that sites.

Let's see: if I play "classical" chess I get to test my openings once every
six hours. At bullet chess, I get to test it 30 times an hour. Which do
you think will give me a stronger opening?

>>>To improve is needed a balance between study and practice, ... and it
>>>seems you do not play OTB chess.
>>
>> I got to play Nakamura on ICC. Not like that will happen OTB, now is it?
>
> I have played OTB with stronger players than Nakamura and in clasical time
> control. Many OTB players no matter what rating have played sometimes with
> that kind of players.
> Actually you only need to play with people stronger than you.

I prefer to train with the supercomputers because they plug any leaks in my
game. I find when I play humans, they don't put up sufficient resistance to
tell me if I'm really playing well or not when I win.

>> (..) I trained so hard, for so long, and digested so much theory so long
>> ago that I know exactly where my game stands at all times.
>> (...)
>
> In that case, you "know" more than many GM. Nothing to add.

Most GMs are aware of their abilities, I would think.

>>> (...) you wrote you play at that level 2200-2300 and you won many
>>> games with stronger opposition.
>> Only recently.
>>
>>>I find difficult to trust you without viewing any of those games.
>> I'm too busy training with these supercomputers to worry about what
>> anyone thinks of my games. When I'm ready to destroy a tournament, I
>> shall.
>
> You do not seem very busy writing here about the 1/x rule and similars.

I write here after long bullet-chess sessions. I played for 17 hours
straight yesterday (into today), and took out maybe 30-45 minutes to post.

> I'm sceptical about you destrying any tournament, ... but I can be wrong,
> of course.

I don't belong in the game if I don't believe I'm the best. I train as if I
have the talent to become a world champion and designed my training method
to convert that talent into actual playing ability. It is a slow, painful
process littered with errors along the way. I can definitely see why most
players believe it is impossible to accomplish, but I don't let that (or my
age) deter me.

If nothing else, I get to develop the method for others to follow when I'm
done, and I get some neat content for my website.

Now if I can only find a few new chess groupies I'd be good to go.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 18 May 2005 11:42:15
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>>>>You can NOT improve very much without playing OTB chess.
>>>
>>>Maybe YOU can't improve that way, but I know how to self-train. (...)
>>> Meanwhile, someone training on the net has none of these
>>> distractions and can run his games through his PC as they occur.
>>
>>Well, no problem, if you can find strong players (IM, GM) interested in
>>playing classical control games with you, it would be similar, ok.
>>The only problem is that players only play blitz in that sites.
>
> Let's see: if I play "classical" chess I get to test my openings once every
> six hours. At bullet chess, I get to test it 30 times an hour. Which do
> you think will give me a stronger opening?

I disagree, ... we have different opinions and there is no sense
continuing exposing them.

>>>>To improve is needed a balance between study and practice, ... and it
>>>>seems you do not play OTB chess.
>>>
>>>I got to play Nakamura on ICC. Not like that will happen OTB, now is it?
>>
>>I have played OTB with stronger players than Nakamura and in clasical time
>>control. Many OTB players no matter what rating have played sometimes with
>>that kind of players.
>>Actually you only need to play with people stronger than you.
>
> I prefer to train with the supercomputers because they plug any leaks in my
> game. I find when I play humans, they don't put up sufficient resistance to
> tell me if I'm really playing well or not when I win.

I disagree, ... we have different opinions and there is no sense
continuing exposing them.

> I don't belong in the game if I don't believe I'm the best. I train as if I
> have the talent to become a world champion and designed my training method
> to convert that talent into actual playing ability. It is a slow, painful
> process littered with errors along the way. I can definitely see why most
> players believe it is impossible to accomplish, but I don't let that (or my
> age) deter me.

Good luck!

AT

Date: 18 May 2005 13:37:50
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> Let's see: if I play "classical" chess I get to test my openings once
>> every six hours. At bullet chess, I get to test it 30 times an hour.
>> Which do you think will give me a stronger opening?
>
> I disagree, ... we have different opinions and there is no sense
> continuing exposing them.

Difference of opinion and all that. In my book I acknowledge that it's
easier to get to 2400 by studying endgames, but it's easier to get to 2800
by studying openings.

>> I prefer to train with the supercomputers because they plug any leaks in
>> my game. I find when I play humans, they don't put up sufficient
>> resistance to tell me if I'm really playing well or not when I win.
>
> I disagree, ... we have different opinions and there is no sense
> continuing exposing them.

Then stop anytime you want.

>> I don't belong in the game if I don't believe I'm the best. I train as
>> if I have the talent to become a world champion and designed my training
>> method to convert that talent into actual playing ability. It is a slow,
>> painful process littered with errors along the way. I can definitely see
>> why most players believe it is impossible to accomplish, but I don't let
>> that (or my age) deter me.
>
> Good luck!

If only chess were luck.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 18 May 2005 06:17:20
From: me
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

On Tue, 17 May 2005 20:52:18 -0700, Ray Gordon wrote:

> To me, the opening in chess is like the starting gate in a horse race: I
> want a two-length lead every time.

hehe as someone who has raised race horses, you have your analogies
incorrect. When a horse breaks out of the gate it rarely means anything
unless they really stumble. Often a horse will kill itself in beginning
and lose stamina. Every jockey will tell you that horses that win have
the stamina in the backstreach (ie endgame).
rarely do you see a horse that is leading in the beginning of the race be
the winner at the end.

To sum up a chess/horseracing analogy.

Openings / starting gate

- as long as you dont stumble your fine.

Middlegame / most of the race :)

- positioning is everything, don't run out of stamina

Endgame / backstretch

- this is where the race is won

J. Lohner
ICC 'Inconnux'
'Lohner laine Thoroughbreds', Hastings park BC Canada :)

Date: 18 May 2005 13:28:08
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> To me, the opening in chess is like the starting gate in a horse race: I
>> want a two-length lead every time.
>
> hehe as someone who has raised race horses, you have your analogies
> incorrect. When a horse breaks out of the gate it rarely means anything
> unless they really stumble.

As someone who handicaps horse races, gate speed is extremely important.
Much more so in chess because, unlike horse racing, the player in front is
stronger and has more options, plus an easier game.

>Often a horse will kill itself in beginning
> and lose stamina.

In chess, the opposite happens.

>Every jockey will tell you that horses that win have
> the stamina in the backstreach (ie endgame).

That's the homestretch.

> rarely do you see a horse that is leading in the beginning of the race be
> the winner at the end.

Actually that is not true: the American racing game is biased towards speed.
Of course, if you pit one speed horse against seven behind him and he wins
"only" 25 perent of the time, that doesn't sound like a lot, but it's one
against seven.

> To sum up a chess/horseracing analogy.
>
> Openings / starting gate
>
> - as long as you dont stumble your fine.

The stronger you are in the opening, the more likely your opponent will
stumble.

If you play 1. g3 and I play 1. g6, I haven't "punished" your opening. If
you play 1. g3 and I play 1. e5, I have. Same thing if you play 2. Bg2 and
I play 2...d5. I know I'm equal because Black is not supposed to get a big
center.

> Middlegame / most of the race :)

Where it is won more often than not. The opening sets up the middlegame.
What you call the middlegame, however, I usually call the opening because
I'm booked out past move 20 in most lines now.

> - positioning is everything, don't run out of stamina
>
> Endgame / backstretch
>
> - this is where the race is won

That's the homestretch.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 19 May 2005 00:10:23
From: me
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

LoL

perhaps i should have read my late at nite article, yes its called the
homestretch, but other than that, your horse race analogy is completely
wrong.

the 'racing game' is based on speed, but the lead in the beginning rarely
has anything to do with this. What you are refering to is the 'beyer'
rating. This rating sometimes applies quite well, but this often depends
on several factors (track conditioning, trainer, jockey etc...) anyone
who picks a pure 'speed' horse without looking at several factors is
going to lose money.

I still stand by my statement that those horses that break out of the
gate in the lead rarely win the race. The only time this is critical is
on the outside two post positions where the horses have to get in a good
position.

all i am really getting at is that your analogy doesnt hold up. I
personally spend some time studying the opening via computers (both fritz
8 and CM 10k) and do believe the opening is very important. I go over
every slow game i play with these programs (especially fritz) to see
where I went wrong and how I should play next time in the openings. I do
this almost immediately after each game (standard) I play. The only
thing I would disagree with is the opening is where people should spend most of
the focus.

>
> As someone who handicaps horse races, gate speed is extremely important.
> Much more so in chess because, unlike horse racing, the player in front
> is stronger and has more options, plus an easier game.
>
> That's the homestretch.
>
>
>> rarely do you see a horse that is leading in the beginning of the race
>> be the winner at the end.
>
> Actually that is not true: the American racing game is biased towards
> speed. Of course, if you pit one speed horse against seven behind him
> and he wins "only" 25 perent of the time, that doesn't sound like a lot,
> but it's one against seven.
>

Date: 18 May 2005 05:51:53
From: Frisco Del Rosario
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

In article <[email protected] >, "Ray Gordon"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> To me, the opening in chess is like the starting gate in a horse race: I
> want a two-length lead every time.

While one's opponents will settle for a nose at the wire every time.

Mr. Parker, along with seduction guru and chess professional, you are also
a horse handicapper. How often does that horse with the two-length lead at
the first turn win the race? Don't runners call those guys the "rabbits",
who set the pace then fall back into the pack when the race is won? Rated
1900, are you the Secretariat of chessplayers, able to get out to two
lengths early and then win wire to wire? Even the best horses -- I mean,
grandmasters -- falter once in a while as they round the turn, don't they?
Being human, an' all.

To me, the opening in chess is like starting a walk through a forest.
Suppose I could only find two maps of the forest, both of them incomplete.
One of them showed me how to get into the middle of the forest, and the
other showed me how to get out. I think I'd want that map leading to the
exit. Any banana can wander into the middle of forest and then get lost;
even if he had that map leading him to the middle -- I think we call those
"opening books" -- he'd still be lost once the map ran out.

Horses are not allowed to put pieces back on the board to get to some
opening they've mastered, but they can always aim for some checkmating
pattern they know (no matter how bad their positions are), or simplify
toward an endgame they know.

Isn't it the racers who have the kick at the end who win the races? The
basketball teams who play their best ball in the last two minutes? Well,
maybe not chess professional Gordon Roy Parker, but maybe other people
would rather win their games at the end of the game.

--
Frisco Del Rosario
A First Book of Morphy -- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1412039061

Date: 18 May 2005 08:16:03
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

>> To me, the opening in chess is like the starting gate in a horse race: I
>> want a two-length lead every time.
>
> While one's opponents will settle for a nose at the wire every time.
>
> Mr. Parker, along with seduction guru and chess professional, you are also
> a horse handicapper. How often does that horse with the two-length lead at
> the first turn win the race? Don't runners call those guys the "rabbits",
> who set the pace then fall back into the pack when the race is won?

No. Frontrunners have a huge advantage in racing, because they have a clear
path to the wire and will not encounter traffic problems.

>Rated
> 1900, are you the Secretariat of chessplayers, able to get out to two
> lengths early and then win wire to wire? Even the best horses -- I mean,
> grandmasters -- falter once in a while as they round the turn, don't they?
> Being human, an' all.

Last time I checked, most GMs were rated 1900 at one time in their lives.

> To me, the opening in chess is like starting a walk through a forest.
> Suppose I could only find two maps of the forest, both of them incomplete.
> One of them showed me how to get into the middle of the forest, and the
> other showed me how to get out. I think I'd want that map leading to the
> exit.

Show me some of your endgames against Fritz on its highest level.

>Any banana can wander into the middle of forest and then get lost;
> even if he had that map leading him to the middle -- I think we call those
> "opening books" -- he'd still be lost once the map ran out.

The player who leaves book play first is the one at a strong disadvantage,
as he has to spend time OTB on a position that the other side has already
seen many times before.

> Horses are not allowed to put pieces back on the board to get to some
> opening they've mastered, but they can always aim for some checkmating
> pattern they know (no matter how bad their positions are), or simplify
> toward an endgame they know.

A chessgame is like a race to a winning position, however.

> Isn't it the racers who have the kick at the end who win the races?

Not if they are too far back. They also don't accelerate at the end, but
simply decelerate more slowly. A six-furlong race might have fractions of
:22, :45.3, 1:11.4, in which case the three quarters were run in 22, 23.3,
and 26.1. The horse who is "flying" at the end is usually going slower than
he was at the beginning.

>The
> basketball teams who play their best ball in the last two minutes?

If they are down by 20 it won't matter.

>Well,
> maybe not chess professional <snip>, but maybe other people
> would rather win their games at the end of the game.

They have to get there first.

Every chessgame has an opening; does every game have an ending?

The most effective way to improve one's chess rating is always to extend
their opening repertoire by one move in all lines.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 18 May 2005 08:41:05
From: Frisco Del Rosario
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

In article <[email protected] >, "Ray Gordon"
<[email protected] > wrote:

> >Well,
> > maybe not chess professional GORDON ROY PARKER, but maybe other people
> > would rather win their games at the end of the game.
>
> They have to get there first.

Of course they'll get to the end of the chess game if they are as alert
tactically as their opponents. Even if one's opponent is an -- cough --
OGM, games between fallible humans will be determined, probably, by
tactical oversights.

> Every chessgame has an opening; does every game have an ending?

Grandmaster Mednis wrote dozens of articles under the umbrella "From the
Opening to the Ending", citing games from certain lines which zip right
into an ending (the most common example is 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6
4. Bc6 dc6 5. d4 ed4 6. Qd4). I tell students that they can avoid the
opening, but they cannot avoid the ending -- students can take an open
openings manual to the board with them, but if they can't promote a pawn
or coordinate the pieces to deliver mate, they'll end up no better than,
say, 1900.

> The most effective way to improve one's chess rating is always to extend
> their opening repertoire by one move in all lines.

The biggest part of one's chess ability, said Cecil Purdy (about whom
Fischer said was the greatest chess teacher ever for non-masters), is
one's ability to memorize patterns, then to recognize them at the board.
Good players don't have to think as much as bad players -- they see a
position, their brains spin around, and if they have a position in their
heads that matches the one in front on them by pattern, they ask
themselves if a move that worked in the position they remember is
available now. They don't have to work so hard at the board, because
they've already done the homework.

Therefore, the most effective way to improve one's chess rating is to
extend one's library of tactical patterns through the study of diagrams.

Mr. Parker, your tactical ability is quite evident from the games in your
ICC library. You didn't win those nice games by outbooking your opponents,
you recognized some neat tactics.

--
Frisco Del Rosario
A First Book of Morphy -- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1412039061

Date: 18 May 2005 11:48:41
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Frisco Del Rosario ha escrit:

> Mr. Parker, your tactical ability is quite evident from the games in your
> ICC library. You didn't win those nice games by outbooking your opponents,
> you recognized some neat tactics.

Excuse-me,

Who is that Mr Parker?

What's his ICC nick?

I would like to visit that library.

thanks,
AT

Date: 18 May 2005 10:37:41
From: Frisco Del Rosario
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

In article <[email protected] >, Antonio Torrecillas
<[email protected] > wrote:

> En/na Frisco Del Rosario ha escrit:
>
> > Mr. Parker, your tactical ability is quite evident from the games in your
> > ICC library. You didn't win those nice games by outbooking your opponents,
> > you recognized some neat tactics.

> Who is that Mr Parker?

Ray Gordon and Gordon Ray Parker are the same.

> What's his ICC nick?

rndmndounsound

Some of the games are very cool, even when they are not models of opening
preparation 30 moves deep.

--
Frisco Del Rosario
A First Book of Morphy -- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1412039061

Date: 19 May 2005 01:15:35
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Frisco Del Rosario ha escrit:
> Ray Gordon and Gordon Ray Parker are the same.
>
>>What's his ICC nick?
>
> rndmndounsound
>
> Some of the games are very cool, even when they are not models of opening
> preparation 30 moves deep.

It seems a joke, ... the only player in "Lib rndmndounsound" up to 2000
was "Molton" and lets see:

[Event "ICC 0 1"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2005.02.17"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Molton"]
[Black "RndMndOUnsound"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A45"]
[WhiteElo "2210"]
[BlackElo "1721"]
[PlyCount "76"]
[EventDate "2005.??.??"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 Ne4 3. Bf4 g5 4. Be5 g4 5. Bxh8 Bh6 6. e3 Nxf2 7. Bd3
Bxe3 8.Qf3 Nxh1 9. Qxg4 e6 10. Qh5 Ke7 11. Qxh7 Bf2+ 12. Kd1 Kd6 13.Be5+
Kc6 14. Be4+ Kb6 15. Nf3 Bxd4 16. Bxd4+ c5 17. Nc3 d6 18. Na4+ Kb5
19.Qh6 cxd4 20. Qd2 d5 21. Qd3+ Kc6 22. Qb3 Nf2+ 23. Ke2 dxe4 24. Ne5+
Kd6 25. Qb4+ Kxe5 26. Kxf2 Qd5 27. g3 Nc6 28. Qc5 e3+ 29. Kg1 Qxc5
30.Nxc5 b6 31. Nd3+ Ke4 32. Rf1 f5 33.Rf4+ Kd5 34. b3 e5 35. Rxf5 Ba6
36.Rh5 Bxd3 37. cxd3 Rf8 38. Kg2 e2 {White resigns} 0-1

I'm sure no player made perfect moves in the first 10 moves in that
game. And this "lib" is updated until ch 2005. Maybe all
RndMndOUnsound victories to IM were last week.

I have also found the supercomputer-Gordon game in his web and it seems
it was played in spectrum or comodore-64. Really it seems a joke.

Maybe Gordon would like to post here some chapters of his book as a
"promotion" like the comments of that supercomputer game. Maybe some of
us would consider buying that book.

AT

Date: 19 May 2005 10:40:17
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected] > wrote:
> Maybe Gordon would like to post here some chapters of his book as a
> "promotion" like the comments of that supercomputer game. Maybe some of
> us would consider buying that book.

The `book' is just a series of pages on his website. The address is in
his signature.

Dave.

--
David Richerby Microsoft Soap (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ personal hygiene product that's really
hard to use!

Date: 19 May 2005 03:35:50
From: Adrian MacNair
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

"Antonio Torrecillas" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm sure no player made perfect moves in the first 10 moves in that
> game. And this "lib" is updated until ch 2005. Maybe all
> RndMndOUnsound victories to IM were last week.
>
> I have also found the supercomputer-Gordon game in his web and it seems
> it was played in spectrum or comodore-64. Really it seems a joke.
>
> Maybe Gordon would like to post here some chapters of his book as a
> "promotion" like the comments of that supercomputer game. Maybe some of
> us would consider buying that book.

Antonio, I propose you play Ray Gordon a correspondence match with 10/40
time controls to be viewed here publically on rec.games.chess.analaysis.
Encourage him to use his supercomputer as an aid. And then let's see if his
first 25 moves are GM material.

Date: 19 May 2005 15:03:50
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Adrian MacNair ha escrit:
>
> Antonio, I propose you play Ray Gordon a correspondence match with 10/40
> time controls to be viewed here publically on rec.games.chess.analaysis.
> Encourage him to use his supercomputer as an aid. And then let's see if his
> first 25 moves are GM material.

Hell Adrian,

Anyone can play 25 moves at high level helped by databases and chess
engines, the actual game starts when each player need to find a plan or
to choose a type of ending to achieve.

But ... have a look at the game I posted! In the first 10 moves black
lost a rook in move 4 and did not take a queen two times.

AT

Date: 18 May 2005 14:45:34
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: The Key To The Middle And Endgame

>> What's his ICC nick?
>
> <snip>>

I don't use nicks on the servers anymore, as people can find your weaknesses
too easily by observing your play over time.

> Some of the games are very cool, even when they are not models of opening
> preparation 30 moves deep.

Usually I chase people out of the book very early, especially if they've
played me before.

The player around these parts who seems to approach the opening the way I do
is Vivek Rao. Patrick Wolff also has a knack for finding that sharp line
for White or the equalizing or imbalancing line for Black.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.

Date: 16 May 2005 16:08:34
From: John J.
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

I have no idea why Ray acts that way. It see that the Internet brings out
the worst in people.

He has yet to answer my question regarding why doesn't he play in one of the
many high stakes tournaments. Since he's at 2300 strength I would think he
would handily win any under 2000 section and walk away with mucho dinero.

John
"k Houlsby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >Why would I tell anyone stuff like that?
>
> Why *indeed* would a *jerk* like you do *anything* to help out *his own
> mother*?
>
> Sr. Torrecillas has, for many years, been one of the most consistently
> intelligent and helpful members of the group. I have been the
> beneficiary of a great deal of that help, I'm happy to say.
>
> You don't *have* to help him, but it might be nice.
>
> Just think, at some point in the future, you might post a request with
> which Antonio might be able to help, or, indeed, I might, but because
> you have behaved like such a jerk, we may decide *not* to help you
> after all....
>
> Other people who read this thread may decide the same.
>

Date: 16 May 2005 16:03:07
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating

En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:

> This kid was rated maybe 1800 a few short years ago. Now he's strong enough
> to compete with GMs and dusts them regularly on ICC. This may be the real
> reason Kasparov decided to quit (too many talented kids from the
> computer-era getting ready to dust him).
>
> His opening repertoire is shoddy, his middlegame is spectacular (like a
> computer's), and his endgames are pretty good, especially for someone so
> young.
>
> His games are definitely worth studying for future trends in chess,
> especially in the openings. I've seen some wild ideas from this kid,
> including sacrificing a pawn on b4 in the main line of the Center Counter,
> and playing 6. Rg1 against the Najdorf.
>

Who is that boy?

What is his nick in ICC?

AT

Date: 16 May 2005 14:43:16
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: 13 year old kid gets 2700 ICC bullet rating