Awesome name... Carlito's Way rocked hard. My favourite Pacino impressions come from that movie: "I owe him, Gail", and "You think you're big time? You're gonna f***ing die... big time...."
WOW! 1hr time limit
I hope to cut this down with all_aces
Sadly, I'm probably the last person who would cut this down. I'm gonna need all the time I can get. Maybe 45 minutes each, but any less and I'd start to sweat, and shake.
I lost to MickeyHoldem (don't all rush to voice your surprise at once now) So we have one result out of 5 for this round. Please try to get your games in ASAP and post your results so we can start on the 2nd round.
Round 1:
professor vs dvst8r
Dan808 vs R3d-3y3s
all_aces vs Don Carlito
HellmuthFan vs Jay
MickeyHoldem vs MiamiKeith 1-0
I have sent a PM to professor but I haven't heard back yet
He's a busy guy (or so he claims ;-) ) Anyway if you don't hear back from him in the next couple of days PM me and I'll try to get in touch with him. There's no great rush... this is pretty informal... I'd like it if each round took a week or less but if not its no big deal.
So, I downloaded the 'World Chess Network' and played a practice game in preperation for tomorrow night. The only guy looking for a game had it set at 20 minutes. We were almost done, and I had him on the ropes, but I ran out of time 30 seconds before he did. I didn't know that was the end of the game! It said that he won, and then he disconnected, and left, even though I think we could have played on regardless....
Anyways, realistically, I only *need* 30 minutes to play this, but 45 will make sure that the game doesn't end in this lame-o, cheesy fashion.
So, I downloaded the 'World Chess Network' and played a practice game in preperation for tomorrow night. The only guy looking for a game had it set at 20 minutes. We were almost done, and I had him on the ropes, but I ran out of time 30 seconds before he did. I didn't know that was the end of the game! It said that he won, and then he disconnected, and left, even though I think we could have played on regardless....
Anyways, realistically, I only *need* 30 minutes to play this, but 45 will make sure that the game doesn't end in this lame-o, cheesy fashion.
Regards,
all_aces
hahahaha....
Yeah losing on time is the worst! no worries I will make sure we play at least 45 minutes.
Check the settings to add sound, show last move, choose btw click-click or drag. etc etc
also check out the features to change the color on the board....
So, I downloaded the 'World Chess Network' and played a practice game in preperation for tomorrow night. The only guy looking for a game had it set at 20 minutes. We were almost done, and I had him on the ropes, but I ran out of time 30 seconds before he did. I didn't know that was the end of the game! It said that he won, and then he disconnected, and left, even though I think we could have played on regardless....
Anyways, realistically, I only *need* 30 minutes to play this, but 45 will make sure that the game doesn't end in this lame-o, cheesy fashion.
Regards,
all_aces
I played my game against MickeyHoldem with no time limits. We were done in under an hour (I think??? I wasn't really keeping track). There was ONE move where I really wish I had taken more time. It was one of those moves where as soon as I made it (before he even moved) I saw that I had a much better move. I mean, I would have lost anyway (he is a much better player than I am) but I think I could have battled with him and made it close. Instead, I really had to scramble after making this mistake, and I got a bit desperate and made my bad position much much worse.
I am REALLY rusty now... I looked back at a game that I had played a year ago (on FICS, against a player rated some 400 points higher than me). I was black in that game as well, and I WON, and it was against the same opening that Mickey used against me today. The main differences were (1) I was playing a lot back then, and I knew the opening just as well as my opponent did... today I was lost by move 3 or 4, and (2) I honestly think that that game a year ago is the best game I have played in my life. There is a reason that I saved it for this long ;-)
I dunno. I find that it's hard to concentrate on more than one thing at once. This was back when I was taking some time off poker, and I really immersed myself into chess. I just can't do both at once. Does anyone else have this problem?
well, i've been called obsessive-compulsive many times...i don't agree with my wife necessarily ...
so i find my self immersing myself in things for stints... juggling...magic...houdini...poker...back to magic...speedcubing...more poker...chess....obsessed with whichever it is at the time! i do manage to still maintain interest in everything at once, but i'd say i definately focus on one at a time.
i have a question since u mentioned ratings.
i've researched how to calculate ur rating, but all algorithms include a previous rating. i learned how to play chess about 2 weeks ago. i don't have a previous rating. from what i've read, that would put me at about 700....do i just assume that? or is there something i'm missing?
For previously unrated players use the following until you have played 24 games and the use the regular formula:
R = A + 400 (W - L) / N
where R is the your rating, A is the average rating of the your opponents, W is the number of wins, L is the number of losses, N is the total number of games played.
I dunno. I find that it's hard to concentrate on more than one thing at once. This was back when I was taking some time off poker, and I really immersed myself into chess. I just can't do both at once. Does anyone else have this problem?
When I started my practice game, I was in a shorthanded 10/20 game at Stars. Within a minute, I closed the game at Stars. There are some things you can do at the same time: walk and chew gum, play a NL tournament and a shorthanded cash game, check your email, post on pokerforum, read RGP, and play a tournament on Stars... but you can't play chess and poker at the same time. At least, I couldn't.
I realize you were talking more about 'long-term' focus; as in, get in a mindset to play good chess or get in a mindset to play profitable poker, but I thought I'd share my inability to multitask with chess.
BTW, here is a rough transcript of the conversation I had last night with my girlfriend:
Her: What are you doing?
Me: Loading a chess program.
Her: Why?
Me: We're playing a pokerforum chess tournament.
Her: Why?
Me: For fun.
Her: Are you playing for money?
Me: No, just fun.
Her: Then why are you doing it.
(I'd like to say, at this point, that my girlfriend is becoming more of an opportunistic capitalist than I ever thought I could ever be. The thing is, she's only 'time=money' when it comes to my time. Anyways...)
Me: For fun, you know, for competition.
Her: Who's in it? Is ScottyZ in it?
(ScottyZ is really the only forum member she knows of, and for some reason she always wants to know what he's doing. Is he in this tournament? Is he in that tournament? Etc... Etc...)
Me: No.
Her: (looking at the computer) Oh my God. The chess people have CHAT. They TALK to each other. Honey, you can't do this.
Me: Why not?
Her: You're becoming a computer geek. You're playing chess online against people you don't know...
Anyways, if I'm a computer geek, I'm a computer geek. I don't think I am... actually, I think this whole 'online chess' thing is pretty cool. I'm surprised that people aren't playing for money, but that's where a poker mentality will get you. I wonder if there is a market for a chess/backgammon/poker gambling website. Hmmm....
Me: For fun, you know, for competition.
Her: Who's in it? Is ScottyZ in it?
Cool... I'm becoming famous? 8)
Anyways, if I'm a computer geek, I'm a computer geek.
[zombie-like voice:] join us.... JOIN USSSSSS
I don't think I am... actually, I think this whole 'online chess' thing is pretty cool.
This is a nice example of contradictory statements.
I wonder if there is a market for a chess/backgammon/poker gambling website.
I'd be surprised if there was much betting going on at chess, on- or off-line, since it's purely skill based. The closest thing to gambling (well, it technically is gambling) would probably be B&M chess tournaments that offered prizes and charged an entry fee.
Backgammon gambling is somewhat common on-line. After poker, I'd guess it was the next most commonly bet on skill & luck based game on-line.
Anyways, if I'm a computer geek, I'm a computer geek. I don't think I am... actually, I think this whole 'online chess' thing is pretty cool.
You are SUCH a computer geek...
The thing about online chess (or online anything else) is that it's REALLY easy to find a game. If you want to play, you play. Someone, somewhere, also wants to play.
I'm surprised that people aren't playing for money, but that's where a poker mentality will get you. I wonder if there is a market for a chess/backgammon/poker gambling website. Hmmm....
They exist. Backgammon is a better gambling game than chess. The problem with chess is that it is usually pretty obvious that a worse player is badly outclassed. You'd have to be an idiot to keep coming back for more. Backgammon has that nice "luck" factor that poker has. It keeps 'em coming back because they win fairly often... just not as much as they lose. (FWIW, at backgammon, I'm one of "them")
well, i've been called obsessive-compulsive many times...i don't agree with my wife necessarily ...
so i find my self immersing myself in things for stints... juggling...magic...houdini...poker...back to magic...speedcubing...more poker...chess....obsessed with whichever it is at the time! i do manage to still maintain interest in everything at once, but i'd say i definately focus on one at a time.
i have a question since u mentioned ratings.
i've researched how to calculate ur rating, but all algorithms include a previous rating. i learned how to play chess about 2 weeks ago. i don't have a previous rating. from what i've read, that would put me at about 700....do i just assume that? or is there something i'm missing?
I'd like to make a suggestion here. Don't get overly hung up with ratings. Just play, and learn. You will know when you are getting better. You will know when you are playing a player who is much better than you, and you will know when your opponent is much worse.
Ratings are good if your goal is to get better, and you use your rating as a gauge to see if you are acheiving your goal. The problem is that a lot of people play with the GOAL of increasing their rating, not of becoming better chess players. They will only play games as white (since rating systems don't usually take this into account). They only play against players with higher ratings then them, so if they lose their rating doesn't go down by much, but if they win it goes up a lot, and if they can squeeze out a draw it goes up. In short, they abuse the rating system in order to increase their rating. The goal has nothing to do with becoming better, or playing the game to enjoy it... it is about getting a higher rating, so that (presumably) others will think that they are good players.
I saw a lot of this going on when I played at FICS. I even found myself starting to think about it (when I looked at playing a game, I would think about what would happen to my rating if I won, and what would happen if I lost). At this point, I decided to just stop playing rated games, and just play for the sake of playing. It worked for me.
well, i've been called obsessive-compulsive many times...i don't agree with my wife necessarily ...
so i find my self immersing myself in things for stints... juggling...magic...houdini...poker...back to magic...speedcubing...more poker...chess....obsessed with whichever it is at the time! i do manage to still maintain interest in everything at once, but i'd say i definately focus on one at a time.
i have a question since u mentioned ratings.
i've researched how to calculate ur rating, but all algorithms include a previous rating. i learned how to play chess about 2 weeks ago. i don't have a previous rating. from what i've read, that would put me at about 700....do i just assume that? or is there something i'm missing?
LOL
This is so much like me! I too have an obsessive-compulsive behaviour. I think it started when I was 6 when I was collecting comic books! hahahaha!
For the past 3 years it's been Chess, RPG games, Basketball, Day Trading (back in University), and now its Poker
and I agree with Keith, don't worry too much on the ratings.
That was a very good game, DC, and I'd say that if I lost. Very wild, it seemed to me. Not careless, but there were a lot of power pieces in the middle of the board for a long time. Aggressive, I guess is a better word.
You had my ass kicked for the first half, positionally. I was just running defence, playing scared, trying to cover my bases. Then I caught a couple of breaks and so it goes... On one hand I'm looking forward to our next meeting, and on the other hand I'm not. I have a feeling I won't be walking away with a win next time.
MickeyHoldem, a few pages back you offerred to handle the swiss pairings for this tourney. Do you think that you could take over and handle the whole thing? I think I am done with this forum... I will still finish playing in the tourney though. E-mail me: kbellul "at" yahoo "dot" com.
Also since the switch was made to the new forum software, you have to manually turn PMs on. I'd suggest that everyone in the tourney do this, at least for the duration of the tourney, so that you can get in touch with your opponents and arrange a time/site to play. Mickey, your PMs seem to be off (or I would have sent this to you privately instead)
Good luck everyone... looking forward to my next match.
Lol me too. I wanted that f***ing hat so bad I couldn't see straight!!! :banghead: And then Scharf came along and f***ed me. I'm seeing a counselor now, though, and we expect a full recovery by 2006...
Lol me too. I wanted that f***ing hat so bad I couldn't see straight!!! :banghead: And then Scharf came along and f***ed me. I'm seeing a counselor now, though, and we expect a full recovery by 2006...
Regards,
all_aces
ps: j/k
Let's go to Regina and get him. I'll hold him down and you work the kidneys.
Huh? You don't the new look-n-feel, or is it something else?
There will probably be quite a few glitches for the first little while, and we'll have to do a few extra things like set-up our options/preferences again (and things like that). But from what I've seen so far, the new forum has all the features of the old one, and then some.
Or maybe you're just ticked off that France lost today. Me too. :banghead:
Comments
Yeah it is definitely a very different game. You'll actually have to think ;-) Maybe we can have a blitz chess tournament next.
Keith
Awesome name... Carlito's Way rocked hard. My favourite Pacino impressions come from that movie: "I owe him, Gail", and "You think you're big time? You're gonna f***ing die... big time...."
Sadly, I'm probably the last person who would cut this down. I'm gonna need all the time I can get. Maybe 45 minutes each, but any less and I'd start to sweat, and shake.
Regards,
all_aces
Round 1:
professor vs dvst8r
Dan808 vs R3d-3y3s
all_aces vs Don Carlito
HellmuthFan vs Jay
MickeyHoldem vs MiamiKeith 1-0
Keith
He's a busy guy (or so he claims ;-) ) Anyway if you don't hear back from him in the next couple of days PM me and I'll try to get in touch with him. There's no great rush... this is pretty informal... I'd like it if each round took a week or less but if not its no big deal.
Keith
Anyways, realistically, I only *need* 30 minutes to play this, but 45 will make sure that the game doesn't end in this lame-o, cheesy fashion.
Regards,
all_aces
hahahaha....
Yeah losing on time is the worst! no worries I will make sure we play at least 45 minutes.
Check the settings to add sound, show last move, choose btw click-click or drag. etc etc
also check out the features to change the color on the board....
ttyl
I played my game against MickeyHoldem with no time limits. We were done in under an hour (I think??? I wasn't really keeping track). There was ONE move where I really wish I had taken more time. It was one of those moves where as soon as I made it (before he even moved) I saw that I had a much better move. I mean, I would have lost anyway (he is a much better player than I am) but I think I could have battled with him and made it close. Instead, I really had to scramble after making this mistake, and I got a bit desperate and made my bad position much much worse.
I am REALLY rusty now... I looked back at a game that I had played a year ago (on FICS, against a player rated some 400 points higher than me). I was black in that game as well, and I WON, and it was against the same opening that Mickey used against me today. The main differences were (1) I was playing a lot back then, and I knew the opening just as well as my opponent did... today I was lost by move 3 or 4, and (2) I honestly think that that game a year ago is the best game I have played in my life. There is a reason that I saved it for this long ;-)
I dunno. I find that it's hard to concentrate on more than one thing at once. This was back when I was taking some time off poker, and I really immersed myself into chess. I just can't do both at once. Does anyone else have this problem?
Keith
so i find my self immersing myself in things for stints... juggling...magic...houdini...poker...back to magic...speedcubing...more poker...chess....obsessed with whichever it is at the time! i do manage to still maintain interest in everything at once, but i'd say i definately focus on one at a time.
i have a question since u mentioned ratings.
i've researched how to calculate ur rating, but all algorithms include a previous rating. i learned how to play chess about 2 weeks ago. i don't have a previous rating. from what i've read, that would put me at about 700....do i just assume that? or is there something i'm missing?
R = A + 400 (W - L) / N
where R is the your rating, A is the average rating of the your opponents, W is the number of wins, L is the number of losses, N is the total number of games played.
When I started my practice game, I was in a shorthanded 10/20 game at Stars. Within a minute, I closed the game at Stars. There are some things you can do at the same time: walk and chew gum, play a NL tournament and a shorthanded cash game, check your email, post on pokerforum, read RGP, and play a tournament on Stars... but you can't play chess and poker at the same time. At least, I couldn't.
I realize you were talking more about 'long-term' focus; as in, get in a mindset to play good chess or get in a mindset to play profitable poker, but I thought I'd share my inability to multitask with chess.
BTW, here is a rough transcript of the conversation I had last night with my girlfriend:
Her: What are you doing?
Me: Loading a chess program.
Her: Why?
Me: We're playing a pokerforum chess tournament.
Her: Why?
Me: For fun.
Her: Are you playing for money?
Me: No, just fun.
Her: Then why are you doing it.
(I'd like to say, at this point, that my girlfriend is becoming more of an opportunistic capitalist than I ever thought I could ever be. The thing is, she's only 'time=money' when it comes to my time. Anyways...)
Me: For fun, you know, for competition.
Her: Who's in it? Is ScottyZ in it?
(ScottyZ is really the only forum member she knows of, and for some reason she always wants to know what he's doing. Is he in this tournament? Is he in that tournament? Etc... Etc...)
Me: No.
Her: (looking at the computer) Oh my God. The chess people have CHAT. They TALK to each other. Honey, you can't do this.
Me: Why not?
Her: You're becoming a computer geek. You're playing chess online against people you don't know...
Anyways, if I'm a computer geek, I'm a computer geek. I don't think I am... actually, I think this whole 'online chess' thing is pretty cool. I'm surprised that people aren't playing for money, but that's where a poker mentality will get you. I wonder if there is a market for a chess/backgammon/poker gambling website. Hmmm....
Regards,
all_aces
Cool... I'm becoming famous? 8)
[zombie-like voice:] join us.... JOIN USSSSSS
This is a nice example of contradictory statements.
I'd be surprised if there was much betting going on at chess, on- or off-line, since it's purely skill based. The closest thing to gambling (well, it technically is gambling) would probably be B&M chess tournaments that offered prizes and charged an entry fee.
Backgammon gambling is somewhat common on-line. After poker, I'd guess it was the next most commonly bet on skill & luck based game on-line.
ScottyZ
You are SUCH a computer geek...
The thing about online chess (or online anything else) is that it's REALLY easy to find a game. If you want to play, you play. Someone, somewhere, also wants to play.
They exist. Backgammon is a better gambling game than chess. The problem with chess is that it is usually pretty obvious that a worse player is badly outclassed. You'd have to be an idiot to keep coming back for more. Backgammon has that nice "luck" factor that poker has. It keeps 'em coming back because they win fairly often... just not as much as they lose. (FWIW, at backgammon, I'm one of "them")
Keith
I'd like to make a suggestion here. Don't get overly hung up with ratings. Just play, and learn. You will know when you are getting better. You will know when you are playing a player who is much better than you, and you will know when your opponent is much worse.
Ratings are good if your goal is to get better, and you use your rating as a gauge to see if you are acheiving your goal. The problem is that a lot of people play with the GOAL of increasing their rating, not of becoming better chess players. They will only play games as white (since rating systems don't usually take this into account). They only play against players with higher ratings then them, so if they lose their rating doesn't go down by much, but if they win it goes up a lot, and if they can squeeze out a draw it goes up. In short, they abuse the rating system in order to increase their rating. The goal has nothing to do with becoming better, or playing the game to enjoy it... it is about getting a higher rating, so that (presumably) others will think that they are good players.
I saw a lot of this going on when I played at FICS. I even found myself starting to think about it (when I looked at playing a game, I would think about what would happen to my rating if I won, and what would happen if I lost). At this point, I decided to just stop playing rated games, and just play for the sake of playing. It worked for me.
Keith
LOL
This is so much like me! I too have an obsessive-compulsive behaviour. I think it started when I was 6 when I was collecting comic books! hahahaha!
For the past 3 years it's been Chess, RPG games, Basketball, Day Trading (back in University), and now its Poker
and I agree with Keith, don't worry too much on the ratings.
That was a good game....
All_aces your a good player! there were some many chances where I could have done some damage at first but you had the game well covered
know am on a mission! lol
You had my ass kicked for the first half, positionally. I was just running defence, playing scared, trying to cover my bases. Then I caught a couple of breaks and so it goes... On one hand I'm looking forward to our next meeting, and on the other hand I'm not. I have a feeling I won't be walking away with a win next time.
Good game.
Regards,
all_aces
professor vs dvst8r
Dan808 vs R3d-3y3s
all_aces vs Don Carlito 1-0
HellmuthFan vs Jay
MickeyHoldem vs MiamiKeith 1-0
Keith
No problem. You probably won't be the last.
Keith
Also since the switch was made to the new forum software, you have to manually turn PMs on. I'd suggest that everyone in the tourney do this, at least for the duration of the tourney, so that you can get in touch with your opponents and arrange a time/site to play. Mickey, your PMs seem to be off (or I would have sent this to you privately instead)
Good luck everyone... looking forward to my next match.
Keith
Regards,
all_aces
Regards,
all_aces
ps: j/k
ScottyZ
ps: also j/k
There will probably be quite a few glitches for the first little while, and we'll have to do a few extra things like set-up our options/preferences again (and things like that). But from what I've seen so far, the new forum has all the features of the old one, and then some.
Or maybe you're just ticked off that France lost today. Me too. :banghead:
ScottyZ