Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Correspondence Chess / Correspondence Chess / Antares vs. Uly: Into the unknown paradise...
1 2 Previous Next  
- - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-04-16 21:31
1. d4 *
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-04-19 03:52
I bet the unknown paradise is actually hell, is it not?

1. d4 Nf6
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-04-19 07:42

> I bet the unknown paradise is actually hell, is it not?


Its either Corrvalon or Drawnhell... :wink:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 *
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-07 03:28
Huh... I don't even remember from where 1...Nf6!? came from, holding now as third best after 1...d5!! and 1...e6! :eek:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6

rnbqkb1r/pppp1ppp/4pn2/8/2PP4/8/PP2PPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-08 15:55

> Huh... I don't even remember from where 1...Nf6!? came from, holding now as third best after 1...d5!! and 1...e6! :eek:


Actually i was also surprised, knowing you as the e6-d5-guy, but as you would play these three moves against nearly any of White's setups anyway... not too much difference for !!/!/!?... :razz:

3. Nf3 *
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-09 15:55

> Actually i was also surprised, knowing you as the e6-d5-guy, but as you would play these three moves against nearly any of White's setups anyway... not too much difference for !!/!/!?... :razz:


There's a difference. But not if white goes Nf3!? and forfeits Samish variations forever...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5

rnbqkb1r/ppp2ppp/4pn2/3p4/2PP4/5N2/PP2PPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-09 17:13

> But not if white goes Nf3!? and forfeits Saemish variations forever...


Since you would play Nimzo vs. 3. Nc3 (which i beat blindfolded!) i wanted to see what else you want to offer:

4. Nc3 *
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-10 16:56
Lol, you correct me and then you do it wrong? It's the Saemisch :razz:

But anyway, it is well known as the Samish, it's actually equivalent to Samish/Petroff - Saemisch/Petrov. I don't consider "Petroff" wrong...

>Since you would play Nimzo vs. 3. Nc3


Wow, I should get into contacting you to ask you what I'm going to play, since I don't know it myself. This currect move I spent hours deciding between dxc4 and c6, if you already knew I was going for c6 you could have told me and I could have saved time...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6

rnbqkb1r/pp3ppp/2p1pn2/3p4/2PP4/2N2N2/PP2PPPP/R1BQKB1R w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-10 19:13
First, let me get quickly back to a comment of yours from the other game-thread:

> "[...] instead of rushing up the start of the games, which didn't rush anything due to my pacing, anyway."


Uly, you asked to play our last game again, so i just created two game-threads (granting myself a White-game as well), nothing more... no rushing but fully understanding that you play when you can & want anyway. There is no time-control, no nothing; just a full understanding of "your pacing" that these two games may be the last ones being played and ending on rybka-forum... if we even make it before it ceases forever. :grin:

> It's the Saemisch :razz:


Actually its the Sämisch, named after the late German GM Friedrich Sämisch, but as English language doesn't know 'ä' (='ae') and 'sch' is the German form of English 'sh', i wanted to do you a little favor... my fault! :yell:

> if you already knew I was going for c6 you could have told me and I could have saved time...


Indeed i knew - 4...dxc4 would be interesting&unbalanced (=it's a Antares&Om-move!), so obviously you don't play that :smile: (still i gave you a side-chance for 4...Be7 though!)... as a 1.d4 player one has always be prepared to face the Semi-Slav anyway (just your move order with all that !!/!/!?/?! doesn't make too much sense aiming for one), so be sure its my little beloved pet... but as i don't want to play my main weapon against it, i now have to browse a little for an approach i want to give a try. Stay tuned. :cool:
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-10 23:57
I mean that the game threads were rushed because we never agreed about what we were going to do, you just created the threads and assumed I'd play.

Actually, it was never my intention to start 2 games against you, just one. Did you know that? No, because that's proof the match was rushed :razz:

The negociations should end before the game threads are created. I got some, and you got some (twice of what I was going to give you.)

>but as English language doesn't know 'ä' (='ae')


See? If ae=ä and sh=sch, then the Samish spelling was correct from the start.

>but as i don't want to play my main weapon against it,


I beg you to treat our match as if it was the final round of the ICCF World Championship, or something, as I'm doing, the worst thing that could happen is for me to get an easy draw and you to claim "it's because I didn't use my main weapon."

Last time you defeated my best, so I think I deserve your best too.

Go all guns blazing or don't bother.
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-11 08:18

> because we never agreed about what we were going to do, you just created the threads and assumed I'd play.


But it is true that you actually didn't really bring up this Fischermode-"topic" the time you played * your first moves, no? :grin: IS there anything you want to renegotiate? :wink:

> I got some, and you got some (twice of what I was going to give you.)


Actually i wanted to insist on a weekly free-house delivery of this food, but kindly let this drop because Urusov sounded tasty enough!

> See? If ae=ä and sh=sch, then the Samish spelling was correct from the start.


A representation you might better understand:


Google-proof: "Saemish chess" results in 53.240 hits, "Samish chess" in pure 5.110 - so you're more than 10 times wrong!

> [...] so I think I deserve your best too. Go all guns blazing or don't bother.


Believe me, i would NEVER avoid a Nimzo against you in a serious game, but here i was just curious where all this !!/!/!?/?!/?/??-system will end, and believe it or not, it's a Semi-Slav with 1...Nf6!?+2...e6! ... - brilliant!
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-11 19:38

>IS there anything you want to renegotiate? :wink:


No, I'm fine.

We could negotiate actually replaying the Urusov and at what point from that game I try to save it. Remember you beat me because of a bug, what I don't know is if you'd have beaten me anyway without the bug. You believe you would have, I truly have no idea (since I claimed I could play the position infinite times against you and draw them all, the bug came as a surprise - I guess I didn't count on it...)

But the whole point of the exercise is for us to replay from a position you claim is won for you already, where I claim it's still a draw. Deviating earlier in the Urusov makes as much sense as going for the Spanish, except I don't think it's possible for me to beat you in the Urusov, so it's the same for me to play for a draw from the start of the game as playing for a draw in a position you claim is won for you.

We'd need to suspend these games we're playing until we're done with that, though.

>Actually i wanted to insist on a weekly free-house delivery of this food


Must be eaten live, and hot. And at a relatively fast speed before it gets cold, ruining the experience.

Otherwise, they sell "Trompo meat" (al pastor) in the mall, specially designed to be stored in the fridge, so you can eat it whenever you want. I'm actually going to eat an arabian taco with that meat and some sauce right now.

>Google-proof: "Saemish chess" results in 53.240 hits, "Samish chess" in pure 5.110 - so you're more than 10 times wrong!


No, "Saemish chess" brings only 2 results, THAT WAS MY WHOLE POINT, copy and paste it if you don't believe me.

So yeah, I've been arguing about you missing the c on there.

If "Samish chess" is 5.110 hits and "Saemish chess" has only 2 hits, I was +2500 times more right than you.

You might have been confused because Youtube shows results for Saemisch when you search for Saemish without quotes. Try the quotes.

> Believe me, i would NEVER avoid a Nimzo against you in a serious game


Can I do that as well? Play some garbage move and if I lose, claim "I'd not have played that in a serious game"?

Again, take this game seriously or cancel the match.
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-11 19:48 Edited 2018-05-11 21:08

> No, "Saemish chess" brings only 2 results


Uly-buddy, please google these two words without those "" and then apologize to me (obviously chess was just used to get Saemish into the right context!). With "", your "Samish chess" also just results in barely 2 hits.

Edit: I just read that very unrespectful[!] :grin: statement:

> Remember you beat me because of a bug


Uly stated: "Just this morning realized that it was a bug in Stockfish's persistent hash"
Uly stated: "I've been using 7 engines for this game."
:lol:
Uly stated: "Good job Antares, you have truly bested me"
Uly stated: "I have to say you're the strongest opponent I have ever faced" <- this actually hangs as a poster over my bed! :twisted:

Conclusion: If you play here two interesting games, i might really consider giving you a chance to show me your draw...
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-11 21:59

> please google these two words without those "" and then apologize to me (obviously chess was just used to get Saemish into the right context!


I still win, check this:

"saemish" chess ->  2,410 hits

"saemisch" chess -> 180,000 hits

Your saemish thing was 90 times wrong.

> Uly stated: "Good job Antares, you have truly bested me"


You bested me because of a bug.

> Uly stated: "I have to say you're the strongest opponent I have ever faced"


That was true back when I said it.

Get with the times! You defeated me on December 2014, it's now May 5 2018, I've faced 2 or 3 peeps stronger than you.

> If you play here two interesting games, i might really consider giving you a chance to show me your draw...


I can't play interesting games unless you take them seriously. Mainly, if you play for a draw there's nothing I can do. But how interesting is it depends on both sides.

So I'll go and double:

If YOU don't provide 2 interesting games for me then I will never play you again. I have already promised another game to Mark Eldridge, so these won't be the last ones on the forum. So you will see me play on, perhaps I'll even challenge Master OM or something, but you won't get access to my moves again.

There you have it. I guess this is blackmail but if it comes to this to make you play at your best, so be it.
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-12 07:38 Edited 2018-05-12 07:41
Sämisch-conclusion: Sämisch=Saemisch (Google treats it the same, as English language doesn't know so called motated vowels like 'ä'), Saemish being a not-so-good "English'ciation" (as you pointed out: Petroff->Petrov is the same "league"), but Samish not only that but simply lacking the 'e'. End.

> You bested me because of a bug.


The bug is between your ears Uly, as the reason for that White-loss of yours with all your ridiculous [draw-]claims back at that time can be found in an romantic/overoptimistic opening, some poor middlegame-choices and a complete lack of endgame-understandings... but instead that you blame yourself, your chess-skills or your lazyiness (why not double-check what obviously looks losing?! You were noticed 178x times that your analysis/position-judgement is wrong!!), you blame a single bug somehow spread over 7 engines which you most likely even compiled in yourself. Be a man and stand behind YOUR moves!
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-12 20:51 Edited 2018-05-12 20:54

> Sämisch-conclusion: Sämisch=Saemisch (Google treats it the same, as English language doesn't know so called motated vowels like 'ä'), Saemish being a not-so-good "English'ciation" (as you pointed out: Petroff->Petrov is the same "league"), but Samish not only that but simply lacking the 'e'. End.


No.

The thing here is that you corrected me stating that Saemish was more correct than Samish, then used Google to support it. But Google supports me:

"samish" chess -> 4,990 hits

"saemish" chess -> 2,320 hits

Samish is twice as correct as Saemish. Your correction was wrong.

> Be a man and stand behind YOUR moves!


I would if I knew what would I have played without the bug. The bug just ruined everything. That's what we need to play that game again, and then two things could happen:

1 - I draw the game. That'd mean without the bug I'd have drawn it anyway. That'd mean the openinhg was fine, the middlegame choices were wine, my understanding of the endgame was fine, my chess skills were fine, and I was not lazy. Since chess is a draw with perfect play, it doesn't matter if I draw like that or if I draw like SPOILER ALERT you're going to draw me in this game. That was my path, a bug got in the way.

2 - I lose the game. Then the bug was irrelevant, I'd have lost no matter what. Maybe you're my strongest lifetime opponent still after more than 3 years.

We just don't know.

It's not just playing the game again and see if I can draw it, the whole concept of if I should be spending my time with correspondence chess games at all or look for a new hobby is at stake.

That's why I think it was important to close that circle before starting new games, and why I think things were rushed.
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-12 21:23
:yell::yell::yell: SäManiac :yell::yell::yell:

Maybe we discovered here a GoogleZero-bug, let's see:

"samish" chess -> 4,990 hits [even 6140 here!]
"saemish" chess -> 2,320 hits [2480]
"saemisch" chess -> ~42,000 hits
"sämisch" chess -> ~17,600 hits [just!, disappointing]
but:
samish chess -> 4,890 hits [strange, even less than in ""]
saemish chess -> ~51,300 hits [:yell:, note: again without ""]
saemisch chess -> ~44,000 hits [a little more than with "", as expected]
sämisch chess -> ~67,000 hits
sämisch schach (=German word for chess) -> ~45,900 hits

First of all, sorry for being a little harsh this morning, all i wanted to say is: When you type in a move, its your move - not that of the several tools helping or inspiring you to exactly this move. Honestly i thought the same when Paul blamed several people&books because of his regularly drawish play [what an insult!] instead of himself - blindly adapting that knowledge. My philosophy is simply: The time you type in a move, its YOUR move - nothing&noone's else [fault].

And please don't be so philosophic :lol:... it was a single game where we had a lot of fun - ok, i in the end a little more than you, but nothing in the world can bring that 2014-time back... sadly.

> if I draw like SPOILER ALERT you're going to draw me in this game.


You better draw me, as i already played 3. Nf3!? + 4. Nc3?! (completely winning Catalan-lines must stay in book!) and 5. Bg5? (i want to lure future opponents in the Semi-Slav, and finishing them even with 5. e3!! then)... :razz:
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-13 04:30
Oh, I'm not saying that you didn't defeat me, I take full responsibility of my moves, you did beat me, no excuse.

However, the reasoning for move making is important, basically, I was cheated by my chess engine which gave me wrong information, I followed it blindly and that led to my loss.

What I want to know is what would have happened in the alternate universe where I didn't have that engine at all, or at least knew about the bug. You could have defeated me anyway, or I could have drawn that game. And you don't know how much knowing that I'd have drawn it would mean to me.

I don't think you've been harsher than me, anyway. I may have been harsher because I'm not sorry about being harsh :razz:

>You better draw me, as i already played 3. Nf3!? + 4. Nc3?! (completely winning Catalan-lines must stay in book!) and 5. Bg5? (i want to lure future opponents in the Semi-Slav, and finishing them even with 5. e3!! then)... :razz:


Yeah, I think your best chance to defeat me would have been going for the Samish :razz:
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-13 11:42
Uly, to me the truth is that engines in '14 didn't find 48...Re8 on their own as 52...g6 was a little deeper, yet directly in front of it one couldn't actually miss it - yet you tried to tell my a little story :lol:)... so its easy to see that you simply missed that resource in your analysis -especially analyzing 15-20 moves ahead- and expected another (rook-move-)line, which you most likely correctly analyzed to 0.00 - i also was of the believe that only 48...Re8 (with the 49...Re7-idea) wins! And believe me, that win still makes me smile today, as it was simply the best Urusov ever played!

> Yeah, I think your best chance to defeat me would have been going for the Samish :razz:


Then play 2...g6 next time, the move which make 1...Nf6 great [again]!
Parent - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-13 16:50
No wonder you weren't interested in replaying the Urusov (from your "won" position), if you believe you already know the truth. I don't know the truth, and since you were wrong about Saemish>Samish who knows if you're wrong about this as well :razz:

We will see... maybe...

> Then play 2...g6 next time


I love the positions after g6! For the white side! Black doesn't have any fun there...
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-12 11:38
And let me add that: Over the years i really gained respect for you buddy!, because your own approaches, ideas, style... it's just that we're pretty stubborn and sometimes[!] have a little different opinion about nuances! :lol:
Parent - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-12 20:55
Well, I consider you my archnemesis, at least you accept that you're also stubborn :razz:
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-11 19:42
Ok, after getting you sharp[dylan!] :grin: a little, now back to chess:

5. Bg5 *

rnbqkb1r/pp3ppp/2p1pn2/3p2B1/2PP4/2N2N2/PP2PPPP/R2QKB1R b KQkq - 1 5
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-12 02:21
Here I have 5...h6!? as losing, or something.

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4

rnbqkb1r/pp3ppp/2p1pn2/6B1/2pP4/2N2N2/PP2PPPP/R2QKB1R w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-12 15:42

> Here I have 5...h6!? as losing, or something.


Well, a few years back you guys had a hard time there with the "Dark Knights", but 5...h6 in 2018 to me is one of the last remaining battle-fields in corr-chess with rich chances for improvement for both sides.

My own pet (where i spent years of analysis with, all main-lines deep into the endgames) is 5. e3, but obviously it also would have to need a deep 2018-analysis...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 *

rnbqkb1r/pp3ppp/2p1pn2/6B1/2pPP3/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R b KQkq e3 0 6
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-12 21:13

> but 5...h6 in 2018 to me is one of the last remaining battle-fields in corr-chess with rich chances for improvement for both sides


What improvements for black? After 5...h6 black has 0% chances of winning, all it can do is increasing drawing chances, which sounds poor.

This matters to me because apparently I'm a much better black player than I'm a white player. With black I'm able to equalize and then turn the tables around and gain an edge and increase it. With white I mostly hit a wall and go into an equal game with few pieces where my opponents have no trouble.

So coming that way I can say that playing the most drawish move as black is foot shooting yourself.

>My own pet (where i spent years of analysis with, all main-lines deep into the endgames) is 5. e3, but obviously it also would have to need a deep 2018-analysis...


Meh, I've killed all my pets. All my analysis from before February 2018 is garbage and I can easily refute it. I have accumulated over 1.49GB of analysis over the years (not counting my Aquarium trip!), and it's kind of sad when I find some !! position move where I supposedly spent several weeks analyzing and reaching strong conclusions, but Stockfish 9 doesn't like the move. Then I match old and new and Stockfish completely obliterates all my work with a few moves that I never considered back then with all my arsenal, so it's like searching through a forest where every tree could be hiding some big monster ready to eat the whole analysis.

I wonder how long would it take for the current analysis that I'm making to become obsolete, but I wouldn't be surprised if by August 2018 it's already garbage...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5

rnbqkb1r/p4ppp/2p1pn2/1p4B1/2pPP3/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-12 22:12

> Well, I consider you my archnemesis


I wished you would, but you're play is more aiming for the Peace Nobel prize! :lol:

> After 5...h6 black has 0% chances of winning


Really, i wanted to give you a 13. Nxf7-knight4pawn-odd chance!

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 *

rnbqkb1r/p4ppp/2p1pn2/1p2P1B1/2pP4/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R b KQkq - 0 7
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-13 16:52

> Really, i wanted to give you a 13. Nxf7-knight4pawn-odd chance!


Duh, you know there's conditionals to lead to the positions you want? Huh? I don't think you really wanted, or I don't think you wanted much...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6

rnbqkb1r/p4pp1/2p1pn1p/1p2P1B1/2pP4/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-17 08:42

> I love the positions after g6! For the white side! Black doesn't have any fun there...


With the KID you can score nice wins against those who just put in a (barely-checked) engine-move; Gruenfeld, though drawish, has nice pawn-advances on the king-side, and against a lot others you get a very interesting game (as this early bishop-fianchetto is much better than engines evaluate).

> Duh, you know there's conditionals to lead to the positions you want?


Giving you a long conditional in 99,473126% of all-times leads to a "My turn again..."-orgy and a final chicken-out!

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6
8. Bh4 *

rnbqkb1r/p4pp1/2p1pn1p/1p2P3/2pP3B/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R b KQkq - 1 8
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-17 20:23

> With the KID you can score nice wins against those who just put in a (barely-checked) engine-move;


But I can score those nice wins anyway with what I already play. Actually, with those moves they play, it makes me feel like I could have played anything and still won. Which is very annoying, because it's as if all my strategies and choices didn't matter, I was going to eventually win anyway, no matter what...

So a reason to consider quitting this is because I don't enjoy such "nice wins" anymore. 2 such players challenged me to a game on FICGS, I just ignored their challenges...

>Gruenfeld, though drawish, has nice pawn-advances on the king-side, and against a lot others you get a very interesting game


Ugh, I've been playing lots of Gruenfelds recently and they were snorefests. I guess I don't know how to play it, and I even wonder how some of them could be so boring given the material that they have. It seems "low depth" is enough to equalize them, so I offer draws (because, I can't even build a plan that defeats Stockfish at depth 28, what chance do I have on 10 moves in 40 days?)

>Giving you a long conditional in 99,473126% of all-times leads to a "My turn again..."-orgy and a final chicken-out!


That only happens when you want to conditional me into a position I don't like!

Anyway, I don't consider the upcoming positions worthy of the Peace Nobel prize, but I guess you know better...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5

rnbqkb1r/p4p2/2p1pn1p/1p2P1p1/2pP3B/2N2N2/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-17 21:13

> But I can score those nice wins anyway with what I already play.


But you're somehow restrictive playing these moves against me?! :surprised:

> That only happens when you want to conditional me into a position I don't like!


Well, you don't like complex and [dylan-]sharp one's, so that's about every position that interests me... but Botvinnik is pretty ok for me.

> Anyway, I don't consider the upcoming positions worthy of the Peace Nobel prize [.]


Actually i never played Botvinnik... so at least some learn-effect. :smile:
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-18 00:20

> But you're somehow restrictive playing these moves against me?! :surprised:


You aren't one of those guys that play (barely-checked) engine-moves, the ones we're talking about, are you?

> Well, you don't like complex and [dylan-]sharp one's, so that's about every position that interests me... but Botvinnik is pretty ok for me.


You make no sense, either the Botvinnik is dull or simple, or me going for it means you had a wrong impression on me :razz:

> Actually i never played Botvinnik... so at least some learn-effect. :smile:


Haha! Really? Well, prepare for a mountain of analysis ahead...

Prediction: You'll go for Nxg5
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-18 01:09 Edited 2018-05-18 01:13

> guys that play (barely-checked) engine-moves


What, engines are allowed in this game? :mad:

> You make no sense, either the Botvinnik is dull or simple, or me going for it means you had a wrong impression on me :razz:


Well, what realistic choices did i give you with move 5:
- h6: The REAL corr-battlefield, for those who want a game: 5/5 stars
- Nbd7: 6. e3!!, my little Cambridge`Springs(sounds like paradise!)-dream: 6!/5
- Be7: Bg5's positional approach, but with the in 4.e3 bad bishop developed obviously an improvement for White: 3/5
- dxc4: Pawngrabba!!!, 'nough said: unrated* (*for your convenience)

> Haha! Really? Well, prepare for a mountain of analysis ahead...


I didn't play it, yet i already had a few lines/positions analyzed and its in my occiput as one with many Outof2moves-choices opening with a slavish potential for semi-interesting endgames... which is with a 89,21927% probability enough for you to get in serious danger!

> Prediction: You'll go for Nxg5


Let me guess, your book has: Nxg5?!, Bg3!?, Bxg5! and exf6!! - right?

Ok, have to go to bed now - really tired. :lol:
Parent - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-19 08:32

> - h6: The REAL corr-battlefield, for those who want a game: 5/5 stars


I stopped reading here. You can't give 5 stars to a position black can't win!

>which is with a 89,21927% probability enough for you to get in serious danger!


We can't ever agree on something, can we? I don't think you can ever reach 89,218% probability of getting me in serious danger! Unless our definitions of "serious" are different :razz:

>Let me guess, your book has: Nxg5?!, Bg3!?, Bxg5! and exf6!! - right?


Actually, book only contains Nxg5! and exf6?
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-19 13:11

> I stopped reading here.


Unbelieveable!, i share you some good chess-advice and you don't care, even ignore... :surprised::confused::sad:

> You can't give 5 stars to a position black can't win!


Actually i'm in deep believe that Black has there chances as well beginning with the later middle-game, which is -as you know- rare in corr-chess.

> We can't ever agree on something, can we?


That's because you ALWAYS samish out the truth! :grin:

> I don't think you can ever reach 89,218% probability of getting me in serious danger!


Ulysses, knowing you now a little, i know how this game will proceed:

a) In two or three moves the usual itsa0.00-draw trash-talk will start. Yes, i really envy Mark for just getting silent moves. :lol:
b) This will be further underlined with fancy analysis-screens, 3day-delay "ponder hits" or "didn't expect, i had XYZ much better!" and i will be tortured with that 20-30 moves minimum.
c) A 0.00-draw challenge will be offered, and refused to play on until i accept it. :yell:
d) Small winds of change blow trough the endgame-trees where sometimes your little monsters hide... now -0.0x-evals are granted and move-speed slows down considerably.
e) Trash-talk will be further intensified, seeking samish sidelines besides the actual game-position... even some little tricks may be tried.
f) Designation of disaster, then Resignation, yes even a slight Depression (which shouldn't be - its just a chess-game!) - the position is lost - again! This phase will be far the shortest of all, practically immediately succeeded by...
g) The fault question: Bad BAD engine-bugs, the calculation and/or persistant hash was crippeled by faulty memory or a trojan virus chessware, someone hacked your account here or some mod you may have had a little dispute someday&-where tweaked your moves, a mouse-slip made you analyzing a move meant for another game or even universe... unlike with chess-openings with White, here actually your fantasy is limitless!
h) Someday we will play again, because at least it was somehow fun - for me! :wink:

> Actually, book only contains Nxg5! and exf6?


How frivolous, as Bg5! and Bg3!? (insert them!!!) may be deepwatered winners!

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6
8. Bh4 g5 9. Nxg5 (9...Nd5 10. Nxf7) *

rnbqkb1r/p4N2/2p1p2p/1p1nP3/2pP3B/2N5/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R b KQkq - 0 10
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-20 10:07

> Unbelieveable!, i share you some good chess-advice and you don't care, even ignore... :surprised::confused::sad:


Your advice looks very OTB-centric and doesn't seem to match my corr-analysis.

>Actually i'm in deep believe that Black has there chances as well beginning with the later middle-game, which is -as you know- rare in corr-chess.


Happy to play the white side of that. If we ever play a game again...

>That's because you ALWAYS samisch out the truth! :grin:


Fix'd.

>Ulysses, knowing you now a little, i know how this game will proceed:


Again, you're confusing me with the old Uly...

You know I have access to all my analysis methods and engines of the past, right? That I can put my romantic ideas to the test before playing them out? No?

The truth of the matter is that if I was able to have all the resources that I have today, and was able to play my 2014-self, as he was, I'd destroy him, harder than you destroyed me, I even know my weaknesses and what was needed to defeat me. So playing like that Uly would only get me weaker, no way I'm going back to playing in a way I even know how to smash.

> Yes, i really envy Mark for just getting silent moves. :lol:


Eh, I'm concurrently playing 42 games, and this is the only one where I'm engaging with the opponent. I'm losing two other games as we speak, and winning some I don't care about... but I guess these kind of interactions are what make these games interesting. I wonder if there's a way to revive the lost art of chess commentary in these kind of games, the ICCF, FICGS and the LSS all are just silent...

> Someday we will play again, because at least it was somehow fun - for me! :wink:


We won't play again if I don't want. Remember it's you who is being tested and if your moves on this game don't live to your energetic chattering you won't have any luck playing me again on this format :evil:

>How frivolous, as Bg5! and Bg3!? (insert them!!!) may be deepwatered winners!


I haven't even looked into them, as I said. I'm trying to focus on the moves that matter!

> (9...Nd5 10. Nxf7)


I don't know what you're eating. Did you try tacos al pastor and they were bad or something?

I don't even have 9...Nd5 in my analysis, and honestly don't know where it came from...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Nxg5 hxg5 {Draw offer.}

Here's your way out if you want it. Doubtful if you're serious about trying to win!
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-20 12:43 Edited 2018-05-20 13:11

> Fix'd=fix'd up again.


:yell: please don't skip a)-d) so quickly!

Yet i agree, evolution of oneself plus commenting on the games here is a nice -niche- experience (isn't playing ICCF/FICGS/LSS just a form of chess-speaking with Eliza?!)! Actually i don't understand most people in computer-chess and here on forum, just letting engines play by theirself or whatever... to me they're tools to understand the game better and improve one's play, one's understanding, even one self - at least with making decisions, taking risks, making long-term strategies and executing tactics, and oh, also understanding endgames. :grin:

> I don't even have 9...Nd5 in my analysis, and honestly don't know where it came from...


Its the famous Alatortsev-system with what i just wanted to give you a helping conditional! Never ever i will do that... still i enjoyed not receiving a "my turn again..." again! Yeah!

> We won't play again if I don't want.


Believe me, i will often -like i already had- just lay back in my sun-chair and think about how i squeezed the juice out of your little Urusov, and now later even Ruy, just move by move... there is really not more needed to make me real happy. :razz:

I sadly can't process your draw-offer, as i already programmed in an automatic...

                    

                     :twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5
9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 *

rnbqkb1r/p4p2/2p1pn2/1p2P1B1/2pP4/2N5/PP3PPP/R2QKB1R b KQkq - 0 10
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-21 09:01

> to me they're tools to understand the game better and improve one's play, one's understanding, even one self - at least with making decisions, taking risks, making long-term strategies and executing tactics, and oh, also understanding endgames. :grin:


Maybe? One thing I have learned about games is that they tend to reflect how one is in life, like a fractal. If one loses one position because one was too passive, that's a reflection of being too passive in life.

However, this isn't exclusive to corr-chess, I have learned more about myself playing StarCraft :razz:

>Its the famous Alatortsev-system with what i just wanted to give you a helping conditional! Never ever i will do that... still i enjoyed not receiving a "my turn again..." again! Yeah!


Oh, I'm sure you'd have enjoyed if I accepted the conditional, considering if there's positions you could easily defeat me, they probably exist aplenty in the 9...Nd5?! variations.

>I sadly can't process your draw-offer, as i already programmed in an automatic...


It's unwise to let things on auto-pilot, you know?

...

Anyway, full disclosure: the reason I dragged you into this position is because it's one of the most, or the most, analyzed variation that I have. This is my territory, and I have one of the highest experiences defending these positions.

My analysis got so big over the years, that I had to split it in three:



Because Bookup fails to count the number of variations after the 50k point...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 Nbd7

Forget about being happy if we never play again! Prove me wrong! Give me your best shot!

Score: 0.00
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-21 09:09

> VERY FANCY Uly-screen


Ah, the good old days... but didn't/shouldn't you want to get rid of that thing, which -in your opinion- let you in so badly in '14?

Btw., i read that at move 44 that time you realized that your defense is on waggly legs, so you claim you can drawprove me with that move or even later?
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-21 11:06

> Ah, the good old days... but didn't/shouldn't you want to get rid of that thing, which -in your opinion- let you in so badly in '14?


Oh, the thing is fine, and it's still the most powerful thing out there. I even claimed it on Talkchess this year. But I was feeding it buggy garbage. If you find a mate position but think it's 0.00 and you feed it to the thing, and you can't find a refutation, it will tell you, correctly, that the opponent can't escape the 0.00. Except the opponent doesn't want to escape the 0.00, because it's a mate position, but you don't know. So that's what happened, the thing is fine. The bug was not.

It's as if I had a software that produced 7men tablebases with solved results. Then I have one of the positions of the table reported as draw. Then with the thing I solve the game, and am absolutely certain that I can force you into that position on the table. But once we arrive, it turns out there was a bug and the position is actually lost. See how the thing can't be the problem?

> Btw., i read that at move 44 that time you realized that your defense is on waggly legs


You might notice something peculyar about the pictures I was posting... see how they never go over depth 25?

>so you claim you can drawprove me with that move or even later?


No idea, the plan was:

1. Ask you if you were interested in replaying that game.
2. If you were interested, we'd discuss from what point we'd go forwards.
3. Analyze deeply that point and:
a) Conclude it's lost and propose an earlier point.
b) See it still looks drawn with my resources.
4. Eventually we agree on some optimal point, and start the game. Or it's so early we both agree game's drawn.

But 2. never happened as you rushed out to create two new games, then expected me to play subotimally to reach some position from that game, or something. So that's where we're now...
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-21 15:48

> peculyar


Indeed very matching.

> No idea, the plan was:


Ah, so basically we should saw together on my brilliant win, absolutely riskless and without any investment (for example a White game...) of yours, and if it against doesn't work out for you slow backtrace down to 2. Nf3, which you have already chosen in your alternative Try now... Uly, you're -at least in your, and most likely just in that, thinking- a genius!
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-21 22:56

> and if it against doesn't work out for you slow backtrace down to 2. Nf3


But at least we'd know you defeated me right and square, regardless of the bug. And I could stop mentioning the bug since you'd have defeated me with or without it, anyway.

But it happened, leading to uncertainty.

It's as if Scott Nichols challenged me again to beat him because he made a mouse slip when I defeated him, I'd surely accept. And I'd not be as arrogant to be saying that I'd surely beat him again, because we don't know what would have happened without the mouse slip.

Your victory over me is like my victory over him, until we investigate...
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-21 23:33 Edited 2018-05-21 23:38
You had all the time in the world and tools available to double/triple/centupel-check all your blunders/endgame-"skills", you just didn't it... so we should now even honor your lazyness analyzing down to 2. Nf3, to "have certainty"? HAHA!!! :lol: I have certainty, you were lazy!, and had no clue about that endgames. Yes, you were even reminded to that several times... :twisted:
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-22 00:05

> so we should now even honor your lazyness analyzing down to 2. Nf3


Or we find out that I could have drawn the game with some other move on the penultimate position that we had, if the bug didn't appear.

I never bothered to look at it, I haven't touched that game since 2014, and I won't if you're not interested in knowing the truth.

But when I asked you if you were interested, you rushed out to create two new games. Makes me wonder if you already took a look, found I could easily have drawn it, and chickened out. Because it makes no sense to start a new Urusov game that wouldn't answer any questions from the first.

So that's my story and I'll stick to it, I lost because of a bug in my software, that made me make a move not unlike a mouse slip, and you couldn't have defeated me without the bug on your side. You are welcome to prove me wrong, but you'd need to agree to play on from some position from that game (first you agree we will play, then we investigate what position). Otherwise, it seems you're just afraid that I'd draw that game, and that I'd have played those drawing moves that exist without the bug, and that there was nothing wrong with my play.

But you can't be certain that you'd have defeated me again from those positions if we tried, just like you're not even certain of the moves you'd play in this and the other game we're playing, since you'd already have made them, but I'm still waiting :razz:
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-22 13:34
You should really write a chess-book, working-title "pinulieda's fairy tales"...

Chapter 1: Found novelty in Urusov with 2. Nf3!!!
Chapter 2: How i declared Botvinnik 0.00-drawn at move 10!
Chapter 3: My master-piece in the Ruy 11. Nbd2
Chapter 4: ...
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-25 05:52
If I wrote a book, it'd probably be a women-book :grin:

Anyway, remember how on the other game I never went past depth 25? Well...



In 2018 I go up to depth 40! And that's my mainline, so it ends at 0.00 and if you don't deviate from it, that's a peek into your future for move 26.

I just hope you weren't expecting Rg8 or Bb7...

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 Nbd7 11. g3 Qb6

r1b1kb1r/p2n1p2/1qp1pn2/1p2P1B1/2pP4/2N3P1/PP3P1P/R2QKB1R w KQkq -
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-25 07:09

> If I wrote a book, it'd probably be a women-book :grin:


You should write a book about the love-life of the flag-stones...

And believe me, my expectations regarding your play are actually pretty -let's say:- adjusted to reality, still i thought someone claiming a 0.00draw-50kpositions-experience can both ponder out a next move to a main-line and besides that reply to my move-post instead somewhere middle in the thread; Yes, both were disappointed very badly - again!. :lol:

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5
9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 Nbd7 11. g3 Qb6 12. exf6 *

r1b1kb1r/p2n1p2/1qp1pP2/1p4B1/2pP4/2N3P1/PP3P1P/R2QKB1R b KQkq - 0 12
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2018-05-25 08:30

> ponder out a next move to a main-line


Not with another 40 concurrent games :razz:

> reply to my move-post instead somewhere middle in the thread


Last time I made 2 posts, one as a reply to what you said, the other to post my move. This time I realized a single post suffices, and it's the forum problem to insert replies in the middle of threads. Weirdly enough, after more than 10 years I still haven't found another forum that does it like this, and I don't like it.

...

You know what? I'm fed up with this nonsense! From now on I'll stop using the Reply thing at the bottom of posts, and stick to using the Post option at the bottom of the threads. If everyone did that the forum would behave normally, no "new posts in the middle of the thread" crap...
Parent - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-25 08:42

>it's the forum problem to insert replies in the middle of threads.


Actually i really like this tree-way, the trash-talk in the mid ("the leaves") and an actual move at the end of the thread ("a new trunk").
Parent - - By Antares (****) [de] Date 2018-05-21 15:48

> Score: 0.00


I challenge you that you can't even give out a 10-move conditional underlining that ridicilous claim! :grin:
Up Topic Correspondence Chess / Correspondence Chess / Antares vs. Uly: Into the unknown paradise...
1 2 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill