"Jason (the grim) Repa" wrote in message
news:2fz6g.126691$WI1.68938@pd7tw2no...

Hmmm....you start off butting into a heated thread that has nothing to do
with you......telling everyone that you have a gun

no no no - that's too exciting, used to have to one carry around, is what i
said - it has the opposite effect of glamorising guns

and making violent threats, etc, and now you're trying to be civil. Did
your generic-brand psychotropic medication just kick in?

sometimes people's motives are overdetermined, you know that term, not one
thing, but a complexity

more an endurance thing than explosive strength - although you need some
to wham an iceaxe three inches into a face

Cool! I lift weights and run on a treadmill. Do I get a red star or
something?

oddly enough mountain climbing has different requirements - upper body
strength is less important than legs, treadmill work is good but generally
the trouble with gym-training is that it doesn't snow in a gym, and its not
cold, and you can stop moving without freezing. but the main difference is
that you have less exertion rather than more - but it needs to be more
concentrated, since mistakes traversing a slope have severe consequencies
whereas in a gym nothing of consequence happens if you mess up

its a bit like chess, playing well for 20 moves - and then one goof from
lack of attention sinks all your prospects!

-------

You're talking out of your ass again Innes. Just when I thought there
might be some hope for you as your tone had suddenly become more civil.

But its just talk Jason! Which has a range of moods - and as you say, lots
of people BS about themselves. Its not talk about real stuff, is it? I can't
climb a wall like a fly, can't beat Kasparov and maybe can't beat Tapper!
Who knows?

If you want to know something about aggression abandon psychological talk
and read Lorenz. He, rightly, said shrinks had got it very wrong, and
actually said how necessary aggression was in society.

Professional fighters always talk about what they could (and would) do to
their prospective opponents well in advance of their encounter. Ever hear
a Mike Tyson interview? Ken Shamrock was recently interviewed as he is
getting ready to fight a rematch with Tito Ortiz....and he went into
detail about how he is going to pulverize his opposition. I'm no
professional fighter, but I know with every fibre of my being that I could
knock the living **** out of mouthpiece jackass usenet trolls like you,
Bauer, Nemmers, etc

But you don't know! You don't /really/ know that, or if you can beat anyone
at chess. What you DO know is that aggression pays off - and if you find a
'chess player' without aggression then maybe they are not real chess
players? The problem is how to use that aggression in a fight or a game.

Big-time chess players DEFINITELY have it. Some people give it off like an
aura - you can feel it. Taimanov said Fischer had it, Kasparov has it, but
most of all in his experience Tal had it more than anyone. He didn't just
want to win the game, he wanted to beat YOU, and he wanted YOU to know it.
It wasn't anything said - but maybe stronger than anything that can be said.

But for you and me as chess players, how to use that energy to play chess?
Its the same on the mountain, tough guys, even really tough guys, often get
hurt, or embarass themselves and have to be helped home, because CONTROL of
that energy is difficult.

(probably all at the same time) without even working up a sweat. I've been
waiting for someone to take me up on this offer but there have been no
takers as of yet. I don't want to wait until i'm your age when I may need
a rifle to defend myself.

This is sort of jokey guy-talk, but just the usual bull****ting, right?

The trouble with fighting old guys, actually fighting or playing chess, is
that they have less obvious aggression, but far more control - they have had
more opportunity to channel their energy and put it to use. Rule #2 of
fighting is to notice what or who you are fighting!

Look at all these young buck street blitz players - they are experts at
throwing you off your game, right? Its a critical position, and they razz
you by insulting your mother! Its a good tactic, interrupts your thought,
and your emotions make you numb to what's happening - your energy isn't
going into the game any more. They understand what fuels good chess play,
and how to screw you up.

now, here is the complication - quite often in conflicts people are most
afraid of themselves - so they say about others what they are themselves
most afraid of [think about this a moment, is it bull****, or is it true,
in your experience?]


The phrase that most aptly describes you is "a little bit of knowledge is
a dangerous thing". Being old doesn't make you wise Innes. There are
plenty of old-timer, know-nothing jackasses like you around. People
tolerate you because you connect them to a different time period and are
amusing to laugh at. While you were spending your days doing clerical work
and performing your usual daily mediocrity, I was studying the likes of
Carl G. Jung and Nietzsche,

Nietzsche is a depresing old bloke with a beard, went nuts!

so if you think you're impressing me with your pop psychology 101
reference to a concept known as PROJECTION you are sadly mistaken.

You are mistaken, it doesn't LIMIT you to 101. But what is in 101 isn't
become irrelevant because you can also do 201. That's an error in your
logic.

What am I going to read in your next post.....how you can impress your
friends at parties by administering the Myers-Briggs typology test?

BLINK. If you are bored with the standard crap - or rather how people talk
about it - you are likely to understand Adaptive Unconscious.

Amateur hour is over Innes. You need to work harder than that to impress
me.

O! Be careful of that! Let's say I write to express myself rather than to
impress you. Now I have an advantage, right?

And let's also say that I am interested in people who can express themselves
about what they OBSERVE about their own experience - not what they SPECULATE
upon, about what they have not observed. Those people become boring to write
with, and same as on a mountain, because they are in their heads, they don't
observe much, and you are going to have to carry them home or leave them
where they fell.

That's simpler, isn't it?

The alternative is to continue to speculate with other people who also know
**** about anything - and ALL you know is that everyone is lying - or just
guessing. Its a choice. This isn't easy, its tough. Mouthing off about it is
easy, so is pointing out that mouthing off is a kind of lying.



Repa,Jason (1960) - Aldrich,Don (2080) [A02]
Canadian Open 1997 Winnipeg (5), 15.07.1997
[Repa,Jason]

1.f4

Really!

e5

Another really!


You never heard of the Bird's Opening or the From Gambit before? NIC did
an exhaustive article on it.

That ain't exactly what I asked. I wondered if you thought he lost it, or if
you won it, and if you saw your own weak move. But I don't care if you
don't.

Cordially, Phil

Jason Repa