On Feb 17, 2:03 pm, "Jason_911" wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message

ps.com...



On Feb 17, 12:13 pm, "Jason_911" wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message

groups.com...

On Feb 16, 11:23 am, "SBD" wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:38 am, "Jason_911" wrote:

SBD is another pathetic crybaby who hides behind an alias that can't
play
chess, or do anything else with any degree of competance for that
matter.
Not only did this whining ninny back down from an OTB match, he
wouldn't
even play me online. I suppose that's because both of us know what
the
result would be. You are a loser buddy, and you'll always be a
loser.
You
have less significance in this world than a cockroach.

I have no alias, Jason, my name is well-known and out there, and part
of my email address! You know it as well as anyone here.

I backed down from no OTB match, I simply wasn't going to travel to
Canada based on your challenge - again, it seemed to me you were the
one with the point to prove especially since I outrate you by aprox
200 points, and you didn't make an offer to play on-line. That I would
have had to decline as my rheumatoid arthritis makes it impossible to
play chess well with quick time controls. I can only hold a rating of
2100-2200 (where I currently play - playchess.com) in quick time
controls as I simply can't move as fast as I used to.

But sure, travel here with the money you offered to play for (but not
those worthless Canadian $$), and I'll be happy to play a match with
you. Anytime, you just travel down here to play and its on. Now that
I am retired, I have a lot of time to play chess.

Steven B. "Less than a cockroach" Dowd

Now, let's wait for the angry, yet empty reply of the little boy
Jason.

I would be happy to coordinate the match on chessworld.net. We could
even have the game annotated. All Jason has to do is sign up and agree
to play.
Rob

Internet corr. games is not "playing chess". It's computer & database vs
computer & database. Don't pretend like you don't already know that Rob.

There are two sites where cheating (in fast games) is not possible. ICC
and
PlayChess. I would have played this coward SBD at EITHER of those sites,
but
alas, he knows he's a weakling compared to me and would lose badly so he
backed right down as predicted.

Jason,
People who want to cheat are going to cheat. I never assume anyone I
am playing chess against is a cheater. If they beat me by themselves
then they are better than me. If they use a computer they have not
proven anything except they are cheaters. There is no dishonor in
losing to a better nor is there in losing to a cheater.The only
dishonor is in not competing.
Rob

Whether you want to call it "being resourceful" or "cheating" is a matter of
semantics. The simple fact is that EVERYONE who gets a decent rating in
corr. chess uses both chess engine analysis and databases. If you refuse to
believe this, it's your problem. The fact still remains. Modern corr. chess
is a form of chess studying, not playing. You can learn alot from this form
of the game assuming you don't just mindlessly run the engine and database
reference but also are a knowledgeable player who thinks about the position
before using the computer assistance.

If you want to actually compete against another human who has to think for
himself you have to either play him (her) OTB, or fast games on a secure
online server such as Playchess or ICC. BTW, what's your OTB tournament
rating Rob?

JMR

My OTB rating is non-existant because I don't play OTB. My rating at
chessworld.net is currently 1425. Everyone doesn't cheat. For me it
doesn't matter either way. If I lose, then it was because the other
person was better. They played a better game. Does it make me less a
person? No. My ego simply isnt that fragile. I will play
anyone,anytime. I prefer email chess because I rarely have
uninterrupted time to sit down and do nothing but play chess.