On Feb 18, 9:19 pm, "Jason_911" wrote:

I'll take your avoidance of answering me as a "yes".

Apparently, there is some gross logic flaw in the programming
of this insult-bot; I suspect it may still be in the early
experimental stages of development.


What is your OTB rating my low IQ

OTOH, it apparently is very astute in analyzing its own
weaknesses, at least in the area of IQ. It remains to be
seen whether this carries over to its, I assume, chess
playing abilities.


ape friend? 1100? 1200?

Hey -- not bad guesses. I wonder if its programmer was
already familiar with RM's results at GetClub.com? In fact,
I am beginning to wonder if it may be the case that the
same programmers are responsible for both.



Do you need help in setting up the pieces?

Simulation of a young child, seeking "common ground"?

Were you born this dumb Rob or did you get dropped on your head alot?

Again, apparently the insult-bot has been programmed
to seek common ground; however, note that a human,
dropped on its head, will nevertheless self-repair to some
extent, while an insult-bot will suffer irreparable damage
due to its rigid -- and fragile -- hardware.



[Event "www.ChessWorld.netTournamentnumber #70461"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net"]
[Date "2007.2.15"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "robmtchl"]
[Black "Chess One"]
[Result "*"]
[Board "3391183"]
[Termination "in progress"]

1. e2e4 c7c5 2. Ng1f3 Nb8c6 3. c2c3 d7d5 4. e4e5 Bc8g4 5. d2d4 e7e6 6.
Bf1b5 Qd8b6 7. a2a4 Ng8e7 8. O-O Ne7f5 9. Bc1g5 h7h6 10. Bg5f4 Bf8e7
11. Bb5d3 O-O 12. h2h3 Bg4xf3 13. Qd1xf3 g7g5 14. Bf4h2 Nf5g7 15.
Nb1d2 cxd4 16. c3c4 Nc6b4 17. a4a5 *

Uh... this is not the right way to play the French Sicilian,
Mr. Mitchell. Are you *trying* to make your friend look
like a real nearly-an-IM? The establishment of the e5
spearhead is of little value where Black is able to slip in
....B-g4 before playing ...e6, as there is no significant
cramp. In addition, the move B-b5 exerts zero pressure,
and in fact exposes this piece to attack, as you saw.

Your best plan at this point would be to try a swindle, as
by stating that your account had been hijacked by some
idiot hacker (perhaps this Jason creature?), and that he
had been playing to throw the game in order to make you
look bad. Believe me, this IM Innes fella is not all that
smart -- he might just believe such a story. Start over
and play moves like 1.d3, 2.e3, 3.Be2, 4.Bd2 -- you'll do
much better. Good luck now.

-- help bot

On Feb 19, 2:18 pm, "help bot" wrote:
On Feb 18, 9:19 pm, "Jason_911" wrote:

I'll take your avoidance of answering me as a "yes".

Apparently, there is some gross logic flaw in the programming
of this insult-bot; I suspect it may still be in the early
experimental stages of development.

What is your OTB rating my low IQ

OTOH, it apparently is very astute in analyzing its own
weaknesses, at least in the area of IQ. It remains to be
seen whether this carries over to its, I assume, chess
playing abilities.

ape friend? 1100? 1200?

Hey -- not bad guesses. I wonder if its programmer was
already familiar with RM's results at GetClub.com? In fact,
I am beginning to wonder if it may be the case that the
same programmers are responsible for both.

Do you need help in setting up the pieces?

Simulation of a young child, seeking "common ground"?

Were you born this dumb Rob or did you get dropped on your head alot?

Again, apparently the insult-bot has been programmed
to seek common ground; however, note that a human,
dropped on its head, will nevertheless self-repair to some
extent, while an insult-bot will suffer irreparable damage
due to its rigid -- and fragile -- hardware.

[Event "www.ChessWorld.netTournamentnumber#70461"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net"]
[Date "2007.2.15"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "robmtchl"]
[Black "Chess One"]
[Result "*"]
[Board "3391183"]
[Termination "in progress"]

1. e2e4 c7c5 2. Ng1f3 Nb8c6 3. c2c3 d7d5 4. e4e5 Bc8g4 5. d2d4 e7e6 6.
Bf1b5 Qd8b6 7. a2a4 Ng8e7 8. O-O Ne7f5 9. Bc1g5 h7h6 10. Bg5f4 Bf8e7
11. Bb5d3 O-O 12. h2h3 Bg4xf3 13. Qd1xf3 g7g5 14. Bf4h2 Nf5g7 15.
Nb1d2 cxd4 16. c3c4 Nc6b4 17. a4a5 *

Uh... this is not the right way to play the French Sicilian,
Mr. Mitchell. Are you *trying* to make your friend look
like a real nearly-an-IM? The establishment of the e5
spearhead is of little value where Black is able to slip in
...B-g4 before playing ...e6, as there is no significant
cramp. In addition, the move B-b5 exerts zero pressure,
and in fact exposes this piece to attack, as you saw.

Your best plan at this point would be to try a swindle, as
by stating that your account had been hijacked by some
idiot hacker (perhaps this Jason creature?), and that he
had been playing to throw the game in order to make you
look bad. Believe me, this IM Innes fella is not all that
smart -- he might just believe such a story. Start over
and play moves like 1.d3, 2.e3, 3.Be2, 4.Bd2 -- you'll do
much better. Good luck now.

-- help bot

I learn by example. Thanks for the help.
Rob

"Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...

Your best plan at this point would be to try a swindle, as
by stating that your account had been hijacked by some
idiot hacker (perhaps this Jason creature?), and that he
had been playing to throw the game in order to make you
look bad. Believe me, this IM Innes fella is not all that
smart -- he might just believe such a story. Start over
and play moves like 1.d3, 2.e3, 3.Be2, 4.Bd2 -- you'll do
much better. Good luck now.

Trash advice.

-- help bot

I learn by example. Thanks for the help.

I was encouraged by beating a 2100 player in 14 moves when I had the black
pieces, and with the white pieces he resigned at move 18. You don't need to
have rating envy to deny this, you just have to be a sad case full of
perhaps this and perhaps that, as if no real experiences were available to
you.

Such is your correspondent who spends hundreds of hours playing a
dork-computer program, daftest lying thing ever seen on this planet, to
warrant issuing you advice.

Such is usenet. Real players just play, win or lose, and don't get messed up
about relative hierarchial positions. Only 'perhaps-people' get nuts about
the fact "they coudda been a contenda!"

ROFL!

Phil Innes

Rob

Such is usenet. Real players just play, win or lose, and don't get messed
up about relative hierarchial positions. Only 'perhaps-people' get nuts
about the fact "they coudda been a contenda!"

Do "real" players cowardly avoid playing rated chess for over ten years in
order to convice people they're still worth 2042 uscf as you have done
innes? Why don't you put your money where your mouth is you
psuedo-intellectual, bull****ting old geriatric has never been?

JMR

On Feb 21, 5:21 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

I was encouraged by beating a 2100 player in 14 moves when I had the black
pieces, and with the white pieces he resigned at move 18.

Huh? Is the "nearly-an-IM" titled player describing two
different games here, or does he have serious math issues,
I wonder?


You don't need to have rating envy to deny this,

One fellow o'er in Shakespeare land went so far as to
proclaim himself a 2450, no less! But why he stopped
there no one knows, for even higher numbers were well
within his envious grasp, had he simply reached for
them with all his might!

you just have to be a sad case full of perhaps this and perhaps
that, as if no real experiences were available to you.

Nonsense; anyone can play at GetClub and get real
experience of the game -- even patzers like Rob Mitchell.

Okay, maybe my advice wasn't so well thought out; but
the point was he played the opening cluelessly, moving
pieces about willy-nilly. In chess, it is best to have a
plan -- even a bad plan may suffice, provided the opponent
is a bit cooperative!


Such is your correspondent who spends hundreds of hours playing a
dork-computer program,

Rybka is no dork, fella! I'll wager it kicks your behind
with Knight odds. Of course, Rob Mitchell is a Rook
odds player; make that two Knights and a quarter-pawn.
Heck, with Rybka's genuine 3000 rating, make it Queen
odds -- what the heck.


Such is usenet. Real players just play, win or lose, and don't get messed up
about relative hierarchial positions.

That's just what I tried to explain to Hamlet, er, or was his
name Othello? Whatever. His attempts to pull the wool
over readers' eyes by making up stories about himself was
very funny, especially in view of the way he was caught and
exposed.

-----

On this matter of actually playing chess, I am now running
into somewhat tougher opposition at RedHotPawn. Yes, every
now and then an opponent will last well into the 30's or even
as long as 40 moves, which is a tremendous improvement!

Even so, my brilliant mind wins out in the end, almost
invariably with a sparkling "petite combination", worthy of
any great master of the royal game. Purists may bemoan
the fact that neither of us has followed along well-established
theory through the opening, yet I seriously doubt this takes
away from the artistic effect, the beauty of the finale and the
superlative technique demonstrated by the ingenious winner.
But I should pipe down, lest some may think me immodest.
Better to let others sing my praises, as Sanny has done, for
instance. But keep quiet about that; I don't want the creature
getting any more envious than it already is -- the pitiful thing!

-- help bot

"help bot" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Feb 21, 5:21 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

I was encouraged by beating a 2100 player in 14 moves when I had the
black
pieces, and with the white pieces he resigned at move 18.

Huh? Is the "nearly-an-IM" titled player describing two
different games here, or does he have serious math issues,
I wonder?

The 1300-computer-beater wants to know if a game with white and with black
against the same 2100 opponent is one or two games?

You don't need to have rating envy to deny this,

One fellow o'er in Shakespeare land went so far as to
proclaim himself a 2450, no less! But why he stopped
there no one knows, for even higher numbers were well
within his envious grasp, had he simply reached for
them with all his might!

Only our friend the secret Sloan would proclaim that - and of course he is
contextually, er, damaged. But our 1300-beater corn-fed obsessive isn't -
no, he now takes what the biggest liar since Nixon said as gospel, and even
utilises 'self-proclaimned'. What a ****wit you are Kennedy! What a pale
excuse for a man.

You could get a life or your own but you too are damaged, no? Cry more. Lie
less. Try it as an experiment?

Otherwise continue your vampiric obsessions with real people, and see if
this is widely popular? I don't think so. But then again you are mostly too
boring to take seriously except as gad-fly with an occassional joke, and I
am sure you can entertain Jason and St Louis, and 'our' Kingston... zzzzz
None of whom are playing the rgcp tournament since they are too, too

PI


you just have to be a sad case full of perhaps this and perhaps
that, as if no real experiences were available to you.

Nonsense; anyone can play at GetClub and get real
experience of the game -- even patzers like Rob Mitchell.

Okay, maybe my advice wasn't so well thought out; but
the point was he played the opening cluelessly, moving
pieces about willy-nilly. In chess, it is best to have a
plan -- even a bad plan may suffice, provided the opponent
is a bit cooperative!


Such is your correspondent who spends hundreds of hours playing a
dork-computer program,

Rybka is no dork, fella! I'll wager it kicks your behind
with Knight odds. Of course, Rob Mitchell is a Rook
odds player; make that two Knights and a quarter-pawn.
Heck, with Rybka's genuine 3000 rating, make it Queen
odds -- what the heck.


Such is usenet. Real players just play, win or lose, and don't get messed
up
about relative hierarchial positions.

That's just what I tried to explain to Hamlet, er, or was his
name Othello? Whatever. His attempts to pull the wool
over readers' eyes by making up stories about himself was
very funny, especially in view of the way he was caught and
exposed.

-----

On this matter of actually playing chess, I am now running
into somewhat tougher opposition at RedHotPawn. Yes, every
now and then an opponent will last well into the 30's or even
as long as 40 moves, which is a tremendous improvement!

Even so, my brilliant mind wins out in the end, almost
invariably with a sparkling "petite combination", worthy of
any great master of the royal game. Purists may bemoan
the fact that neither of us has followed along well-established
theory through the opening, yet I seriously doubt this takes
away from the artistic effect, the beauty of the finale and the
superlative technique demonstrated by the ingenious winner.
But I should pipe down, lest some may think me immodest.
Better to let others sing my praises, as Sanny has done, for
instance. But keep quiet about that; I don't want the creature
getting any more envious than it already is -- the pitiful thing!

-- help bot

On Feb 22, 5:44 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

I wonder why this here nearly-an-IM, now demoted to "master",
whines so much about folks not playing? A while back, he was
explainin' how he wasn't gonna play in the rgc tourney, but jist
as soon as it was clear he jumps in and beats up on Rob
Mitchell agin! Now if that don't beat all; a man who'll moan and
groan about others whuppin the tar outta patzers, while a-doing
jist that his self! What a hoot. This fella's jist as funny as he
can be, poppin' jokes what make fun o' his self, over an' over,
and all the while makin' as if they was directed at some other
feller. When the show is over I'm a gonna go an' watch some
more comedies, like maybe The Three Stooges, er maybe
Laurel and Hardy. What a hoot!

-- laugh bot

On Feb 22, 6:55 pm, "help bot" wrote:
On Feb 22, 5:44 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

I wonder why this here nearly-an-IM, now demoted to "master",
whines so much about folks not playing? A while back, he was
explainin' how he wasn't gonna play in the rgc tourney, but jist
as soon as it was clear he jumps in and beats up on Rob
Mitchell agin! Now if that don't beat all; a man who'll moan and
groan about others whuppin the tar outta patzers, while a-doing
jist that his self! What a hoot. This fella's jist as funny as he
can be, poppin' jokes what make fun o' his self, over an' over,
and all the while makin' as if they was directed at some other
feller. When the show is over I'm a gonna go an' watch some
more comedies, like maybe The Three Stooges, er maybe
Laurel and Hardy. What a hoot!

-- laugh bot

A word of caution about ratings on Chessworld.net:

2100 on that server is *maybe* 1500-1600 USCF OTB. *MAYBE*.
2500's there are probably Cat A/Expert/Candidate Masters USCF OTB.

Inflation is rampant there.

On Feb 22, 5:55 pm, "help bot" wrote:
On Feb 22, 5:44 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

I wonder why this here nearly-an-IM, now demoted to "master",
whines so much about folks not playing? A while back, he was
explainin' how he wasn't gonna play in the rgc tourney, but jist
as soon as it was clear he jumps in and beats up on Rob
Mitchell agin! Now if that don't beat all; a man who'll moan and
groan about others whuppin the tar outta patzers, while a-doing
jist that his self! What a hoot. This fella's jist as funny as he
can be, poppin' jokes what make fun o' his self, over an' over,
and all the while makin' as if they was directed at some other
feller. When the show is over I'm a gonna go an' watch some
more comedies, like maybe The Three Stooges, er maybe
Laurel and Hardy. What a hoot!

-- laugh bot

I beg for the whooping so I can learn from my mistakes. There are lots
of better players than me who have suffered the same fate to Phil. If
anything, he is modest when describing his abilities because his ego
and self worth are not measured by rating points.
Rob

-- laugh bot

I beg for the whooping so I can learn from my mistakes. There are lots
of better players than me who have suffered the same fate to Phil. If
anything, he is modest when describing his abilities because his ego
and self worth are not measured by rating points.
Rob


I find it amusing that the loudest people here are also the
ones that aren't playing. Phil has been very good in these tournys.
I personally prefer playing people with higher ratings than myself.
(which is almost everyone) theres no better way to improve