wrote in message
oups.com...

Chess One wrote:
What is this about?


A chess discussion. You are unqualified to be a part of it.

You snipped my challenge pipsqueak - go brag with someone else - since
its
you who know nOOOOOOOthing and gotta write so that others are reduced to
even less than your own level - its a well known psychological mechanism
of
ego survival.

What challenge? Do you want to play me a match now? Or did we agree to
enter the ChessCafe Christmas contest finally?

I suggest you tuck your tail between your legs and come back when you
are ready to discuss chess at an adult level. When you can follow basic
facts about chess, probably after reading a few books, come back and
try to operate at a level above that of a 1200 rated glue-sniffer.

By the way Philsy, telling you that you are unqualified is not
bragging; it is stating facts about your own deficits.

Poor Dr Dowd reverts to denigrating other people full time and making
suggestion about how they should behave, proving my thesis above that he
utilises this survival method to compensate for chronically low self-esteem.
What he can't do is write about chess here and instead suggests that others
can't do so either, since they are mocked as unqualified low-rated
glue-sniffers.

It is really Dr Dowd who avoids the challenge referenced above, which he
again has made no response to. Ironically, Dr Dowd who can't write his own
name, avoids the subject of a critical approach to chess by those who can,
and actually suggestions his evasive cupidity allows him a warrants to
denigrate them.

Please return on chess subjects - then it will not be necessary to suggest
anything at all about self or others' capability, but to demonstrate it.

Phil Innes

"Tom Martinak" wrote in message
ups.com...
A. An incredible ruling. Chess sets have one queen and it's universally
accepted, especially in speed games, that a pawn can be queened by
turning a rook upside down.

"Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative." Personally
though, I prefer consistency in application of rules to imagination.
Isn't this answer somewhat inconsistent with the view given in "since
he touched the queen first, even if it was off the board"? After all he
did touch a rook.

Maybe this use of the upside-down rook explains why the USCF rules wait
until the piece is released. Only upon the release of the rook, will
you be entirely sure whether it was a just a rook or was meant to
represent a queen.

The Gijssen ruling on not writing down the move beforehand is quite recent -
and this rule preceded that. If you write your move before, then there is no
doubt whatever to intent, and no rules conflict with any others. Period.

And maybe the fact that FIDE only requires the piece to touch the
square (maybe that's why Kenneth Sloan originally thought that?) is
because they don't normally use the rook in that way?

Laugh! jr is absolutely right about inverting the rook to indicate a spare
queen - which appears less known here in the USA but is played everywhere
in Europe that I've visited, where they typically don't supply a spare Queen
with chess sets either.

Every complication of this issue can be traced back to someone dickering
around with the rules to achieve some small point, while creating a right
mess of conflicts in the wake of the new rules.

Ridiculously, you can write the rules of chess in about 20 pages, but the
last time I looked at rules+interpretations it was about 350 pages - very
much of it the esoterica of interactions among rules which I think do not
benefit chess players at all, and were not introduced by players as much as
officials.

Phil Innes

- Tom Martinak

Thanks Neil. Phil

wrote in message
ups.com...

Chess One wrote:

Next there will be a
stunning revelation that Pope John Paul was a chess problemist, another
Evans boner that the chess world knew to be false for several years

What is this about?

http://www.astercity.net/~vistula/vatican.htm

"My interest in the subject was caused by the GM Larry Evans' column
from The Washington Post (3rd December 1994)."

From Chess Notes, by Edward Winter:

C.N. 3118 referred to the old claims regarding Pope John Paul II and
chess, pointing out that they had frequently been exposed as a hoax. An
early case of exposure was on pages 192-193 of the May 1984 BCM, and
two decades later even Larry Evans caught on. From page 6 of the Winter
2004 Chess Life:

'Although widely quoted in many other sources, apparently the
problem and game attributed to Pope John Paul II in my column last
January is [sic] a hoax.'

WE CAN'T WAIT

"The new editor, interviewed in THE CHESS JOURNALIST, said that cutting
several regular monthly columnists will free up space for more
features. Like what? He cited an article on "women in correspondence
chess" as his vision of what might interest readers." -- GM Larry Evans


http://wcn.tentonhammer.com/modules....icle&sid= 777

We can't wait to read about such burning issues as women in
correspondence chess in July instead of Evans On Chess!


Chess One wrote:

Laugh! jr is absolutely right about inverting the rook to indicate a spare
queen - which appears less known here in the USA but is played everywhere
in Europe that I've visited, where they typically don't supply a spare Queen
with chess sets either.

PAWN POWER

http://wcn.tentonhammer.com/modules....rder=0&thold=0

"Underpromotion can play a key role in certain settings. Upon reaching
the 8th rank a pawn can't remain a pawn or become a new king. If the
original queen is still on the board, you can make a second one by
replacing the pawn with an upside-down rook. In theory each side can
have 9 queens, but nothing even close to this has ever happened in a
real game." -- GM Larry Evans

Tom Martinak wrote:

Maybe this use of the upside-down rook explains why the USCF rules wait
until the piece is released. Only upon the release of the rook, will
you be entirely sure whether it was a just a rook or was meant to
represent a queen.

And maybe the fact that FIDE only requires the piece to touch the
square (maybe that's why Kenneth Sloan originally thought that?) is
because they don't normally use the rook in that way?

wrote in message
oups.com...
WE CAN'T WAIT

"The new editor, interviewed in THE CHESS JOURNALIST, said that cutting
several regular monthly columnists will free up space for more
features. Like what? He cited an article on "women in correspondence
chess" as his vision of what might interest readers." -- GM Larry Evans


http://wcn.tentonhammer.com/modules....icle&sid= 777

We can't wait to read about such burning issues as women in
correspondence chess in July instead of Evans On Chess!

Is this a joke? Come-on! He's pulling your leg. I thought of doing a parody
of CL once, but Women in Correspondance Chess!

R

O


F


L

!

!


Phil Innes


Chess One wrote:

Laugh! jr is absolutely right about inverting the rook to indicate a
spare
queen - which appears less known here in the USA but is played everywhere
in Europe that I've visited, where they typically don't supply a spare
Queen
with chess sets either.

ANOTHER UNHAPPY MEMBER

This note was forwarded to us by George Butler of Redwood City, Ca.

Letter to the editor:

I will miss the Evans column greately. To me he is the de facto dean
of American chess and perhaps its conscience as well.

************************************************** ******************************

I got a form reply to this email to Lucas. Sucks.

-- George Butler

Larry Parr wrote (29 Jun 2006 13:23:33 -0700):

ANOTHER UNHAPPY MEMBER ...

_
Does Larry Parr have a prediction about the result of the
USCF board election?

Chess One wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
WE CAN'T WAIT

"The new editor, interviewed in THE CHESS JOURNALIST, said that cutting
several regular monthly columnists will free up space for more
features. Like what? He cited an article on "women in correspondence
chess" as his vision of what might interest readers." -- GM Larry Evans


http://wcn.tentonhammer.com/modules....icle&sid= 777

We can't wait to read about such burning issues as women in
correspondence chess in July instead of Evans On Chess!

Is this a joke? Come-on! He's pulling your leg. I thought of doing a parody
of CL once, but Women in Correspondance Chess!

If you knew Jennifer Shahade was the author of the article, would you
feel differently about it?

wrote:

Letter to the editor:

I will miss the Evans column greately. To me he is the de facto dean
of American chess and perhaps its conscience as well.


Back when I was still reading Chess Life, the title
"Dean of American chess" was assigned to George
Koltanowski and/or Arnold Denker, as I recall.

--

For what its wurth, I two will miss the Even's collum grately.
His obsesssion with Fisher was the closest thing too haveing
Bobby back four real. And the looney attacks on Carpov
gave us a brake from are disapointment over Fissures weigh
two urley retirment. But don't fourget you can still reed
Evens at TenTonHammar.com! "It aint over, till its over".

(Im not sending this two Chess Life cause I dont reed
them no more)

-- helpful bot