listen I have a block schedual, and I swear my teachers are evil, I had one who decided for the first test this year to give us 250 question test on the summer reading (sad part is it wasn't even English) that had to be done in 90 minutes, I was done in 45 and I hadn't even read the book or spark noted it, and I made like a 90 or some crap like that, then my Chem teacher tried to blow my hand off (Ca + H20 = Ca02 +H2, H2 + fire = Boom) however I left the boom out of my mind and well that didn't work out to well.

It sucks to a degree, like instead of 30 or fourty math thingamajigs to do a night we have 90 or so and instead of just barely finishing a book a quarter, try 5 or 6, the only good thing is history we actually got somewhere, like try Teddy Roosavelt somewhere

So... you're saying you had a 250 question test written in a language that's, I'm assuming, other than your native tongue, and over material that you hadn't read or studied.  You say you finished this test in half the allotted time and made an A.

You use this experience to support the idea that your teacher is evil / your classes are hard?  Because it seems to illustrate the exact opposite.

well considering my teacher gave most of the class an extra 90 minute session because I was the only won finished after the first day and I was the only one who made an A I was quite happy. any way I meant the class, it was in English thankfully. but the class was some crap like Pshyc or something

Well, it should be obvious that the number of classes doesn't matter much, it's how hard they are.  1 class can be harder than 5 combined classes.

Besides, it shouldn't be about what material you have to know for a test and what letter grade you get.  It's about how much you can learn.  Not cram and forget a month later, but actually learn.  If the class is easy, you can do extra on the side.  That's what makes you a successful student.

Well, again, if the only one who made an A didn't read the material the test was over, that says more about the other students than the difficulty of the class.

I agree, but did you see what my chem teacher did

actually if you do anything other than work fast food joints/ cashcier you will need at least Algebra, To you know, do your TAXES. but US history is fun, world history prevents us from going Nuclear, literally, and a few others which I won't go into yet

I wish the HS culture wasn't "brag about how little I can get away with / complain about having to work in my classes"  I know this isn't everywhere, but just from general cultureal knoweldge I'm assuming it's the majority of high schools (united states).

Although I understand that school is forced on kids, they don't necessarily want to be there in the first place.

Heard somewhere that some asian-american culture is just as the parent goes to work and works hard to support the family, the child goes to school and works hard to benefit the family too... it's like their job and they take it seriously.  This is much more admirable.

ouch in the US they practicaly Haze interns in the med field. I am looking to do chem engineering

nah lets keep this friendly and let the arguments die. music anyone, or their favorite famous game

mine is the Byrne Fischer 1963 US. Champion ship 0-1 23 moves or something like that.

my second favorite game from that one is Fischer Evans 1963 US championship 1-0

IM pfren  

Ok so lets get some facts out there

Banard Parham is currently rated 2000 and hasnt been rated 2200+ since 1994, he had a 2 year stint as a 2200 player from 92-94 . He was clearly a very talented tactician back in the day but the only reason he is maintaining a rating now is due to  a fixed  rating floor of 2000. For the last 10+ years his tournament history shows him frequently dropping games to Class C players and struggling against equal or stronger opposition. Clearly his name attached to this idea is just maintaining his fame. His  approach just makes him marketable to those players looking for a secret way to win and not the validity of it. 

there is such thing as a rating floor, he would have dropped below it, had it not been for it

errr sure but the question is did he play it while  he was a master? and did it actually limit him? clearly he hasnt maintained that level for almost 20 years. He has flat lined his rap;id and otb ratings and cannt drop below which I am sure he would. If you look at his recent stats he is probably closer to 1800-1900 at best. This is probably the result of his insistance to the matrix system. It would be interesting to know what local  masters think of him, honestly.,..

This is not the kind of issue that can be settled by argument; the only thing that counts is OTB success. If you believe in it, play it. If you don't believe in it, don't play it.  What could be simpler? 

From every thing I've learned about chess in my life, it looks like a dreadful opening, and grandmaster practice seems to support that view, since it appears in less than .001% of all grandmaster games. But so what? It's just a bunch of moves. If playing them makes you happy, play them and good luck!

no the United States has some quirks

nope just proved it was a razor of an opening.

i know parham is a chessmaster, im one of his students who uses matrix to win

how does it work exactly