Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

How do you move to strategy from tactics?

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #221


    good to have balance in life.


    Once tabled, all stresses leave.

    Ruletrs have good balance or they die

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #222


    To control oneself is to have balance.  Too hard to win in the battlefield of your mind.  Your spirit tells you to do this and your flesh want this.  Takes a lot of discipline to achieve such dimension. Better enjoy your lot for this is God's gift to man.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #223


    I see there are 2,500 gods. I beleive in resurrection thru science and technology...by Man. But christian ethics are valuable and built western civilsation. It is from Judiasm from Akenaten...whom Moses followed,. He ruled for 20 uyears and predeeded Tutankhmun.


    When he died, monotheism was overthrown. Moses came out of Egypt because he had sworn belief in Aten.

    Akhenaten - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Afraid if you follow Jesus the real world will cruxify you.

    That may make chess difficult.


    However christian ethics are something to aim at.


    Reality is a big help and all people beleiving a delusion are insane & dysfunctional. I am always picking christians up

    Psychiatry is still young.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #224


    To follow Christ is really hard.  You have to surrender your will and follow His words. His words when applied becomes a spirit.  A spirit of truth.  whether one believe it or not, it does not matter cause it will stand to be truth by itself. Reality can easily be explained.  One exists and later its disappears like a puff of smoke. This is reality in the way our limited senses can  comprehend. But life existence makes me believe that there is a God and there must be life after death. Life itself cannot be explained by science, only in Judaism can one be aware of how it appeared. Others may call it a delusion but are there any better answers to such questions.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #225


    I dont want to follow anyone NOR surender, but die fighting like the nutter I am, SURE of the resurrection through science.

    Truth is. And I share your moral code.


    I prefer facts. Yes life after death...by resurrection through medical sceince and computing, not by faith which is reified Hope.


    It is dangeropus to have a relgion. It clouds the issue of survival.

    Yes there are better answers through knowldge.


    I act morally because altruism is important for species survival.


    it is VERY hard to be a free thinker: I can read or not read the Bible but any system claiming to be the only way and all other paths are wrong is insane.

    Insanity is easy. An animal can do that. But reality which is the events in the universe and the laws that gvern them, is hard.


    We will achieve immortality through sceince...with resurrection of the body, and also we will end sufferenting through sceince iwth Paradise Engineering.( H+)

    This is not speculative or hopeful, but what is planned and we are achiveng our plans as predicted for 100 years!

    By 2045 all suffering will end as we understand it


  • 24 months ago · Quote · #226


    It is dangeropus to have a relgion. It clouds the issue of survival.

    The issue of survival is quite dubious in this dimension. Our generation will surely be gone 50 years from now.

    It is better to believe something written and considered to be true and ensure yourself that if it is true or not but you did what is right chances are you could be in the right path.

    What if hell is true? It is not too late to change our belief system than to face consequences when it arrives. Altruism is noble but we have to take care of ourselves too.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #227


    Okay, how do you move back to strategy and tactics?

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #228


    Guess the topics just led us to philosophical issues of life. This thread is like a driftwood. Hluek got too many talents that different topics just pop up. It is like a quantum leap. Bet he can beat Oprah.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #229


    Hi Andy.


    No not gone 50 years from now at all.


    Do you know what an exponential is?

    Technology is advancing on that.

    In 50 years you will be immortal and technology will have resurrected the dead.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #230


    Never heard about that kind of technology Hluek.  I hope man can resurrect the dead and create immortality but I doubt about it. If man can do that then I guess we don't need to have a God, we can create our own universe, for we know now how to create life. We both agree that man has limitations but we have the ability to adopt and adjust to survive. But resurrecting also the dead seem very dubious to me.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #231


    This technology for resurecting the dead is already being built armhow.


    By 2018 Project Bluebrain will have one human brain simulated on ibm supercomputers in Switzerland.

    By 2022 ibm will have completed Quantum Computers which calculate near infinite numbers and by 2030 personal computers will have the intelligence of human beings (Kurzweilai.net)

    YOu can lok at projections from Wright's Law which shows technolgical acceleration of doubling capacity every 1.4 years.

    Like rice of chess board doubling every square, at first not much rice by by 32 squares, more rice than all China.

    People used to say computers are dunb and will never beat a man at chess.

    But Wright's Law showed they would be better by 1997-8.

    In 2030 you will prefer a sex robot to a real woman/man:

    (Woman is robot!)
  • 24 months ago · Quote · #232


    wow, maybe we are still backward here in news of breakthroughs in technology. never heard about that here in our country yet. i still in doubt about it, advance technology cannot even find a real cure to cancer. sometimes media is exagerating issues that are still in their prime. as of now, we can't even know what electricity is. one thing i am sure of, institutions that are into development need assurance positively to their financiers to allot budgets. it must still be business.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #233


    Ang iyong argument ay flawed. Ito ay hindi tungkol sa cancer.It ay hindi tungkol sa negosyo. Ang arguement sa kabuuan Archaeology na technlogy nakahilig tumigil at kahit na kung lahat ay namatay ito pa ring magpatuloy.

    Electricity  (a subset of electromagnetism which is one of the 3 fundamental forces (& weak/strong nuclear & gravity/higgs boson)

    It is created when membranes collide (M THeory) and is a form of energy.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #234


    Gomosuke wrote:

    Ang iyong argument ay flawed. Ito ay hindi tungkol sa cancer.It ay hindi tungkol sa negosyo. Ang arguement sa kabuuan Archaeology na technlogy nakahilig tumigil at kahit na kung lahat ay namatay ito pa ring magpatuloy.

    Electricity  (a subset of electromagnetism which is one of the 3 fundamental forces (& weak/strong nuclear & gravity/higgs boson)

    It is created when membranes collide (M THeory) and is a form of energy.

    Hindi mo yata naintindihan ang ibig kong sabihin bagamat pinoy ka ba o hapon? Alam natin ang electicidad ay energia subalit hindi pa rin natin alam kung bakit siya ganoon. Intiende kabalero? Ang sa negosyo, ibig sabihin, nangangailangan ng pera ang mga scientifico upang patuloy and pagre-research nila. Kung sabihin nila sa mga nagsupporta ng financial sa kanila na wala silang nakita, eh mawawala ang supporta at kikitain nila sa ganoon klaseng trabaho. Intindihin mo muna ang yong binabasa bago magsalita.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #235


    Excuse me armhow, I did not mean to seem arrogant. I am ignorant of many things, especialy the ancient taglog language you speak fluently. But dutiful enough to correct.

    The higgs boson shows fields are as important as concentrated and less paramnetered events like particles.


    There may be many fields, and many forces like fundamental forces because dark& black matter are unknown. it could be that most of everything is unknowable.

    How can we have a strategy in chess unless we know ALL the moves possible? But not even the fastest computer can do all possible moves whcih includin repeats are infinite.

    St Paul says we see through a mirror darkly, and Plato that we see through a fire only shadows of realty. My teacher said if I want to know anything I must study one raindrop all my life.Embarassed That will show me everything else.


    My friend is studying women. He says they are unknowable and harder than chess, because you cant beat them . LaughingThey have flashes of brilliance that come from nowhereCool he can see.


    The aim of war and chess is to win one woman.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #236


    My friend is studying women. He says they are unknowable and harder than chess, because you cant beat them . LaughingThey have flashes of brilliance that come from nowhereCool he can see.

    Well my friend, if you study humans whether a man or a woman, you are dealing subjectively. Every human being is unique.  Let's put it this way " Man is becoming" and changes will always occur. Factor affecting the subject is time or seasons. Every stimulus experienced has an effect to human behavior.  The only certainty of man are the right or wrong direction of path it chooses even if the intentions are good.  It is just like chess.

  • 24 months ago · Quote · #237



    There is no subjectivity discussable, by definition. Once a common language is adopted this discussion is about objects.


    The issue is value toward a being. How are you intrinsicaly valuable?

    Only by immortality, either not dying or actual medical resurrection, which may be 40 years away.




    In philosophy & science, like chess, everything is exposed. The game of bluff with women is a part of the game of chess, but it can never beat deep knowledge of the moves and over all strategy -  which is to kill the bipolar parts in you, finding balance, and subordinate impulse to pragmatic will:


    This should make it clearer:


    A Game of Chess

    by TS Eliot ("Cracklypot")


    The Chair she sat in, like a burnished throne,
    Glowed on the marble, where the glass
    Held up by standards wrought with fruited vines
    From which a golden Cupidon peeped out 80
    (Another hid his eyes behind his wing)
    Doubled the flames of sevenbranched candelabra
    Reflecting light upon the table as
    The glitter of her jewels rose to meet it,
    From satin cases poured in rich profusion; 85
    In vials of ivory and coloured glass
    Unstoppered, lurked her strange synthetic perfumes,
    Unguent, powdered, or liquid—troubled, confused
    And drowned the sense in odours; stirred by the air
    That freshened from the window, these ascended 90
    In fattening the prolonged candle-flames,
    Flung their smoke into the laquearia,
    Stirring the pattern on the coffered ceiling.
    Huge sea-wood fed with copper
    Burned green and orange, framed by the coloured stone, 95
    In which sad light a carvèd dolphin swam.
    Above the antique mantel was displayed
    As though a window gave upon the sylvan scene
    The change of Philomel, by the barbarous king
    So rudely forced; yet there the nightingale 100
    Filled all the desert with inviolable voice
    And still she cried, and still the world pursues,
    “Jug Jug” to dirty ears.
    And other withered stumps of time
    Were told upon the walls; staring forms 105
    Leaned out, leaning, hushing the room enclosed.
    Footsteps shuffled on the stair,
    Under the firelight, under the brush, her hair
    Spread out in fiery points
    Glowed into words, then would be savagely still. 110

    “My nerves are bad to-night. Yes, bad. Stay with me.
    Speak to me. Why do you never speak? Speak.
    What are you thinking of? What thinking? What?
    I never know what you are thinking. Think.”

    I think we are in rats’ alley 115
    Where the dead men lost their bones.

    “What is that noise?”
    The wind under the door.
    “What is that noise now? What is the wind doing?”
    Nothing again nothing. 120
    You know nothing? Do you see nothing? Do you remember
    I remember
    Those are pearls that were his eyes. 125
    “Are you alive, or not? Is there nothing in your head?”
    O O O O that Shakespeherian Rag—
    It’s so elegant
    So intelligent 130

    “What shall I do now? What shall I do?
    I shall rush out as I am, and walk the street
    With my hair down, so. What shall we do to-morrow?
    What shall we ever do?”
    The hot water at ten. 135
    And if it rains, a closed car at four.
    And we shall play a game of chess,
    Pressing lidless eyes and waiting for a knock upon the door.

    When Lil’s husband got demobbed, I said,
    I didn’t mince my words, I said to her myself, 140
    Now Albert’s coming back, make yourself a bit smart.
    He’ll want to know what you done with that money he gave you
    To get yourself some teeth. He did, I was there.
    You have them all out, Lil, and get a nice set, 145
    He said, I swear, I can’t bear to look at you.
    And no more can’t I, I said, and think of poor Albert,
    He’s been in the army four years, he wants a good time,
    And if you don’t give it him, there’s others will, I said.
    Oh is there, she said. Something o’ that, I said. 150
    Then I’ll know who to thank, she said, and give me a straight look.
    If you don’t like it you can get on with it, I said,
    Others can pick and choose if you can’t.
    But if Albert makes off, it won’t be for lack of telling. 155
    You ought to be ashamed, I said, to look so antique.
    (And her only thirty-one.)
    I can’t help it, she said, pulling a long face,
    It’s them pills I took, to bring it off, she said.
    (She’s had five already, and nearly died of young George.) 160
    The chemist said it would be alright, but I’ve never been the same.
    You are a proper fool, I said.
    Well, if Albert won’t leave you alone, there it is, I said,
    What you get married for if you don’t want children?
    Well, that Sunday Albert was home, they had a hot gammon,
    And they asked me in to dinner, to get the beauty of it hot—
    Goonight Bill. Goonight Lou. Goonight May. Goonight. 170
    Ta ta. Goonight. Goonight.
    Good night, ladies, good night, sweet ladies, good night, good night.

    (You shoud use the notes Eliot provided or it doesn't make sense. Then call a psychiatrist...most of them are on chess.com, treating one another, and are easy to sopt. They open with average ratings and die with ratings about 200)


  • 24 months ago · Quote · #238


    There once was a lady who always wear in red

    Requires to play chess with her when she's in bed

    She uses her queen to capture your king

    With moves you'll groan as your pieces cling

    Swifly her knights presses you to surrender your will

    Blowing your mind her pawns continue advancing til

    Excitement bursts even you hold still

    Seconds ticks as both of you played blitz

    trying hard to win each other pieces piece by piece

    Her face glitter as she touches her bishop

    Both of you seem to have a hiccup

    A sudden outburst of spasm occur in a row

    The chess game happily ended in a draw

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #239


    hleuk2 wrote:

    (You shoud use the notes Eliot provided or it doesn't make sense...)



    I'm afraid those don't help much.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #240


    Wow, Gonnosuke is (almost) back!

Back to Top

Post your reply: