MATRIX CHESS

Hello everyone first I would like to say that; everyone who plays Qh5 is not a matrix player. A matrix player consist of some who can analyze the board by indexing which is looking at the board geometrical concepts. Another thing, you guys are talking about a man which is Bernard Parham, who has played thousands of games, a grandmaster and have beaten Bobby fisher with these concepts. He has also trained many players with these concepts and they have went on to be grandmasters themselves. So before you talk down on the concept make sure you do your own research.

Name one grandmaster who plays by these geometrical concepts.

I thought Bernard Parham was a Master, not a GM.  And, to my knowledge, Parham beat Fischer in a simul game, which I guess is still considered a decent accomplishment.

I think I would enjoy a game against Parham to test this theory of Matrix Chess.

You're right, Mr. Parham is a master. As for the simulated game vs fischer, I believe it was a live match not simulated. I briefly spoke with him about it a month or so ago and he mentioned nothing about it being simulated. I will ask him about it tomorrow.

Tricklev, to answer your question about a grandmaster he has trained I can tell you this, he has trained multiple grandmasters and has given lessons to already existing grandmasters. Because of the stigma around Qh5 those GMs who were already GMs are not publicly announcing this. I will get a few names of GMs he has trained however. I don't think it's my place to give out names of GMs who became GMs without him and are now going to him for training in Matrix chess.

lol whoops. The problem is he cant play under my account and has no desire to start an account of his own. Take a road trip to Purdue University and play him live.

?!

Sure he can! Just play an unrated game, and there's no problem.

I think in order to insult my intelligence first you need to learn decent grammar. Second, he is a master so your argument is non-existant and based on incorrect facts.

Third, "that's probably not because of the opening which pose 0 theoretical problems to Blacks unless you are a bad player." -- that's just wrong.

DrizztD, in my email with chess.com they stated that, and I quote, "letting someone play a game on your account is classed as cheating."

They also state that computer assistance is cheating. However, they allowed one computer assisted player (cheater_1) and went so far as to organize a vote chess game against him because he always played unrated games, and announced ahead of time that he was going to use the computer chess program he was working on programming. (He was later banned for other things, but that's not the point.)

Similarly, if you play an unrated game and announce that Parham is playing the game not you, it should not be in violation of the rules.

Also, I think I'm going to challenge you.

well with the level of histility from so many members on this post, I am not going to take a chance to have them capitolize on a rule related mistake I may make. I emailed chess.com and if they permit Mr. Parham to play on my account in unrated games then we can work something out.

When you challenge me, please let me know if it is me or Mr. Parham you are looking to play. Thanks.

I'm curious why he can't just set an account of his own up.  It's quick and easy and eliminates any potential rule violations.

that is why he doesn't set up an account.

Hmmm... Windingshu, I'm pretty sure there's no problem if you play unrated. Besides, you'll get more criticism from people for not letting him play than for letting him play on your account.

Well, I should hear back from chess.com soon enough. So we will be able to close this question once and for all.

WindBAG-ingshu is a troll and full of crap.  I posted a thoughtful response to him pages ago and he responded by being insulting and telling me that while my points could be responded to "what would be the point". 

My USCF rating is just as high as this idiot's mentor.  And btw, the guy with the just about the lowest rating participating this trollapalooza festival is wingnut-ingshu himself. 

PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLL

Okay tngerb, even a troll deserves love and I guess you're the guy to give him a big bro hug. Enjoy, just remember to shower off afterwards.

Btw, what makes any of you even think that WINDBAGshu even knows this guy Parham?  It could all just be a hoax.  Sure, Parham won't set up an account to demonstrate his theories... righhhhhhhht.  That really makes sense.  Instead we've got this windbag speaking for him by proxy.

Oh btw, did I ever mention that I have a friend who's a Grand Master who has been renting a room in my house for a couple of years?    He says that he took some lessons with Parham for a couple of months when he was a kid and says Parham's ideas are completely ludicrous.  Seriously.  You don't believe me?  Prove me wrong.

As far at the "good games" Windy could just as easily be playing the first couple of moves and then using an engine for the "good" games and pretending it's Parham.  This whole thread is idiocy.   

tngerb thank you. You are on the side of common sense in this case.

I have no need to prove that I know Mr. Parham. The facts that I come up with and the answers to questions I get from him are not made up. I have been learning from Mr. Parham for 3 months and I am having a lot of fun and learning a lot. Through this post I am trying to give insight into a system that is being used in chess but has little information available.

If all else fails and you have that much dedication to chess, take a road trip to Indiana and play him yourself. He is a brilliant chess player and a great mentor.

The player who won against Fischer in a simul was Fenner Parham, not Bernard Parham.

It's true. Bernard Parham wasn't on chessgames.com, but Fenner Parham was, and he beat Fischer.