ROT, a new opening system?
Sort:
gumpty
Dec 9, 2008
0
#41
i dont get it, i thought it was ok to do thatif you left the notice to say it was his work? anyhow like i said, what harm is it if its already in the public domain, anyone can read this, whether here or there :-)
Because "copyright so-and-so, such-a-year" inherently implies that you may not reproduce without the creators knowledge/consent unless specificly stated otherwise, even if you leave in the copyright notice. (That's why you usually see something to the tune of "reproduced with kind permission of")
I can't see any harm in reproducing it here, as you are clearly not trying ot pass it off as your own work, and are obviously trying to generate interest in his ideas. But it's still up to him, although I can't see him minding. But his copyright notice does not include the typical "permission is granted.........as long as you leave this notice intact......" yada-yada
And don't confuse publicly visible with being in the public domain. Public domain works are free of copyright, and anyone may reproduce and modify them at will. Again, it's quite possible that Mike just wants to prevent someone from coming along and becoming famous for playing his ROT, and he didn't get around to or see the need to include an appropriate clause. On the other hand, he might want people to go to his site to read it; the site appears to sell stuff after all. You should ask him.
Its also entirely possible that there is yet another reason why it was funny, second_wind was amused before you mentioned that you had never spoken to him...
This thread is so bull*$"! I been taking a closer look at that website. Now I really am wetting myself.
But you *really* should get around to inserting the games properly, whenever you get the chance. You can expect all you readers to keep a chessboard by the PC... That was a very lazy social engineering attempt, trying to get someone else to do them because you couldn't be bothered to work out how to insert them yourself.
Its an even lazier social engineering attempt to use unobfuscated links for your phishing URL's, and a site was has no sensible reason to be an e-shop from the front page to embed it them...
...WARNING - NOBODY FOLLOW THE ORDER FORM LINK ON THE WEBSITE GIVEN... DEFINITELY DON'T BUY STUFF!
And if this is the sort of crap the admin of Team England! stands for, then remove me from the group immediately, Gumpty, you effing Numpty - I'll just have to miss out on chess world league.
Dec 10, 2008
0
#44
Ahem* right then, where do i start.....1) This thread may well be BS (in your opinion) and you are entitled to that opinion. However i have no idea why it has angered you so much, i merely found a link to this information whilst browsing chess related articles and thought it was interesting enough to post up here and let others read it. Indeed some people have thanked me for this info and have enjoyed reading it. 2)I'm sure you are wetting yourself, you seem like somebody with little or no self control. 3)You call me lazy for not posting up the games? yet if you actually READ what i said earlier , you would have noticed that i said i was at work, on a company PC, that has been 'cropped' meaning that many things that work at home wont work here at work. For example, whilst i am writing this now, i cant see the text, i only see an empty white screen, i cant play live chess, i cant post photos or games, i cant watch videos, i could go on, but you get the message (hopefully) that i didnt not post the games through laziness, i didnt post them because it was impossible. 4) You talk about ''even lazier social engineering attempt to use unobfuscated links for your phishing URL's'' I have no idea what this means, or what the hell you are talking about. 5) Then you say ''...WARNING - NOBODY FOLLOW THE ORDER FORM LINK ON THE WEBSITE GIVEN... DEFINITELY DON'T BUY STUFF!'' now where in the hack did i ask ANYONE to BUY anything??? i posted a link to the site only when people were going on about copyright issues, to show that it was actually just info i got off a public website. AND I WILL REPEAT, i dont even know this guy in person, i have seen him about at tourneys but thats it, this was never meant to be a promotion or anything other than me sharing an article i found interesting (i wont bother in future). 6) Then finally you come out with this...''And if this is the sort of crap the admin of Team England! stands for, then remove me from the group immediately, Gumpty, you effing Numpty - I'll just have to miss out on chess world league.'' Hehewell let me tell you , i am the founder of team england, and 99% of people love the group and are telling me how pleased they are, to be honest i couldnt give a stuff what you think, you seem to have a problem with me personally, and hey thats your choice! lol.I will be removing you from the group, and i hope after reading this, that other admins see what a fool you are and dont let you join their groups either. Finally all i have to say to you, is that you may well get away with calling me names on the internet (effing numpty) but i would love for you to try it to my face, absolutely LOVE IT. lol.
Right thats you finished with. To anyone else who is tracking this thread, I am sorry that i havnt had chance to post up the games yet, i promise that i will when i am off work (which isnt until next monday :-( ), as i have already said, i cant post games (or do many other things) from work ,but if anyone beleives this idiot about me not knowing how to post games or being too lazy, you only need to check my profile for blogs with my OTB games in, that i posted ages ago, so again this sort of blows mr gobby 's theory out of the water. I hope some of you enjoyed reading this article. :-)
Dec 10, 2008
0
#45
as you can see from all my posts in this thread, there is not even any spaces between the paragraphs etc, this is because i have to access chess.com through a proxy server from work, and it sends everything a bit wierd!
I looked up four games by this mike surtees guy. He got a sound beating on all four. This is enough for me.
1 - you linked a malicious website. I'm doing a rootkit cleanup instead of playing chess this week. On top of that my son is ill. I'm an insomniac who doesn't get much sleep anyway and I was effed off with you. Tell me how you would have reacted, after taking time to read and respond to your original post. You either knowingly or unknowingly played your part.
2 - I never said you asked anyone to buy anything. You asked them to go do a site which contained a link to a secure payment from with a self signed certificate. Of course I didn't access the form fully, but I tested this after I realised I was slammed, as there didn't seem to be much more harm to done. Can you not see how I considered you lazy, if you were genuinely free of being dubious? You did not prepare correctly what you chose to share and I spent my own good time speaking in this thread, not because I had a huge interest in it, but because my the admin of a team I just joined was enthused about something and I wanted to show a willingness to bring discussion to the table. Because the poor preparation I spent a lot of time which could have been used playing good chess with the friends I already have here, twofold because I had to try and pick through badly laid out analysis, and all wasted because the f*$£"ing joke was on me.
3 - "effing Numpty" - a pretty tame way of saying idiot. It was abusive, and I genuinely and sincerely apologise that I could not find the calm to bite my tongue, or find another avenue to vent. I left the group immediately, you're happy, I won't miss something I never had a chance to explore, so lets leave it there. You had a bloody good shout at me here, went off to delete me, found I'd already left and you write "Good riddance d*** h***" on my notes.
4 - With that in mind, I hope you realise the irony of the following:
"Finally all i have to say to you, is that you may well get away with calling me names on the internet (effing numpty) but i would love for you to try it to my face, absolutely LOVE IT. lol."
5That's everything I wish to say to you. I don't want this to become a flame war, and if you have some sincere wish to explore the ROT ideas... I would suggest you do it in a new thread. Nothing anyone will say will goad me into posting a public reply.
Lastly, just so you don't get the wrong idea, I'm not trying to make friends or beg forgiveness. I'm trying to explain and apologise for some poor conduct, which I pride myself on avoiding, to anyone who is following my posts.
EDIT - I am not claiming the player or his system are invented. Just that I followed a link to a page containing his thesis that was malicious.
Dec 10, 2008
0
#50
I've looked at a few of his games on here, and it seems a much of a muchness. He loses as many games as he wins, and the games he loses seem to be lost because the opponent's pieces win him the pawns that are being used in the centre. The wins appear to be because the opponent gets cowed into giving up pieces stupidly. I think it's also dangerous to think of it as a system that can be used to beat anything. I'd assume that the games that were won were by people who had prepared well and long and hard on a system that they could guarantee he would play, and had some good ideas of how to beat it. I think the other big danger of this system is that it needs real accuracy from what I've seen, in order to play it well. Otherwise you're just storming the centre and you'll get picked off by your opponent's well developed pieces. Would I be able to play and win with it at the same level as me? No. Also, from what I've seen, it ends up with inherently boring games. Very closed games with both players needing to be incredibly accurate to keep the game going. The player playing the system doesn't have any real attacking chances because they don't develop early enough, and the other player is crammed in by the pawn wave. Personally, I wouldn't want to play in one of those games, because I can't see it being much fun, which is the real reason I play chess. It just looks a bit too much like grinding.
Dec 10, 2008
0
#51
shakje wrote:
I've looked at a few of his games on here, and it seems a much of a muchness. He loses as many games as he wins, and the games he loses seem to be lost because the opponent's pieces win him the pawns that are being used in the centre. The wins appear to be because the opponent gets cowed into giving up pieces stupidly. I think it's also dangerous to think of it as a system that can be used to beat anything. I'd assume that the games that were won were by people who had prepared well and long and hard on a system that they could guarantee he would play, and had some good ideas of how to beat it. I think the other big danger of this system is that it needs real accuracy from what I've seen, in order to play it well. Otherwise you're just storming the centre and you'll get picked off by your opponent's well developed pieces. Would I be able to play and win with it at the same level as me? No. Also, from what I've seen, it ends up with inherently boring games. Very closed games with both players needing to be incredibly accurate to keep the game going. The player playing the system doesn't have any real attacking chances because they don't develop early enough, and the other player is crammed in by the pawn wave. Personally, I wouldn't want to play in one of those games, because I can't see it being much fun, which is the real reason I play chess. It just looks a bit too much like grinding.
i understand totally mate, nice well thought out post.
Dec 10, 2008
0
#52
No problem, it's very easy to just dismiss it out of hand, but I think what my post boils down to is this: it's a difficult system to play properly, and it's a lot easier for someone of my level to simply memorise the openings I need parrot-fashion than to spend time learning a system I don't think looks that fun.
I'd much rather have a reasoned discussion about it than mouth off though :)
This thread just got three-fold more dramatic
I'm not sure what is wrong with the site, I visit all the time!
I like watching him use these ideas, quite interesting. I try it sometimes in 1 0 games on FICS. f3, Nh3 ideas. I don't know what I am doing, but then neither does my opponent, so I win out of confusion :)
I did overhear one conversation at a tournament that went along the lines of "He (surtees) has dropped a lot of grading points since he started with this ROT rubbish"
I've watched Mike play many times. Each time I saw him he was useing ROT and interestingly each time I saw him he always won prize money at the end of the tournament. If you ask me the guy's a genious.
Jul 29, 2024
0
#57
Mike Surtees has a game of his against John Nunn from 1977 published in "Beating The Sicilian"...alas he lost that one...probably lost because Dr Nunn was pretty lethal in those days
Jul 29, 2024
0
#58
It's just kind of useless to talk at such length in abstract theoretical terms without showing some actual lines. When you play in an odd way, and you're a fundamentally strong player, you will win games on account of just confusing people and being strong, Magnus does this frequently, but it doesn't mean you've figured out some revolutionary way of thinking about the game short of... I'm playing these odd moves that go along with this different philosophy and confusing people.