Anatomy of a Loser
Sort:
Yasuandite wrote: You have a real talent for words. Not chess. Words. Go write a book or something.
Think of it this way, without people who are worst than you at chess, how else would you ever be able to make such delightfully pompous and elitist statements?
And without people like you who make statements like these, who else will I be able to cherish when I go to bed at night, thinking that I have somehow made the world a better and more fulfilling place for people like you?
I guess that is all. Thank you. ~Aeppel
I must admit, you almost made Monster energy drink come out of my nose, thanks for the laugh.
Yasuandite wrote:
You have a real talent for words. Not chess. Words. Go write a book or something.
Yasuandite,
You're right that she has talent. Her flippant annotations pale to the calibre of her actual writings. I can assure you that she's writing a book, I'm also sure she appreciates the encouragement. And for someone who's been a member but not played a game on this site, I think you should reserve judging another member's chess aptitude. "Go write a book or something"? I can tell a 14-year old's alternate "Ohh goody I get to be an asshole on the internet with anonimity!" account when I see one.
That made me laugh. Excellent.
Apr 28, 2008
0
#28
"You have a real talent for words. Not chess."
Who's to say what talent for chess is? There's certainly a difference between talent and knowledge; between talent and experience; between talent and skill. People can gain knowledge, acquire experience and hone skills, but no one can invent, or even fake, talent.
The author of the above quoted pithy statement seemingly fails to understand the difference.
You do definetly have a talent for words. I think that any book that you might write would be a great one, and would appreciate a signed copy!
On a chess related note, I too would not have resigned, because even if he wins, the more you play (moves and games), the more you learn.
Very nice post!
Keeping in mind that I am by no means any good at chess myself, you weren't in a bad position early. Instead of 11. Nxf6+, you could just as easily taken his bishop on e7. Generally, knights and bishops are worth the same amount so it doesn't really matter but if you can take prevent him from having both bishops while keeping your bishops, you probably should do it, all other things being equal. (Whole debate about Knights v. Bishops and their relative value. But whatever). And it would have been harder for him to chase your knight on g5 without that bishop.
Also, his 11 ... Bxf6 doesn't really threaten your knight because your black bishop on d2 protects your knight. It might lead to an exchange of knight for bishop but you aren't going to lose material there.
You are so HILARIOUS!! I love your sense of humor!...And you do it as a poet would! Rael is right, however, that you (unknowingly) used a strong opening (a version of the English I believe) of which I am very familiar. You had a number of attacks you could have came with, but you allowed your doubt and hesistance to hold you back....
Best. Thread. Evar.
Or maybe it was her other one...
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/paranoid-chesscomers
i love
awesome annotation, carry on like this and you'll soon get even better in both :o)
write a poem and post it on out general discussion!
Very familiar funny mood, but in the end dead.
You have a real talent for words. Not chess. Words. Go write a book or something.