Nice Bishop sac

 I must be a bad bigot in that case cause the higher their rating/title the more I tend to pay attention to what they have to say.....heck, it even started way bak when I was only 1300 and when one of the clubs A class players ( daniel thats uscf 1800-1999) spoke or tried to help me after they smacked me around I listened and tried to learn ! I didnt argue with them like I knew as much as them cause they proved over and over on the board that I didnt ! My first club had only one player over 2000 and he was around 2100 and he was like God for the rest of us hacks ! Man..... my bigotry started way back then !!

I didn't ask you to post any analysis, Reb.

I never insulted you in these posts, I didn't say you were wrong, and I didn't try to argue with you. Why then are you doing this to me? If I'm wrong, then great! I have already stated at least three times that I have realized from what you told me that my line doesn't lead to a forced mate (I was wrong!) and that Black can stop the attack from mating soon. (Wrong again!) So what makes you think I can't accept when I'm wrong?

I didn't disrespect you (to the best of my knowledge) on any of the afore-mentioned posts, so, again, there is no need to insult me. If you like, we can exchange analysis like sane human beings or we can not. Either way, I say that we drop this discussion and part friends. 

I was mistaken in thinking that f6 produces a forced mate, and I'm sorry for mixing up my classifications. So what do you say?

good game

Also, I realize that higher ratings mean a better player, but my rating on this site has only been based on correspondence games and thus my opponents may have had access to computers and so forth. I try not to use any computers in my gameplay because I believe that it's a form of cheating.

What happened, Daniel3, was you used the word "expert" in the general sense, when in USCF terms that is just a class player. Though why they would expect a Canadian to know the complete ranking terminology of the United States chess world and how to use to avoid offense is beyond me.

Daniel, your attitude reminds me of an incident I witnessed in a tournament in Atlanta about 15 years ago. A friend of mine ( and nemesis ) NM Guillermo Ruiz had just finished demolishing an A class player of about 1900. Ruiz was rated about 2300 at the time. After the game the loser asked Ruiz if he would go over the game with him and show him where he went wrong , where he could have played better and Ruiz agreed. When Ruiz was trying to point out his errors and why they were bad the guy just kept arguing with Ruiz on every point !  I couldnt believe it ! After a few minutes of this in frustration Ruiz just shrugged and asked him " if you know so much why ask me?" and walked away...... I assume you want to get better at chess ? I think thats a pretty safe assumption of most chess players, especially the younger ones. To do that you need to have the right attitude and know who to listen to. Having opinions is fine but stating them as fact isnt. When you do this you can expect to be called down by those who know better/more. Dont view it as an attack on you but as an attempt to help/teach you.

 1) Expert is one notch above the top class players.

2) Having seen BC players drop south for our tournaments in Wa and Or, I can tell you Canadians know what an Expert is, even those who didn't come south (as we shared a regional magazine). I think the dividing line of those in the know is the dividing line between those who take part in serious, organized chess and those who are inexperienced.

I don't mind if people are trying to point out my errors, but insulting me like RainbowRising was doing (as his first post before giving any constructive criticism) is enormously annoying.

In the future, I'll try to be more attentive to what better players are saying to me.

 I havent seen a lot of incidents like that, only a few. I once asked a German IM to go over a game I had just lost to him in a tournament in Spain and he simply refused ! This was a shock to me as even GMs often dont mind to do a post mortem with me after they beat me. The post game analysis that amazed me most was in a tournament in Spain where I lost to GM Ubilava. He used to be one of Anand's seconds I believe, dont know if he still is. In any event I was pleasantly surprised when it was He who asked after my resignation if I wanted to look at the game and ofcourse I did ! It was amazing how much MORE he saw than me ! After a few minutes I just shut up and didnt offer anything ! I just watched him go through lines and explanations and sat in amazement ! The only other GM I have ever played/analyzed with that was equally as impressive is Kevin Spraggett.

All you've demonstrated is that we can add condescending and patronizing to my assessment.  Since we're working on our vocabulary, here's another:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/supercilious

you're both acting like victorian gentlemen arguing over which country to invade next.

Rainbow Rising; "you, sir, are a fool!"

Daniel3; "A fool? balderdash! For you, sir, are an ignoramous!"

Rainbow Rising; "An ignoramous? why I never! you, sir, are a cretinous gelatinous mass of unprocessed pork with half the looks of the giant mole on my hindquarters, and half the brains of a lobotomised flat-earth theorist!

Daniel3; a cretinous gelatinous mass of unprocessed pork with half the looks of the giant mole on your hindquarters, and half the brains of a lobotomised flat-earth theorist! How Dare...." 

etc. etc.

Jokes aside, this is more what your argument is like.

RainbowRising; "Bow down to my superior chess skills and knowledge!"

Daniel3; "No! for my line is different to yours and, ultimately, wrong. Yet I still believe it!"

RainbowRising: "For some reason, I still care. Read the dictionary links I send you; Mine is a dictionary of hate. Hate aimed towards your less than adequate arguing skills. Me and my modicum of intelligence find you and and your convictions offensive, not to mention your sensibilities and most of all the cheek you displayed in implying that I, I of all people, were guilty of being wrong about chess-(I wonder if such a thing is possible). Do you know who you are speaking to?

When I was younger, I thought I was pretty good at chess. Oh sure, there were masters and grandmasters out there; but I was sure that I could understand what they were doing.

Now that I am older, I realize what a terrible chessplayer I am; I am embarrassed by all the things I do not know and daunted by the knowledge of all the things I cannot do.

A year or so ago, a USCF master started coming to our blitz club in the company of his friend and student. The guy has a swagger about him, a boisterous manner that (if he's eviscerating you, as he did to me last week with black after 1 e4 a6 2 d4 Ra7) can come off as arrogance. But at the end of the day he's got the skills to back it up. Not long after meeting the master, I confessed to a fellow class player that "I don't know whether I despise him or admire him."

Turns out he's a good guy. But more importantly, I quickly became convinced of his powers and have been completely open to his advice. And why not? He possesses a level skill that I seek to obtain. His approach to the game rests on a plane entirely above mine, and I'm certainly not going to improve by deluding myself about my own abilities.

The door to improvement has an inscription that demands you must first γνῶθι σεαυτόν: Know Thyself.

fair enough. You can't force someone to agree with you or learn from you, though, and who cares if they don't? especially if you're better anyway. More fool them.

It would seem the better you become in the chess world, the more you look down on others... back to the topic, a very nice bishop sac, always fun to "Give up a piece" for a win.

 thanks dc1985

 very true

I think it was that funny line there rainbow that kicked it all off, next time, Daniel, use the word, possibilities instead of forced, unless is really is FORCED, it's true f6 looks good but i think if your mate combo works, (it probably wouldn't) then moving the rook looks like a much better long term move, 

I just thought my move looked better.

reading this made my day.

lol