Post your best miniatures here - Chess Forums - Page 846

Ben_Dubuque · 2011-09-09T13:49:59-07:00

Please annotate them and enjoy others posts to begin here is an otb one i played today

Ziryab

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16901

crazedrat1000 wrote:

Analysis gave this one a 2500 rating.

@Barefoot_Player for the 3rd time, I am not disputing what the definition of a miniature is - I simply do not care what it is.
You're trying very hard to construe me as disputing the definition of a miniature, since it seems to give you a point, but it's a failed attempt - I simply am not arguing that.

I studied psychology at university for 3 years, until I got wise and switched to a STEM field. In terms of scientific standards and rigor psychology is not in the same league as other sciences.. the field is in a peer review crisis... most of the biggest medical scandals of the last 100 years have occurred in psychology. The psychology institutions of the West are widely mocked... the average psychology students IQ is about 20 points lower than students in the other STEM fields... It's essentially a pseudoscience full of poorly educated mental cases, who have a need to pose as scientists to bolster their credibility. There are exceptions but they're rare, and they're generally ignored by their peers.
Psychology should quit trying to be a science and embrace its roots in philosophy. Those roots are inescapable. Jung was as much of a philosopher as a psychologist - in admitting as much he remains on firmer ground than the modern quacks practicing today. He certainly has you nailed, in any case.

Carry onward!

Is any of this relevant?

Will you estimate my IQ if I tell you my college degree was in history?

How will it change if you learn that I studied history, literature, and anthropology in graduate school, earning a PhD?

Will the estimate increase when you learn that the end of my 30 years of college teaching was as an instructor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and that my course was crosslisted as Honors?

Ziryab

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16902

Historically, as @Barefoot_Player documents well, a miniature is a game ending by move 25 or a game ending by move 20.

Streamers cannot even correctly distinguish the Fried Liver Attack from the ways players avoid it. They have spoken so loosely that every early move of the king is called the Bong Cloud. What happened to the Hammerschlag?

We live in an era when definitions no longer matter. You can say anything. If you attract an audience, your words are judged to be true. That’s tragic and caused some deaths in Texas this weekend.

crazedrat1000

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16903

Ziryab wrote:

crazedrat1000 wrote:

Analysis gave this one a 2500 rating.

@Barefoot_Player for the 3rd time, I am not disputing what the definition of a miniature is - I simply do not care what it is.
You're trying very hard to construe me as disputing the definition of a miniature, since it seems to give you a point, but it's a failed attempt - I simply am not arguing that.

I studied psychology at university for 3 years, until I got wise and switched to a STEM field. In terms of scientific standards and rigor psychology is not in the same league as other sciences.. the field is in a peer review crisis... most of the biggest medical scandals of the last 100 years have occurred in psychology. The psychology institutions of the West are widely mocked... the average psychology students IQ is about 20 points lower than students in the other STEM fields... It's essentially a pseudoscience full of poorly educated mental cases, who have a need to pose as scientists to bolster their credibility. There are exceptions but they're rare, and they're generally ignored by their peers.
Psychology should quit trying to be a science and embrace its roots in philosophy. Those roots are inescapable. Jung was as much of a philosopher as a psychologist - in admitting as much he remains on firmer ground than the modern quacks practicing today. He certainly has you nailed, in any case.

Carry onward!

Is any of this relevant?

Will you estimate my IQ if I tell you my college degree was in history?

How will it change if you learn that I studied history, literature, and anthropology in graduate school, earning a PhD?

Will the estimate increase when you learn that the end of my 30 years of college teaching was as an instructor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and that my course was crosslisted as Honors?

Well when we have millions of practitioners passing off personal anecdotes as science... when the field of psychology is in a peer review crisis and has no real philosophical justification for calling itself a science... and when those practitioners aren't even cognitively equipped to recognize or correct the problem - yes, it matters - since it means we get widespread medical malpractice / medical scandals, and a large part of the naive public takes psychology seriously because it presents itself as a science. Furthermore, the youth have been most scandalized by this. So yes, it matters.

Considering how lackluster higher education is, and especially in a domain where the science is very muddy... to practice psychology well requires an independently strong intellect. If it were a hard science it'd actually require less intelligence to practice properly. On a mass scale this is not happening.

I was at the very top of my class in psychology, and I did not do homework or study at all... I was playing starcraft 2 for 12 hours a day back then, and only a few hours before the test would I do the most minimal review. I didn't even take notes. I got all As... often I scored the highest in the class. The class were probably just as lazy, but many of them were simply dense. But that is how dumbed down the psychology curriculum is. For the most part, the material is stuff you can just answer based on common sense / listening to the lecture and hearing it once. The contrast between psychology and a real STEM field is impossible to overstate. These people are not scientists, and never will be.

rocknmetalforever45

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16904

crazedrat1000 wrote:

Ziryab wrote:

crazedrat1000 wrote:

Analysis gave this one a 2500 rating.

@Barefoot_Player for the 3rd time, I am not disputing what the definition of a miniature is - I simply do not care what it is.
You're trying very hard to construe me as disputing the definition of a miniature, since it seems to give you a point, but it's a failed attempt - I simply am not arguing that.

I studied psychology at university for 3 years, until I got wise and switched to a STEM field. In terms of scientific standards and rigor psychology is not in the same league as other sciences.. the field is in a peer review crisis... most of the biggest medical scandals of the last 100 years have occurred in psychology. The psychology institutions of the West are widely mocked... the average psychology students IQ is about 20 points lower than students in the other STEM fields... It's essentially a pseudoscience full of poorly educated mental cases, who have a need to pose as scientists to bolster their credibility. There are exceptions but they're rare, and they're generally ignored by their peers.
Psychology should quit trying to be a science and embrace its roots in philosophy. Those roots are inescapable. Jung was as much of a philosopher as a psychologist - in admitting as much he remains on firmer ground than the modern quacks practicing today. He certainly has you nailed, in any case.

Carry onward!

Is any of this relevant?

Will you estimate my IQ if I tell you my college degree was in history?

How will it change if you learn that I studied history, literature, and anthropology in graduate school, earning a PhD?

Will the estimate increase when you learn that the end of my 30 years of college teaching was as an instructor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and that my course was crosslisted as Honors?

Well when we have millions of practitioners passing off personal anecdotes as science... when the field of psychology is in a peer review crisis and has no real philosophical justification for calling itself a science... and when those practitioners aren't even cognitively equipped to recognize or correct the problem - yes, it matters - since it means we get widespread medical malpractice / medical scandals, and a large part of the naive public takes psychology seriously because it presents itself as a science. Furthermore, the youth have been most scandalized by this. So yes, it matters.

Considering how lackluster higher education is, and especially in a domain where the science is very muddy... to practice psychology well requires an independently strong intellect. If it were a hard science it'd actually require less intelligence to practice properly. On a mass scale this is not happening.

I was at the very top of my class in psychology, and I did not do homework or study at all... I was playing starcraft 2 for 12 hours a day back then, and only a few hours before the test would I do the most minimal review. I didn't even take notes. I got all As... often I scored the highest in the class. The class were probably just as lazy, but many of them were simply dense. But that is how dumbed down the psychology curriculum is. For the most part, the material is stuff you can just answer based on common sense / listening to the lecture and hearing it once. The contrast between psychology and a real STEM field is impossible to overstate. These people are not scientists, and never will be.

I'd ask questions about the American educational system. The fact that some Harvard students think the Moon is bigger than the Sun says a lot. But it's not only America. Education systems everywhere, including my country, keep getting dumbed down to create sheep, not free thinkers. The motto seems to be: Study more and learn less! Your hatred of psychology exists because of that, not because psychology is useless. You'd probably be thinking the same about anything else if you studied it instead.

Ziryab

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16905

crazedrat1000 wrote:

Ziryab wrote:

crazedrat1000 wrote:

Analysis gave this one a 2500 rating.

@Barefoot_Player for the 3rd time, I am not disputing what the definition of a miniature is - I simply do not care what it is.
You're trying very hard to construe me as disputing the definition of a miniature, since it seems to give you a point, but it's a failed attempt - I simply am not arguing that.

I studied psychology at university for 3 years, until I got wise and switched to a STEM field. In terms of scientific standards and rigor psychology is not in the same league as other sciences.. the field is in a peer review crisis... most of the biggest medical scandals of the last 100 years have occurred in psychology. The psychology institutions of the West are widely mocked... the average psychology students IQ is about 20 points lower than students in the other STEM fields... It's essentially a pseudoscience full of poorly educated mental cases, who have a need to pose as scientists to bolster their credibility. There are exceptions but they're rare, and they're generally ignored by their peers.
Psychology should quit trying to be a science and embrace its roots in philosophy. Those roots are inescapable. Jung was as much of a philosopher as a psychologist - in admitting as much he remains on firmer ground than the modern quacks practicing today. He certainly has you nailed, in any case.

Carry onward!

Is any of this relevant?

Will you estimate my IQ if I tell you my college degree was in history?

How will it change if you learn that I studied history, literature, and anthropology in graduate school, earning a PhD?

Will the estimate increase when you learn that the end of my 30 years of college teaching was as an instructor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and that my course was crosslisted as Honors?

Well when we have millions of practitioners passing off personal anecdotes as science... when the field of psychology is in a peer review crisis and has no real philosophical justification for calling itself a science... and when those practitioners aren't even cognitively equipped to recognize or correct the problem - yes, it matters - since it means we get widespread medical malpractice / medical scandals, and a large part of the naive public takes psychology seriously because it presents itself as a science. Furthermore, the youth have been most scandalized by this. So yes, it matters.

Considering how lackluster higher education is, and especially in a domain where the science is very muddy... to practice psychology well requires an independently strong intellect. If it were a hard science it'd actually require less intelligence to practice properly. On a mass scale this is not happening.

I was at the very top of my class in psychology, and I did not do homework or study at all... I was playing starcraft 2 for 12 hours a day back then, and only a few hours before the test would I do the most minimal review. I didn't even take notes. I got all As... often I scored the highest in the class. The class were probably just as lazy, but many of them were simply dense. But that is how dumbed down the psychology curriculum is. For the most part, the material is stuff you can just answer based on common sense / listening to the lecture and hearing it once. The contrast between psychology and a real STEM field is impossible to overstate. These people are not scientists, and never will be.

So, no.

BTW, psychology is scientific in its methodology. Of course, what you learn in 101 is quite basic and does not get into the heart of the matter.

It is ironic that you judge as low IQ practitioners of the discipline that invented IQ.

crazedrat1000

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16906

IQ is known for being the most statistically validated construct psychometricians have produced. It's more of a statistical construct than a psychological one, due to the way it's produced... It has an underlying philosophical basis with forms of intelligence, but it's justified using correlations.

"psychology is scientific in its methodology"

It's not, if it was it wouldn't have a reproducibility crisis. It just pretends to be, but you can insist otherwise - your opinion is irrelevant, the numerous medical scandals over the last couple decades are evidence of what I'm saying. And I can name a number of prominent psychology professors who've said the same thing publicly.

On another note, I don't especially want to derail this thread since it's more interesting seeing peoples games than arguing with you matters which you don't understand.

Barefoot_Player

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16907

@ crazedrat1000

“There is no rule against posting games longer than 25 moves in this thread. Try showing me where in the forum rules such a rule exists, (it’s in the title!) you can't. You've come up with that rule and tried to establish it, but you simply have no authority to, and so you are ignored. You are ignored not only by me, but by countless others in the thread, as you've admitted.”

How am I being ignored when you keep talking to me? Countless others? I think both of us can count up to 10. But I suspect that number of people is way less than that. And where did I admit that countless people ignore me? I think you are putting a personal spin on statements of people who disagree with you. I simply remined you that a quantity of people agreeing on something being true does not make a conclusion or statement true or accepted by others more knowable about a subject. This is one of the things that STEM incorporates in its philosophy.

“It is predictable / amusing that you believe people refusing to obey you are behaving as "male narcissists" - but this is illustrative of the kind of credibility crisis psychology is in, and why many people including myself do not take it very seriously. When psychologists brand things with medical terminology while really they're just asserting their personal values, they are not really doing science. Just pretending.And psychology is also just, by nature, philosophical - since the mind is intangible (I do not think so. It seems that the mind is a product of the brain and it does respond to electrical stimuli, and because we have not figured out every about it yet, does not mean it is intangible.)

Seriously. I never asked anyone to obey me. I’m just one person who is using a well-used, and well accepted definition of a chess miniature. I’ve provided evidence of this definition by citing the works of writers of NMs, FMs, IMs, and GMs as well publications of national and international organizations.

You have not. Nor has lukeluke. Nor has anyone else who has perpetuated as different definition of a miniature.

It is a recognizable fact, at least by most people with a workable knowledge of STEM, is that the side which provides the most evidence, in quality and quantity, is the side that is most likely to be correct.

When I asked lukeluke about his evidence to back up his claim, he has either has no evidence and is lying or he refuses. But if he refuses, one has to ask why.

Based on his response, which is calling me a troll and suggesting I have a serious mental issue, he simply does not have the evidence. When one resorts to insults and attacking the other side, it means he cannot think of a more appropriate response.

But again, you who are working with STEM, should know this already.

“When psychologists brand things with medical terminology while really they're just asserting their personal values, they are not really doing science. Just pretending.”

Sounds like some people in this forum.

Lukeluke, are you now ready to send us the wonderful GM names and links for us?

crazedrat1000

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16908

^ Once again, what I've disputed is not the definition of a miniature, but whether I should care what that definition is. I've told you 3 times already that I'm not disputing the definition of a miniature. Since you've once again portrayed this as the essential argument... I have no reason to bother with that wall of text, it's pedantic, confused babble.

You are deeply confused in many respects, it seems.

rocknmetalforever45 wrote:

I'd ask questions about the American educational system. The fact that some Harvard students think the Moon is bigger than the Sun says a lot. But it's not only America. Education systems everywhere, including my country, keep getting dumbed down to create sheep, not free thinkers. The motto seems to be: Study more and learn less! Your hatred of psychology exists because of that, not because psychology is useless. You'd probably be thinking the same about anything else if you studied it instead.

No, I studied computer science later on for 4 years. Today I work as a software engineer. The difference between the curriculum was like night and day. The STEM curriculum needs improvement, but its still a serious course of study, it's not a total joke like psychology.

Psychology doesn't have to be useless in principle, but in practice it is. There are great psychologists, they're rare but they're philosophers as much as they are psychologists. To even produce a framework for simple concepts such as "mental disorder" requires a vast philosophical foundation. It's alot of philosophy with a little topping of weak empiricism on top, which alot of the time practitioners ignore or interpret however they see fit. And philosophy is opinion, ultimately.

Reproducibility is the ultimate test of scientific validity, lack of reproducibility is very discrediting. Back in 2015 there was a study which attempted replicate 100 studies from major psychology journals. So these are the gold standard journals in the field, if we can't replicate these... we're in trouble. Well, it found that a large portion of the original findings could not be replicated.

There are many reasons for the problems in psychology, some of which I named - poor education system, the minds intangible nature, etc. In addition, researchers often have personal motives which undermine the conclusions. Part of this is due to psychology just requiring some philosophical basis, which leads to people injecting their own values / beliefs, or at the very least motivated by them. Psychology researchers also often rarely have a good grasp of statistics - the types of people who enter the field are not proficient in math, by temperament and by capacity. The other thing is psychological phenomenon are often very context-dependent. They're dependent on a very large number of factors which are hard to control for and distill.

lukeluke00

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16909

Oh boy. This is why I've avoided talking directly to TBP a long time ago, everytime someone gives him attention he ruins the thread completely.

When asked by other poster I have provided many articles that present miniatures beyond 25 moves, just from a quick Google search. If anyone here besides TBP asks me, I'll gladly search them again or look the post that is here in this thread somewhere. For now I wish this argument dies again and people just share their short games.

crazedrat1000

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16910

Well, now that I've set the record on psychology straight I'd actually prefer if the thread went back to focus on games, that's what makes the thread interesting.
Ironic when the person arguing that others are derailing the thread with non-miniatures derails the thread in a massive way in the process.

lukeluke00

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16911

My contribution to return to sanity

AngusByers

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16912

And myself as well, back to our regularly scheduled program. Dug out this old game of mine from the 90s, played against one of the lower CM settings (Moderate), after having come across an historic game showing a double bishop sacrifice in Bird's Opening. It was fun to have it work out, but not the sort of thing that works against humans if you just try and set it up from the start.

Barefoot_Player

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16913

Luluke,

Is this the way you usually end an argument when you have no answer? Just to stop talking and perhaps even run away? Are you interested in finding out the truth about what we’ve been talking about? Doesn’t that interest you?

You said you already answered my question. I have searched this forum but could not find it. Perhaps you never sent it?

Stop saying that you posted or that you will post later. Just post it now. Is that so hard?

Otherwise, we are likely to revisit this very subject which will probably end the same way. With me asking you to provide what your evidence is and you refusing to answer. Maybe you don’t have the GMs or publishers to back your claim. Maybe you fear being wrong. Maybe you fear that I, or someone else, might just look up what you submitted in your posting. Yeah, I gotta tell you that might happen. So what? If you are correct and being truthful, then you should have no fear about myself, or anyone else looking it up.

Just post it! It’s not hard if you are telling the truth.

Now in response to calling up miniatures, here is one more.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I enjoy playing the Sozin Najdorf. I’m glad that I wasn’t White in this game.

"masoodch"-"backrankbrawler"15 minute gamechess.com, Aug. 30 2020["backrankbrawler", https://www.chess.com/blog/backrankbrawler/a-najdorf-sicilian-miniature]1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.O-O Be7 8.Re1 O-O 9.f4 [This is the first position where I wasn't sure what to do. My main candidates here were ...e5, ...b5, and ...Nbd7. I chose ...b5 because I thought ...e5 might have been premature (or wasn't ready to open up the diagonal for the bishop).] 9...b5! (9...Nbd7 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Nxe6 seemed unpleasant to me during the game. However, 11...Qb6+ 12.Be3 Qc6 13.Nxf8 Bxf8 = seems fine. 9...e5 10.Nf5 Bxf5 11.exf5 +/= seemed a little too loose for my liking, especially with White's light-square bishop enjoying the a2-g8 diagonal.) 10.Bd3 Bb7 11.Nf3 Nbd7 12.e5 dxe5 13.fxe5 Ng4 14.Kf1 (If White is careless, things can go downhill quickly.14.h3? Qb6+ 15.Kh1 Nf2+ -+ ; 14.Rf1 Ndxe5 -+ winning a pawn with a continuing attack. ; 14.Qe2 Bc5+ 15.Kf1 Ndxe5 -+ with similar threats to what happened in the game.) 14...Qb6 15.Qe2 Ndxe5 16.Nxe5? (16.h3 Nxd3 17.cxd3 Bxf3 18.gxf3 Nf6 -+ with a very comfortable position. White's kingside is in shambles.; 16.Be3 Nxe3+ 17.Qxe3 Qxe3 18.Rxe3 Nxd3 19.Rxd3 Rfd8 Black's extra pawn and two bishops should be decisive here.) 16...Nxh2mate 0-1

crazedrat1000

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16914

There's an embedded board you can use, FYI.
You can even export games in PGN format and paste that into the board.

Barefoot_Player

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16915

Yes,

And thank you crazedrat100. But this game is copied from a Word document.

Barefoot

lukeluke00

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16916

Yawn...

Back to more games, this time against a GM.

lukeluke00

Apr 6, 2025

0

#16917

AngusByers wrote:

And myself as well, back to our regularly scheduled program. Dug out this old game of mine from the 90s, played against one of the lower CM settings (Moderate), after having come across an historic game showing a double bishop sacrifice in Bird's Opening. It was fun to have it work out, but not the sort of thing that works against humans if you just try and set it up from the start.

It's not that easy to counter the white initiative even after 8...Be8. You have g4-h4 ideas. Nice game

AngusByers

Apr 7, 2025

0

#16918

lukeluke00 wrote:

AngusByers wrote:

And myself as well, back to our regularly scheduled program. Dug out this old game of mine from the 90s, played against one of the lower CM settings (Moderate), after having come across an historic game showing a double bishop sacrifice in Bird's Opening. It was fun to have it work out, but not the sort of thing that works against humans if you just try and set it up from the start.

It's not that easy to counter the white initiative even after 8...Be8. You have g4-h4 ideas. Nice game

Thanks. Admittedly White got the ideal set up and Black didn't try to hinder White at all.

StevetheRabbit

Apr 7, 2025

0

#16919

This is the first 'rapid' (15/10) game I've played for about a year. Busyness has meant that I've just been doing the puzzles every day and playing occasional 'daily' matches.

This is a Sicilian Dragon, so-called because the analysis tends to drag on. It was very popular when I was growing up in the 1960s and early '70s, but I hadn't met it for years. When I won the game I thought I'd done really well, but analysis shows that all my best moves could have been improved upon, especially my dynamic Rook sacrifice to force mate in 3.

jmoopening

Apr 7, 2025

0

#16920

Happy to have a brilliant move. 10. Nxg5