FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
Thanks for the post Corrijean. That was my thought too but then I got to the point where I felt that things were so insane over there that they had become silly ( I mean 1500 plus posts, Good Grief ! ).
Thanks for the interesting posts. I remember reading that Paul Morphy would get very very very stressed out when his opponent would drag out the time between moves because there were no time-limits back when Morphy was playing.
Actually that story, true as it is, only refers to one incident in a game between Morphy and Paulsen at the 1st American Chess Congress. Morphy was generally very patient.
Thanks for the recent posts.
Javan64: Yes I think that you have the correct term there.
Batgirl: According to my trusty old Chess Dictionary you are quite correct. In the American Congress of 1857 " Paulson played so slowly that Morphy was reported to have shed tears of frustration while he waited for Paulson to move " ( the personification of Sitzfleisch ? ). Of course Chess clocks were introduced to solve the problem of Players being too slow.
I see that we now have a tread on the go here stating that Chess is not about Intelligence. Well perhaps at long last the mystery of Chess will be solved ? ( or perhaps the new thread will turn out to be silly lol ).
Now we have a new thread on the go here to push the idea that the Perpetual Check needs to go. Quote: And still they come ! ( and yet more of them beyond that lol ).
Correct. Although he seldom took more than one minute on his own move, Morphy was patient and polite with long-thinking opponents.
Paulsen, it should be remembered, was infamous for his slow play, which was noted by many in those pre-clock days. Oddly enough, in his later years he had to adapt to clocks, and while the early time limit of 30 moves in two hours is slower than modern events, it was an abrupt adjustment for those used to none. Yet Paulsen's apparent strength didn't suffer from having to move faster.
As one reads thru the posts in this thread one might think that the odd new rule being proposed here is a bit " out there " lol. However one of the oddest things that I've seen in these forums recently is that the thread in regards to abolishing the Stalemate rule has now gone to over 1500 posts. So is that silly or is that insane hmmm ?
Mainly it's because the little punk and few others won't let it die.
Thanks for the info Estragon.
Returning to my trusty old Chess Dictionary again ( yes a few of us oldtimers still have some books lol ) I found some good info re time-controls. During a 1860 match between Anderssen and Kolich, hourglasses ( aka sandglasses ) were first used and in this system two extra people would be at the Game Table to manipulate these rather unwieldy " timepieces ". Assuming that each player had a hourglass which would run for 3 hours that would limit the Game to a total of 6 hours. Then in 1883 T.Wilson invented the analog Chess Clock which are now of course being replaced by Digital units.
There is a thread going here that states October 9th is National Chess Day. I think that to celebrate this holiday we need a new variation of Chess and I popose Chug-a-lug Chess Matches. The winner of the first game in the Match must down a pint of Beer. The same for the 2cnd game and the 3rd game etc. The Match ends when one Player cannot continue. The winner is the Player with the best score but the last person standing gets one more pint of Beer ( Consolation Prize if he or she lost the Match lol ).
Someone has a thread on the go now because they want to be Congratulated after they win a Game. Well it is nice if your oponent says gg after a Game but a lot of people here just want to play without chatting at all. Mind you we could take a survey and if enough people need to be Congratulated then we could ask Chess.com to add a new feature. After a player wins a game his Computer could blare out a recording of The Double Eagle March and the Monitor could show a clip of Fireworks going off ( indicating that the person who won is truly a Wonderful Human Being ! ).
Some people just need a hug.
Adolf needs a hug?
The way I see it, if you have the time to worry about how anonymous strangers treat you on the internet, you must enjoy a relatively worry-free life.
Hey, that suggests a new catchphrase: "Get a (relatively worry-free) life!"
Thanks for the post.
One thing tho, if I chat with someone on-line then they are a internet pen-pal ( ie: no longer a stranger ? ).
Some of us are stranger than others.
Don't be a stranger!
Don't be estranged, sir!
A strangers just a friend you haven't met, or possibly the last face you will see this side of Heaven.