My style is also positional. Sometimes I try to play tactical. My advice: don't do it!
Will Playing Tactically When my Style is Positional Improve my Chess Skill?
Sort:
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
kindaspongey wrote:
[... I have some sympathy for your point of view, however, there can be other considerations. Chebyshevv was concerned about my reason-for-compliance question, and it therefore seemed desirable to preserve a handy record of some of what inspired the question. Also, it was claimed that I seemed to have difficulty accepting that Chebyshevv has the right to argue a point. Consideration of that claim also made it desirable to keep a fair portion of the record handy. Also, when several conversations are interwoven in the same thread, handy records can help to clarify what is being said in one of those conversations.]
A handy record is also provided by simply scrolling up to the previous post. ...
At the time of making my post, I have no idea how much will have appeared and whether or not my post will end up on the same page. Indeed, it may already be that relevant parts are on a previous page. By the way, have any objections to pictures of cooking instructions, etc.? Perhaps IMBacon will decide to delete #305, #310, #313, #315, and # 316, but, as I type this, they are there.
btickler wrote:
Your posts are already long-ish due to your copious quoting...it would be nice if you (and others) could learn how to cull the excessive indented comments from your replies, especially when it's a half-page of nested comments and a 1-2 line reply from you. I'm purposely leaving the nested comments in to help show how annoying it is to see these walls of nested comments posted serially.
I'm glad somebody finally said something about this. Yes, it's very annoying. I always try to delete the previous comments and only leave what is needed to follow the conversation. Thanks, Btickler.
I've never seen anyone spam bacon before. I've seen eggs and spam, eggs toast and spam, eggs spam, spam and spam, but never bacon spam. lol
Jan 4, 2020
0
#293
IMBacon wrote:
Stop fighting Mom and Dad
I know it's upsetting, sorry son.
And just for the record, Spongey is the wife.
Jan 4, 2020
0
#295
Chebyshevv wrote:
IMBacon wrote:
Stop fighting Mom and Dad
I know it's upsetting, sorry son.
And just for the record, Spongey is the wife.
I posted that?
I dont remember...But then again, there is a lot i dont remember.
He is definitely not the alpha in a relationship.
IMBacon wrote:
How does ketosis work?
So now you're a Keto Quido after spamming bacon? lol
Jan 4, 2020
0
#297
Just taking the opportunity to get a cheap shot on everyone, editing my post in a way puppet head said I had to learn, and slappin you and spongey too 
Jan 4, 2020
0
#298
Triglycerides? Sounds like something fossilised in the Cretaceous Period.
Jan 4, 2020
0
#299
JeffGreen333 wrote:
IMBacon wrote:
How does ketosis work?
So now you're a Keto Quido after spamming bacon? lol
Keto on!
If i was in the mob. I would be a Keto Guido.
There's no such thing as compliance in normal conversation. People disagree and then argue their point. I argued mine, and you seem to have difficulty accepting I have the right to do that.
Meanwhile you continue to fail to argue your point. You quote others not as supporting evidence, but as your whole case.
For example a reasonable person would give this kind of reply: "John Nunn talks about having style in his book ____ which is aimed at beginners. Therefore I think it's fair to say beginners have style, and at the very least it's unreasonable to attack beginners for claiming they have a style."
And then I might say: "colloquially yes, beginners have style, and in some sense it's unfair to beginners that so many in this topic have treated that phrasing as a grave sin. Even so, there is a legitimate distinction to be made between style and preference -- between actions borne from knowledge and actions from ignorance."
This is an example of how a normal conversation might develop.
Boy, you're a regular one-man debate team. lol But you're absolutely right.
Yeah
I'm sometimes strident in my delivery, but it's not like I can't see both sides. If someone logically argues for their position I'm happy to hear it and I'll back off. Unfortunately it's not very common in the chess.com forums that someone can form a reasonable argument, so I end up coming off as unreasonable. At least that's how I see it.