MY LEGACY

Do you have a minor in linguistics as well cheater_1?

 I find your use of fractions interesting... 1/10th of the energy you put into engine building you say?  This same energy that had you just use other peoples code? this same energy that has you "building" your engine at a hobbyist level? 

Or perhaps to put it another way - 1/10th of the energy to make a chess engine that was rather unremarkable would result in someone being a master at chess... unless of course they arn't a child.  Because well you have to start studying hard* (about 1/10th of stealing code to make a program) earlier or much like SLA (second language acquistion) it is in your words "IMPOSSIBLE" to become both a master of chess and fluent in a second language the older you get.  There have been STUDIES that prove it.  Well with evidence like that I guess you have to be right.

I really hope the producers of REAL chess engines have thanked you for increasing the demand for their products.  Also I'm sure you have a framed letter from Kasparov thanking you for showing him that training with engines would improve his game. 

Thanks cheater_1 for claiming credit for things that have been happening without you for as long as I remember.

As a side I'm not sure if I actually want you to stop posting or not.  The more you post the more silly all your claims sound.  This tickles me.  I think that maybe Erik should create an imaginary land section on the forums for posters like you.

cheater_1, you are tragic.

Tragic, for you are not driven because you want something: you are driven because you think that being driven is what you want. This engine story is the vessel for your queeste, but it is pointless.

Reality does not materialize from claims. You will never attain anything real from relentless desire in itself, and yet you desire for nothing but the existence and acknowledgement of these traits in yourself.

 I fear that only if everyone respected you for being brutally honest, relentless in your pursuit of things - in general in possesion of all the traits you single out as virtuous -, only then would you understand. 

Therefore, I acknowledge all the virtues you deem present in yourself, and salute their existence. But if this leads to nothing, I can not but feel sad because you are then only them, a hollow container, striving for their recognition without a real purpose for yourself. 

Now, you are a slave of this image. But it is only you that can break the chains.

EXILEDCANUCK.....pure gibberish. You make little sense. True, I have STOLEN an existing code and modified it and manipulated it. So SUE me. Public domain, baby. I invented a better mousetrap. I am no more a plaigarizer than anyone who has ever taken an existing idea or product and made it better.

RC WOODS.....huh?

My gibberish as you call it was not attacking you for the means in which you came up with "your program" but rather was questioning how much energy you seem to claim to have to put into it.  According to what you say, the energy you put into your program could fuel 10 people to become master level chess players.

I only seem to be speaking gibberish because I am addressing the gibberish you speak with the exact same logic.  But by all means, keep posting your nonsensical fanciful tales of who you want us to think you are.  The more you post the more you chip away at any potential for a legacy you ever had a chance of having (in my opinion next to none...).

You have done no more for computer aided chess than any random drug taking athelete has done for steroid use.  You didn't invent the engine, you didn't make engine use popular, you didn't create anything original or new, you claim legacy for doing nothing other than talking about the nothing* that you do.

If you spent 1/10th of the energy you put into claiming to be someone special into actually doing something, you might find that you actually accomplish something. 

Just a thought. 

a small small man, with an even smaller mind, and evidently, no life

Computer aided chess has has MUCH a right to be at this site as regular chess. AS MUCH A RIGHT.

It is my GOAL to make it commonplace here as well as getting other players to take on the entire chess.com pool of players.

To igonore computer aided chess, to dismiss it as ANYTHING other than chess, is the height of ARROGANCE. Chess programs have beaten every single Grandmaster on the planet at one time or the other. Much can be learned from them. INDEED, MORE can be learned from CHESSMASTER (the single best tutoring program) in 1 week than you can gain in a month of poring over books.

I dont think many people here would disagree with me when I say that a complete novice, spending a month with the CHESSMASTER program, would emerge a STRONGER play than a complete novice who spent a month with Kasparov or Anand, etc.

Cheater I don't think anyone here argues with the merits of using computers to become better at chess THROUGH TRAINING.  The issue this chess community appears to have with you is that you don't see the distinction between using a chessprogram to train and using a chessprogram to cheat.  No one has an issue with players having a trainer... but if that trainer sits next to them during the game and helps them choose a move then peope start to have an issue with it.

I would also suggest that using a computer all the time to play chess dampens your ability to think through the game.  Which makes you a worse player when you don't have your computer on.

Computers are/will be stronger chess players than people.  That does not mean that people should stop playing chess.  Cars can move faster than people that doesn't stop foot races.

I don't think anyone has said that engine chess is not chess or a lesser form of chess but rather the player that uses an engine to cheat rather than as a learning tool gets less from the game.  In contrast you seem to be implying that the type of chess most of the people on this site want to play is some how a lesser version than the chess you want to see played. As has been stated eslewhere - if I wanted to play against a computer I would, if I want to play against people I do.

I feel that in your mind chess is all about winning - not how you get there.  If thats how you feel why cheat? why not just play against people rated 1000 points lower than you.  Oh thats too boring is it? Well what do you get out of playing an opponent with the help of a computer who's rating is 1000 points higher than them?  You are not a player of chess cheater - you are a spectator.

I will be "HONEST" in saying these following things.

Cheater_1 is the greatest thing that has ever happened to chess.com.  He is the apple of our eye and he is revered throughout the entire website.  He is a nice and cavalier man who likes to make advancements in computer aided chess during his free time.  Cheater is very outgoing and has ongoing relationships with many of his nice coworkers.  He genuinely cares for the well being of chess.com and wants to help chess.com make a smooth transition into the computer age.  ALL HAIL CHEATER_1!!!

You Legacy

 from your profile page

Chess Cheater
Midwest, United States

Member Since: Nov 24, 2007
Last Login: Jun 16, 2008
Profile Views: 3809
Points: 287

Birthday: Aug 27, 1965

Occupation: IT

About Me:
I'm a very complex person. Fiercely independent and live life according to the rules that I make up. I'm willing to resort to whatever means necessary (I draw the line at murder, though) to achieve my goals. I'd clobber my grandmother with a 2x4 if that's what I needed to do. I'm 42 and single, seeing no woman can put up with me for more than a few weeks.

My Chess Style / Favorite Openings:
Professional chess cheater for over 10 years.