On a Serious Note (just this once)
Sort:
If you want to debate, join the open discussion group, a group specifically made for debating topics. I, personally, would rather see a post on CHESS in the general chess forum, and off-topic posts in the OFF-TOPIC forum. It's fine if you want to be provocative in your writings, but, for once, I would like to see a topic started by cheater_1 that has something to do with the game of Chess, and how it is played.
bwahahahaa......
are u doing a test or somekind of tesis on human behavior ??????
hmmmmm..... he he he , i love it
yeah dont talk publicly and DO NOT expect anyone to read your whole post. I certainly didnt!
Jan 14, 2008
0
#5
I posted a topic on Fischer Random Chess (among others) but it's worthless even if 9999999 people view it and 4 reply. Face it, the people here respond to edgy-ness. They need it. I provide it.
You spelled adage wrong.
(Just throwing that out there)
I think that controversial forums are good to have so lots of different opinions can have thier voice in it, however, slandering people of any age or race is the wrong way to go about it. As any chess.com player, you deserve the right to post and voice your opinion on the forums and I do think some of your postings are beneficial to some but some were hurtful to others. Being 14 years old some people don't think my voice counts as much and just because the people at pogo were 13 doesn't mean you should think any less of them except thier maturity levels may be a little lower than you. Over all I think that you have every right to voice your opinion and I whole-heartedly encourage it.
Jan 14, 2008
0
#8
Now, lets talk chess. Enough about me. I LOVE the way my last thread went about the SOLVING of chess, as checkers has been solved. Anyone who has posted that there is a specific number of MAXIMUM TOTAL VARIATIONS in chess is flat out WRONG. No such number has yet been determined. You can't take a bunch of numbers and multiply 'em and factorial 'em and say there are "X" variations. It's not about plugging in numbers to come up with a final number...DUH!!!. It took a computer 16 YEARS to determine the 500 billion billion variations of checkers. ONCE the number is determined (that's the hard part) then comes creating the database (the brute force part). Once you have a database of (who knows, maybe of a googolplex of variations (a 1 followed by 10^100 of zeros)), then you can set about trying to solve it. We're not even at step one yet, but I want to spearhead the SOLVING of chess. E4.
Jan 14, 2008
0
#10
Thanks chess god, I think your voice counts, and I'm really trying to not be abusive. I also support free speech, popular or not. By the way, I'm the Chessgod here, ok? I'm rated 2900.
I hope that chess is never completely solved, atleast not in my life time. Even though if chess IS solved then I believe it will still be quite popular.
You come off as pretty narcissistic in your other posts already but one all about yourself, on the general chess board nonetheless. Set aside that this belongs in the off topic board I don't think anyone cares that much really.
I think Fischer chess is really cool - I'm looking forward to playing some games with other interested friends in the near future. It would be great if the programmers on chess.com could be one of the first websites to offer fischer chess to the public - something to look into?
I'm glad you admitted that you really do like this site and some of it's people, and your post above is interesting for the shift in strategy, being upfront about what it is you're doing, while at the same time developing the character, adding depth to it (elliciting perhaps some sympathy by means of the honest self-deprecation). I can appreciate the intention to make things interesting, that's for sure. I wish my posts recieved similar traffic. I do appreciate this humanizing post, wherein you point out that you're a "power hungry-argumentative-nerd who likes to study the human psyche." Fair enough, in a way you're playing a game altogether different than chess, you just happen to be on this site.
Mainly what I take away from your post is that you're actually happy to be on the site, and you don't want to be entirely written off, but in fact, seen as one of the group, albeit in an odd role, but one you see as contributing something the site needs. Again, fair enough.
I'll keep reading your posts, and I'll keep taking things easy, heh. You might be right about "touchy feely posts" (my blog might be one of those) but I think you'll be surprised at how far sincerity goes as well.
Tune in next time for another Episode of Cheater_1 on Chess.com. How will he raise the ire of the chess.com community this time? Don't miss the exciting, controverisal and ever-edgy Cheater_1 channel. Play. Learn. Share. Flame!
cheater_1 wrote:
I realize that everyone here hates me...
Okay, this is ridiculous. Do not start to impose your hate on everyone here.
Jan 15, 2008
0
#15
cheater_1 wrote: Now, lets talk chess. Enough about me. I LOVE the way my last thread went about the SOLVING of chess, as checkers has been solved. Anyone who has posted that there is a specific number of MAXIMUM TOTAL VARIATIONS in chess is flat out WRONG. No such number has yet been determined. You can't take a bunch of numbers and multiply 'em and factorial 'em and say there are "X" variations. It's not about plugging in numbers to come up with a final number...DUH!!!. It took a computer 16 YEARS to determine the 500 billion billion variations of checkers. ONCE the number is determined (that's the hard part) then comes creating the database (the brute force part). Once you have a database of (who knows, maybe of a googolplex of variations (a 1 followed by 10^100 of zeros)), then you can set about trying to solve it. We're not even at step one yet, but I want to spearhead the SOLVING of chess. E4.
Before you start your computer cranking through the calculations to determine how many possible positions there are in chess you might like to investigate whether chess actually is solvable. That could save you a huge amount of time if you discover that no solution is actually possible. On the other hand, if you discover it IS solvable, then you know you are not wasting your time.
Why draw attention to youraself again?
I didn't look at or respond to your Fischer thread because I don't really give a damn abuot Fischer. You have an inferiority complex, you're not special, I'm not special, no one on this site is special. We're just here to play chess, leave the psycho-analytical stuff to the side please.
Jan 15, 2008
0
#17
RAEL Without a doubt you have the BEST single post about who I am. (post #14). YOU GET IT. You may not like who I am, but at least you UNDERSTAND. Thanks. I'm sure that others will think that RAEL is just one of my alter egos now, since no one could actually identify with me.
In response to the solvability of chess, it is solvable because it is a FINITE game. Chess is a game of FINITENESS--time remaining, number of pieces, number of squares a piece can move, 50 move rule, etc.--all have specific numbers. Let's look at the extreme for a second. The King and Rook vs. a King has been solved. I think it's no more than mate in 14 in ANY position. As you add pieces, you may have mate in 34, etc. It progresses exponentially by the time you have a full 32 piece board. There will be, one day, a computer that has a huge database of every single variation possible for every single move possible. It will access this database and make a flawless move so that it is invincible. If the program were to play itself for one million games, its record would be 0-0-1,000,000. All draws. It will happen.
Jan 15, 2008
0
#18
cheater_1 wrote:
In response to the solvability of chess, it is solvable because it is a FINITE game. Chess is a game of FINITENESS--time remaining, number of pieces, number of squares a piece can move, 50 move rule, etc.--all have specific numbers. Let's look at the extreme for a second. The King and Rook vs. a King has been solved. I think it's no more than mate in 14 in ANY position. As you add pieces, you may have mate in 34, etc. It progresses exponentially by the time you have a full 32 piece board. There will be, one day, a computer that has a huge database of every single variation possible for every single move possible. It will access this database and make a flawless move so that it is invincible. If the program were to play itself for one million games, its record would be 0-0-1,000,000. All draws. It will happen.
Being finite does not guarantee solvability. There are many finite problems that are known to have no solution.
but if N=NP is proved (se millenium problems, googel it, whatever) chess, and all uther finite games can be solved.
Jan 19, 2008
0
#20
Redwall wrote:
but if N=NP is proved (se millenium problems, googel it, whatever) chess, and all uther finite games can be solved.
That's a big if. Even if N=NP is proved it only shows that a certain class of problems may be solvable, it does not provide a solution to specific problems or even prove that chess itself is solvable.
Fellow members of this site, I'd like to take a moment to say that I really do like coming here and posting (whether it's my own twisted topics or responding to others). Ever since I virtually gave up playing at Pogo, I missed the dialog (good and bad) between chessplayers. I am now getting it here--and the average age here is much higher than that of Pogo players (13 at Pogo I'd guess).
Yes, I come across as an arrogant, conceited, troll, flamebait, etc., but I make no apologies because I really am a real life jerk. Remember, I'm in my early 40's, never married, never had kids.
I realize that everyone here hates me, but I honestly do love the game of chess and play OTB regularly and like debating you all. Yes, I get a rise out of stirring the pot here, but that's who I am. My file at my place of employment is filled with disciplinary write-ups. It may sound to you that I'm trying to add legitimacy to who I am or trying to prove too much that I'm a jerk, but I am who I am. When you mix the occupations that I have at one time or another considered taking up (psychologist, lawyer, Career Military Officer, "computer hacker") you can see that that mix yields a power hungry-argumentative-nerd who likes to study the human psyche.
I especially love reading the responses from people outside the USA. "Foreigners" usually have a totally different take and are generally more on target with their responses to the posts.
Too many people take themselves (or myself) too seriously here, I find. Loosen up, people.
In case you havent noticed, my last 2 topics that I started got a total of like 8 responses because they were as dull as they get. No one wants to comment on Fischer Random Chess. BOOOORING. My last "credibility" topic got something like 99 responses in 2 days. The number isn't what matters to me, it's the chance to debate or talk to a wide variety of people with a wide variety of opinions. No one wants to watch touchy feely hugs and kisses--we want ACTION.
Every topic I post will be "edgy" or "controversial". The old addage applies here, "If you don't like what's on TV, turn the channel." If you hate me so much, don't click on a topic started by cheater_1.
I am a trainwreck, look away if you can.