On “The Secret of Chess”

Sort:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
chesster3145 wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
chesster3145 wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

Concerning the closed position terms present in 'The Secret of Chess', why would anyone think you could find a better manual on the KID and similar closed setups:

 

The closed position concepts the book formulates are very useful for real game play, indeed.

Putting that aside, the move times in your diagram prove this wasn’t a 2 2 game.

I have had at least 5+3.

SF probably 2+2.

It is just the header that says 2+2.

But are not you aware no one can play top engines at blitz?

You’ve already said no one can play top engines with a limited time control. That means no time control at all - another severe handicap for SF.

 

I meant no one EXCEPT me.

I bet SF will beat you 100-0, even with a piece down. happy.png

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
hitthepin wrote:
Guys, I made this thread so we could share our opinions-not argue.

My opinion is we need chess content, and not these stupid altercations.

No one interested to learn something first hand for my book, for my superior knowledge?

I am here to offer advice and answer questions, but no one asks.

In that way, I don't see what creative discussion could arise.

 

chessspy1

Ok, I also will offer my superior knowledge I also offer advice and answer questions.

I think this is a good idea. We 1400 rated players like Lyudmil and I should show we are quite prepared to advise FMs GMs and the like how to best play.

stewardjandstewardj
hitthepin wrote:
Guys, I made this thread so we could share our opinions-not argue.

as long as both arguing sides are on, argument is bound to happen. Lyudmil retaliated, we retaliated back, and war escalated lol

stewardjandstewardj

I say we nominate someone to play one correspondence game with Lyudmil on chess.com. Maybe a CM, one or two commented in his forums, and one is bound to be willing to play. If we could get one, maybe even an IM.

Of course, that's if Lyudmil would accept, which he should since one game couldn't take up that much time.

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

You are a disaster.

From now on, I will ONLY post chess content.

This is how one beats Komodo with black in a setup which GMs lose:

 

Don't thank me for the good game, enjoy.

If you want more of this: https://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/human-versus-machine.html

stewardjandstewardj
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

You are a disaster.

From now on, I will ONLY post chess content.

This is how one beats Komodo with black in a setup which GMs lose:

 

 

Don't thank me for the good game, enjoy.

If you want more of this: https://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/human-versus-machine.html

I thought you wouldn't want to accept the most simple request due to the fact that you are afraid to lose

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

Lose from WHOM?

As far as I know, Kasparov is already retired. happy.png

GWTR

Two days ago, I bought Human Versus Machine, Part 1 off amazon.com.
It is awesome..
I dig the section on pawns in The Secret of Chess, but the rest is over my head.


Well, over my head until I read https://www.amazon.com/Human-Versus-Machine-Stockfish-Komodo-ebook/dp/B0768G8R2C/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Now I see clearly.

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

It is a whole different world with GWTR involved! happy.png

chesster3145
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

Lose from WHOM?

As far as I know, Kasparov is already retired.

And he's still better than you... happy.png

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

That is what you think.

He is tremendous, but I have my bit of knowledge too.

chesster3145
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

That is what you think.

He is tremendous, but I have my bit of knowledge too.

False knowledge, actually: you’ve simply put overly complicated terms and centipawn values to concepts everyone already knows and understands. My solving and explaining your positions is proof of this.

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

So far, you did not manage to solve even a single position, so just shut up.

 

stewardjandstewardj
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

That is what you think.

He is tremendous, but I have my bit of knowledge too.

Yes. He is tremendous. That makes sense....

If by tremendous, you mean good at chess, he has a 1667 in correspondence chess on chess.com after playing over 120 games. He is anywhere from OK to good at chess, depending on what your standards of "good" are, but not "tremendous", whatever that means...

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

You are referring to Chesster, and I have been referring to Kasparov...

Anyway, Chess.com ratings seem a bit strange to me, some really good people have low ratings, while some really bad high ratings.

Engine use?

luckbird

love is better than chess

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

Love is everywhere, in chess and body alike.

For some people, it is more in chess than elsewhere.

Btw., where did FBloggs go?

Back in the army?

He has not posted on my threads since ages.