players who hit and run...

Survival of the fittest? You have no clue what you're talking about at all, do you? And what's great about starting a "troll topic"? Besides, you didn't answer my question, instead you pointed to a cartoon character. Well done!

For my own sake I'll ignore the rest, but you know what 'drink the kool-aid' stands for right? Not something you'd use for boosting your own morale.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=drink+the+kool-aid

im laughing so it had value whats the point of doing anything?... being the alpha male in chess means your magnus carlsen... u are making me explain something that i really cant because its circumstancial really on what makes an alpha male id assume ud know where im coming from

Huh? First you're talking about "alpha male instincts". Now it's Magnus Carlsen being the alpha male in chess. Which are 2 non related things really. And what did you mean by survival of the fittest?

about the kool aid and the morale i know the origins its not to that extent, basically some people know how to reason vs those who choose not to reason so these topics are just full of bait...

 some people are too smart for their own good sometimes

alpha males survive therefore are the fittest, as i said its circumstancial u must have a low IQ and id categorize u with those who "dont get it"or u like to poke at people. this is chess so i specified that magnus is the alpha male in his domain duh. theres nature, chess, ect... but the focal point is whats an alpha male? well as i said its gonna depend, i plan compete in my own playing field i plan to be the alpha male i gotta live it i dont talk about it

"u gotta split a top on the regular or get plugged in your mug from a slug by your competitor" -Kool G Rap

Since you've mentioned people who know how to reason vs. baiting...looking at you posts consisting of incoherent rambling about "alpha male instincts", bringing it "like goku", "survival of the fittest", "you suck at chess therefore your opinion is irrelevant" and so on leaves me with the question if there's any substance to your posts and quite possibly your whole persona besides claiming your own superiority towards complete strangers on the internet by pointing to a board game and outdated concepts of "alpha" being equal to the guy having the loudest voice, the biggest empty gestures of self confidence and constantly talking about his own abilities.

No offense if you're 12 years old or something, in this case sorry, it's perfectly normal to act like this while being younger.

And quoting Kool G Rap to prove a point? Really?

i was directly targeted and set it straight, its about chess and someone commented on my picture for no reason in a way that seemed rude so i diddnt instigate... do u get thrills looking for exploitations on forums? u got way deep on that like your some therapist

And how exactly did you response to some random guy commenting on your picture? You could've responded by saying that this is non relevant to the topic at all at which point he would've had no valid response at all.

Instead, you basically replied along the lines "You suck at chess. You're not an alpha male. Your're soft", which already proves my point. You didn't "set it straight" at all. You replied to a meaningless personal attack by spamming even more personal attacks.

The funniest part though is where you told the guy that his comment on your avatar is meaningless because he's bad at playing chess. So it's really not that I have to look for exploitations, you do a fine job on your own, lol.

+1.

I never decline rematches to play someone else when the game was played properly (ie without having to show I can mate with two queens or getting timed out in a completely trivial to win endgame).

But it does not mean that I feel it is a moral obligation, or that I will never change my mind about rematches.

Maybe you should have taken the opportunity to dispel the stereotype instead of walking into it.  Seriously.  An "alpha male" does not behave the way you are.  

If you want to exude actual confidence, take down the naked torso pic, stop worrying about other players "snubbing" you by not taking your rematch offer, and stop talking like a gang member.  False bravado, working out, and playing Chess aggressively are not going to make you grow any closer to the top of that door you are standing in front of.  You are young, healthy, and smart enough to play Chess decently well, apparently.  

Own it, without the oozing insecurity.  Some will find this post mean, but it's the nicest thing I could tell you.  Give it some thought.

"By this I mean they resigned when obviously dead-lost and didn't make me play out some trivial ending. If they do that and then ask for a rematch, they get declined."

Although I don't have a problem declining rematches, this doesn't factor into my decision making. I don't really attatch a person to me needing to carry out this goal -- it's more the game itself that's "making me" use my advantage to achieve the goal (checkmate) to which all other advantages are subordinate. Taking out a minute to make sure I'm not getting stalemate when up a lot of material -- however tedious I may find that (just as I might, hypothetically, think grinding a positional advantage is tedious too), indeed, I consider a part of the game, even if it's not the most exciting. I think a lot of playing chess is conforming to the goals of the game -- doing what the board needs you to do, not what you would like to do. I might be annoyed that my only chance to win in a certain position is to attack when I'd rather build up positionally -- but again it's not really about me -- I respect the idea of setting aside those desires and focusing my energies on achieving the goal the game has set in front of me, regardless of what I might argue with words as to why I deserve to win a game (chess doesn't ask for speeches, it just asks for one thing -- mate).  Ultimately, I get satisfaction simply knowing I did that, even if there were moments that felt like tedious work.

It's a very rare opinion indeed. I will probably be the first expert to have one like that. I understand why people believe the opposite, but for whatever reason, the above philosophical view of games in general is what pops into my particular brain.

This forum ended more or less with the first response lol 

"If you are not pissed off for greatness, that means you are okay with being mediocre." - Ray Lewis

Words of wisdom that don't make any sense. Hang on... I just googled this  Ray Lewis character and discovered he's a footballer so everyything's okay: footballer are allowed to not make sense.
 

ray lewis is probably far more intelligent than u are and myself hes the best at what he does thats what makes sense, i embrace how he brings that mentality that ambitious style is needed to strive 

Anyone who get annoyed because their opponent doesn't give them a rematch must be very insecure.

I tend to avoid them as i've had many cases where an insecure opponent rematches and then uses an engine in the second game to get 'revenge'.
Likewise I don't demand any, and even if I do, im not concerned if they reject it.

All the things about 'you wouldn't act like that in real life (not giving rematch) is stupid. First of all no one would act like such a child after been beaten in sport. I do a lot of sparring in kickboxing and never after a round do people start complaining like an 8 year old a demand a rematch. It is a much beter use of time to spar with someone different, as they will have a unique style and you can learn more from matching against many different people.

Its the same with chess, playing the same person again and again wouldn't teach you as much as versing a unique person each time would.

i don't care at all about rematching or giving rematches (actually, i usually give one rematch, though i rarely ask unless i'm feeling weird), but i can relate to almost never being engine'd after accepting a rematch.

ive got attitude in my game it has been helpful, to be a fighter u gotta have that aura of a winner and believe it and its selfish but the objective is to completely destroy in a fight or chess so losing to me isnt cool in either, im not ok with being some chump and obviosly if get schooled in chess im good enought to realize, if a player doesnt let me rematch because i sense they have doubt they cant walk way feeling like a true winner when they are being called out, i realize we have lives but if its possible to rematch its best to do that and shut them up if u believe u got the skills to back it up, for a competitive person who fights they should have that fighting spirit because ive also competed ive had one amatuer fight only but i know the competitiveness it takes to win u gotta do what other people wont do u gotta love something and want it more than then next guy and to hate losing but not as much as the love of winning