Maybe he's someone with a grudge against Hungarians so he says things to make them look bigoted.
Pros and Cons of reading chess books
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Yeah I've seen some beautiful Hungarian women, that's for sure. I've just not seen any idiots claiming to be from Hungary.
roflez wrote:
i guess if you didn't have wiki you wouldn't have a clue where hungary is,right? guess what, that's the country most of your geniuses are, the one with the most beautiful women, that shithole that has a much longer and more proud history than your nation will ever have. no matter how bad hungary is, i would not in a million years choose to be an american instead. you egoistic moron.
see, now that's funny. did i mention hungary being a shithole? nope, you did! did i say hungary was a bad place? nope, you did. But you've proven my point. you're just some idiot mad at america, for no apparent reason
What wrong in a dictionary?The things i wrote,I could have written them without the help of any dictionary,because i know the meaning of talent,Genius.I gave them as a proof and your definiton does not tally with the correct definiton in any way.
Don3 wrote:
What wrong in a dictionary?The things i wrote,I could have written them without the help of any dictionary,because i know the meaning of talent,Genius.I gave them as a proof and your definiton does not tally with the correct definiton in any way.
What is a "correct definition"?: what a book says, or what investigations by renowned scientists and people, living proofs of what we are talking here, stated? The dictionary intends to define, just that, it does not prove anything. And peace and tostones, I'm going to sleep, it´s late here. 
Correct definiton is the most apt definition possible.It is the best way to understand the meaning of words.
"The dictionary intends to define, just that, it does not prove anything"
It just doesn't define,it gives the meaning of the word (the exact way it is understood throughout the world)
its the SI system of word.Unlike physics where we have MKS system,Si system,FPS system
In english there is only one standard that is SI system a.k.a dictionary
Cambridge is one of the best by the way and my personal preference along with oxford.
roflez wrote:
i guess if you didn't have wiki you wouldn't have a clue where hungary is,right? guess what, that's the country most of your geniuses are, the one with the most beautiful women, that shithole that has a much longer and more proud history than your nation will ever have. no matter how bad hungary is, i would not in a million years choose to be an american instead. you egoistic moron.
Your nationalism is making me hungry, time for breakfast and some coffee.
Jun 14, 2011
0
#133
CharlyAZ wrote:
@erikido: great positions.
the first one I think g5 is ehem, "super-confident", let say it that way. But it had an interesting follow up.
the second one you could take in e5, and still have a great attack. the continuation looked superb though :)
the third one I wonder why not take in g6 right away.
the last one is probable that Ne6 wins as well. (thats what I saw, not Nh7, more original)
Haha, I thought maybe super confident or super ignorant.
Yes in the third one I missed the mate after taking on g6(calculated that he would be getting 2 rooks and a pawn mass for the queen.) but somehow missed the mate
Yes, n-e6 would have worked, it seems, as well. although that might have allowed escape through f7(just playing it over in my head)
Don3 wrote:
Correct definiton is the most apt definition possible.It is the best way to understand the meaning of words.
"The dictionary intends to define, just that, it does not prove anything"
It just doesn't define,it gives the meaning of the word (the exact way it is understood throughout the world)
its the SI system of word.Unlike physics where we have MKS system,Si system,FPS system
In english there is only one standard that is SI system a.k.a dictionary
hahaha, I surrender, my friend, when somebody start shooting to me that kind of acronyms that in the world I know. I hated physics, chemistry and math in the school; I was too busy solving chess puzzles :)
And if you define, you are giving it meaning, though 
thanks for surrending.I appreciate it.
Hahahahaha, that was funny, 
. Did you even read the last sentence? I just don't want to argue with a belief which creed is "the best way to define a concept is reading a dictionary" (written for someone) instead of scientific evidence.
Peace be with you.
I don't want this topic to be surrounded by a dictionary.i want it to be chess related.
Don3 wrote:
I don't want this topic to be surrounded by a dictionary.i want it to be chess related.
I thought I was talking about chess and books and investigations and you were the dictionary guy. I have to read the thread again. I'm insomniac and when Im in this states of mind anything could happen. 
....hmmm
Peace, my friend.
RoseQueen1985 wrote:
It always amazes me how people online argue the smallest, stupidest things, to the bitter then. Someone says "2+2-4", and someone else comes in and says, ..."well...really 2+2=4 only in..." and a huge name calling argument ensues wherer nationalities, cultures and believes are involved.
Oh, and everyone is a psychotherapist.
We are argumening ACCEPTED defenitions now? really? wow. Just wow. I guess next time the dictionary tells me that a Puma is a large feline I better not believe it unless enough testing has been done. Ridicolous.
I feel like a kid caught steelig candy. And worst because in this case I felt it was necessary argumenting because it meant a difference. Trying to make a point I was hit in the head with the volumes of the prestigious and precise Cambridge dictionary. What to do, what to do? 
*sigh*
Jun 15, 2011
0
#140
Hello rudy - clark , some say I am naturaly talented also :) Books help enhance your game , also watching opening videos and Doing tactics . http://chesstempo.com/ is a great site to improve tactics . Hope that helped have a great day ~CodyCarson
lick your own butt some more,please.. you're just like the rest of america, an egoistic assmunch.i wish ppl like you were born dead - not just brainwise like yourself.
I've only been playing chess for less than a year and a half, but i have a natural talent for it, seeing as i became the best in my district in this short amount of time. My USCF rating is 1362 with only 5 games being played. Many people have told me that i should read chess books and study openings. Even my opponents suggest this; opponents who, armed with this knowledge, still lost to me. My mindset has been that if i memorize openings and study books, that my creative play will be inhibited, that my style will in a sense be more "robotic" because i'd be playing from memory and not on the spot. I could use some different points of view on this matter
at first i was offended. but then i noticed , hey! you're from Hungary. of course you'll make a rant about America and generalize us all