Forums

The resignation

Sort:
Ziryab

I have resigned myself to my addiction to playing through every game of chess.

PLAVIN81

That is the way it should be-I cannot understand why you would not finish a gameFrown

Metastable

I'm glad you resigned yourself to not resigning. It would have been confusing if you had said you were not resigned to resigning instead. Myself, I'm not yet resigned to not resigning. Call me a not resigned non-resigner.

Tom500
Metastable wrote:

I'm glad you resigned yourself to not resigning. It would have been confusing if you had said you were not resigned to resigning instead. Myself, I'm not yet resigned to not resigning. Call me a not resigned non-resigner.

Ziryab

Actually, I was thinking of the five million games in my database. I want to play through every one from Greco to Magnus.

bastiaan

I would pick quality before quantity. I don't even want to imagine how long it will take to play through them and actually think about the moves.
At least that is why I just pick a few random big names from chess history and call them my favourites:)

Ziryab
bastiaan wrote:

I would pick quality before quantity. I don't even want to imagine how long it will take to play through them and actually think about the moves.
At least that is why I just pick a few random big names from chess history and call them my favourites:)

I think that if I devote 60-70 hours per week, I can finish all games through 2012 by 2056 or thereabouts.

Metastable

That's some serious OCD, Ziryab :-)

Scottrf
Ziryab wrote:
bastiaan wrote:

I would pick quality before quantity. I don't even want to imagine how long it will take to play through them and actually think about the moves.
At least that is why I just pick a few random big names from chess history and call them my favourites:)

I think that if I devote 60-70 hours per week, I can finish all games through 2012 by 2056 or thereabouts.

I don't.

Ziryab
Scottrf wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
bastiaan wrote:

I would pick quality before quantity. I don't even want to imagine how long it will take to play through them and actually think about the moves.
At least that is why I just pick a few random big names from chess history and call them my favourites:)

I think that if I devote 60-70 hours per week, I can finish all games through 2012 by 2056 or thereabouts.

I don't.

I play through them very fast.

Scottrf
Ziryab wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
bastiaan wrote:

I would pick quality before quantity. I don't even want to imagine how long it will take to play through them and actually think about the moves.
At least that is why I just pick a few random big names from chess history and call them my favourites:)

I think that if I devote 60-70 hours per week, I can finish all games through 2012 by 2056 or thereabouts.

I don't.

I play through them very fast.

You have less than 2 minutes per game. I think you'll get some serious RSI.

(Also, I didn't notice at first that you 'only' meant 5 million games.)

ChessicalZ

Even if down in material or in a lost position it makes sense to play on. After all aren't we playing the game to find the best moves? It is good practice to solve every problem we come across, especially in the most challenging positions. We may even win a few games too !

blake78613

You might consider passing on the under 10 years of age championships.

Ziryab

How do I change the name of the thread to a clockwork orange!