----------> this forum is better without him intervening in people's threads with his garbage.
This forum is better without people with 0 game (and 0 at all) active on site only to destroy (with 0 effects obviously..) Mr. LT ....like you.
How tedious to change account only for this..and so sad.
I know, now people will come back with the 3500 rated story...
Come back where?
Since he has not played any rated games for the last 15+ years, his OTB/Rapid/Blitz rating is zero.
Same goes for his correspondence rating.
End of story.
"If Super GMs would put such effort to win against engines as LT did, they would be very good in this task, much better than LT, I guess."
"But LT is the only guy crazy enough to spend so much time playing against engines."
The problem with these statements is that he has given absolutely no proof. He "claims" to have done this. He "claims" to have routinely beaten chess engines. He "claims" to know the "secrets" of chess. When in fact there is not a single shred of proof. Personally, I dont care either way. I hope he makes a fortune with his books. And again...the main issue is his refusal to show any proof. Sure his book says he had the engine set at certain parameters, but is that proof? Of course not.
If a scientist published a paper "claiming" to have solved the mysteries of the universe, but supplied no proof, and no facts, how do you think that would be taken?
If somebody rated 900 will accuse you of cheating in your games here what would you say? Ok, you will contact the support because you enjoy protection against such accusations here. But let's assume you can' contact the support. What would you do? Would you try to offer scientific evidence for your fair games? Like showing that you have inaccurate or blunders in your games? And what would you do if the guy say this is not a scientific evidence, but only shows that you make intentional blunders in still winning positions?
You have to offer evidence of cheating.
Not the opposite.
I know, now people will come back with the 3500 rated story and argue it is all about unfounded claims, right? Ignoring that LT more than once told us that he thinks his rating is far below 3500.
But nobody point to these statements.
As they don' fit to the attempts to attack him.
LT has written this book "The Secret of Chess" and it hasn't sold many copies since his arrogant I'm always right attitude at the beginning of this thread. That pretty much sums up that this book has been a failure, he has written other books as well which have all been failures. That is the truth whether people like it or not. Who knows what his real strength is and who really cares? He's been off the forum for days now, no doubt he will be back but this forum is better without him intervening in people's threads with his garbage.
He continues to avoid playing real people which only hinders him even further. There are many other books out there that will help improves ones chess and they're all better than The Secret of Chess. End of discussion.
The discussion still isn't ending...
I know, now people will come back with the 3500 rated story...
Come back where?
Since he has not played any rated games for the last 15+ years, his OTB/Rapid/Blitz rating is zero.
Same goes for his correspondence rating.
End of story.
As I have already stated, ratings aren't necessarily indicative of strength. I haven't trained to box since I was a teenager. Do you suppose that means I still couldn't impose my will quite well as a chess boxer, regardless of what my ratings are or aren't ?
As I have already stated, ratings aren't necessarily indicative of strength. I haven't trained to box since I was a teenager. Do you suppose that means I still couldn't impose my will quite well as a chess boxer, regardless of what my ratings are or aren't ?
May I suppose that Senna committed suicide because you were able to drive faster than him?
As I have already stated, ratings aren't necessarily indicative of strength. I haven't trained to box since I was a teenager. Do you suppose that means I still couldn't impose my will quite well as a chess boxer, regardless of what my ratings are or aren't ?
May I suppose that Senna committed suicide because you were able to drive faster than him?
If you want to talk some smack and go back and forth a bit, so be it, but I refuse to engage in a dialogue, so flippantly about a tragedy....
I find some of them only see what they want to see...
Human beings in general tend to over-estimate their own abilities, expertise, and intelligence. This is an evolved survival mechanism. If we truly understood how lacking we actually are, life would seem more intimidating, and we'd be more averse to necessary risky behavior (such as competing for resources). See "Dunning-Kruger Effect". We're all guilty of it. Some humility would be appropriate from all parties. This cuts both ways in any debate.
I find some of them only see what they want to see...
That's what all LT's followers are like as well. You refuse to acknowledge his cowardice to play any real people. He's afraid that he'll lose and get humiliated, the sooner you all see that the better. This anechoic chamber excuse is complete crap.
I had a discussion once with a guy who thought it was cowardice to not fight a fight that he knew there was no ultimate victory in. I argued it was stupidity and not cowardice and that he needed to learn the difference. He died trying to fight an armed man in a robbery.
Lyudmil would never get a fair game. Everyone would use Stockfish and then say, I thought you could beat Stockfish and if he did beat them or Stockfish, playing engine like moves or moves that draw or beat engines, he would quickly get banned, accused of engine use.
.....it is a fight with no ultimate victory. He is intelligent enough to know that ahead of time...
"If Super GMs would put such effort to win against engines as LT did, they would be very good in this task, much better than LT, I guess."
"But LT is the only guy crazy enough to spend so much time playing against engines."
The problem with these statements is that he has given absolutely no proof. He "claims" to have done this. He "claims" to have routinely beaten chess engines. He "claims" to know the "secrets" of chess. When in fact there is not a single shred of proof. Personally, I dont care either way. I hope he makes a fortune with his books. And again...the main issue is his refusal to show any proof. Sure his book says he had the engine set at certain parameters, but is that proof? Of course not.
If a scientist published a paper "claiming" to have solved the mysteries of the universe, but supplied no proof, and no facts, how do you think that would be taken?
If somebody rated 900 will accuse you of cheating in your games here what would you say? Ok, you will contact the support because you enjoy protection against such accusations here. But let's assume you can' contact the support. What would you do? Would you try to offer scientific evidence for your fair games? Like showing that you have inaccurate or blunders in your games? And what would you do if the guy say this is not a scientific evidence, but only shows that you make intentional blunders in still winning positions?
You have to offer evidence of cheating.
Not the opposite.
I know, now people will come back with the 3500 rated story and argue it is all about unfounded claims, right? Ignoring that LT more than once told us that he thinks his rating is far below 3500.
But nobody point to these statements.
As they don' fit to the attempts to attack him.
I never mentioned cheating. I am not accusing him of cheating. As I have said before, I hope he makes millions on his books. What i am saying is that IF he has truley found a way to improve on chess, then fantastic! But if youre going to make the claims he has made, he needs to back them up, and show proof. Im sorry...saying you think youre the 2nd. strongest player in the world is not proof. Publishing a bunch of games against engines is not proof, without any way to verify the data.
Nah, he is not the strongest anymore.
I played vs 3500 rated SF, in a 100 games match. I won 99, drew 1, 0 loss.
I calculated my rating and got a whooping
4420! rating.
I am selling my secrets. Check this link.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/stockfish-is-very-weak-10-new-methods-to-beat-engines
I had a zero rating too, during a period that I was inactive.
Current rating 2307, quite a bit lower than it was 20 years ago.
LT had a rating of 2095 some 12 years ago, inactive since then. So, his current rating is zero, simple as that.
Apparently you don't know the difference between rating, and strength. Too bad for you.
I had a zero rating too, during a period that I was inactive.
Current rating 2307, quite a bit lower than it was 20 years ago.
LT had a rating of 2095 some 12 years ago, inactive since then. So, his current rating is zero, simple as that.
Apparently you don't know the difference between rating, and strength. Too bad for you.
Now you change to a semantic discussion to go on in your project of denigrate the author of a chess book. A horrible book according to your opinion.
But wait, you didn't read the book yet, based on the idea "why should I read a book from a guy with a zero rating? ".
It is a pity that one of the most active contributions in the forum is to criticize a book that you never read.
I'll gladly give an honest review if given a free copy. However, based on the goings-on in this forum, I've decided not to spend my money on the book. As such, as mentioned time and time again, LT's detractors are merely commenting on LT's credentials, as well as his postings in this forum.
I'll gladly give an honest review if given a free copy. However, based on the goings-on in this forum, I've decided not to spend my money on the book. As such, as mentioned time and time again, LT's detractors are merely commenting on LT's credentials, as well as his postings in this forum.
Check the beginning of the post. LT did advertising for his book. People immediately came with the "argument" "weak player =weak book".
They provoked him constantly until the point he began to react accordingly.
I'll gladly give an honest review if given a free copy. However, based on the goings-on in this forum, I've decided not to spend my money on the book. As such, as mentioned time and time again, LT's detractors are merely commenting on LT's credentials, as well as his postings in this forum.
Check the beginning of the post. LT did advertising for his book. People immediately came with the "argument" "weak player =weak book".
They provoked him constantly until the point he began to react accordingly.
You need to read the first page of this thread again. There was a query about his fide rating and statement about people usually buying books if someone has a strong rating, at least FM strength but preferably GM strength (which is true btw) and Lyudmil seemed to take it personally and instead of acknowledging that fact, he immediately started being arrogant and cheeky. This is not how someone should react when trying to promote their product, not if they want to be successful.
Super GMs make their money playing against humans. They use engines for their prep, but to win against humans.
LT spend a lot of time playing and analysing the games against engines.
Only engines.
He is highly specialised in this task.
Few people would not agree with the statement “Roger Federer is a strong tennis player”.
But if somebody spend decades to improve a single aspect of the game, like for example using a ball machine to hit balls to a certain target on the court, this person could get much better in this task than Federer.
Because Federer doesn’t earn money hitting targets on the court.
He is specialised in winning against humans.
If Super GMs would put such effort to win against engines as LT did, they would be very good in this task, much better than LT, I guess.
But LT is the only guy crazy enough to spend so much time playing against engines.
There is nothing impossible in what he is doing.
His skills only reflect his dedication and perseverance.
He should be respected for being able to do this.
But most people prefer to show disrespect and insult him.
And he insults back.
Making this thread a sad example how humans can be disrespectful to each other.
The best prove (for me) that LT is playing against engines (and not cheating by using engines in this task) is the fact that he struggle a lot to defeat a new released version of SF.
If he would be a cheater he would just say “today I won three games against the new SF”.
But instead he was posting losing games or draws, or winning odd games.
But of course most people (who lack LT’s enthusiasm and love for the game) probably would say “this is part of the fake”.
It is cheap to accuse people of cheating. It costs nothing, just a little bit time.
Especially if they do something that we will never be able to do.
No, LT is not an easy person.
But I accept him as he is.
Even if he likes Trump!
Nobody is perfect.
I love your post. Sadly, no matter how concise it is, I am finding talking to the wall might be more productive...