I lose most of my games on blitz on time. Live is a joke to me. I like taking my time. I somrtimes tush on onlinr though
Wow
Sort:
Thanks for calling me mr though. Now i have better things to do such as school. Au revoir!
Goodbye Mr. Forktime, we shall meet again... :)
Honestly.. m looking forward to another game between you 2 ;-) if ur up for it that is !
i wouldnt worry too much OP , judging from most of clunnys posts on here
shows him to be a rude jerk who likes to bad mouth others.
its hardly a massive surprise to discover hes also a bad loser.
Got to put a word in for Clunney here - I played him once about a month ago and remember the game because I played a mouse slip on the 2nd move (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5?! (instead of ... e6), which led to some good natured banter during the game and an eventual loss for me:
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=690439577
I know his posts here in the Forum; he's not a rude badmouthing jerk, he just says what a lot of others would think and not say, which is mostly refreshing and just sometimes a bit over the edge.
Looking forward to you 2 guys' next game! 
PS I just ran the game through Houdini. Clunney - your 19... g6 wasn't good, but it certainly wasn't a reason to resign. Houdini 1.5 gives 19... Nf5 as being best at +0.2 for Black; 19... g6 20.h4 (best move) gives White +0.29 when followed by 20... Qd5. So maybe a bit of a storm in a teacup?
Forktime has a higher online rating than Clunney. Why should we be surprised that Forktime won? The standard rating is irrelevant when we're talking about an online game. If Clunney beat Forktime in a standard game, would it be fair to accuse Clunney of cheating based on their online ratings??
clunney, you are just being an idiot. You lost, deal with it! Don't blame your own fail on your foe, just look at where you went wrong, and move on. FYI, I hate people who call every one they lose to a cheater.
Lol thanks guys. I didnt see nb5 as bad aswell.
clunney wrote:
I'm not going to walk around telling everyone you're a cheater, in fact I really don't care, but I think it's suspicious when a 1200 player (the last time I played against a 1200 player in a serious game, he was mated in 29 moves. The time before? 26 moves, as Black) goes from making random knight moves to consistently playing strong moves and randomly spitting out deci-pawn assessments (during the course of the game!). I'm sort of disappointed that I threw away the win with my g6?? blunder, as I should be able to win that position even against an engine (up a pawn, with a comfortable position). But I haven't said anything to anyone about it, since it's online chess and doesn't matter to anyone, why even post this?
Forktime either wanted to either get rid of your darksquared bishop (thus making you weak there) or establishing a strong knight on the sixth. Sounds good in theory but he's neglecting development. 6.dxc5,Bxc5 7.Bd3 is considered the mainline. 5.Nf3 isn't considered mainline and 5.Nce2 and 5.f4 are considered better. The position is closed so there's no need to bring the knight out so early although it's nevertheless quite playable.
I looked at your game against the real life (almost) 1300 and he clearly had no plan. ...h5 is pure hope chess when he should be thinking of provoking a central pawn of yours forward and pressuring the center.
5...Bxc3? he's a bit confused, there's no need to weaken himself on the dark squares and surrender the bishop pair, which more than make up for your lost control (which is only temporary) over e4.
6...Nc6? Again confusion. He's probably planning to create tension with ...e5, but he can do this immediately with 6...c5! Although you're still better due to his previous strategic error.
7...Qxd5 the queen isn't in danger of being exposed quite yet, although exd5 looks preferable as it frees up the infamously bad QGD bishop.
8.Nd2! this deserves an exclamation, no question about it. He played Bxc3 because he obviously wants to use e4 as a launching point and you don't give him it.
8...Ng4? Seriously? Hope chess at its worst. He's probably indecisive about the plan he wants to undertake, gave up on the e4 strategy and is now preparing ...e5. The problem however is this is a faulty plan and black completely surrenders e4 to you, allowing you to erect a well-supported pawn center.
10.Ba3! Preventing castling and highlighting why Bxc3? Was a strategic error. The dark color complex is important for black in QGD lines, giving up this bishop should not be done without a good reason as bishops guard weak squares.
12...h5 this committal move serves no purpose. Maybe dreaming of a kingside attack that isn't really there?
13...c6? Is another strategic blunder. Your bishop and knight's positions should send off a red flag to him stating not to weaken d6 at any costs. He's done at this point and therefore should try for a desperate swindle, not that I could see one here for him anyway.
15.Nd6+ suggests itself and the first that comes to mind, though the one played in the game is still winning.
You totally dunked that guy.
Correspondence is different since calculation errors are eradicated due to analysis boards being around and having more time to think thus minimizing careless moves.
13...c6 was terrible as it weakens d6. It is quite obviously an accessible square for your pieces as proven by 14.Nc4!
MonkStyle wrote:
I'm not so certain I'm crazy about 6...a6.
Especially after...
"Wastes time, terrible move. The sort of move that you would expect from someone under 1200, though. "
This ...a6 is the sort of unneccessary, un-French move I would in turn expect from someone unfamilar with positional chess play in the French.
And true to it, now that I check the DB, 5.Nb5 is far from popular, but has seen a few master plays. 6...a6 is absent as a reply.
I think the truth is far more likely that Fork won the game legitimately than that his opponent is really some 1800 who for whatever reason can't breach the 1500's here in correspondence or blitz play. That seems far fishier to me.
At the very least I think clunkey needs a book on the French, and another on manners.
Dear Mr. 1100, you live like 30 miles away from me (if you do live in New Orleans), so if you'd like to meet at a tournament or something to play a few games and determine for yourself whether or not I'm "1200 strength", the offer is on the table. If you even pick up a half point on me, then you have every right to continue saying embarrassingly stupid things about my playing strength.
On a lighter note, I appreciate the nice comment Wasted_Youth :D Apparently, when you say such rude things as "The Blackmar-Diemer gambit is ludicrously lacking for compensation." or "The King's Gambit is better than the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.", you make enemies on this site.
There is also a ridiculous move order mistake I accidentally inserted in the game vs. Adrian Stacey, in the actual I played d6 before Qc1 (of course), and the game transposed to what I posted, but in the move order I posted, he would be able to play Qe5... No, I almost forgot to play d6 in the actual game, but didn't. :P
Anyway, like I've said, I don't play chess online seriously, I do it for fun (and with few cares for how it turns out). I think most serious chess players save their best play for tournaments and rated games. Online chess is just to kill time and boredom when I have nothing to do for school.
Regards.
tldr
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
I resigned, he has a winning attack, which I missed (I had calculated that I could take his a-pawn, but that just loses quickly). It happens, and if he found all those moves, good for him! But I really don't think he did. His blitz rating on here is like 800, and his Online rating is close to 1500. Which is a HUGE difference.... So I don't really know what to think of his playing strength.