Author: Andre van Ark
Date: 01:40:53 11/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 2003 at 02:40:15, Peter Skinner wrote: >On November 14, 2003 at 02:31:40, Andre van Ark wrote: > >> >> >>Yes, it is true Vincent could analyse this games quite well. >> >>But he is banned..... >> >>Mainly because he called a certain person "an old idiot" >> >>And some people like to throw with nud on Vincent, even while he isn't able to >>defend himself. >> >>Who should be banned ? >> >>Kind regards >>André van Ark > >Either you haven't been here that long, or you just haven't read his previous >posts. I would bet my ex-wife and a bag of chips that Vincent would indeed state >that Kaspy played like a 2000 rated patzer. It has happened time and time again. >In fact here is a few tells from channel 64 on ICC during the first game: > >Diep(C)(64): i am only here for a few minutes. this game is of no interest to >me. >Diep(C)(64): playing a weak opening vs a computer is stupid >Diep(C)(64): already i can see it will be draw >Diep(C)(64): diep can draw this blindfolded > >As you can see Diep should be in this match rather than Fritz... > >Peter Hi Peter, Uhhhmm you may keep your ex-wife but the bag of chips is welcome. :-D All I can say ( I am a 1875 elo patzer) that Vincent is right. "Diep(C)(64): playing a weak opening vs a computer is stupid >Diep(C)(64): already i can see it will be draw >Diep(C)(64): diep can draw this blindfolded" As the game has showed Vincent statements are OK. Or do I oversee something? Btw. Diep doesn't take the pawn on f2 in the first gane. Kind regards, André
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.