What's new
By:

America Warming To Cuba

heyhey said:
To each his own, man. A good cigar to me smells like leather, nuts, berries, and smoke(of course).
Click to expand...

I think cigars smell better to people who smoke than to people who don't.

As for the difference between the expensive and the cheap ones, I've read that it's hard to tell them apart if you don't know which is which beforehand.
 
I'm not a cigar person, but I have no idea why a cigar from Cuba would be any better or worse than one from the Dominican Republic. It's the same climate/area. Do Cubans have much more expertise in the way they prepare them? Or at this point is it just exotic since they are banned.
 
Hack said:
I like to play some chess. How good are you?
Click to expand...

I topped 2000 briefly (USCF, I think I got to 1900 FIDE or close), but usually hovered in the 1800 range when I played competitively in high school and into the 90's. I have placed top 5 in several regional and state tournaments sponsored by USCF and FIDE. Kids, work, school, illness and a host of other things pulled me out of any serious consideration of the game in the mid to late 90's, although I still play with a couple of different clubs locally and online whenever I can.

I actually beat a grand-master when he came to play a simultaneous exhibition game when I was going to college in Phoenix. It was in the mall and I signed up on a whim, not being in any of the local clubs at that point. I was the only board of 15 or 20 or so playing that won, although I think there were few draws. That was cool. I can't remember his name, I know he was American and he was very cool about it. He actually resigned, which I thought was better than a long-drawn-out checkmate scenario, and then came back to me later and congratulated me and stuff. One of my better chess memories.
 
America warming to Cuba?... Sorry folks, global warming is a myth.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I topped 2000 briefly (USCF, I think I got to 1900 FIDE or close), but usually hovered in the 1800 range when I played competitively in high school and into the 90's. I have placed top 5 in several regional and state tournaments sponsored by USCF and FIDE. Kids, work, school, illness and a host of other things pulled me out of any serious consideration of the game in the mid to late 90's, although I still play with a couple of different clubs locally and online whenever I can.

I actually beat a grand-master when he came to play a simultaneous exhibition game when I was going to college in Phoenix. It was in the mall and I signed up on a whim, not being in any of the local clubs at that point. I was the only board of 15 or 20 or so playing that won, although I think there were few draws. That was cool. I can't remember his name, I know he was American and he was very cool about it. He actually resigned, which I thought was better than a long-drawn-out checkmate scenario, and then came back to me later and congratulated me and stuff. One of my better chess memories.
Click to expand...

I can beat the computer on easy about 1 in 4 times. True story.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I topped 2000 briefly (USCF, I think I got to 1900 FIDE or close), but usually hovered in the 1800 range when I played competitively in high school and into the 90's. I have placed top 5 in several regional and state tournaments sponsored by USCF and FIDE. Kids, work, school, illness and a host of other things pulled me out of any serious consideration of the game in the mid to late 90's, although I still play with a couple of different clubs locally and online whenever I can.

I actually beat a grand-master when he came to play a simultaneous exhibition game when I was going to college in Phoenix. It was in the mall and I signed up on a whim, not being in any of the local clubs at that point. I was the only board of 15 or 20 or so playing that won, although I think there were few draws. That was cool. I can't remember his name, I know he was American and he was very cool about it. He actually resigned, which I thought was better than a long-drawn-out checkmate scenario, and then came back to me later and congratulated me and stuff. One of my better chess memories.
Click to expand...

Thats a cool story. I love chess. Except I haven't done any kind of competitive leagues or anything. Just play within a small group of friends and done some online playing. Not much though. I didnt do as good online but not bad. Seemed like I would win one lose one. Highest guy I beat had a score of 2040. Im not even sure how those scores or ranks are tallied tbh. I hovered around 1450. But I thought online wasnt all that fun. I like the 3d view a whole lot better and playing a live person. I seemed to make more mistakes online that normally wouldn't make.

It'd be interesting to pick your brain. Have you read any books on chess? Recommend any?
 
Oh ya,

My cool chess story is, I beat the app on my phone and memorized every move how to beat it over and over.

Kick its ****ing *** after it beat me about 45 times. Then I proceeded to whoop it a dozen times or so. Changing the level didnt matter.
 
heyhey said:
What wood do you prefer to smoke with? I have a bunch of apricot and some apple that I am curing right now.

The only smoke I think I dislike is exhaust. Sadly, that is basically the air we will have to breathe in utah for the next couple of months.
Click to expand...

Depends on what I am cooking. I like a mix of oak, cherry or apple, and hickory for pork butt, cherry and apple for ribs, apple or apricot for poultry, hickory and/or oak for beef. Generally I liked fruit woods for pork and poultry and hardwoods for beef, but pork butt takes on a great flavor with a mix of woods.
 
Hack said:
It'd be interesting to pick your brain. Have you read any books on chess? Recommend any?
Click to expand...

It's dated, but My System by Nimzowich is certainly a great way to move from introductory level to middle-level.
 
I want to go there. I've heard nothing but good things about Cuba via the various travel troves/people that have been there as a place to visit so I would be excited for that reason if it were more accessible. Though I'm guessing all those gleeful tales might change a bit if Cuba was just absolutely jammed with tourists.
 
Hack said:
Thats a cool story. I love chess. Except I haven't done any kind of competitive leagues or anything. Just play within a small group of friends and done some online playing. Not much though. I didnt do as good online but not bad. Seemed like I would win one lose one. Highest guy I beat had a score of 2040. Im not even sure how those scores or ranks are tallied tbh. I hovered around 1450. But I thought online wasnt all that fun. I like the 3d view a whole lot better and playing a live person. I seemed to make more mistakes online that normally wouldn't make.

It'd be interesting to pick your brain. Have you read any books on chess? Recommend any?
Click to expand...

Ratings generally are calculated using the results of tournament or match play in sanctioned events. Although some clubs have their own club ratings. Basically it is a way of showing how strong the competition is you are playing and where you fall against that competition. There are lots of sources for calculating scores, and of course wikipedia. Masters generally are rated in the 2200 range and up, grandmasters over 2400. Highly competitive tournament players will fall in the 1900-2100 range, and so on. This also fits within a letter classification system, class A being the highest just below expert/master level, and then class B on down to H or I or something. We generally use classes to set up local tournaments to make them more competitive, as that way you can play people at your own level. But in club play I have seen class C players beat our resident experts in individual matches.

Online ratings use some formula or another to approximate the regular ratings. In my experience, they are not very reliable other than in that exact forum, and online poses other problems, like people using a chess program to "cheat" and come up with their moves for them.

As far as books go I think I have about 20. If you are a moderate player, there used to be a series called the Fireside Chess Library, with lots of books about the individual parts of the game, openings, tactics/mid-game, end-game, etc. I enjoyed Logical Chess by Chernev. How to Reassess Your Chess is a great book that can help you to get deeper into your own style and how to analyze your own game. My System, as pointed out by OB, is pretty good too.

I learned the most about chess in my early teens by re-creating games by grandmasters and then working through the situations myself. I used magazines and watched what games I could, and traveled even to watch tournaments. There are several books out with games played by Bobby Fischer, of which I had one as a kid that I read and re-read. It had his analysis and thoughts about the positions and how he thought through a move, and it offered the entire game in algebraic notation with pictures, then left it at a critical decision point and asked you to make the next move, then turn the page and see what he did. In studying the game I have found that this is one of the best learning methods for chess. There are now a lot of books out there with "chess problems" that present a situation and ask you to solve it with the best move possible. If you go for one of those books try to find one that offers more than just one solution (as most of the time, there are multiple choices in a real game) and then provides some analysis for the moves possible and the logic behind their choice of the "best" move. There are also online options and a few apps but the apps are generally too easy or way too hard, but still might be worth a try. I still like to take the problem out of the book and build it on my board and the play through it. Like you I prefer real chess, and 2D chess gets old fast.

But in the end there is no substitute for playing. If you start playing tournaments don't get caught up in ratings. A lot of players approach it that way and will ask you first your rating, then your name. They can tend to be far too careful to either have fun at the game or really learn to win. They push for and accept draws far too often for my taste. I have won otherwise lost positions, where my opponent offered a draw and I refused even with him up a full pawn or even bishop or knight, just because he didn't want to get drawn into a complicated mid-game or drawn-out end-game. I play with reckless abandon for the most part, preferring an open middle game with lots of quick tactical moves and strikes and fluid motion across the board. I tend to think through those positions better than my opponents and make fewer mistakes, and it can take a positional chess player right out of the match to throw things open with a well-placed sacrifice.

If you would like we can open a thread and discuss chess more in-depth, or PM me or whatever and we can play a few games online somewhere. I love to get into mid-game tactics and openings are always fun to discuss and dissect. (I like gambit openings for the most part when playing white, with a preference for queen pawn openings, and off-center counters when on black to throw people off, like the sicilian or gruenfeld defense, although I usually don't follow classical lines for either of those).

Sorry, didn't mean to go off like that, but that is one of my favorite topics.




TL;DR version: Chess is fun!!
 
LogGrad98 said:
Ratings generally are calculated using the results of tournament or match play in sanctioned events. Although some clubs have their own club ratings. Basically it is a way of showing how strong the competition is you are playing and where you fall against that competition. There are lots of sources for calculating scores, and of course wikipedia. Masters generally are rated in the 2200 range and up, grandmasters over 2400. Highly competitive tournament players will fall in the 1900-2100 range, and so on. This also fits within a letter classification system, class A being the highest just below expert/master level, and then class B on down to H or I or something. We generally use classes to set up local tournaments to make them more competitive, as that way you can play people at your own level. But in club play I have seen class C players beat our resident experts in individual matches.

Online ratings use some formula or another to approximate the regular ratings. In my experience, they are not very reliable other than in that exact forum, and online poses other problems, like people using a chess program to "cheat" and come up with their moves for them.

As far as books go I think I have about 20. If you are a moderate player, there used to be a series called the Fireside Chess Library, with lots of books about the individual parts of the game, openings, tactics/mid-game, end-game, etc. I enjoyed Logical Chess by Chernev. How to Reassess Your Chess is a great book that can help you to get deeper into your own style and how to analyze your own game. My System, as pointed out by OB, is pretty good too.

I learned the most about chess in my early teens by re-creating games by grandmasters and then working through the situations myself. I used magazines and watched what games I could, and traveled even to watch tournaments. There are several books out with games played by Bobby Fischer, of which I had one as a kid that I read and re-read. It had his analysis and thoughts about the positions and how he thought through a move, and it offered the entire game in algebraic notation with pictures, then left it at a critical decision point and asked you to make the next move, then turn the page and see what he did. In studying the game I have found that this is one of the best learning methods for chess. There are now a lot of books out there with "chess problems" that present a situation and ask you to solve it with the best move possible. If you go for one of those books try to find one that offers more than just one solution (as most of the time, there are multiple choices in a real game) and then provides some analysis for the moves possible and the logic behind their choice of the "best" move. There are also online options and a few apps but the apps are generally too easy or way too hard, but still might be worth a try. I still like to take the problem out of the book and build it on my board and the play through it. Like you I prefer real chess, and 2D chess gets old fast.

But in the end there is no substitute for playing. If you start playing tournaments don't get caught up in ratings. A lot of players approach it that way and will ask you first your rating, then your name. They can tend to be far too careful to either have fun at the game or really learn to win. They push for and accept draws far too often for my taste. I have won otherwise lost positions, where my opponent offered a draw and I refused even with him up a full pawn or even bishop or knight, just because he didn't want to get drawn into a complicated mid-game or drawn-out end-game. I play with reckless abandon for the most part, preferring an open middle game with lots of quick tactical moves and strikes and fluid motion across the board. I tend to think through those positions better than my opponents and make fewer mistakes, and it can take a positional chess player right out of the match to throw things open with a well-placed sacrifice.

If you would like we can open a thread and discuss chess more in-depth, or PM me or whatever and we can play a few games online somewhere. I love to get into mid-game tactics and openings are always fun to discuss and dissect. (I like gambit openings for the most part when playing white, with a preference for queen pawn openings, and off-center counters when on black to throw people off, like the sicilian or gruenfeld defense, although I usually don't follow classical lines for either of those).

Sorry, didn't mean to go off like that, but that is one of my favorite topics.




TL;DR version: Chess is fun!!
Click to expand...


I'm not a good chess player by any stretch but I thought I would share a tactic that has worked for me in the past. When playing black and the other player opens with kings pawn I'll often play queens pawn. If they take my pawn I'll continue to offer queen side pawns with the result being that I have effectively advanced my large pieces while they are down a pawn and haven't moved another piece.

I almost always lose if I allow them to get a strong position and I don't break it. I will often sacrifice a piece and try to have a possible fork or two ready to make up for it.
 
heyhey said:
I'm not a good chess player by any stretch but I thought I would share a tactic that has worked for me in the past. When playing black and the other player opens with kings pawn I'll often play queens pawn. If they take my pawn I'll continue to offer queen side pawns with the result being that I have effectively advanced my large pieces while they are down a pawn and haven't moved another piece.

I almost always lose if I allow them to get a strong position and I don't break it. I will often sacrifice a piece and try to have a possible fork or two ready to make up for it.
Click to expand...


Do you mean this opening?

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/exp...d5.exd5.c6&nodes=21720.287531.1212840.1212841
 
heyhey said:
I'm not a good chess player by any stretch but I thought I would share a tactic that has worked for me in the past. When playing black and the other player opens with kings pawn I'll often play queens pawn. If they take my pawn I'll continue to offer queen side pawns with the result being that I have effectively advanced my large pieces while they are down a pawn and haven't moved another piece.

I almost always lose if I allow them to get a strong position and I don't break it. I will often sacrifice a piece and try to have a possible fork or two ready to make up for it.
Click to expand...

Center counter defenses can be fun, but can also open up a big can of worms. I have played the caro-kann before (the one OB linked to), but it takes some real finesse through the opening to not leave yourself hopelessly backward.

But I like openings like this that throw the opponent for a loop. When most players open with 1. d4 or 1. e4 they normally expect d5 or e5 in return, maybe occasionally a knight move like Nc6, but when you throw a non-standard opening at most players it can cause them some real problems. If they are sharp, you could also get your *** handed to you.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Center counter defenses can be fun, but can also open up a big can of worms. I have played the caro-kann before (the one OB linked to), but it takes some real finesse through the opening to not leave yourself hopelessly backward.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you can get that position from a Caro-Kann, but if white plays d4 next, he converts it to the Caro-Kann. That position came from the Scandinavian.
 
One Brow said:
I'm not sure you can get that position from a Caro-Kann, but if white plays d4 next, he converts it to the Caro-Kann. That position came from the Scandinavian.
Click to expand...

I am sure you could get there, just depends on the sequence. I didn't look too closely at the position, just noted the pawn at c6 which is characteristic of the caro-kann.

Looking at it again it is possible it started with the caro-kann mainline, d4 c6 and just went a little sideways. That one, at least when I click it, is not too far in, what 3 moves, and could go any number of ways at that point.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I am sure you could get there, just depends on the sequence. I didn't look too closely at the position, just noted the pawn at c6 which is characteristic of the caro-kann.

Looking at it again it is possible it started with the caro-kann mainline, d4 c6 and just went a little sideways. That one, at least when I click it, is not too far in, what 3 moves, and could go any number of ways at that point.
Click to expand...

First, based on what you've posted, you're a better chess player than I. So, I am bringing this up with respect.

In the diagram, white has made two moves, e4 and then xd5. How does that happen if black stared with c3?
 
LogGrad98 said:
I topped 2000 briefly (USCF, I think I got to 1900 FIDE or close), but usually hovered in the 1800 range when I played competitively in high school and into the 90's.
Click to expand...

That's really impressive. I used to play table tennis pretty seriously and they use the same rating system. I maxed out around 1600 or so, and that was probably good enough to make me one of the top 20 players in the state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top