Non-controversial thread . . . I promise
 

I am interested to know whether any of you are serious chess players.

Thank you,

greymule

You wouldn't know a rook from a pawn if bit you on the arse! Why don't you take up a real sport- like checkers! You can't move that piece there- what are you, NUTS??!!

And don't even get me started on the 1973 Fischer-Bruznekoff debacle! It was a TRAVESTY- a freakin' #@*%! TRAVESTY, I'm telling you!

:rolleyes:

If you must know, I play frequently online versus other players at Yahoo Games.

Can I be serious even if I'm not that good?

I love it but am merely a rank amateur. Backgammon is fun too!

I guess you can be seriously bad. ;)

...in every game, with every coach. :D

JJ

Yes, I am
 

Greymule,

I am a serious player. I am a USCF Life Member, a Senior TD, and have organized and directed over 100 tournaments, including State championships and National events. And I have been a State association President, USCF Delegate, and involved in Chess politics in other ways. Makes this board seem rather tame at times when I think about it.

Sadly, I have not played in any tournaments in awhile, and my rating is only about 1600. Both will change soon.

Want to play a game by e-mail?

I'm curious, what are some of the more heated topics concerning chess?

"Did the white queen use HGH?"

"Pawns are underrated."

"Why Big Blue is proof that humans are doomed."

Roger Clemens has said that the horse tranquilizers were really for his knight.

And, even though I don't know it, I must be on some "chess mailing list." I keep getting email offering to sell me a product that will help strengthen my bishop and make my queen happy. I haven't responded because I think it's just a rook, and I refuse to be a pawn in their game.

You missed the king and knight. Checkmate. Nicely done.

Once a king, always a king, but once a knight is usually enough.

Mongo just pawn in game of life.

I had a feeling my post would generate a string of clever responses, and you outdid even my high expectations.

I have been playing correspondence chess for 25 years. I love it, even though it's slower than a high school baseball game. Snail mail games used to take several months, or even a couple of years, but now everyone except the old guys uses e-mail.

The U.S. Chess Federation's magazine Chess Life once featured Ron Guidry on its cover. Apparently he also loves the game. I met Guidry about 15 years ago and mentioned that cover, and he really perked up and enjoyed talking chess a bit. When I told him that I had also been a pitcher, and had it not been for a sore arm. . . . Well, I know he was doubly impressed.

jkumpire and canadaump6, I sent you e-mails through this site, so look for them.

Speaking of on-line games, I recently ran into the father of one the kids I had coached in Little League. The son had just been graduated from Duke (he was not on the lacrosse team). The father told me that his son had over the past year made more than a million dollars playing on-line poker. Is that possible? (If it is, on-line poker pays more than on-line chess.)

As a college student now with roommates who play poker, I will say that it is theoretically possible to win a million dollars on online poker. Occasionally there will be million dollar tournaments that can be entered for as little as nothing (literally free million dollar tournaments!). The last players get sent away to islands to play the last table in person. Of course these players have to pay taxes, etc.

By just playing everyday, some people are definately making hundreds of thousands.

Here is a website that shows just how much some people are winning (and losing). http://www.officialpokerrankings.com

I'd also like to point out its "illegal" in the United States.

Speaking of Duke, I think they played a football game at MSG tonight... poor officials could have called 60 fouls. Heck, probably came close.

I knew the missing pieses would turn up.:eek:

I'd LOVE to see you castle, John! :D

I'd rather see him castle Marsha.

I'm not too sure I should be reading this thread at work anymore....

Why you bring this up? Three more players not originally charged have filed charges. Are you following the case, not the original non-case but the more recent ones?

Are you attempting to make this thread controversial ?? :D

Why do you bring [the Duke case] up?

Actually, I mentioned it only to keep the thread non-controversial, as I had promised. I named the school because I thought it might be of some interest to readers, but then I figured it best to note that the kid wasn't on the lacrosse team, so readers would know that he couldn't have been involved in the "fiasco."

And yes, I have been following the recent developments, and reading Until Proven Innocent, a detailed account.