sobek: thanks for the updates,keep up the good work

sobek: We are checker players!! So?

patch: me secret :-))))))))))))))))))
So, it is me job, for checkers players

sobek: I am curious to know where you found the information re Stonehaven

News from Qualifying Tournament, Stonehaven.

Standing after fourth round:
Ronald King 12 points, William Docherty 10 points, Richard Beckwith and Mustafa Durdyev 9 points, Bagtyiar Durdyev, Miles Hannigan and Jim Morrison 8 points, Clayton Nash and Shane McCosker 7 points, Frank Bednall, DOnald Oliphant and COlin Young 6 points.

Won Mustafa Durdyev 30 points
2. Ron King 29 points
3.Tom Watson 24 points
4. Bagtiyar Durdyev 23 points
5. Shane McCosker 22.points
Good job from Mustafa and younger Shane

sobek: you are much better informed on the world draughts scene than I am,thank you

patch: oldest is Mustafa, second Bahtyiar, next Parahat, next Amangul (world champion GAYP), Bashim}3th. in junior) and I forgot name of same young (12yr), he won turkmenistan championship in international draughts. :-) Interesting family :-)

2006 Checkers Single Elimination Championship

11 more players needed!

City: thank you Nick

well done Patch my son!

Nick

sobek: not much good with names but I think it was Bahtyiar,the oldest brother

patch: thanks, and Mustafa or Bahtyiar Durdyev won?

Durdyev won the masters with Ron King and Tom Watson second and third,gooner was refering to patch,seniors winner

I ask too:
Who is winner and where is table from tournament?

 
gooner: YAY THE WINNER GREAT JOB WINNER







Who is the winner ? :)

gooner: Yes,it's good to see hard work and dedication pay off in the only way to test one's true ability! Congratulations to the winner!

A big congratulation to the winner of the seniors section in Stonehaven Scotland last week. A regular on bk and a deserved winner after years of dedication to the game. Its not all doom and gloom here after all.

I find it a total joke that you persist in trying to convince others you are "so great". Like I have said before real genuine players don't boast try just play face to face..........

Why don't you answer the question about you playing in proper tournaments? You are adament you are good and that is the sure fire and easy way to prove people wrong, yet you don't.

Stop digging this hole for yourself,as soon you won't be able to get out of it.

Hmmmm!!

Alex Moiseyev has posted something interesting on the ACF page about something discussed here.

http://usacheckers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=713

Purple: We can only compare ability here of real life players which to me is ironic considering we have this discussion in a forum on the internet. Computer checkers started to ruin actual tounaments aswell when the EDA decided to allow them in. One player I know actually walked out of a tourney after being drawn against computers in the first two rounds and he has been playing checkers all his life. The man who turns up with his laptop and a disk takes second prize when winning the tournament. Something is badly wrong there.

Checkers is more than a child's game. It is a game that tests one's competitiveness and skill.
With the introduction of computer programming,the best and only way-IMO-to determine who can beat whom is through one on one ,face to face ,play.
This is,and can be,achieved through tournament play such as the one taking place in Scotland as we speak. :-)

If anybody remembers the old Banks'e Ladder..the top ten or 12 players there were so damn good they would rattle your teeth. It was mail play however.

Nomad: I agree. It can be great fun to speculate if Ron King can beat Alex or how would Wylie or Anderson do against today's top players. We can compare ability without calling any of them drunks, cheaters, scoundrels etc. LOL. Then this board will be being used to it's best value.

Sorry to bring this up but I must.

This is getting a bit off topic. Can we stick to disussions about the game and not about each others ability or skill. It is too close to baiting and flamming for any good to come. I am sure all of you are great players, as such I am sure there is a more honorable way for everyone to settle these misunderstandings. Thank you

Still missing the point.

I had been recovering from a broken back when I played Alex in 2004, already nearly 2 full years since I played any so called "serious checkers." If you really chatted with Alex, I find it HARD TO BELIEVE he would not mention this. And if you tell me such an injury would not impact your play, you are wrong.

Furthermore, I won a game, 1 out of 3, with 1 draw, all played late at night after hours of playing his son in Gothic Chess, plus we had a few beers as well.

I would rate his play as "not that great" but under the circumstances, this was by no means a tournament. It was 3 blitz games, at varying time controls.

In 2002, Alex also had Nemesis when we played in Banks Ladder. I was able to defeat him in one game. The common claim I hear is "Nemesis doesn't lose" or can't lose or something similar, but in the hands of a World Champion, who can also "check its play", it did lose.

Why? Using WCC as a "tool" I was able to "look ahead" and lead it down paths leading to positions my own experience knows will lose, and that a program will not see until too late.

I have done this here to Pedro, winning from 110+ moves out if you count both sides.

It's not too hard to do IF YOU HAVE THE ABILITY to back it up. You can't do this if you are mindless computer player.

And, as many people know, Alex won't play you on the internet unless you play 3 minutes or quicker. Anyone care to tell me how someone could have time to enter a move into a computer, wait for it to think, then make its move, all in under 3 minutes?

IT'S IMPOSSIBLE, so drop it.

I won my own games. I have wins against the last 3 world champions - Alex, King, and Lafferty.

Al Lyman still has my blitz game with Laffertry from the GameZone saved somewhere. This was played without a clock but still in about 5 minutes total with about 20 people watching. And again, it was BEFORE GIL AND I MADE WCC, so you mind telling me which program was being used???

If you still have that email, forward it to me at GothicChessInfo@aol.com or else I consider it a forgery.

The NACA was based in New York and there were COUNTLESS events sponsored by them. Mostly offering exhibitions at carnivals, the NACA players always drew a crowd when playing simuls. The president of the company was a retired fire chief who played a pretty mean game.

Sorry, you can't convince me that something I know is true did not exist - I was in some of their tournaments and was a volunteer at two of their simuls, playing 20 boards each time.

And finally, get a life.

I can't help it that I was good at a game that you wasted decades of your life playing. It's a joke. It's a child's game, and you act purely infantile if you insist that I can't play the game.

I beat the computer world champion in 1996.
I beat the last 3 human world champions in at least one game.
And all of you losers keep trying to say I can't play because you are basically jealous of my ability to play a stupid game.

The matter is not closed, it is open, as long as you persist in your nonsense.

Gooner: Karpov signed it. It is a PRELIMINARY AGREEMENT. If they did not want to sign this, why bother with a 100 page document outlining every single detail.

The top line says it isn't a contract????????

Socrates: That was my point all along

DMatt: Alex Moiseyev once sent me a message at the ACF Forum regarding Ed Trice.



This should solve any confusion:



<table class="forumline" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="1" width="100%">
<tbody><tr><td class="row2"><span>From:</td>
<td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%"><span>shr</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="row2"><span>To:</td>
<td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%"><span>Passionate Draughts</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="row2"><span>Posted:</td>
<td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%"><span>Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:44 pm</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="row2"><span>Subject:</td>
<td class="row2" width="100%"><span>Re: Ed Trice</td></tr></tbody>
</table>




<span>"Concern your question about Ed Trice. I can't
tell that he is my close friend. We played very actively online back to
1997-2001. I played with WCC on Mac Banks ladder. Ed also often helped
me with WCC 10 pieces database to analyse some positions. And finally,
one time, when I visited my old son in Phili, we both came to Ed house
and spent one evening.


It was wonderful time. I met him and his family (wife and
daughter). All I can tell you - his personality is: "heavvy nurd". He
likes jokes, fooling people etc. But he is really nice person. We
played couple checkers games, and I wouldn't rate his level higher than
"very advance novice" <img>


When I played with him online at the end of 90's, it was obvious to
me, that he uses program. In fact - he tested program. So - for him it
wasn't wasting time or fooling only. But he wanted to make it more
attractive. It didn't bother me at all.




<span>Regards,



Alex
"



Trice evidently never participated in any NACA 11-man ballot event as
he once claimed. I guess he claimed his offline games were in Roberto
W.'s Games Database - but I was a member in Roberto's club and there
were no such games. Roberto also said none of the games were played by
Ed Trice and there wasn't any "NACA" event games in the Database.



So...the truth is obvious now - so the discussion should end.

gooner: Here's is Kaprov's signature on the contract:

http://www.gothicchess.com/zmnxcbv.html

A "hidden" html name for the obvious reason.

Good luck to all playing in the British championship in Scotland (For personal reasons) and to the competitors in the 3 move play off. Should be a classic.

DMatt: I don't remember anyone attacking you here for some time and your posts are welcome insofar as they relate to checkers and not to pointing out the real or imagined dark side of other players here.

DMatt: I cant dispute or agree with your statement about your play unfortunately, so I think that is the end of it as far as I am concerned. I will repeat myself again though when I say playing in tournaments will be the only bench mark any player can aspire to.

On your other subject, (If true) just finished reading "Bobby Fischer Goes To War" and would look forward to that event if it ever takes place.

P.S. Grim Reaper has been banned from every discussion board on BrainKing, in case you did not know.

I only came back here because your statement functionally impugned me when you wrote:

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=9&ngi=544486

You implied I was avoiding you, and this is clearly not the case. I did not avoid the World Checkers Champion who came to visit the week before Christmas when I was walking around like the Hunchback of Notre Dame, so I would not be avoiding a game with you.

I can't back down from an issue where I am attacked for no reason. Rescind your statement about me trying to avoid you, and I will have nothing more to say.

The whole point is moot anyway. I haven't played checkers in a very long time, and I am trying to get Bobby Fischer to play Anatoly Karpov a 12-game match of Gothic Chess. So far, Karpov said yes, and I flew to Iceland just last month to meet with Grandmaster Fridrik Olafsson, Bobby's closest friend and neighbor.

http://www.gothicchess.com/images/iceland_1.jpg

From left to right:

A youthful 71-year old Fridrik Olafsson, Alexis Skye (a 6'5 blonde goddess) who is the most popular Gothic Chess tournament director, International Master Frank Camaratta from the HouseOfStaunton.com (Frank is designing the wooden Gothic Chess set for the Fischer-Karpov match) and on the far right, me with my big bald spot *1*

I am playing a couple of games of checkers on here to try and get back into the swing of things, but it is no longer a "focus" for me.

Just two things I want to make perfectly clear:

1. I have never declined or refused to accept any challenge to play a game of checkers.

2. I am, or was, very good at the game, and nothing anyone can say can change that.

DMatt: As always you miss the positives and always concentrate on the negatives. When a player like Alex makes that opinion you listen as he knows more than any of us. So when will we see you in a tourney? You seem so adament to defend your corner, yet the obvious way to finish off the critics is to play in tourney conditions, which seeing your personality would be something you should do and I would be the first to hold my hand up and apologise. The choice is yours but I can guess the answer.

btw...Grim Reaper or DMatt? Do you really need both?

This was the game with Pedro:

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=967503

WCC does not annotate games. Sure it's a great tool, but it has no concept of strategy, and it certainly cannot distill essential elements into curt explanations that make sense. BTW, Alex has Nemesis and WCC and Kingsrow and Cake, so why can't he use them to annotate his own games? For that matter, since thousands of copies of WCC were sold, why didn't Alex contact any of these people to have them annotate their games?

I'll tell you why. Because I have a unique perspective that Alex values, and I can explain things in ways that are instructive and worthwhile.

You may recall, a while back, there was another discussion involving ustica, pedro, and myself. Ustica said something like "you would have shown more courage to play move X-Y in your game with me rather than W-Z which is an easy draw", to which my reply was "X-Y loses." Pedro chimed in, claim the move would not lose, so we played a complete game where he agreed to play move X-Y and I would play the other side.

It took about 117 moves if you count both sides's moves, but I won.

Can I see 117 moves ahead in a position with about 18 pieces on the board?

No, of course not.

It was my intuition based on many, many games that lead me to make the claim that I could win from that position. And you know Pedro was gunning for me, trying like heck to hold down the draw.

Even you cannot convince this board that a program is able to perform a 119 ply search and call a win a win from that distance.

Regarding Ron King, you missed the point entirely. Ron King did not drive 500+ miles to your house to play some checkers with you.

Alex did drive such a distance to play me.

Grim Reaper 15. March 2003, 15:33:49 14. July 2006, 23:34:36

Multiple nicks being used.. nothing changes

DMatt: To your final question my answer is WCC!

You seem to have a short memory aswell, let me refresh it... I have actually complimented you on this board aswell or don't you actually want to discuss that? Is it just negative behaviour you react to?

I know what I wrote in messages to you as you at first claimed it would be a waste of time me playing you because of your so called ability but the difference is, I would always prefer to play stronger players to further my game as I would learn more from losing those games as winning against lesser opponents.

btw... I met Ron King once!! What does that mean?

gooner:

I am not always trying to convince anyone of anything. People that lose to me are the ones trying to say "he must be using a computer."

What computer was I using when I defeated the Deep Thought chess supercomputer in 1989 when I played it in front of about 100 people?

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1272214

What computer program was I using when I beat Chinook on October 20, 1996? (see the link Purple posted to the Wall of Honor). If you count from the bottom up you will see I was the 5th or 6th person to ever defeat it on the highest setting.

I would like to remind you that it was this feat that put me in touch with Gil Dodgen. He was impressed with my win, and we agreed to collaborate on a new checkers program, WCC. We relased it as a Macintosh program in August of 1997 and a PC program in September 1997.

Year later, when visiting Gil at his home in southern California, he asked me to play WCC an 11-man ballot game on a computer that was averaging 400,000 positions per second. Not only did I get a draw with it, I predicted 12 moves it must make in order to secure this draw. Don't take my word for it, ask him yourself. His email is GilDodgen@cox.net and I'm sure he will vouch for my playing abilities.

I don't understand why you keep saying you made no such arrangements to meet and play checkers. Then why did you say I was "reluctant"? You told me you were coming to Philadelphia, you said you wanted to play, and I agreed.

Once you got here, I did not hear from you.

So what?

I have had players try and meet me before. I was in Kansas City in 2001 and I called Al Lyman. He could not play because he said he was going to some log cabin with a son-in-law or something. Leo Levitt wanted to meet with me one time, but his wife had to be taken to the hospital, and he could not swing by.

I didn't accuse them of fabricating anything. Stuff happens.

And if I am such and "amateur", as you say, just answer me this one question:

Why did the current World Champion ask me to annotate one of his favorite games?

I would love to hear your conspiracy theory on that one.

DMatt: Thanks for the excuse Ed, but if you want me to go into details I can. You have shown yourself up on checker discussion boards for a very long time now and are always trying to convince others (or maybe yourself) that you are a good checker player. Maybe you are or not who cares but why keep persisting in name dropping and boasting. Great players I have met have one thing in common and that is the art of not trying to convince others they are great they just show on the board at real tournaments face to face thats the difference.

As far as this so called meeting and giving you dates is concerned, proof would be nice as I find that statement very funny as my (girlfriend) as you put it would duly back me up.

gooner:

1. When Alex visited me, I had been recovering from re-injuring a previously broken back. Did he tell you that I could not even stand up straight the whole time he was there?

2. His son was with him, and we played chess and Gothic Chess for at least 2 hours. There was much beer and chatter, nothing much about checkers even started until about 10 PM.

3. I showed him the perfect play databases in my computer lab upstairs. He had to spot me a 3 minute head start for me to even get there!

4. Some of the most difficults wins in the 4x3 database Alex could not win against the program. He was impressed. At this point, he asked if I wanted some games with him. Back down the stairs we went.

5. I did not have a checkers set, nor did he. We played on a chess board using only pawns. At first Alex gave me 10 minute to 3 minute odds. Even in my injured state, I had a won 6x6 ending against him, and we both stopped the clock. The next game was played at 5 min to 5 min, which I resigned, the next at 5 min to 3 min, to a 6-piece draw.

How this translates to a "good novice player" I don't know. Maybe because of my loss I walked into an easy shot in the endgame, but the other 2 games I thought I played well above the mark, given that he was crowned World Champion not too long before and I had effectively not played much in months.

6. You told me the name of the hotel, the address, and the dates you would be there. You left no phone number or any other way to contact you. I drove down there, you weren't there.

Amazing how the sands of time allow you to re-write history. Just take a look at both of your posts.

DMatt: By all means. He said to my father during a meeting while at a tournament that you were know more than a good novice player. Its amazing what computers can do. On the other subject a meeting was never arranged you seem to live in a world of fantasy. End of discussion.

Stardust: Correct!!

gooner: I waited 90 minutes in the hotel lobby off of Island avenue. You failed to mention that you did not make the reservation (maybe your girlfriend did?) so the hotel clerk could not find your name in the register.

Who was avoiding who?

And I have pictures of the World Checkers Champion visiting me on December 18, 2004. Funny, I can't play checkers, but Alex feels it necessary to make a trek to my house (with maybe 7 days notice) just to see how good I am.

Furthermore, he asked me to annotate what he considered his best game he has played. You can read about it here:

http://www.usacheckers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=609&start=15&sid=fe667613241dda0b193e9a2c000f182c

So I can't play checkers but the World Champion asks me to annotate his own game for his own book.

Care to explain that?

DMatt: Nice try lol! Both points are true but going into detail will just bore me. 10 out of 10 for effort though.

DMatt: Funnier how someone felt they had to open a bogus account to point out something that means nothing.

Just read the posts. Seems these two by the same person have flip-flopped more than John Kerry.

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=9&ngi=381939

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=9&ngi=544486

Funny how gooner forgot his own viewpoint over time.