The Secret of Chess

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Locked
User avatar
velmarin
Posts: 1598
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:48 am

Re: First Review

Post by velmarin » Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:05 pm

I think you should calm down a little. I write four words and you see two pages of stories.
Yet 2120 ELO FIDE is still pretty strong for me.
I never got that grade. My compliments.

BrendanJNorman
Posts: 1297
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 11:43 pm
Full name: Brendan J Norman

Re: First Review

Post by BrendanJNorman » Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:14 pm

velmarin wrote:I think you should calm down a little.
I think that next time you see somebody say something, you should read what they claim carefully, and not jump to mock, twist their words and make fun of them.

Given that I haven't played a FIDE event for 9 years, I am in no position to make observations about my FIDE playing strength....and didnt.

Everything I have ever claimed on this forum has been in honesty, yet trolls, internet bullies and corrupt TC moderators seem dedicated to painting my words in a negative way.

In your case, I'm going to forget about this occasion, since you yourself seemed to have had a change of tone.

Happy Chinese New Year.

:lol:

User avatar
velmarin
Posts: 1598
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:48 am

Re: First Review

Post by velmarin » Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:50 pm

BrendanJNorman wrote: Happy Chinese New Year.

:lol:
You can play here official FIDE online,
It's not the same but they ensure official FIDE tournaments

https://www.premiumchess.net/int/en/home

Happy new year.

User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 2256
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: First Review

Post by Ovyron » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:36 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:How could anyone forbid the use of SF, I mean, are you in your right mind?
What else do you call this post by yourself!?:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:I will post, if anything just on this thread, as I can not post 100 replies in 5 threads.

will wait for the truth outing at some propicious point in time.

in the meantime, I would request pretty much everyone in this hating bunch, primarily Bram, Andreas, Possioto, Herbert, Vincent, etc., not to use SF for their analyses, as in SF code there have been at least 20 successful evaluation patches based on my ideas, and without those, SF would never have reached its current status.

do you want me to enumerate them all?

- advanced levers
- blocked storming pawns on the 6th rank
- edge a/h storming pawn, blocked by king
- minor-queen imbalances
- penalty for doubled pawns in terms of distnace between the pawns
- center bind bonus
- penalty for low mobility pieces on the edge

etc., etc., at least 20!

other ideas of mine have served for successful patches too, indirectly, because the primary notion has been mine, or because my suggestions have spurred thoughts along similar lines.

for example, a piece protector bonus has been proposed by me and tested at the framework long time ago.
attacking squares on the king side, not part of the shelter, too
bonus for penetration points, currently, minors attacking an outpost square
etc., etc.

also, pawn push threat, and
most importantly, psqt bonus for connected defended and duo pawns in terms of rank, implemented in late 2013 by Joerg Oster and Ralph Stoesser.

do you know that this patch was a turning point in SF's development?
omly after it, SF began playing in a more positional vein, considering its advanced pawns.

only after it, SF was able to become the strongest engine on the planet!
without it, quite probably it would not have done so.

because of it, SF is currently playing KIDs best.

all these patches and the subsequent SF rise would have been impossible without me.

do you consider that at all, when attacking me in such an atrocious manner?

do you?

that is why, I would kindly ask you not to use SF any more in your tests and analyses.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Ulisses P, Lanzo Nazaire and VR are the same person, right?
Nah, Ulysses P is the only account I have used on Talkchess. I was Uly and Vytron at Rybka Forum and OpenChess. I was Dylan Sharp at Hiarcs Forum. I've been Ovyron, and Yntec at other places.

When confronted, I always admit to my other nicknames in places, even when it causes me great trouble (the greatest trouble I faced was when I, as Dylan Sharp, admitted to Harvey Williamson that I was Ulysses P, and all hell broke loose and I lost my position as Captain of both Hiarcs Forum and Rybka Forum in the middle of a game, I'd have saved weeks of suffering by just withholding this info! But even my enemies can attest, that I'm always truthful when it comes to nicknames... when confronted.)

It's still nice to be confused with Vasik Rajlich, though :P
Make someone happy today.

User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 2256
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: First Review

Post by Ovyron » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:39 pm

BrendanJNorman wrote:Conveniently, HGM has also deleted your post with containing this, but still... don't pretend you never said it.
I can confirm I saw the post that HGM deleted with jose mº velasco's attacks.

And then jose mº velasco contacted me by PM claiming that he never posted that and that he did nothing wrong! He had a very convincing argument, that'd have put me on his side if I didn't read the post before being deleted, so this proves Jose is a troll 100%.

Anyway, I'm glad you're still around Brendan :)
Make someone happy today.

User avatar
velmarin
Posts: 1598
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:48 am

Re: First Review

Post by velmarin » Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:08 pm

Ovyron wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:Conveniently, HGM has also deleted your post with containing this, but still... don't pretend you never said it.
I can confirm I saw the post that HGM deleted with jose mº velasco's attacks.

And then jose mº velasco contacted me by PM claiming that he never posted that and that he did nothing wrong! He had a very convincing argument, that'd have put me on his side if I didn't read the post before being deleted, so this proves Jose is a troll 100%.

Anyway, I'm glad you're still around Brendan :)

I don't know why you're trying to get everything dirty and slander.
I do have it all stashed away, and my proof that I didn't insult Brendan,
but I'm not gonna publish it because there's no need to publish more stories.
You're acting in bad faith, and some nonsense wants to turn you into I don't know what... stop please.

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6037
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: First Review

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:57 pm

Ovyron wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:How could anyone forbid the use of SF, I mean, are you in your right mind?
What else do you call this post by yourself!?:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:I will post, if anything just on this thread, as I can not post 100 replies in 5 threads.

will wait for the truth outing at some propicious point in time.

in the meantime, I would request pretty much everyone in this hating bunch, primarily Bram, Andreas, Possioto, Herbert, Vincent, etc., not to use SF for their analyses, as in SF code there have been at least 20 successful evaluation patches based on my ideas, and without those, SF would never have reached its current status.

do you want me to enumerate them all?

- advanced levers
- blocked storming pawns on the 6th rank
- edge a/h storming pawn, blocked by king
- minor-queen imbalances
- penalty for doubled pawns in terms of distnace between the pawns
- center bind bonus
- penalty for low mobility pieces on the edge

etc., etc., at least 20!

other ideas of mine have served for successful patches too, indirectly, because the primary notion has been mine, or because my suggestions have spurred thoughts along similar lines.

for example, a piece protector bonus has been proposed by me and tested at the framework long time ago.
attacking squares on the king side, not part of the shelter, too
bonus for penetration points, currently, minors attacking an outpost square
etc., etc.

also, pawn push threat, and
most importantly, psqt bonus for connected defended and duo pawns in terms of rank, implemented in late 2013 by Joerg Oster and Ralph Stoesser.

do you know that this patch was a turning point in SF's development?
omly after it, SF began playing in a more positional vein, considering its advanced pawns.

only after it, SF was able to become the strongest engine on the planet!
without it, quite probably it would not have done so.

because of it, SF is currently playing KIDs best.

all these patches and the subsequent SF rise would have been impossible without me.

do you consider that at all, when attacking me in such an atrocious manner?

do you?

that is why, I would kindly ask you not to use SF any more in your tests and analyses.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Ulisses P, Lanzo Nazaire and VR are the same person, right?
Nah, Ulysses P is the only account I have used on Talkchess. I was Uly and Vytron at Rybka Forum and OpenChess. I was Dylan Sharp at Hiarcs Forum. I've been Ovyron, and Yntec at other places.

When confronted, I always admit to my other nicknames in places, even when it causes me great trouble (the greatest trouble I faced was when I, as Dylan Sharp, admitted to Harvey Williamson that I was Ulysses P, and all hell broke loose and I lost my position as Captain of both Hiarcs Forum and Rybka Forum in the middle of a game, I'd have saved weeks of suffering by just withholding this info! But even my enemies can attest, that I'm always truthful when it comes to nicknames... when confronted.)

It's still nice to be confused with Vasik Rajlich, though :P
You could not be that mot-a-mot, could you?
I don't know, you have the same style: attacking people with no reason at all...
Why you had to attack my book?

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6037
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: First Review

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:01 pm

BrendanJNorman wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
velmarin wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:

5. I work in chess marketing and have earned tens of thousands of dollars in a single week for chess companies,
This is really possible,
How lucky are some of you :wink:
If he HAD been earning that much, he would not have been asking to promote my book on a commission...
You are Jose seem to have dyslexia or some other learning disability.

Reread what I wrote, genius:
I work in chess marketing and have earned tens of thousands of dollars in a single week for chess companies
Naturally, I don't get a big portion of the money.

In regards to getting a "commission" for selling your book - you got this from your twisted imagination.

I never said that, I simply offered advice.

But for now, I'm enjoying seeing you embrace your humiliation as the chess world mocks you and your scammy approach to promotion.

So that offer is obviously off the table for you.
Indeed, it is regrettable a good book and a diligent author should be attacked that virulently.

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6037
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: First Review

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:09 pm

Ovyron wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:Conveniently, HGM has also deleted your post with containing this, but still... don't pretend you never said it.
I can confirm I saw the post that HGM deleted with jose mº velasco's attacks.

And then jose mº velasco contacted me by PM claiming that he never posted that and that he did nothing wrong! He had a very convincing argument, that'd have put me on his side if I didn't read the post before being deleted, so this proves Jose is a troll 100%.

Anyway, I'm glad you're still around Brendan :)
Now, if I am a troll, Jose is a troll, Brendan is obviously a troll and you even more so, what should we conclude about Talkchess? :D
At least Henk is very nice.

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6037
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: First Review

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:16 pm

BrendanJNorman wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
velmarin wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:

5. I work in chess marketing and have earned tens of thousands of dollars in a single week for chess companies,
This is really possible,
How lucky are some of you :wink:
If he HAD been earning that much, he would not have been asking to promote my book on a commission...
Do you have any idea how much David Smerdon earns as an actuarial scientist?

Multiple six figures - that's all I'll say.

And still he reviewed your book, at your request, for FREE.

Why?

And why did I originally offer to help you?

For "commissions" off a book I was sure wouldn't do well?

No.

Because Australians are just nice people.
Some Australians, who earn multiple six figures, like David Smerdon, are really nice, others, quite the opposite.
It obviously depends on the income.
Why did he review the book?
Because he got interested, as simple as that.
He is a good, intelligent, straightforward person.

Locked