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.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: First Review

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:25 pm

BrendanJNorman wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Otherwise, you are just LYING.
That is what you are, Brendan, a LIAR.
Says the guy claiming to be the only guy on earth who can beat Stockfish. :roll:

Here are some TRUTHS for you, Lyudmil.

1. Hundreds for 2750+ GMs have tried and failed to defeat Stockfish.

2. You claim to have done so - numerous times.

3. Unlike most chessplayers, especially those with a playing strength of 2750+ as you claim, you have no history at all of playing chess online. Therefore, no proof of playing strength.

4. You also refuse to provide proof of your claims.

5. People on chess.com have run your games against Stockfish through Stockfish...and strangely enough, Stockfish no longer agrees with the moves he played against you. :lol:

Those are self-evident truths, which in and of themselves, reveal you to be the liar.

If you truly as as strong as you say, I challenge you to 6 games of 3 0 on LiChess.com.

If you win even 3, I'll take your claims seriously, if you win all 6 (as someone stronger than SF should) - I'll promote your book myself.

How does that sound? Time to put up or shut up.
No matter how bad my book sells, if you start promoting it, it will be a disaster.
3/0, is that all the you can play?
Is that how you got a good online rating, by using time lag, wins on time and fast hand-moving?
All those games with no increment make no sense at all.
You are to weak for me, I would have played some games in order for you to indulge in my brilliant play, but for the time being I simply don't play online.
1/3 of the online players are cheaters, right?
Post a position where the SF version used by me for a particular game takes a very different decision, or just shut up.

PS. Again, I did not start all this.
I hate the way it goes, but that is it.
I posted another review and couple of games, nice input.
Then, Ulisses comes and starts trolling; Brendan joins into the scuffle; others too.
Again, it was not me who started it.

karger
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:27 am

Re: First Review

Post by karger » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:53 pm

I knew your giant ego would force you to respond ...

JJJ
Posts: 1285
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:47 am

Re: First Review

Post by JJJ » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:46 pm

karger wrote:I knew your giant ego would force you to respond ...
You have the same ego since you wanted him to respond.

karger
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:27 am

Re: First Review

Post by karger » Sat Feb 17, 2018 12:12 am

Baptists , Since you made me aware of that fact , I really feel bad 😈

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Nay Lin Tun

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:17 am

Thank you Nay Lin Tun for the 1-star review you just put on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-revi ... 1522041400
Your only review, without a verified purchase, you even did not nuy the book, did not read it, but felt the necessity to denigrade it.
And to decrease my chances of selling some books.

Thank you very much.
That is what I have to fight each and every day...
It is... very strenuous, very hard, very desperate at moments.
Why should people be so evil?

In what way is the book average, how can you back your statement:
"There is no new info or secrets in this book rather than common chess knowledge such as pawn structure."?
Obviously, you have not read the book.
Why you reviewed then?
Don't you feel ashamed?

Let EVERYBODY on this forum know who Nay Lin Tun is.

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: Nay Lin Tun

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:20 am

Really, I feel like vomiting, just mentioning your name.
Probably you know that Amazon reviews could be revised.
I hope you revise/delete your review soon.

BrendanJNorman
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 11:43 pm
Full name: Brendan J Norman

Re: Nay Lin Tun

Post by BrendanJNorman » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:35 am

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Thank you Nay Lin Tun for the 1-star review you just put on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-revi ... 1522041400
Your only review, without a verified purchase, you even did not nuy the book, did not read it, but felt the necessity to denigrade it.
And to decrease my chances of selling some books.

Thank you very much.
That is what I have to fight each and every day...
It is... very strenuous, very hard, very desperate at moments.
Why should people be so evil?

In what way is the book average, how can you back your statement:
"There is no new info or secrets in this book rather than common chess knowledge such as pawn structure."?
Obviously, you have not read the book.
Why you reviewed then?
Don't you feel ashamed?

Let EVERYBODY on this forum know who Nay Lin Tun is.
This is getting stranger each day...

Somebody commented on this review saying:

Image

Huh? "(B. Norman)" - I didn't write that!

I mostly agree with it, but I didn't write it.

Which brave person feels the need to sign my name to something, rather than use his own?

Bloody chessplayers...

WHOEVER USED MY NAME TO COMMENT, PLEASE CHANGE IT. THIS IS IDENTITY THEFT AND WILL BE REPORTED TO AMAZON.

BrendanJNorman
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 11:43 pm
Full name: Brendan J Norman

Re: Nay Lin Tun

Post by BrendanJNorman » Sat Feb 17, 2018 12:15 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Really, I feel like vomiting, just mentioning your name.
Probably you know that Amazon reviews could be revised.
I hope you revise/delete your review soon.
It probably isn't him.

Somebody left a fake review under my name too.

You have an enemy who is more crafty than you think.

Nevertheless, I have reported the use of my name to Amazon.

Image

Image

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 23505
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: First Review

Post by hgm » Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:02 pm

BrendanJNorman wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:You are just an A**Hole, Brendan, nothing more that that.
What's the bet HGM doesn't delete this post? :lol: :roll:
I advise everyone to take that bet, and then report the post. :lol:

I never delete postings without receiving a request for it. For the simple reason that I am usually not aware that they even exist. Do you really think I would be behind my terminal every minute of the day watching the childish nonsense you so eagerly participate in, just in case someone gets fed up with you?

If you would have wanted the post to be deleted, you should have reported it. That you use it instead in your illegal campaign to discredit the moderators, IMO makes that this is not really an insult anyway, but just a (self-censored) objective statement of fact. Which makes me less inclined to delete it, even if it would be reported now...

BrendanJNorman
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 11:43 pm
Full name: Brendan J Norman

Re: First Review

Post by BrendanJNorman » Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:04 pm

hgm wrote:
BrendanJNorman wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:You are just an A**Hole, Brendan, nothing more that that.
What's the bet HGM doesn't delete this post? :lol: :roll:
I advise everyone to take that bet, and then report the post. :lol:

I never delete postings without receiving a request for it. For the simple reason that I am usually not aware that they even exist. Do you really think I would be behind my terminal every minute of the day watching the childish nonsense you so eagerly participate in, just in case someone gets fed up with you?

If you would have wanted the post to be deleted, you should have reported it. That you use it instead in your illegal campaign to discredit the moderators, IMO makes that this is not really an insult anyway, but just a (self-censored) objective statement of fact. Which makes me less inclined to delete it, even if it would be reported now...
So what you're really saying is:

Due to your personal grievances, you aren't going to do anything.

We already knew this.

Locked