Post: #1

Given the size of RVF, I figure we must have a bunch of guys who play chess on the popular sites.

I actually on my 2nd tag played a guy with the same tag as a former RVF member the other day...though he didn't respond to my message.

If anyone is active online and wants to play sometime we should have a thread for it.

I'm on chess.com and lichess.

Post: #2

I'm on chess.com. Profile jjagusah.

Post: #3

I just had to make a burner account on chess.com (my main one unfortunately has my name on it in lichess and chess.com)

My account on lichess: midnightmare

My account on chess.com: midnightmare2018

Post: #4

I think I've got a couple of you guys added now. Whenever you guys want to play let me know.

Post: #5

Man I used to do a big rip of good cocaine and play chess.com for a couple hours. The intensity of the combo and the strategy just went together.

Almost killed my love for the game sober.

Post: #6

(08-24-2018 08:52 PM)Laner Wrote:  Man I used to do a big rip of good cocaine and play chess.com for a couple hours. The intensity of the combo and the strategy just went together.

Almost killed my love for the game sober.

I haven't tried that combo before. I'm addicted to speed chess. Not as bad anymore. When I was in my early teens though I was nuts. I remember one weekend where I played 800 games of bullet.

Chess.com is nice because at the higher levels theres more titled players to play but the interface is horrendous. Its so choppy. I can't watch netflix like I usually do while I play. Lichess is so much smoother.

All the kids these days are just too fast for me. Makes it really tough to rip bullet as much as I used too. Can still get 2200s on both servers but anyone 2400 or above rips me a new one just about every time. Maybe with your combo I could keep up.

Post: #7

My great Uncle played Bobby Fischer in the 70's and actually beat him. Albeit, it was one of those combo games where Fischer was playing 10 people are the same time going from table to table, but still a cool story.

He taught me when I was about 8 so I've always liked it. When I used to work offshore during college summers, we'd either spend downtime playing cards or chess. I usually won the chess games.

Haven't played much since but it's fun and keeps the mind sharp.

Post: #8

I'm fairly sure there's a chess thread knocking about from the past that I contributed to.

Could be imagining it though...

Post: #9

(08-25-2018 08:59 AM)Saweeep Wrote:  I'm fairly sure there's a chess thread knocking about from the past that I contributed to.

Could be imagining it though...

We only had this one:

Education Resources to Chess and Mental Arithmetic

The rest of the chess discussions you probably remember were posted in the "Forum "Lounge" - Everything goes!" thread.

Definitely can't hurt to have a dedicated Chess Thread, of the same name.

Post: #10

(08-25-2018 03:07 AM)robreke Wrote:  My great Uncle played Bobby Fischer in the 70's and actually beat him.

That's still very impressive to beat him in a simul. For the most part those guys do not lose in live simuls. Given Fischer is strength your uncle probably was National Master level I'd assume (if the time controls were lengthy).

One of the downsides to how chess players have moved from ICC to chess.com is you don't really get the huge gap in rating matches. (Chess.com automatically sets your search paremeter at -200 +200. You can manually change it then. With rating pools if you were a 2000+ you could forseeably match a Super GM.

Post: #11

(08-25-2018 03:07 AM)robreke Wrote:  My great Uncle played Bobby Fischer in the 70's and actually beat him. Albeit, it was one of those combo games where Fischer was playing 10 people are the same time going from table to table, but still a cool story.

Unless your uncle is a famous chess player, it is hard to believe. Playing against 10 people at the same time is not difficult as it sounds. Magnus Carlsen did it plenty of times and some books says doing it is actually good since it "clears" your mind.


I won few local tournaments when I was 12 to 17 but then I lost interest. My ELO was around 1900. Not impressive but decent.



I highly recommend buying Chessmaster (10th ed I think). Joshua Waitzkin teaches you from scratch and it's quite good even for advanced users. Importantly you learn end game (the most important). Some concepts were new for me.

Post: #12

(08-25-2018 02:55 PM)joost Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 03:07 AM)robreke Wrote:  My great Uncle played Bobby Fischer in the 70's and actually beat him. Albeit, it was one of those combo games where Fischer was playing 10 people are the same time going from table to table, but still a cool story.

Unless your uncle is a famous chess player, it is hard to believe. Playing against 10 people at the same time is not difficult as it sounds. Magnus Carlsen did it plenty of times and some books says doing it is actually good since it "clears" your mind.


I won few local tournaments when I was 12 to 17 but then I lost interest. My ELO was around 1900. Not impressive but decent.

It's possible but his uncle would've had to been atleast NM strength I'd say if not better. Very improbable a 2000 rated player or an expert player would pull that off.

I agree playing 10 weaker players isn't as difficult as it sounds. Fischer's knowledge of the openings he was playing would've been high enough that he could basically blitz through them and probably be up material on quite a few of the boards entering the mid game.

Theres a show on netflix called Magnus detailing his rise from little kid to world champion. I'm pretty sure in one part of it Magnus goes 18-0 in a simul.

Post: #13

Chessimo is a pretty good app. Sort of like duolingo for chess

Post: #14

(08-25-2018 03:04 PM)lavidaloca Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 02:55 PM)joost Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 03:07 AM)robreke Wrote:  My great Uncle played Bobby Fischer in the 70's and actually beat him. Albeit, it was one of those combo games where Fischer was playing 10 people are the same time going from table to table, but still a cool story.

Unless your uncle is a famous chess player, it is hard to believe. Playing against 10 people at the same time is not difficult as it sounds. Magnus Carlsen did it plenty of times and some books says doing it is actually good since it "clears" your mind.

It's possible but his uncle would've had to been atleast NM strength I'd say if not better. Very improbable a 2000 rated player or an expert player would pull that off.

It seems very unlikely.

10 boards is nothing, Fischer in the mid 60s to mid 70s would have wiped the floor with 10 IM level players, maybe even lower rated grandmasters. NM is way too optimistic here, he was the world champion and strongest player at the time.

Playing a simul as a player of peak Fischer's strength is not difficult at all to begin with. I'd be surprised if on average he'd spend more than 5 minutes in total during the whole event having to come up with an original idea or plan.

It's all "been there, done that" for him, he can basically play the whole thing on autopilot.
You play an opening and know some theory, well, Fischer knows all the theory, and he knows it a lot better than you.
Most people would already lose the game at this stage, without noticing.
He also doesn't blunder.
He doesn't allow you to start a mating attack that's going anywhere.
You won't be able to simplify into an advantageous endgame either.
If you have survived until this point, you will at best have an equal endgame where he'll squeeze you until you break under the pressure.
Or it's really elemental and you manage to hold it, which would be impressive.
Then you have a draw, not bad at all.

Most importantly, a strong master playing a simul will notice pretty quickly who the best players among the participants are, and will make sure to be careful and pay some extra attention to them.

So I find it a bit hard to believe. But hey, maybe Bobby had a bad day.
Or maybe it was a clock simul with a shit ton of boards and your great uncle flagged him.

Post: #15

@Belgrano I agree suggesting NM was even being generous.

With that said I was going off of elo probabilities... see this article https://www.mark-weeks.com/aboutcom/aa03a25.htm

With that said that 1-3 points / 100 an NM would be expected to score against a player of Fischers caliber would likely be only generated from draws it is remotely possible.

I think the elo system and probabilities are less accurate the higher rated the players are. A 1000 rated player beating a 1600 seems much more likely as both of those level of players are going to make a lot of mistakes / blunders.

Fabiano Caruana and Magnus Carlsen are playing right now in the Sinquefield Cup...I believe if Fabiano wins he will technically be the #1 rated player granted the tournament is still in progress.

Magnus is up at the moment but time is tight. Magnus is down to 3 minutes. Magnus has to make 10 moves in 1 minute 30 seconds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmAhVZFYZEY

Post: #16

[align=right]

(08-25-2018 02:55 PM)joost Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 03:07 AM)robreke Wrote:  My great Uncle played Bobby Fischer in the 70's and actually beat him. Albeit, it was one of those combo games where Fischer was playing 10 people are the same time going from table to table, but still a cool story.

Unless your uncle is a famous chess player, it is hard to believe. Playing against 10 people at the same time is not difficult as it sounds. Magnus Carlsen did it plenty of times and some books says doing it is actually good since it "clears" your mind.


I won few local tournaments when I was 12 to 17 but then I lost interest. My ELO was around 1900. Not impressive but decent.



I highly recommend buying Chessmaster (10th ed I think). Joshua Waitzkin teaches you from scratch and it's quite good even for advanced users. Importantly you learn end game (the most important). Some concepts were new for me.

Hard to believe or not, it happened. And yes, It may have been more than 10 players that Fischer was playing. All I know is it was a combo game that happened in, I believe, in New Orleans and there were multiple players. Hell, it could have been 20 or more.

At the time I heard the story and when my family was talking about it at other times, I was very young, less than 10 years old. I offered 10 players just as an example of the fact that Fischer was playing multiple people.

As far as what level my Uncle was, I don't remember if he was Master, Grand Master, etc. I do know he was known for being very good at chess and playing many tournaments. It's possible he was a master. I don't remember hearing exactly what level since, again, it was a long time ago and I didn't know enough about chess/ chess master levels to ask.

Post: #17

Chess has played a huge role in my life. If you are a professional chess player, anticipating and predicting your opponent/partner/colleague/friend/stranger's next steps becomes second nature to you. Kudos to my mom for taking me to chess school at the age of 6. Chess and swimming are the only sports I will make sure my kids are very proficient in. Chess for mind and swimming for body/safety.

Post: #18

(08-26-2018 12:59 AM)robreke Wrote:  As far as what level my Uncle was, I don't remember if he was Master, Grand Master, etc. I do know he was known for being very good at chess and playing many tournaments. It's possible he was a master. I don't remember hearing exactly what level since, again, it was a long time ago and I didn't know enough about chess/ chess master levels to ask.

Edit: I actually found a New Orleans simul where Fischer dropped 3 games, won 70 and drew 1. Granted it was in 1964.

The 3 players he lost too were far from extraordinary.

2 Experts and a Class C player (granted the Class C player was 15 and could've been underrated)

I'm somewhat baffled that he dropped 3 games to players of that level he must have been playing extremely fast.

There is some dispute as to whether all 3 players were correctly named as the winners. (Some people are saying one of the guys who was in the newspaper as winning is not correct and that it was another who happened to be a very strong player.)

I will say this from looking at the games Fischer resigned in positions where he treated his opponent as though they were a professional player. I suspect he could've pulled out some of these games or atleast gotten draws despite being down.

Post: #19

(08-26-2018 04:14 AM)lavidaloca Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 12:59 AM)robreke Wrote:  As far as what level my Uncle was, I don't remember if he was Master, Grand Master, etc. I do know he was known for being very good at chess and playing many tournaments. It's possible he was a master. I don't remember hearing exactly what level since, again, it was a long time ago and I didn't know enough about chess/ chess master levels to ask.

Edit: I actually found a New Orleans simul where Fischer dropped 3 games, won 70 and drew 1. Granted it was in 1964.

The 3 players he lost too were far from extraordinary.

2 Experts and a Class C player (granted the Class C player was 15 and could've been underrated)

I'm somewhat baffled that he dropped 3 games to players of that level he must have been playing extremely fast.

There is some dispute as to whether all 3 players were correctly named as the winners. (Some people are saying one of the guys who was in the newspaper as winning is not correct and that it was another who happened to be a very strong player.)

I will say this from looking at the games Fischer resigned in positions where he treated his opponent as though they were a professional player. I suspect he could've pulled out some of these games or atleast gotten draws despite being down.

Wow, I was going to call BS on the story because Fisher losing (as contrasted with a draw) to an average player, even at age 21 and even in a multi with dozens of players, is highly unlikely. Figured someone's uncle fibbed their entire life, and his nephew is honestly repeating the fib.

Post: #20

(08-26-2018 04:14 AM)lavidaloca Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 12:59 AM)robreke Wrote:  As far as what level my Uncle was, I don't remember if he was Master, Grand Master, etc. I do know he was known for being very good at chess and playing many tournaments. It's possible he was a master. I don't remember hearing exactly what level since, again, it was a long time ago and I didn't know enough about chess/ chess master levels to ask.

Edit: I actually found a New Orleans simul where Fischer dropped 3 games, won 70 and drew 1. Granted it was in 1964.

The 3 players he lost too were far from extraordinary.

2 Experts and a Class C player (granted the Class C player was 15 and could've been underrated)

I'm somewhat baffled that he dropped 3 games to players of that level he must have been playing extremely fast.

There is some dispute as to whether all 3 players were correctly named as the winners. (Some people are saying one of the guys who was in the newspaper as winning is not correct and that it was another who happened to be a very strong player.)

I will say this from looking at the games Fischer resigned in positions where he treated his opponent as though they were a professional player. I suspect he could've pulled out some of these games or atleast gotten draws despite being down.

I had assumed the game was played in the 70s because that's when I heard it. I was a kid then. I was wrong though.

I just googled that article. Yes, my Uncle is listed on there as a "giant killer" in the '64 games where he, indeed, defeated Fischer. The game is also archived on chessgames.com. I won't say his name and please don't anyone here but...Case closed!

Post: #21

Just an heads up. The World Chess Championship started today between the American challenger Fabiano Caruana(who is no Fischer) and the World Champion Magnus Carlsen. Backing Magnus for the win!

Post: #22

Hey everyone, what's your opinions on the AlphaZero vs Stockfish matches? Disregard the fact that there were some favourable "conditions"; just focus on the moves and strategy.

I don't play a lot of chess, but I saw how AlphaZero performed some sequences that no human player would ever imagine to play.

(12-27-2017 07:33 PM)Saccade Wrote:  This would be interesting to any RVF chess lovers, and is an important moment for computation in general. Check this out:

On December 5th, there was a series of 100 games between Stockfish 8 (the previous number 1 chess machine in the world) and Google child company's DeepMind product: Alpha Zero. AlphaZero, born from AlphaGo, a program that destroyed the world's top Go players, has made a big wave in the chess world.

Now, Stockfish 8 is unbeatable by any human; the best Grand Masters in the world can only hope for a draw with this beast. But, the result of those 100 games with Stockfish? AlphaZero didn't lose a single game. It's final score: 28 wins and 72 draws. Yeesh.

The poignant part of this:

Quote:Indeed, AlphaZero was calculating roughly 80 thousand positions per second, while Stockfish, running on a PC with 64 threads (likely a 32-core machine) was running at 70 million positions per second.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-future...arns-chess

The program is more human in its approach, slashing brute computational force in favor of analysis of patterns of what it determines as good moves. Basically, it ain't thinking about the shit ones.

What's more, it was given no opening databases, and no other help other than the moves of the game. It self-learned in 24 hours...

If you'd like to see some of its games, 10 have been released for your perusing. I recommend ChessNetwork's videos (who is the best youtube chess channel bar none, in my opinion).
Start here:

Analysis Videos by agadmator: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL...vV4spwYkmn
Look at this example @ 11:26 (Move 51 for White) (AlphaZero plays White)



1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 b6 3. d4 e6 4. g3 Ba6 5. Qc2 c5 6. d5 exd5 7. cxd5 Bb7 8. Bg2 Nxd5 9. O-O Nc6 10. Rd1 Be7 11. Qf5 Nf6 12. e4 g6 13. Qf4 O-O 14. e5 Nh5 15. Qg4 Re8 16. Nc3 Qb8 17. Nd5 Bf8 18. Bf4 Qc8 19. h3 Ne7 20. Ne3 Bc6 21. Rd6 Ng7 22. Rf6 Qb7 23. Bh6 Nd5 24. Nxd5 Bxd5 25. Rd1 Ne6 26. Bxf8 Rxf8 27. Qh4 Bc6 28. Qh6 Rae8 29. Rd6 Bxf3 30. Bxf3 Qa6 31. h4 Qa5 32. Rd1 c4 33. Rd5 Qe1+ 34. Kg2 c3 35. bxc3 Qxc3 36. h5 Re7 37. Bd1 Qe1 38. Bb3 Rd8 39. Rf3 Qe4 40. Qd2 Qg4 41. Bd1 Qe4 42. h6 Nc7 43. Rd6 Ne6 44. Bb3 Qxe5 45. Rd5 Qh8 46. Qb4 Nc5 47. Rxc5 bxc5 48. Qh4 Rde8 49. Rf6 Rf8 50. Qf4 a5 51. g4 d5 52. Bxd5 Rd7 53. Bc4 a4 54. g5 a3 55. Qf3 Rc7 56. Qxa3 Qxf6 57. gxf6 Rfc8 58. Qd3 Rf8 59. Qd6 Rfc8 60. a4

Second video examples @ 3:37 (Move 13 for White) & 8:01 (Move 32 for White) (AlphaZero plays White)



1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 Be7 6. O-O O-O 7. d5 exd5 8. Nh4 c6 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nf5 Nc7 11. e4 Bf6 12. Nd6 Ba6 13. Re1 Ne8 14. e5 Nxd6 15. exf6 Qxf6 16. Nc3 Nb7 17. Ne4 Qg6 18. h4 h6 19. h5 Qh7 20. Qg4 Kh8 21. Bg5 f5 22. Qf4 Nc5 23. Be7 Nd3 24. Qd6 Nxe1 25. Rxe1 fxe4 26. Bxe4 Rf5 27. Bh4 Bc4 28. g4 Rd5 29. Bxd5 Bxd5 30. Re8+ Bg8 31. Bg3 c5 32. Qd5 d6 33. Qxa8 Nd7 34. Qe4 Nf6 35. Qxh7+ Kxh7 36. Re7 Nxg4 37. Rxa7 Nf6 38. Bxd6 Be6 39. Be5 Nd7 40. Bc3 g6 41. Bd2 gxh5 42. a3 Kg6 43. Bf4 Kf5 44. Bc7 h4 45. Ra8 h5 46. Rh8 Kg6 47. Rd8 Kf7 48. f3 Bf5 49. Bh2 h3 50. Rh8 Kg6 51. Re8 Kf7 52. Re1 Be6 53. Bc7 b5 54. Kh2 Kf6 55. Re3 Ke7 56. Re4 Kf7 57. Bd6 Kf6 58. Kg3 Kf7 59. Kf2 Bf5 60. Re1 Kg6 61. Kg1 c4 62. Kh2 h4 63. Be7 Nb6 64. Bxh4 Na4 65. Re2 Nc5 66. Re5 Nb3 67. Rd5 Be6 68. Rd6 Kf5 69. Be1 Ke5 70. Rb6 Bd7 71. Kg3 Nc1 72. Rh6 Kd5 73. Bc3 Bf5 74. Rh5 Ke6 75. Kf2 Nd3+ 76. Kg1 Nf4 77. Rh6+ Ke7 78. Kh2 Nd5 79. Kg3 Be6 80. Rh5 Ke8 81. Re5 Kf7 82. Bd2 Ne7 83. Bb4 Nd5 84. Bc3 Ke7 85. Bd2 Kf6 86. f4 Ne7 87. Rxb5 Nf5+ 88. Kh2 Ke7 89. Ra5 Nh4 90. Bb4+ Kf7 91. Rh5 Nf3+ 92. Kg3 Kg6 93. Rh8 Nd4 94. Bc3 Nf5+ 95. Kxh3 Bd7 96. Kh2 Kf7 97. Rb8 Ke6 98. Kg1 Bc6 99. Rb6 Kd5 100. Kf2 Bd7 101. Ke1 Ke4 102. Bd2 Kd5 103. Rf6 Nd6 104. Rh6 Nf5 105. Rh8 Ke4 106. Rh7 Bc8 107. Rc7 Ba6 108. Rc6 Bb5 109. Rc5 Bd7 110. Rxc4+ Kd5 111. Rc7 Kd6 112. Rc3 Ke6 113. Rc5 Nd4 114. Be3 Nf5 115. Bf2 Nd6 116. Rc3 Ne4 117. Rd3

No hesitation to sacrifice the Knight during Move 19 (Re1) @ 3:33 (AlphaZero plays White)



1. Nf3 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. c4 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 Be7 6. O-O O-O 7. d5 exd5 8. Nh4 c6 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nf5 Nc7 11. e4 d5 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Nc3 Nxc3 14. Qg4 g6 15. Nh6+ Kg7 16. bxc3 Bc8 17. Qf4 Qd6 18. Qa4 g5 19. Re1 Kxh6 20. h4 f6 21. Be3 Bf5 22. Rad1 Qa3 23. Qc4 b5 24. hxg5+ fxg5 25. Qh4+ Kg6 26. Qh1 Kg7 27. Be4 Bg6 28. Bxg6 hxg6 29. Qh3 Bf6 30. Kg2 Qxa2 31. Rh1 Qg8 32. c4 Re8 33. Bd4 Bxd4 34. Rxd4 Rd8 35. Rxd8 Qxd8 36. Qe6 Nd7 37. Rd1 Nc5 38. Rxd8 Nxe6 39. Rxa8 Kf6 40. cxb5 cxb5 41. Kf3 Nd4+ 42. Ke4 Nc6 43. Rc8 Ne7 44. Rb8 Nf5 45. g4 Nh6 46. f3 Nf7 47. Ra8 Nd6+ 48. Kd5 Nc4 49. Rxa7 Ne3+ 50. Ke4 Nc4 51. Ra6+ Kg7 52. Rc6 Kf7 53. Rc5 Ke6 54. Rxg5 Kf6 55. Rc5 g5 56. Kd4

AlphaZero Positional Masterpiece as Black



1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. O-O Nd7 7. c3 O-O 8. d4 Bd6 9. Bg5 Qe8 10. Re1 f6 11. Bh4 Qf7 12. Nbd2 a5 13. Bg3 Re8 14. Qc2 Nf8 15. c4 c5 16. d5 b6 17. Nh4 g6 18. Nhf3 Bd7 19. Rad1 Re7 20. h3 Qg7 21. Qc3 Rae8 22. a3 h6 23. Bh4 Rf7 24. Bg3 Rfe7 25. Bh4 Rf7 26. Bg3 a4 27. Kh1 Rfe7 28. Bh4 Rf7 29. Bg3 Rfe7 30. Bh4 g5 31. Bg3 Ng6 32. Nf1 Rf7 33. Ne3 Ne7 34. Qd3 h5 35. h4 Nc8 36. Re2 g4 37. Nd2 Qh7 38. Kg1 Bf8 39. Nb1 Nd6 40. Nc3 Bh6 41. Rf1 Ra8 42. Kh2 Kf8 43. Kg1 Qg6 44. f4 gxf3 45. Rxf3 Bxe3+ 46. Rfxe3 Ke7 47. Be1 Qh7 48. Rg3 Rg7 49. Rxg7+ Qxg7 50. Re3 Rg8 51. Rg3 Qh8 52. Nb1 Rxg3 53. Bxg3 Qh6 54. Nd2 Bg4 55. Kh2 Kd7 56. b3 axb3 57. Nxb3 Qg6 58. Nd2 Bd1 59. Nf3 Ba4 60. Nd2 Ke7 61. Bf2 Qg4 62. Qf3 Bd1 63. Qxg4 Bxg4 64. a4 Nb7 65. Nb1 Na5 66. Be3 Nxc4 67. Bc1 Bd7 68. Nc3 c6 69. Kg1 cxd5 70. exd5 Bf5 71. Kf2 Nd6 72. Be3 Ne4+ 73. Nxe4 Bxe4 74. a5 bxa5 75. Bxc5+ Kd7 76. d6 Bf5 77. Ba3 Kc6 78. Ke1 Kd5 79. Kd2 Ke4 80. Bb2 Kf4 81. Bc1 Kg3 82. Ke2 a4 83. Kf1 Kxh4 84. Kf2 Kg4 85. Ba3 Bd7 86. Bc1 Kf5 87. Ke3 Ke6

Every Chess Player Wrote:"Now Stockfish understands how we feel when we play it"

Stockfish Wrote:Stockfish Resigned The Game

There's probably even more moves AlphaZero performed at a level beyond comprehension and we'll probably never know them all.
_______________________________________________
"I wanna be your end game
I wanna be your first string
I wanna be your A-Team (whoa, whoa, whoa)
I wanna be your end game, end game." #152

Post: #23

Adagmator YouTube channel is my favorite. His videos are entertaining and you learn a thing or two.

Post: #24

"Man I used to do a big rip of good cocaine and play chess.com for a couple hours."

That puts a new spin on the term "speed chess".

On that note, I was pretty good as a kid but I lost interest because I just don't have the patience and powers of concentration. I prefer speed chess but I am way out of practice.

Post: #25

I know how to play but want to get better.

Can you guys recommend a few books/resources?