Is there a forced win for White?

Date: 30 Mar 2007 14:27:04
From: Pono Fan
Subject: Is there a forced win for White?

8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6

or

http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/

Date: 19 Apr 2007 18:24:29
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 5, 6:54 pm, "I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote:
> [PLONK] to you to Chriss. You're not even a chess player. Fuck off and throw
> yourself off a bridge.

Don't do it; it's a trick. Skippy Repa and his kind
live under bridges.

-- coach

Date: 19 Apr 2007 18:18:51
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 4, 12:08 pm, "I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote:
> I'm going to explain it to this 1500 rated imbecile "Ralf Callenberg" again,
> because he hasn't got to concept into his pea brain yet.
>
> Notation (algebraic or descriptive) It's the language that
> chess players, real chess players, use to communicate chess moves, positions
> and analysis, etc. They don't say things like "move that castle over there"
> or "you just put that horsey guy behind that pawn there". They use NOTATION!
>
> Is some of this sinking in yet "Ralf"? I know you're a bit on the slow side
> so perhaps you'll need it repeated a few more times.

Skippy, you are obviously in one of your hothead
tiffs, and have forgotten to take your hand away
from the mouse after clicking "send" the first time.

Try to relax, Skip. As the doctors have explained
over and over, no one is really out to get you; this
is merely a delusion of yours. Take a deep breath
and relax; don't tense up; and remember to take
your meds. That's better.

-- coach

Date: 19 Apr 2007 18:12:52
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 3, 4:17 pm, "I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote:

> I highly doubt someone as patently stubborn and stupid as you will ever make
> it beyond the "C" class.

Skippy, if *you* could do it, anybody can!

-- coach

Date: 19 Apr 2007 18:09:13
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 3, 1:30 pm, "I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote:

> > Jason Repa. He has got a (Canadian) rating of about 2000 and thinks
> > this makes him something like a chess god
>
> It's God, imbecile. Not "god".

Sorry, Skippy, but you're wrong here. God is
capitalized when it refers to "the one true god",
as in Yaweh/Jehovah/he who ain't got no name.
But whenever discussing, say, the Greek gods,
or just any old random god, it is not capitalized.
Examples: "Bobby Fischer is/was a chess god!"
"Zeus and the other gods were not faithful as
spouses."

(You sure seem to get out of our depth easily
and often, Skip!)

> And my 2000+ rating is what it is. YOU on the
> other hand "Ralf" are a 1500 rated IDIOT and you will NEVER be anywhere near
> 2000. You don't have the mental prerequisites for the game.

Interesting theory. Lazlo Polgar set out to prove
that (almost) anybody could be *trained* to become
good at chess, but then, one could argue that his
three girls were unusually st. Still, you serve
as an excellent counterexample, being of low IQ
and yet having a certain talent for the fast game.

I see you're still posing, um, I mean posting under
a multitude of different handles; do you remember
what I taught you about not doing this while
simultaneously whining about others doing it? I
hope so. Just take your meds and everything will
be A-okay.

-- coach

Date: 19 Apr 2007 17:54:29
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 3, 4:48 am, "[email protected]"
<[email protected] > wrote:
> On 3 Apr., 08:56, "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Who is this wanker ???
>
> Jason Repa. He has got a (Canadian) rating of about 2000 and thinks
> this makes him something like a chess god (an angry one, that is). And
> as you might have guessed in the meantime: he has some weak spots in
> communicating with other persons.

Don't sell Skippy short: he's pretty good at bullet-
chess, too. Uses cussin' and spittin' to throw 'em
off kilter, so's he can win on time. Funny thing
about him, though, is he issues challenges left and
right but can't ever seem to show up to play.

-- coach

Date: 19 Apr 2007 17:50:41
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 2, 12:10 pm, "I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote:

> You are an idiot, but you don't have a 2100 Fide rating, so you're half
> right. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT NOTATION IS YOU STUPID FUCK!

Hello Skippy. How's it hangin'?

> Posting some player's name who does have a FIDE rating does not make you a
> FIDE rated player. Get to 130 bcf first Terry. That alone would be a huge
> accomplishment for a moron like you.

Still off your meds, I see.

-- coach

Date: 20 Apr 2007 17:25:24
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

I don't reply to know-nothing, frightened, snivelling little cowards who
hide behind aliases. As soon as I see the name Help-Bitch I [PLONK] without
reading the drivel that spews from the little faggot's keyboard.

JMR

Date: 20 Apr 2007 20:47:24
From: The Revanchist
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

I was better but..... wrote:

>I don't reply to know-nothing, frightened, snivelling little cowards who
>hide behind aliases. As soon as I see the name Help-Bitch I [PLONK] without
>reading the drivel that spews from the little faggot's keyboard.

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we
say in Texas, you couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions
printed on the heel. You are a canker, an open wound. I would rather
kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You took your last vacation in
the Islets of Langerhans.

You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little
worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a
cad, and a weasel. I take that back; you are a festering pustule on a
weasel's rump. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench,
a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same
species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at
the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut.
Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are
a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. You are a technicolor yawn.
And did I mention that you smell?

You are a squeaking rat, a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal bagpipe
player. You were not born. You were hatched into an unwilling world
that rejects the likes of you. You didn't crawl out of a normal egg,
either, but rather a mutant maggot egg rejected by an evil scientist
as being below his low standards. Your alleged parents abandoned you
at birth and then died of shame in recognition of what they had done
to an unsuspecting world. They were a bit late.

Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting
to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a
nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able
to access it ever so much more rapidly. If cluelessness were crude
oil, your scalp would be crawling with caribou.

You are a thick-headed trog. I have seen skeet with more sense than
you have. You are a few bricks short of a full load, a few cards short
of a full deck, a few bytes short of a full core dump, and a few
chromosomes short of a full human. Worse than that, you top-post. God
created houseflies, cockroaches, maggots, mosquitos, fleas, ticks,
slugs, leeches, and intestinal parasites, then he lowered his
standards and made you. I take it back; God didn't make you. You are
Satan's spawn. You are Evil beyond comprehension, half-living in the
slough of despair. You are the entropy which will claim us all. You
are a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered inbred
trout-defiler. You make Ebola look good.

You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid,
nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an
ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with
you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in
a land that reality forgot. You are not ANSI compliant and your kup
doesn't validate. You have a couple of address lines shorted together.
You should be promoted to Engineering Manager.

Do you really expect your delusional and incoherent ramblings to be
read? Everyone plonked you long ago. Do you fantasize that your
tantrums and conniption fits could possibly be worth the $0.000000001
worth of electricity used to send them? Your life is one big
W.O.M.B.A.T. and your future doesn't look promising either. We need to
trace your bloodline and terminate all siblings and cousins in order
to cleanse humanity of your polluted genes. The good news is that no
normal human would ever mate with you, so we won't have to go into the
sewers in search of your git.

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and
obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living
emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a
loathsome disease, a drooling inbred cross-eyed toesucker. You make
Quakers shout and strike Pentecostals silent. You have a version 1.0
mind in a version 6.12 world. Your mother had to tie a pork chop
around your neck just to get your dog to play with you. You think
that HTTP://WWW.GUYMACON.COM/FUN/INSULT/INDEX.HTM is the name of a
rock band. You believe that P.D.Q. Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived. You prefer L. Ron Hubbard to Larry Niven and Jerry
Pournelle. Hee-Haw is too deep for you. You would watch test patterns
all day if the other inmates would let you.

On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are
deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of
wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted.
Spammers look down on you. Phone sex operators hang up on you.
Teleketers refuse to be seen in public with you. You are the source
of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go.
May you choke on your own foolish opinions. You are a Pusillanimous
galactophage and you wear your sister's training bra. Don't bother
opening the door when you leave - you should be able to slime your
way out underneath. I hope that when you get home your mother runs
out from under the porch and bites you.

You smy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock.
You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted
boggish foot-licking half-twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You
gormless crook-pated tosser. You bloody churlish boil-brained clotpole
ponce. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You cockered
bum-bailey poofter. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You
dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill. May your
spouse be blessed with many bastards.

You are so clueless that if you dressed in a clue skin, doused yourself
in clue musk, and did the clue dance in the middle of a field of horny
clues at the height of clue mating season, you still would not have a
clue. If you were a movie you would be a double feature;
_Battlefield_Earth_ and _Moron_Movies_II_. You would be out of focus.

You are a fiend and a sniveling coward, and you have bad breath. You
are the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel.
You wear strangely mismatched clothing with oddly placed stains. You
are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just knowing that
you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go
away. You are jetsam who dreams of becoming flotsam. You won't make
it. I beg for sweet death to come and remove me from a world which
became unbearable when you crawled out of a harpy's lair.

It is hard to believe how incredibly stupid you are. Stupid as a stone
that the other stones make fun of. So stupid that you have traveled
far beyond stupid as we know it and into a new dimension of stupid.
Meta-stupid. Stupid cubed. Trans-stupid stupid. Stupid collapsed to
a singularity where even the stupons have collapsed into stuponium.
Stupid so dense that no intelligence can escape. Singularity stupid.
Blazing hot summer day on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one
minute than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. It cannot
be possible that anything in our universe can really be this stupid.
This is a primordial fragment from the original big stupid bang. A pure
extract of stupid with absolute stupid purity. Stupid beyond the laws
of nature. I must apologize. I can't go on. This is my epiphany of
stupid. After this experience, you may not hear from me for a while.
I don't think that I can summon the strength left to mock your moronic
opinions and malformed comments about boring trivia or your other
drivel. Duh.

The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped
away most of your of what you wrote, because, well ... it didn't
really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative flame was
pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a
load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after
you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more
success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal"
people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering.
But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this
world who find these things to be difficult. If I had known that this
was true in your case then I would have never have exposed myself to
what you wrote. It just wouldn't have been "right." Sort of like
parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the
emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a
demand on you.

P.S.: You are hypocritical, greedy, violent, malevolent, vengeful,
cowardly, deadly, mendacious, meretricious, loathsome, despicable,
belligerent, opportunistic, barratrous, contemptible, criminal,
fascistic, bigoted, racist, sexist, avaricious, tasteless, idiotic,
brain-damaged, imbecilic, insane, arrogant, deceitful, demented, lame,
self-righteous, byzantine, conspiratorial, satanic, fraudulent,
libelous, bilious, splenetic, spastic, ignorant, clueless, EDLINoid,
illegitimate, harmful, destructive, dumb, evasive, double-talking,
devious, revisionist, narrow, manipulative, paternalistic,
fundamentalist, dogmatic, idolatrous, unethical, cultic, diseased,
suppressive, controlling, restrictive, malignant, deceptive, dim,
crazy, weird, dyspeptic, stifling, uncaring, plantigrade, grim,
unsympathetic, jargon-spouting, censorious, secretive, aggressive,
mind-numbing, arassive, poisonous, flagrant, self-destructive,
abusive, socially-retarded, puerile, and Generally Not Good.

I hope this helps...

Date: 19 Apr 2007 17:48:28
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

> An idiot with a 2100 fide rating ????????????

Give me time -- I am working my there!

-- help bot

Date: 20 Apr 2007 17:25:54
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Date: 19 Apr 2007 17:46:33
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 2, 2:35 am, "Terry" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Oops.
>
> Rook behind the pawn and then move the king over.

Hmm. Rook behind the pawn -- who would have
thought of that?

-- help bot

Date:
From: Martin Brown
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Date: 10 Apr 2007 05:51:47
From: Harry Houston
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

[Event ""]
[Site ""]
[Date "4-6-2007"]
[Round ""]
[White "Chessmaster 10"]
[Black "Chessmaster 10"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "oft "]

1. <c5 ^d8
2. <b6 ^f8
3. <c7 ?d3
4. <d6 ?f4
5. ^e7 ^f6+
6. <d7 g6
7. ^e8 ^f7+
8. <d6 g7
9. ^g8 ?h5
10. <e6 ^f8
11. ^xg7 ?xg7+
12. <d5 ^f5+
13. <c6 ?e8
14. <d7 ^e5
15. <c6 <c3
16. <d7 <b4
17. <c6 <a5
18. <b7 ^c5
19. <a8 ^c7
20. <b8 <b6
21. <a8 ^c8#
1-0

"Pono Fan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>
> or
>
> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>

Date: 04 Apr 2007 10:32:55
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On Apr 4, 6:07 pm, "I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote:

> Notation (algebraic or descriptive) It's the language that
> chess players, real chess players, use to communicate chess moves, positions
> and analysis, etc. They don't say things like "move that castle over there"
> or "you just put that horsey guy behind that pawn there".

So, you never heard players during an analysis saying things like "...
and the remote passed pawn wins", " white can now exploit the
weaknesses of the black squares around the black king", "a minority
attack looks good", "white should occupy this open file with the
rooks" and so on and so on? Notation is used for concrete moves, but
if you go to long ranging ideas and patterns where the concrete move
order is not so important, it is common not to use notation but plain
words. Is this concept really so difficult for you to understand? Are
you really so blinded by your anger and your bad temper, that you can
not even see this simple and basic fact?

Ralf

Date: 04 Apr 2007 18:03:18
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

I'm going to explain it to this 1500 rated imbecile "Ralf Callenberg" again,
because he hasn't got to concept into his pea brain yet.

Notation (algebraic or descriptive) It's the language that
chess players, real chess players, use to communicate chess moves, positions
and analysis, etc. They don't say things like "move that castle over there"
or "you just put that horsey guy behind that pawn there". They use NOTATION!

Is some of this sinking in yet "Ralf"? I know you're a bit on the slow side
so perhaps you'll need it repeated a few more times.

Date: 04 Apr 2007 11:00:56
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

In article <[email protected] >,
"Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Are
> you really so blinded by your anger and your bad temper, that you can
> not even see this simple and basic fact?

As somebody said to me recently, Ralf ... "Don't feed the trolls."

He's not interested in a discussion.

-Ron

Date: 05 Apr 2007 04:59:04
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

04.04.2007 20:00, Ron:

> He's not interested in a discussion.

Sure. But the amount of his ignorance, his complete social incompetence
and dumbness is somehow fascinating. He reminds me of those people you
can see at trainstations, who are running around, a plastic bag in one
hand and shouting at the people passing by, at the government, the sun
and the air. I usually try not to go too near to those people, but yet,
I wanted to experience at least once how it is to speak to a deceased mind.

But of course, you are right. there is no point in continuing this. His
freak show gets boring anyway.

Greetings,
Ralf

Date: 05 Apr 2007 22:53:57
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Ralf", you're the imbecile who can't get this simple concept into your
little 1500 rated brain......THERE IS A REASON CHESS PLAYERS USE NOTATION!!

Notation (algebraic or descriptive) It's the language that
chess players, real chess players, use to communicate chess moves, positions
and analysis, etc. They don't say things like "move that castle over there"
or "you just put that horsey guy behind that pawn there". They use NOTATION!

Is some of this sinking in yet "Ralf"? I know you're a bit on the slow side
so perhaps you'll need it repeated a few more times.

Date: 04 Apr 2007 18:03:27
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Date: 04 Apr 2007 13:47:44
From: Claudio Grondi
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Pono Fan wrote:
> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>
> or
>
> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>
Just learn to use the available endgame database available online:

http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database.html

White to move, win in 21.

Move Value
Rd3-g3 Win in 21

Have fun using it!
Looking up these online database is an incredible adventure for any
chess friend!

Claudio Grondi

Date: 03 Apr 2007 01:48:08
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On 3 Apr., 08:56, "Terry" <[email protected] > wrote:

> Who is this wanker ???

Jason Repa. He has got a (Canadian) rating of about 2000 and thinks
this makes him something like a chess god (an angry one, that is). And
as you might have guessed in the meantime: he has some weak spots in
communicating with other persons.

Greetings,
Ralf

Date: 03 Apr 2007 17:30:38
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 3 Apr., 08:56, "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Who is this wanker ???
>
> Jason Repa. He has got a (Canadian) rating of about 2000 and thinks
> this makes him something like a chess god

It's God, imbecile. Not "god". And my 2000+ rating is what it is. YOU on the
other hand "Ralf" are a 1500 rated IDIOT and you will NEVER be anywhere near
2000. You don't have the mental prerequisites for the game.

Date: 03 Apr 2007 21:12:16
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

03.04.2007 19:30, I was better but.....:

> It's God, imbecile. Not "god".

Writing the word capitalized or not depends on what one means with
"god". Look it up in Merriam-Webster if you don't believe me. Gosh, do I
as a German have to teach you English?

> And my 2000+ rating is what it is. YOU on the
> other hand "Ralf" are a 1500 rated IDIOT and you will NEVER be anywhere near
> 2000. You don't have the mental prerequisites for the game.

You on the other hand have difficulties in reading and comprehension. It
has been pointed out to you already by somebody else, that I have a
German rating number of about 2000 and an ELO of about 2100. Not that I
regard this as some rekable achievement or that I think that ratings
have anything to do with mental abilities, but I just wanted to remember
you, that your assumption about my rating is just wrong.

Ralf

Date: 03 Apr 2007 19:42:46
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Ralf, you are, bar-none, the DUMBEST fucking Geman i've ever met in my life.
You start this whole flame thread because you can't get this simple concept
called ALGEBRAIC NOTATION into your little pea brain. It's the language that
chess players, real chess players, use to communicate chess moves, positions
and analysis, etc. They don't say things like "move that castle over there"
or "you just put that horsey guy behind that pawn there". They use NOTATION!
How incredibly stupid do you have to be to not be able to understand this?

And you are nowhere near 2000 and you know it. Your rating is approx. 1500.

Date: 03 Apr 2007 22:23:03
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

03.04.2007 21:42, I was better but.....:

> You start this whole flame thread because you can't get this simple concept
> called ALGEBRAIC NOTATION into your little pea brain.

Well, again I have to question your ability to read and comprehend. You
started calling Terry names when he dared to describe his plan in plain
words. I entered this nice conversation only afterwards.

> It's the language that
> chess players, real chess players, use to communicate chess moves, positions
> and analysis, etc.

As I said: your experience with how chess players discuss a position
seems to be limited.

> They use NOTATION!

Yes, and words. Take a book out of your shelf - you will see a lot of
words inbetween the notations and diagrams (ok, except you happened to
grab an Informator).

> How incredibly stupid do you have to be to not be able to understand this?

And how difficult is it four you to understand, that notations are an
important but not the only way to discuss a position?

> And you are nowhere near 2000 and you know it. Your rating is approx. 1500.

http://schachbund.de/dwz/db/spieler.html?zps=22065-103
http://fide.com/ratings/card.phtml?event=4666313

Are you able to follow the links and understand the given numbers or do
you need a more detailed description? Shall I make a sketch for you?

Ralf

Date: 04 Apr 2007 16:07:56
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Date: 03 Apr 2007 11:16:51
From: Terry
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 3 Apr., 08:56, "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Who is this wanker ???
>
> Jason Repa. He has got a (Canadian) rating of about 2000 and thinks
> this makes him something like a chess god (an angry one, that is). And
> as you might have guessed in the meantime: he has some weak spots in
> communicating with other persons.
>
> Greetings,
> Ralf
>
>

Thanks for the info :-)

He cant be as strong as you say. He fails to see that the position under
consideration is a trivial win. Even a 1200 can see that.

Regards

Date: 03 Apr 2007 17:34:50
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Terry you retarded little cretin troll. Only weak players like yourself are
quick to make assumptions about positions, as you have done. This position
is far from trivia. It's complex enough that even Rybka 2.3 and Fritz 10 are
way off on the assessment, unless they are run for some time. You're a weak,
dumb, know-nothing 130 bcf player Terry. You are not in a position to be
making sweeping comments when you can't back them up on the board. Chess is
a game of skill. There is a reason your rating is so low idiot!

Date: 31 Mar 2007 09:05:15
From: Terry
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Pono Fan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>
> or
>
> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>

This is a trivial win for white.

Rook behind the king then move the king over.

Regards

Date: 02 Apr 2007 07:35:38
From: Terry
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Terry" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Pono Fan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
>> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>>
>> or
>>
>> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>>
>
> This is a trivial win for white.
>
> Rook behind the king then move the king over.
>
> Regards
>

Oops.

Rook behind the pawn and then move the king over.

Regards

Date: 02 Apr 2007 06:55:06
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Terry" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Pono Fan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
>>> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>>>
>>
>> This is a trivial win for white.
>>
>> Rook behind the king then move the king over.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>
> Oops.
>
> Rook behind the pawn and then move the king over.
>
> Regards

Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't even
know what algebraic notation is.

The position is far from "trivial".

Date: 03 Apr 2007 00:03:42
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

02.04.2007 08:55, I was better but.....:
>
> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't even
> know what algebraic notation is.
>
> The position is far from "trivial".

The positon is obviously trivial due to the extra knight and any decent
tournament player should instantly see, how to win this, as one just has
to follow some basic recipes even a beginner should know. If you follow
the posted link to the Namilov tablebase, you can indeed easily see,
that this is exactly the fastest way to win: "put the rook behind the
pawn and move the king over". One might add: king and rook can never
stop the pawn as the knight can always control the sqaure in front of
the pawn.

You seem to have a limited experience in tournament play, if you really
think, that advanced players won't describe a plan without using
algebraic notations.

Ralf

Date: 03 Apr 2007 07:55:38
From: Terry
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 02.04.2007 08:55, I was better but.....:
>>
>> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't
>> even know what algebraic notation is.
>>
>> The position is far from "trivial".
>
> The positon is obviously trivial due to the extra knight and any decent
> tournament player should instantly see, how to win this, as one just has
> to follow some basic recipes even a beginner should know. If you follow
> the posted link to the Namilov tablebase, you can indeed easily see, that
> this is exactly the fastest way to win: "put the rook behind the pawn and
> move the king over". One might add: king and rook can never stop the pawn
> as the knight can always control the sqaure in front of the pawn.
>
> You seem to have a limited experience in tournament play, if you really
> think, that advanced players won't describe a plan without using algebraic
> notations.
>
> Ralf

I play in about 10 otb tournaments a year including 2 fide rated.
I saw no point in using any notation as mine was a general way of winning
in this type of position.

Regards

Date: 03 Apr 2007 07:22:32
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Terry" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> 02.04.2007 08:55, I was better but.....:
>>>
>>> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't
>>> even know what algebraic notation is.
>>>
>>> The position is far from "trivial".
>>
>> The positon is obviously trivial due to the extra knight and any decent
>> tournament player should instantly see, how to win this, as one just has
>> to follow some basic recipes even a beginner should know. If you follow
>> the posted link to the Namilov tablebase, you can indeed easily see, that
>> this is exactly the fastest way to win: "put the rook behind the pawn and
>> move the king over". One might add: king and rook can never stop the pawn
>> as the knight can always control the sqaure in front of the pawn.
>>
>> You seem to have a limited experience in tournament play, if you really
>> think, that advanced players won't describe a plan without using
>> algebraic notations.
>>
>> Ralf
>
> I play in about 10 otb tournaments a year

You can play in all the tournaments you like idiot. Alot of weak patzers
like yourself like to push wood. You keep getting your brains bashed in
because you're too stupid to learn how to play this game, but you continue
to enter tournaments nonetheless.

Seriously buddy, if you don't even know what chess notation is (descriptive
and algebraic) and why it's what real chess players use to communicate moves
and positions, you're totally hopeless. Keep your mouth (keyboard) shut and
your eyes open and even a dumb guy like you might just learn something.

Date: 02 Apr 2007 23:45:34
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 02.04.2007 08:55, I was better but.....:
>>
>> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't
>> even know what algebraic notation is.
>>
>> The position is far from "trivial".
>
> The positon is obviously trivial due to the extra knight

The only thing that is obvious here is that you don't know anything about
chess Ralf. You're probably a weak class player. Morons like you always like
to run around and claim you understand a position but you don't. That's why
you're a weak class player and will never make it to expert or master. If
you think this position is simple, you truly are a know-nothing patzer. It's
not simple at all. And for your information, most positions with Rook and
Knight vs Rook are dead drawn. Many with Rook, Knigh, and Pawn vs Rook are
dead drawn as well. Shut up, watch, listen, and learn Ralf. You don't know
anything.

Date: 03 Apr 2007 22:01:26
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

03.04.2007 01:45, I was better but.....:
> And for your information, most positions with Rook and
> Knight vs Rook are dead drawn.

As this is not a Rook & Knight vs. Rook ending, this information is more
or less useless.

> Many with Rook, Knigh, and Pawn vs Rook are dead drawn as well.

So are many KP-K endings, which doesn't mean that there are no easy wins
with the remaining material. Of course one has to look at the concrete
position. The white pieces are not distributed over the board, they can
work together to support the pawn. It was this grouping of the pieces -
that the white King or Knight are not somwhere off the scene - which let
me on first glance at the position come to the opinion, that this is
won. Afterwards it was not difficult to see in short time how this can
be achieved: After Rg3 black might stop the pawn immediately, but then
the white King can approach his pawn. Together with the Rook he can
cover the pawn, while the Knight attacks the square in front of the
pawn. This way the pawn can step forward and there is nothing black can
do against it. If Black tries to keep the white King away, White can
push the pawn to g7. Without the Knight this would be a draw, as the
white King is too far away to support his pawn. In this particular case,
one has only to realize, that the Knight must be able to go to h5 once
the black King attacks g7. If the King steps to f6, it is enough to have
Nf4 due to the fork on h5. This is the only non trivial aspect of the
position. Black can not stop White from bringing his Knight to h5. Once
this has been done the white King moves over to the pawn to seal things.
All this can be deduced from the position without calculating long
variations, hence I call it an easy win. In the concrete position there
are faster ways of winning based on some threats of forks, but with the
described approach one can at least quickly determine that it is won and
one is in absolut no danger of miscalculations.

A lot of endings have to be calculated very precisely as each tempo
might be decisive. But in a lot of positions this is not the case and
long plans are required where it is not possible to calculate all
variations. Those plans might as well be described with words, as the
concrete moves are not foreseeable anyway. Weak players and still
sometimes strong programs are not able to grasp those kinds of positions
easily, but an advanced tournament player should be able to realize that
in a given position he has to think in long term maneuvers and not in
variations.

Ralf

Date: 03 Apr 2007 20:17:24
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 03.04.2007 01:45, I was better but.....:
>> And for your information, most positions with Rook and Knight vs Rook are
>> dead drawn.
>
> As this is not a Rook & Knight vs. Rook ending, this information is more
> or less useless.

It is only useless to a 1500 rated's brain who is incapable of interpolating
ideas and schemes. GM's do this all the time. They look for what's common
about two positions for a framework, then the work out the significance (if
any) of the differences.

Look idiot, this whole flame you've started is because you're frustrated
that you can't understand what chess notation is and why it's important. A
"C" class player like yourself should keep your yap shut and your eyes open.

>> Many with Rook, Knigh, and Pawn vs Rook are dead drawn as well.
>
> So are many KP-K endings

This is not a KP-K ending imbecile. There are 6 pieces on the board, not
three. You cannot make any comparisons between the two.

I highly doubt someone as patently stubborn and stupid as you will ever make
it beyond the "C" class.

Date: 03 Apr 2007 22:36:58
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

03.04.2007 22:17, I was better but.....:

>> As this is not a Rook & Knight vs. Rook ending, this information is more
>> or less useless.
>
> It is only useless to a 1500 rated's brain who is incapable of interpolating
> ideas and schemes. GM's do this all the time. They look for what's common
> about two positions for a framework, then the work out the significance (if
> any) of the differences.

Yes exactly - they look at the position. The only argument you have
given against the simplicity of the win is based on the number of
pieces. You did not mention the pattern at hand - in contrast to what I
did in my explanations. Were you able to follow them?

>
>>> Many with Rook, Knigh, and Pawn vs Rook are dead drawn as well.
>> So are many KP-K endings
>
> This is not a KP-K ending imbecile.

You might look up in an encylcopaedia of your choice the concept of what
is called "analogy" (you can do this when looking up the difference
between "god" and "God"). I just wanted to point out what you yourself
say above: you have to look at the position, not just count the pieces
and say: "Ah, KNRP-kr - there are a lot of drawn games with this
distribution, so this position can not be simple." I looked at how the
pieces are actually positioned on the board - and *then* made my judgement.

Ralf

Date: 04 Apr 2007 16:08:14
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Date: 04 Apr 2007 21:12:08
From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On 2007-04-04, I was better but..... wrote:
> I'm going to explain it to this 1500 rated imbecile "Ralf Callenberg" again,
> because he hasn't got to concept into his pea brain yet.

P-K-B

<PLONK >

--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org >
========= Do not reply to the From: address; use Reply-To: ========
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

Date: 05 Apr 2007 22:54:43
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

[PLONK] to you to Chriss. You're not even a chess player. Fuck off and throw
yourself off a bridge.

Date: 04 Apr 2007 12:48:30
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 03.04.2007 22:17, I was better but.....:

<... >

> Yes exactly - they look at the position. The only argument you have given
> against the simplicity of the win is based on the number of pieces. You
> did not mention the pattern at hand - in contrast to what I did in my
> explanations. Were you able to follow them?

Exactly the right point!

Kling&Horwitz-fortress positions were thought drawn for a hundred years, til
72 and Roycroft's analysis.

Solve this:
Black: Ke5, Ne4
White: Kd7, Bb3, Bh6

White to move, and 150 years of investigation couldn't prove a win until
Fritz did. Other KN, KBB positions were also thought drawn, then eventually
solved, but the dancing Knight fortress of Kling&Horwitz defeated all
attempts.

What is interesting about the position above is though it is theoretically
provably won, who can actually do it? And if Kasparov didn't solve it, is it
a draw in practice but a win in theory?

Imgaine you are a TD and confronted with arbitrating the position above,
what do you rule?

a) A draw within the 50-move [or even 55-move] rule?
b) A theoretical win for White?
c) A draw, since white is not able to prove his win?
d) Take both players to the pub and flip a coin?

As well as Ralf's comment on the pattern of the piece deployment being
important - here is an added factor of performance, with white not being
able to demonstrate a win in a theoretically won position.

Phil Innes

<... >

>
> Ralf
>

Date: 03 Apr 2007 07:56:37
From: Terry
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:yAgQh.18065$6m4.12267@pd7urf1no...
>
> "Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> 02.04.2007 08:55, I was better but.....:
>>>
>>> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't
>>> even know what algebraic notation is.
>>>
>>> The position is far from "trivial".
>>
>> The positon is obviously trivial due to the extra knight
>
> The only thing that is obvious here is that you don't know anything about
> chess Ralf. You're probably a weak class player. Morons like you always
> like to run around and claim you understand a position but you don't.
> That's why you're a weak class player and will never make it to expert or
> master. If you think this position is simple, you truly are a know-nothing
> patzer. It's not simple at all. And for your information, most positions
> with Rook and Knight vs Rook are dead drawn. Many with Rook, Knigh, and
> Pawn vs Rook are dead drawn as well. Shut up, watch, listen, and learn
> Ralf. You don't know anything.
>
>
>

Who is this wanker ???

Date: 19 Apr 2007 20:22:51
From: Chris Mattern
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

In article <[email protected] >, Terry wrote:
>
>Who is this wanker ???
>
Repa has yet another alias. Back into the killfile you go.

--
Christopher Mattern

NOTICE
Thank you for noticing this new notice
Your noticing it has been noted
And will be reported to the authorities

Date: 20 Apr 2007 17:26:44
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Back to the killfile YOU go Mattern. Nice to see the retards like you
sticking together!

JMR

Date: 03 Apr 2007 07:18:40
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Terry" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "I was better but....." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:yAgQh.18065$6m4.12267@pd7urf1no...
>>
>> "Ralf Callenberg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> 02.04.2007 08:55, I was better but.....:
>>>>
>>>> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't
>>>> even know what algebraic notation is.
>>>>
>>>> The position is far from "trivial".
>>>
>>> The positon is obviously trivial due to the extra knight
>>
>> The only thing that is obvious here is that you don't know anything about
>> chess Ralf. You're probably a weak class player. Morons like you always
>> like to run around and claim you understand a position but you don't.
>> That's why you're a weak class player and will never make it to expert or
>> master. If you think this position is simple, you truly are a
>> know-nothing patzer. It's not simple at all. And for your information,
>> most positions with Rook and Knight vs Rook are dead drawn. Many with
>> Rook, Knigh, and Pawn vs Rook are dead drawn as well. Shut up, watch,
>> listen, and learn Ralf. You don't know anything.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Who is this wanker ???

Someone alot stronger and more knowledgeable about chess, and many other
areas than your peabrain will ever allow you to be. Seriously idiot, if you
don't even know what chess notation is (descriptive and algebraic) and why
it's what real chess players use to communicate moves and positions, you're
totally hopeless.
>
>

Date: 02 Apr 2007 22:52:58
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

In article <[email protected] >,
Ralf Callenberg <[email protected] > wrote:

> You seem to have a limited experience in tournament play, if you really
> think, that advanced players won't describe a plan without using
> algebraic notations.

Indeed. In fact Sherevsky, in his book "Endgame Strategy" talks a lot
about "schematic thinking" - NOT thinking in variations, but rather
identifying the process by which you'll win in conceptual terms, and
only then looking for the moves to make it happen.

(Heck, that's not too different from the planning method Silman
recommends in "How to Reasses Your Chess." He must not be an IM!)

-Ron

Date: 02 Apr 2007 23:49:13
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Ron" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Ralf Callenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> You seem to have a limited experience in tournament play, if you really
>> think, that advanced players won't describe a plan without using
>> algebraic notations.

Actually, the reality is, only a moron would not understand enough to use
notation. That's totally obvious. There is a reason notation was invented.
It facilitates unambiguous communication of chess games and positions.

And I'd beat you 100% of the games at any time control "Ron". If you can't
even understand why chess notation is useful and important, you obviously
are not a chess player at all.

Date: 02 Apr 2007 13:26:27
From: Terry
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:eN1Qh.16153$DE1.743@pd7urf2no...
>
> "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "Pono Fan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
>>>> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is a trivial win for white.
>>>
>>> Rook behind the king then move the king over.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>
>> Oops.
>>
>> Rook behind the pawn and then move the king over.
>>
>> Regards
>
>
> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't
> even know what algebraic notation is.
>
> The position is far from "trivial".
>

An idiot with a 2100 fide rating ????????????

Regards

Date: 02 Apr 2007 16:10:59
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Terry" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "I was better but....." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:eN1Qh.16153$DE1.743@pd7urf2no...
>>
>> "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "Terry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>> "Pono Fan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
>>>>> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>>>>>
>>>>> or
>>>>>
>>>>> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is a trivial win for white.
>>>>
>>>> Rook behind the king then move the king over.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oops.
>>>
>>> Rook behind the pawn and then move the king over.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>
>>
>> Terry, you're an idiot that knows nothing at all about chess. You don't
>> even know what algebraic notation is.
>>
>> The position is far from "trivial".
>>
>
> An idiot with a 2100 fide rating ????????????
>
> Regards
>
>

You are an idiot, but you don't have a 2100 Fide rating, so you're half
right. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT NOTATION IS YOU STUPID FUCK! No Fide rated
player says things like "move the rook behind pawn and put the horsey guy
over there". I've never met a club player rated 1600 or better who doesn't
even know enought to use notation.

Posting some player's name who does have a FIDE rating does not make you a
FIDE rated player. Get to 130 bcf first Terry. That alone would be a huge
accomplishment for a moron like you.

Date: 30 Mar 2007 23:13:55
From: Chvsanchez
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Win in 21 says the Nalimov Endgame Tablebases (http://www.k4it.de/
index.php?topic=egtb&lang=en).

CHS

On 30 , 19:02, "Taylor Kingston" <[email protected] > wrote:
> On 30, 4:27 pm, "Pono Fan" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
> > wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>
> > or
>
> >http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>
> Well, it didn't analyze down to mate, but Fritz8 rated the position
> at about +8, pretty much a lead-pipe cinch. Since White can usually
> win this sort of position with just rook and pawn vs. rook, I would
> think he would have an even easier time with an extra knight.
> Is there some escape clause for Black?

Date: 31 Mar 2007 20:13:51
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Chvsanchez" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Win in 21 says the Nalimov Endgame Tablebases (http://www.k4it.de/
> index.php?topic=egtb&lang=en).
>
> CHS

new one are now out, according to Convekta

Nalimov Endgame Tablebases: [base material about $26 retail]

1) Nalimov Endgame Tablebases, 6-pieces, 2 DVDs (17 Gb).
The product includes the following Endings tablebases:

pawn + pawn against pawn + pawn
pawn + pawn + pawn against pawn
Knight + pawn against Bishop + pawn
Knight + pawn against Knight + pawn
Bishop + pawn against Bishop + pawn

The retail price is 26 USD. Nalimov Tablebases are supplied in standard
formats and can be used in all famous programs including Fritz, Junior,
Chess Base, ?hess Assistant and others.

2) New release of Total Nalimov Tablebases, all 3-4-5 pieces and main 6
pieces, 6 DVDs (50Gb).

This product has the reduced wholesale price and includes more Tablebases
than Fritz DVD Endgame Turbo! Plus Database of 376 000 correspondence games
in PGN format as a Bonus!

The retail price is 59 USD. Nalimov Tablebases and Correspondence database
are supplied in standard formats and can be used in all famous programs
including Fritz, Junior, Chess Base, ?hess Assistant and other.

Phil Innes

> On 30 , 19:02, "Taylor Kingston" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 30, 4:27 pm, "Pono Fan" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
>> > wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>>
>> > or
>>
>> >http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>>
>> Well, it didn't analyze down to mate, but Fritz8 rated the position
>> at about +8, pretty much a lead-pipe cinch. Since White can usually
>> win this sort of position with just rook and pawn vs. rook, I would
>> think he would have an even easier time with an extra knight.
>> Is there some escape clause for Black?
>
>

Date: 01 Apr 2007 05:58:24
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Chess One wrote:

> 1) Nalimov Endgame Tablebases, 6-pieces, 2 DVDs (17 Gb).

There is also a 9-DVD product from ChessBase: DVD-Endgame Turbo 3.

I was better but..... wrote:
> And i wouldn't dream of paying one cent
> for any of it.

That only means you have to rely on others to get them, unless
you decide to compute them yourself. The eMule network is your best
choice, unless you find someone who is willing to share the files
on DVD.

--
Anders Thulin ath*algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~ath

Date: 02 Apr 2007 04:27:20
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

> The eMule network is your best
> choice,

What keywords are best to use on the eMule network?

Date: 02 Apr 2007 14:19:13
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

I was better but..... wrote:

> What keywords are best to use on the eMule network?

None -- use the ed2k-links you get by clicking on each individual entry
on http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/chess/tablebases-online/ , or get the whole
emulecollections and enter. That ensures that you get the files that match
the checksums ... there are some endgame tables around that are faulty,
and you want to avoid those.

Also check the Thread1, Thread2 links in the eMule introduction section --
that ensures you'll use the same servers as everyone else interested in
these files, and particularly the people who have collected everything, and
now just serve them.

--
Anders Thulin ath*algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~ath

Date: 07 Apr 2007 09:50:10
From: Gilles Garrigues
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

Anders :

It looks like they are no more acceptable FTP sites for downloading the 6P
EGTB's
Bob Hyatt quit from that a long time ago (what a pity !). I know there are a
couple of sites but download speed is ridiculous (10kb/s or so). So far I
havn't installed eMule (EGTB would be my only need) but I might end up doing
it. It just doesn't look simple to me.

Please correct me if I am wrong on the FTP sites ...

G. Garrigues
Dunkerque, France

"Anders Thulin" <[email protected] > a �crit dans le message de
news: [email protected]...
>I was better but..... wrote:
>
>> What keywords are best to use on the eMule network?
>
> None -- use the ed2k-links you get by clicking on each individual entry
> on http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/chess/tablebases-online/ , or get the whole
> emulecollections and enter. That ensures that you get the files that match
> the checksums ... there are some endgame tables around that are faulty,
> and you want to avoid those.
>
> Also check the Thread1, Thread2 links in the eMule introduction
> section --
> that ensures you'll use the same servers as everyone else interested in
> these files, and particularly the people who have collected everything,
> and
> now just serve them.
>
> --
> Anders Thulin ath*algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~ath

Date: 31 Mar 2007 20:41:49
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

the 6 piece set is over a Terrabyte. And i wouldn't dream of paying one cent
for any of it

"Chess One" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:3izPh.437$hI4.255@trndny08...
>
> "Chvsanchez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Win in 21 says the Nalimov Endgame Tablebases (http://www.k4it.de/
>> index.php?topic=egtb&lang=en).
>>
>> CHS
>
> new one are now out, according to Convekta
>
> Nalimov Endgame Tablebases: [base material about $26 retail]
>
> 1) Nalimov Endgame Tablebases, 6-pieces, 2 DVDs (17 Gb).
> The product includes the following Endings tablebases:
>
> pawn + pawn against pawn + pawn
> pawn + pawn + pawn against pawn
> Knight + pawn against Bishop + pawn
> Knight + pawn against Knight + pawn
> Bishop + pawn against Bishop + pawn
>
> The retail price is 26 USD. Nalimov Tablebases are supplied in standard
> formats and can be used in all famous programs including Fritz, Junior,
> Chess Base, ?hess Assistant and others.
>
> 2) New release of Total Nalimov Tablebases, all 3-4-5 pieces and main 6
> pieces, 6 DVDs (50Gb).
>
> This product has the reduced wholesale price and includes more Tablebases
> than Fritz DVD Endgame Turbo! Plus Database of 376 000 correspondence
> games in PGN format as a Bonus!
>
> The retail price is 59 USD. Nalimov Tablebases and Correspondence database
> are supplied in standard formats and can be used in all famous programs
> including Fritz, Junior, Chess Base, ?hess Assistant and other.
>
>
> Phil Innes
>
>> On 30 , 19:02, "Taylor Kingston" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 30, 4:27 pm, "Pono Fan" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
>>> > wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>>>
>>> > or
>>>
>>> >http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/
>>>
>>> Well, it didn't analyze down to mate, but Fritz8 rated the position
>>> at about +8, pretty much a lead-pipe cinch. Since White can usually
>>> win this sort of position with just rook and pawn vs. rook, I would
>>> think he would have an even easier time with an extra knight.
>>> Is there some escape clause for Black?
>>
>>
>
>

Date: 31 Mar 2007 17:25:05
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"Chvsanchez" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Win in 21 says the Nalimov Endgame Tablebases (http://www.k4it.de/

Very nice! Do you know of a place to download the 6 piece Nalimov
tablebases?

Date: 31 Mar 2007 20:17:21
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

"I was better but....." <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:RPwPh.4844$DE1.3469@pd7urf2no...
>
> "Chvsanchez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Win in 21 says the Nalimov Endgame Tablebases (http://www.k4it.de/
>
> Very nice! Do you know of a place to download the 6 piece Nalimov
> tablebases?

you can try convekta direct or contact chessville [we are cheaper]

phil

Date: 31 Mar 2007 20:34:30
From: I was better but.....
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

I've never paid for tablebases phil. and dont' intend to start.

"Chess One" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:llzPh.1234$k%2.431@trndny01...
>
> "I was better but....." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:RPwPh.4844$DE1.3469@pd7urf2no...
>>
>> "Chvsanchez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Win in 21 says the Nalimov Endgame Tablebases (http://www.k4it.de/
>>
>> Very nice! Do you know of a place to download the 6 piece Nalimov
>> tablebases?
>
> you can try convekta direct or contact chessville [we are cheaper]
>
> phil
>

Date: 31 Mar 2007 18:36:25
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

I was better but..... wrote:

> Very nice! Do you know of a place to download the 6 piece Nalimov
> tablebases?

See: http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/chess/tablebases-online/

--
Anders Thulin ath*algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~ath

Date: 30 Mar 2007 15:02:07
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

On 30, 4:27 pm, "Pono Fan" <[email protected] > wrote:
> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>
> or
>
> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/

Well, it didn't analyze down to mate, but Fritz8 rated the position
at about +8, pretty much a lead-pipe cinch. Since White can usually
win this sort of position with just rook and pawn vs. rook, I would
think he would have an even easier time with an extra knight.
Is there some escape clause for Black?

Date: 30 Mar 2007 21:56:27
From: Tony Mountifield
Subject: Re: Is there a forced win for White?

In article <[email protected] >,
Pono Fan <[email protected] > wrote:
> 8/8/4r3/2k3P1/8/3R4/3K1N2/8 w - - 0 63
> wKd2,Nf2,Rd3,Pg5/bKc5,Re6
>
> or
>
> http://mychessanalysis.tripod.com/images/

Looks like there should be.

Try 1. Ng4 Rg6 2. Nf6 Kc4 3. Rd5 to start with, then bring the white
king over towards the pawn.

Cheers
Tony
--
Tony Mountifield
Work: [email protected] - http://www.softins.co.uk
Play: [email protected] - http://tony.mountifield.org