LOL yes great avatar, someone should FB message that to her so she can send a long letter to Sklansky (a number of days later) complaining about it and claiming that she never hit the king off the board.

Smilingbill, it's really borderline imo, a number of moves were made when Krush was hitting the clock and Zatonskih was hitting her clock at the exact same time, so it technically was like Zats- was holding down the clock.

Of course this is horrible, but the more horrible thing is having a format like this in the first place (no increment).

New angle: When playing blitz, time your fast playing and clock hitting so you hit the clock the same exact moment your opponent does, so no time goes off your clock!

Absolutely every time when I saw this happen throughout the years castling was not allowed, to me it is sort of a no brainer..? castling short on the queenside and long on the kingside would be as big of a difference in the rules as let's say allowing pawns move not 2 but 3 squares etc. Must be some weird USCF rules that allow castling in such case, you guys like to be different from others

I mean if the castling would be allowed in such case then it could certainly become a very possible angle in blitz games. Now some pricks do it to their opponents hoping that they won't see it and lose material, AND when they see it they wont be able to castle anyway. However, it is your responsibility to check if your pieces are standing correctly, so it is quite easy to avoid. However, if castling was allowed then people could intentionally do it to their own K+Q which would be much less noticeable to the opponent, and various angles stem from that.

Castling is legal under fide rules too. the king is unmoved, the rook is unmoved, and they are on the same rank. Fide has pretty relaxed castling rules.

before 1972 this would be legal:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pam-Krabb%C3%A9-Rochade

Ha! Even better than Kxd5.

Hehe. Very nice, even though I don't understand a word.

Does anyone else think of 0-0 as "castles" a nd 0-0-0 as "triple castles? That link made me think "Quadruple castles. Excellent."

How about read the rules before saying it is allowed by FIDE

http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.ht...5&view=article

A.4.a for Rapid, and B.3.a says same works for blitz.

I am mistaken. Is it the same for regular time controls? I'm sure it is but it could be different.

For the regular time controls I believe the game HAS to be restarted no matter when you spot the irregular placement. Will have to check with the handbook though, might be mistaken

This thread has been a REAL EYE OPENER.

Chess: not a game for gentleman.

Chess, a game for gentlemen that is subsequently also played by scammers, like any other game in the world.

Darren Brown's technique for playing 8 expert players simultaneously, and guaranteeing a 50% result, is pretty funny.

Here's a video of it:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8a...ers_videogames

He plays 9 experts, including a few grandmasters, and wins by 1 overall.

I saw the video.. but how did he predict the number of pieces left on each board?

Did he ever tell?

It's really cooler not to know. Like all "magic tricks", it's boring once you know how it was done. But if you can't help yourself, here's an explanation: http://ct208.blogspot.com/2009/07/de...explained.html

(Please don't comment on it here, out of respect for those who have the willpower to resist clicking the link, and want to remain impressed.)

lol, 'it's like i was playing a grandmaster'

wait, wat

lol at that link. remembering 4 moves at a time is "superb" and could not be done without an ear piece.

yeah I always do my best to put things in spoilers.

Situation: Round 1 of a Game/60min
I was on the winning side of KR+2(unconnected) vs KR
I had 24 minutes left my opponent had 7
My rating is 1825, his was 1305


So what is my percentage to win this? 99.9%?

Well my opponent made a move and then forgot to press his clock. I stared at the board for 7 minutes as if I was thinking and let his time run out. Even in that situation. I'm a cruel and miserable person who will never be loved.

you're such a zatonskih

ha the guy he beat legit, the one guy that is I actually knew him.

he was captain of one of our opposing teams when i played for my uni, he was a 1600 player at best fwiw.....

If he picked a 1600 player then the fact that he picked someone so low likely means it was for the purposes of beating him legitimately. Although Brown's chess must not be '****' for him to be that confident he'd beat him.

Anybody heard of this?

Yesterday I played a 15 0 game on FICS with this much lower rated player. After the first couple moves, he tanks. After 4 min, I type in chat, 'r u ok?', no response. After about 7 minutes, he finally makes a move.

Could he be tanking on purpose just to see if I'd get bored and leave the game, so he could make a move and win on time? That's what it seemed like. Weird.