|
|
#52
05-04-2004, 09:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: If you are playing 800-1000 hands per day, you\'re messing up your life
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks Tim, that puts my best year at about 1728 and the best player I beat at about 1984. [/ QUOTE ] Not bad. If this keeps up, I may start to think it's rare to find a poker player who hasn't played chess. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] 
|
|
#55
05-04-2004, 09:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uscf ratings
yeah....i'm interested in the books you've written as well if you are okay with publicizing them on these forums (and if no one else considers it spam).
when i stabalize my poker-income somewhat (hopefully within the next few weeks) i am hoping to get back into chess (including some appearances at my local chess-club on Friday nights)....but right now i'm dedicated to improving my poker game. a dozen chess-books is quite an accomplishment. heck, given my inability to study over the years, i think just reading a doezn chess books all the way through would be an accomplishment. the highest rated player i beat over-the-board was 1800. i notched a handful of 23 and 2400's playing bullet (1-minute per game) on ICC...does that count?!?! lol. lori, beating a guy in the 2000 range is pretty darn good. i would be patting myself on the back all day long if i did same. i once gave a 2400 a run for his money playing a Wilkes-Barre (2-knights) defense. naturally, after the game he showed me where i erred (around move 16 or so) and missed out on taking a clear advantage. wish i still had the score-sheet on that one. blue-beard - no real nerves struck by the way....just a friendly debate on the definition of 'average'. the more i'm chatting away about this, the more inclined i am to see what local weekend tourneys are coming up in the area. i'm kind of 'chess-inspired' now. better break out that book on the Wilkes-Barre.
|
|
#56
05-04-2004, 09:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
no book plugs
very kind MicroBob
One piece of advice - I wouldn't bother dusting off any book on the Wilkes-Wotzit, in fact managing to get to move 16 is impressive. A friend of mine would be on these forums all the time if he knew he could plug his books but, once they're done, so am I, if you see what I mean. My wife (complete with whip, Homer - lol) put a copy of each in the living room for all to see, but I moved them to my office. The worst thing about chess for the average (ooh! err!) player is the same problem for stronger, 'Master' players (ooh! err!) - namely the game's too bloody difficult and improvement needs to be on a kind of global, commonsense level rather than learning new openings etc. This commonsense sense that decent chess players have seems rather significant when it comes to poker. Anyway, good luck with both...
|
|
#58
05-04-2004, 10:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: also bluebeard
[ QUOTE ]
That's interesting. The attraction of poker to me, after so many years playing chess, is that there's always a pool of people to beat, whereas with chess the problem is the better you get, the better your opposition becomes. In terms of making a living, doing so by playing only your peers is too difficult [/ QUOTE ] i doubt that attraction will last - not only is it long term dissatisfying for someone with your game playing background to beat up on crap players all the time it is also bad for your game - lucky it pays ok - i'm sure the primary reason you became a good chess player was because your competition was often better chess players stripsqueez - chickenhawk
|
|
#59
05-04-2004, 10:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no book plugs
[ QUOTE ]
This commonsense sense that decent chess players have seems rather significant when it comes to poker. [/ QUOTE ] Agreed, it took me many years and many books just to get out of that average club player range myself. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Now with 1/40th the number of books and 1/40th the amount of time, I've already won more money at poker in my first 6 months of playing than I've won in my best 2 years at chess. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
