English Chess Forum

Mike Truran wrote:I didn't like to mention a grammatical error in one so erudite.

(Ellipsis removed from Truran's original )

In confusing 'fewer' with 'less', Saunders committed a lexical, not a grammatical error. We can't spend long enough debating this distinction in my opinion - not on a Sunday afternoon as we recover from the absolute trivia of England chasing down India's 338

Who cares about the misspelling of the genitive of a two letter word and the like? Far more exercising is when a newspaper publishes a Max Moseley interview, a few Saturdays past, and neglects to number the questions. I had to count them myself: eins, zwei, drei, vier, fünf ... Have they not enough principals to guarantee that apposite principles are adhered to in the Fourth Estate?

The most disgusting aspect of the 4NCL is the sight of a gentleman, when on site in the lavatory, availing himself of a cup of coffee. Is there nothing in the rules that forbids this?

John Saunders wrote :-

"... unlike long-established leagues and associations where the rules had been laid down in Edwardian times (and still seemed to have some Edwardian committee members to ensure they didn't get changed!). "

They're not always that modern.

I have sometimes thought that Channel Isolani should name themselves in Norman French. Anyway, Guernsey, Jersey, England and Wales does make 4 nations...

Mike Truran wrote: 2. Bristol Basilisks.

In European bestiaries and legends, a basilisk, from the Greek βασιλίσκος basilískos, "little king", is a legendary reptile reputed to be king of serpents and said to have the power to cause death with a single glance.

That should do the trick in a complicated middle game.

I do like Basilisks - they are quite a challenging medium level creature to fight in many fantasy games. I remember this one called Heroes of might and magic III, which had a character who tamed them as his special skill and you could keep firing and re hiring him to pick up loads and loads of basilisks right at the start of the game which gave a powerful lead at that stage (some might not have heard of this game).

Behemoths might be more appropriate, however, given the way we have been demolishing all in sight like a rampant force of destruction!
Behemoth (Hebrew בהמות, behemoth (Modern: Behemot) English pronunciation: /bɨˈhiːməθ/ or /ˈbiː.əməθ/, also /ˈbeɪ.əmɔːθ/) is a mythological beast mentioned in the Book of Job, 40:15-24.[1] Metaphorically, the name has come to be used for any extremely large or powerful entity.
Also, they are generally high level creatures in any fantasy game so have a bit more of a sense of awe about them.

Joey Stewart wrote:Behemoths might be more appropriate, however, given the way we have been demolishing all in sight like a rampant force of destruction!

Really - http://www.4ncl.co.uk/resdiv2_r5b.htm

Ian Thompson wrote:

Joey Stewart wrote:Behemoths might be more appropriate, however, given the way we have been demolishing all in sight like a rampant force of destruction!

Really - http://www.4ncl.co.uk/resdiv2_r5b.htm

Made me chuckle

That was not a proper win though - Jack, Steve and me should have all won our games but were skanked out of the deserved points so actually you were lucky not to be on the receiving end of a jolly good thrashing!

Also, if you want to play the 'links' game, I have one for you too:

http://www.4ncl.co.uk/resdiv2_r3b.htm#Guildford_A&DC_2

And we beat Wessex 6-2 so I think it shows who the real champions of this encounter are.

Joey, it is all subjective, if you go back to the 3Cs match against Bristol which you won 4.5-3.5, the Collier-Longson match which Bristol won had an instance where Longson missed a simple win in the time scramble, and also Jaunooby-Beaumont was a half a point missed for 3Cs as well, so you can spin any match any way you like

Well, yeah I guess 3C's were a bit unfortunate there but Chris and Dave did have their own missed chances too so I think both games could have gone either way. I just didnt want the Guildford mercenaries to get too confident in case we have to play them again later.

Joey Stewart wrote:Well, yeah I guess 3C's were a bit unfortunate there but Chris and Dave did have their own missed chances too so I think both games could have gone either way. I just didnt want the Guildford mercenaries to get too confident in case we have to play them again later.

We don't, at least not this season.

Joey Stewart wrote:Behemoths might be more appropriate, however, given the way we have been demolishing all in sight like a rampant force of destruction!
Behemoth (Hebrew בהמות, behemoth (Modern: Behemot) English pronunciation: /bɨˈhiːməθ/ or /ˈbiː.əməθ/, also /ˈbeɪ.əmɔːθ/) is a mythological beast mentioned in the Book of Job, 40:15-24.[1]

Weighty matters indeed, the problem, as I see it, is the law of unintended consequences. There are some who object to English pronunciations, even though the modern transliteration behemot is close to the Shephardic enunciation (which, anyway, may not be authentically original). I can see the enterprise being abandoned; many English speakers will opt for "beer mat", rather than struggle with "behemot". Perhaps Diageo could be cajoled into providing sponsorship to the Bristol Beer Mats?

Joey Stewart wrote:I just didnt want the Guildford mercenaries to get too confident in case we have to play them again later.

You won't. If both teams end up in the promotion pool, your loss to the Guildford unpaid amateur team will get carried forward. With a bit of luck, Wessex won't make it into the promotion pool, so we'll drop our loss and start off with more points than you.

Wessex have got a decent chance of getting past kings head though, I wouldnt count on them losing. And even if they do, I am sure those amca kids will be no match for the might of bristol so that is another chance for wessex to make their way up to the promotion pool and retain our nice juicy win against them but, more importantly, guildfords big loss - the seconds might be unpaid but I bet when all the ringers get brought in for the division 1 finals then the seconds will probably be composed of more professional players.

Joey Stewart wrote:... the seconds might be unpaid but I bet when all the ringers get brought in for the division 1 finals then the seconds will probably be composed of more professional players.

I doubt it. The Guildford 1st team have already lost 3 matches, so they have no realistic chance of winning anything. I don't know what the plans are for the 1st team for the rest of the season, but I'd be very surprised if the team is strengthened.

I thought it was traditional for all division 1 teams to bring in additional players for the last weekend, whether they are necessary or not.