The 2001 Fischer internet hoax

[John Upham]

Is it time to lock this thread and move on? Surely 10 pages is enough.

Fewer than 10 pages were easily enough.

[Chris Goodall]

the thought needed to try and get the knight out intact

What thought? The knight isn't trapped. On either move 19 or 20 you could literally have picked the knight up and put it on the undefended square h6. You forgot that it needed saving, is what happened.

Because if the knight was truly trapped, then you would have had to fight for the draw. So your claim that your opponent played like a super-GM to swindle a draw out of you, would make no sense.

Matt - I think there is enough material preserved here for posterity that, if some future journalist takes Alan at face value, they have only themselves to blame.

[Joey Stewart]

One thing I would perhaps say in Alan's defence is that it has recently been discovered that lichess have a lesser known disciplinary procedure where instead of banning players they are instead stealthily placed into a pool where they can only ever match up with
other "undesirables" which probably include a lot of low level engine users so the fact he was seeing cheats online often could be due to that. Or even if not, it's a worthwhile bit of information to know, as lichess community standards are quite vague and moderators are known to punish for seemingly minor offenses.

[Paul Cooksey]

Is it time to lock this thread and move on? Surely 10 pages is enough.

Fewer than 10 pages were easily enough.

I tend to disagree, one thread called "Alan Llewellyn's thoughts on life and chess", to keep them in one place, would suit me.

[John Sellen]

" I tend to disagree, one thread called "Alan Llewellyn's thoughts on life and chess", to keep them in one place, would suit me."

Great idea Paul. Over to you Carl !!

[Matt Mackenzie]

One thing I would perhaps say in Alan's defence is that it has recently been discovered that lichess have a lesser known disciplinary procedure where instead of banning players they are instead stealthily placed into a pool where they can only ever match up with
other "undesirables" which probably include a lot of low level engine users so the fact he was seeing cheats online often could be due to that. Or even if not, it's a worthwhile bit of information to know, as lichess community standards are quite vague and moderators are known to punish for seemingly minor offenses.

The more I learn (here and elsewhere) about the major online chess playing sites, the more my decision to stay away from them is vindicated.

[John Upham]

It isn't that long ago that THE place to play was playchess.com or maybe ICC.

They took their eye off the ball I suppose.

[AlanLlewellyn]

2022-09-13.png

[Joey Stewart]

It isn't that long ago that THE place to play was playchess.com or maybe ICC.

They took their eye off the ball I suppose.

There's been loads of great sites come and go over the years - FICS, Chesscube, chess32, yahoo...
I never played on ICC though, not even once, I never saw the value in paying just to play blitz when I can do it for free anywhere else - chess.com membership probably gives the maximum amount of content for your money if you want to be paying for memberships.

[AlanLlewellyn]

[Event "Barrow Club Championship 22-23"] [Site "?"] [Date "2022.09.12"] [Round "2"] [White "Travers, Ian"] [Black "Llewellyn, Alan Mansel"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B23"] [BlackElo "1578"] [Annotator "Llewellyn,Alan"] [PlyCount "62"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nd4 4. Bd3 g6 5. Nf3 Bg7 6. O-O d6 7. Re1 Bg4 8. Be2 Nxe2+ 9. Qxe2 Nf6 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 O-O 12. d3 e5 $2 $14 13. Bg5 h6 14. Bh4 $6 $14 g5 15. Bg3 Qd7 $2 $16 16. a4 (16. Nd1 g4 17. hxg4 Qxg4 18. Qxg4 Nxg4 19. f3 Nf6 20. Ne3 Rfe8 $16) 16... g4 $2 $16 17. hxg4 Qxg4 18. Qe3 $2 $14 (18. Qxg4 $16) 18... Nh5 19. Ne2 $6 $11 f5 20. f4 $4 $19 Nxg3 $2 $17 21. Qxg3 exf4 22. Qf2 $4 $19 fxe4 23. dxe4 f3 24. Qg3 f2+ 25. Kh1 fxe1=Q+ 26. Qxe1 Qxe4 27. Rd1 Rae8 28. Rd2 Rf5 29. Qd1 Qh4+ 30. Kg1 Bd4+ 31. Nxd4 Re1+ {as its mate in 2 with 32.Qxe1 Qxe1+ 33.Kh2 Rh5# Ian resigned.} 0-1 another game to pick appart, otb 1 hr 30 min club match against a ungraded beginner, his play is suspiciously good and his resignation when he didnt spot the mate but immediately resigned is also suspicious although oly because he didnt seem to realise he had eve lost his queen. I pointed out the mate to him.

[AlanLlewellyn]

It isn't that long ago that THE place to play was playchess.com or maybe ICC.

They took their eye off the ball I suppose.

There's been loads of great sites come and go over the years - FICS, Chesscube, chess32, yahoo...
I never played on ICC though, not even once, I never saw the value in paying just to play blitz when I can do it for free anywhere else - chess.com membership probably gives the maximum amount of content for your money if you want to be paying for memberships.

i often play long online games on icc using my smartboard at 45 45 tc
a smartboard is actually very dumb not a computer -it transfers moves made on a special board to the internet. It only transfers moves you make it doesnt think up moves itself.

[AlanLlewellyn]

It isn't that long ago that THE place to play was playchess.com or maybe ICC.

They took their eye off the ball I suppose.

There's been loads of great sites come and go over the years - FICS, Chesscube, chess32, yahoo...
I never played on ICC though, not even once, I never saw the value in paying just to play blitz when I can do it for free anywhere else - chess.com membership probably gives the maximum amount of content for your money if you want to be paying for memberships.

i often play long online games on icc using my smartboard at 45 45 tc
a smartboard is actually very dumb not a computer -it transfers moves made on a special board to the internet. It only transfers moves you make it doesnt think up moves itself.

also the standard of opening play and quality of opponent is much higher on icc

[Ian Thompson]

another game to pick appart, otb 1 hr 30 min club match against a ungraded beginner, his play is suspiciously good and his resignation when he didnt spot the mate but immediately resigned is also suspicious although oly because he didnt seem to realise he had eve lost his queen. I pointed out the mate to him.

He's not a beginner. His grading record shows he played competitively for about 7 years before taking a break for about 6 years. When he stopped playing he was graded 83 and had been at that level for 2 years.

[AlanLlewellyn]

he never took chess seriously in those 7 years of play, it was just a hobby, he played a few games but he hasnt really studied the game like you would have expected a club player to do.

[Stephen Westmoreland]

What are you accusing your club mate of exactly? What is suspicious about his loss here?

Or are you just demonstrating a win.