chess online
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
baronderkilt 17-Dec-11, 10:04 |
 Chessplayers ... what Occupations do we have ? or Skills too? 1) What occupations do Chessplayers work in ? 2) And besides occupation, what Skills do they have, that might transfer to another position if they desired to ? 3) How many different positions have you held in diverse areas? After settling into something after leaving the front-line of our favorite fastfood joints .... Of course if you stayed there, thats cool too! I played a lot of Frisbee after working late shift at just about every ff place owned by Pepsi Co. (Hey, might as well work where they serve your drink, eh!) ***** For an example, I note that A LOT of Chess players are also Computer Programmers. So that could be the Occupation of many of you. But also, I would like to know if your job is something else, but you have Computer Programming skills. Just as one example of my #2. It could be other things. ***** I will answer for myself as a separate post. Naturally, feel free to maintain privacy on anything & only speak what you will. Or free to add info. My threads are easygoing. [Yet I used to strive to make "Tal-games" ... is their some Inverse Thread vs Play personality thing or something?! I think maybe so! EG's of other easygoing posters: Easy19, fmgaijin, ionadowman, x-machine, jstevens ... yet none are gentle on the board ! Does this mean Positional players will fight tooth and nail in a discussion of which minor piece is best !?! Or ... !? ] hmmm |
||
|
baronderkilt 17-Dec-11, 10:31 |
Oh, an addendum ... Some points & predictions: Computer Programmers Computer or I-Net related work & skills Teaching (English seems a popular subject too; or Literature, etc) Brokers or Investments A sprinkling of Mathematicians **** I will predict a low incidence of Entrepreneurs ... which I would explain thusly: It was my opinion formed from viewing 80's experiences, that Chess players tend to be very poor in this area. Actually, among the worst on the planet!? ... OR the Very BEST. (Consider the organization of the average tournament for example; re profitability, yet able to provide a reasonable return to winning players. Has it happened yet?!! LOL. Ok there are some. But I have seen many more Real bombs of tournaments ... cash down the drain faster than Liquid Plumber; Industrial Strength. Surely you know of what I speak. --------------------------- Then there's also the great paradox of Bobby Fischer. Great prize profit production. Even in Fischer-Spassky #2. But at the same time, afraid to sign contracts. Apparently failed to play timely on his personal artifact's storage unit; gets confiscated. Has the misfortune to have $millions depending on match #2 & choses Yugoslavia at a time when the US gov is going to take issue with trade there. etc. ------------------------------------ Postal Chess icon CCM Max Zavanelli is said to be stunning in investments. He told me so! And I believed him, tho i have no experience in that regard with him. But to be clear this is not who I speak of next ... A certain otb IM had a sparkling reputation for investments. Then S went to prison. I think it was insider-trading, tho this may be wrong. -------------------------------------------------- So I wonder; is there a Reason Warren Buffett & Bill Gates play Bridge, rather than a friendly game of Chess ? Or is it just that one can play Bridge for a $Million per point; but NOT Chess~! I will be pleased if the perceived phenomenon is changed or proven erroneous. I do recall reading a piece about IM Ken Rogoff quiting Chess for business and doing very very well. Also those who can write Chess profitably, or program it. Etc. |
||
|
baronderkilt 17-Dec-11, 15:18 |
For myself ... Or maybe not, but somehow it happened. For Health, Accident & Disability. This is a bit different than a Casualty Adjuster in that we got paid 20% less; since we got all the glory I guess ?! I program a little. But only in BASIC. This is of course the reason I never got to 2100 & spent the bulk of my time under 2000. Since it occurs to me... Every single NM of USCF, that I can think of at this moment, is a programmer. But they did things like Cobalt, Assembler or C . This has got to be the difference. [On the otherhand, FM's I know tend to be Professors of English aor Lit (2). One Farmer, One Poker player, & One USAF. Strangely, NO Programmers !? ] *************** There seems to be some definate weirdness in this Master to Profession thing!? Unless maybe its a localized phenomenon. ***** }8-) ps// After consideration, it seems very safe to put down GK-Mike as among the best of Chessmen in Business AND Programming |
||
|
I learned the game... In our town (Waitara) there was no chess club, much less a chess coach or anyone I could call upon as a mentor. The nearest club was in the city (New Plymouth) 10 miles and more away - definitely out of court for me! All the same, in my last year at Waitara High School (Y12), 6 of us got together for a double-round-robin tournament that lasted several weeks. Not knowing the standard systems, we scored 2 for the win, 1 for the draw. I won the thing with 17 (8.5) points, ahead of the next guy on 12 (6), a large sort of margin, but there were at least 2 games I won that I probably ought to have lost. At that I probably decided the last two places - losing a game to one and drawing against the other! My last year of High School was at Spotswood College in New Plymouth, where I discovered a kid (Evan Ubels) two years younger than I who was stronger (It took 3 quick losses before I won one off him), and as it transpired another guy from Hawera (a South Taranaki town) who was maybe not quite at my level, but close. In the Taranaki Schoolboy Champs, I shared 1st with Evan (after an adjudication I thought even at the time generous in my favour), and the Hawera dude 3rd. It was while at University in Auckland (whose Championship I won once), that I discovered wargames: Diplomacy, Avalon Hill's 'Battle of the Bulge', and miniature wargaming. After that, my interest in chess, bordering hitherto on the obsessive, gradually faded. After obtaining an undergraduate degree in Mathematics at Auckland, then it was move to Welligton doing programming/systems analysis for various outfits that included for several years the Burroughs Corporation. I left the company for more money shortly before they merged with Sperry-Univac to become Unisys. I've always rather regretted that... Later I got a post-grad degree in History (minor in Classics that would have been a second major if that study had been adequately funded), worked for a while for the Government, then, after moving to Christchurch (via Europe) became a house husband studying for and tutoring in the National Diploma of Children's Literature. Though (owing to mind-bendingly stupid government policy) that Diploma is now defunct and the tutoring went with it, I still retain some interest in stories for kids and young adults, especially Fantasy, but also Historical and to some extent SF. That's about it really. |
||
|
|
||
|
baronderkilt 19-Dec-11, 13:34 |
HI blake ... & Ion (And played blindfold Chess at the same time!? Um, or not. It would be pretty predictable games I suppose. Nice to practice tho.) Before becoming a proper Poker pro, with a $20,000+ win, that FM mentioned ran his own janitorial company. I helped him at times. And he told me of the "traps" being set within the office. Things like perhaps leaving a pencil or bit of paper somewhere, under the bosses chair or such; just to be sure they got a full vaccuum. lol. Can you imagine?! Trying to trap an FM like that. ha . It is interesting that of all the Chess Masters I know, he is the most "Scientific thinking". Whearas Poker becomes a game of % to win with the proper card turning, vs value of pot at hand. Etc. And Chess a game of efficiently producing good moves. etc. Which he has also trained others to do. I am reminded that Einstein worked a patent office, after failing math as a child. And was something of a Chess duffer it seems. Well compared to his friend Lasker, heheh. I wonder if Einstein ever won a game from him? I've heard it said he played a Class A game at best. I wonder if any games exist in print ?! |
||
|
Different minds... This might seem irrelevant, but it seems to me illustrative of what I mean. Bob Dylan is said to have remarked to Keith Richards on one occasion that he (Dylan) could have written 'Satisfaction', but He (Richards) could never have written 'Desolation Row'. And I'll buy that. No doubt Dylan could have written 'Ruby Tuesday', 'You can't always get what you want' or even 'Angie'. But could he have written '50,000 Light Years from Home', or 'Gimme Shelter', or 'Paint it, Black'? I'm pretty sure he would simply have chosen not to write 'Sympathy for the Devil' or 'Brown Sugar'... Could Em. Lasker have come up with the Special Theory of Relativity (let alone the General)?Nah! Mind you, had he discovered the Cosmological Constant, he might have have called it the Levitational. Snh, snh, snh (snicker)... Cheers, Ion |
||
|
a little about me I dropped out of school at the end of my freshman year. And worked at manual labor jobs till I worked my up to this position. I don't know when I learned to play chess but I might have played 20 - 30 games before I joined GameKnot. I am still very much a beginner, I have really enjoyed learning and playing. When not at work I am with my family, wife of 7 years and 2 little girls, we have several acres up against forest service property, nothing but woods for 30 miles between us and Canada. We grow as much of our own produce and meat as we can and that keep us busy from April thru October with planting, harvesting and preserving. Plus getting in the firewood and trying to do some camping, hiking and fishing. During the winter months I get caught up on my reading. Right now I interested in WW2 but I read anything from Clive Cussler to O'Henry, Melville and Shakespeare and Spinoza, Plato, Faust. If I had to pick favorites it would be Steinbeck, Solzhenitsyn and Tennyson. This winter I am also learning to play piano. |
||
|
[Event "Princeton USA"] [Site "Princeton USA"] [Date "1933.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Albert Einstein"] [Black "Robert Oppenheimer"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C70"] [EventDate "1933.??.??"] [PlyCount "47"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 b5 5. Bb3 Nf6 6. O-O Nxe4 7. Re1 d5 8. a4 b4 9. d3 Nc5 10. Nxe5 Ne7 11. Qf3 f6 12. Qh5+ g6 13. Nxg6 hxg6 14. Qxh8 Nxb3 15. cxb3 Qd6 16. Bh6 Kd7 17. Bxf8 Bb7 18. Qg7 Re8 19. Nd2 c5 20. Rad1 a5 21. Nc4 dxc4 22. dxc4 Qxd1 23. Rxd1+ Kc8 24. Bxe7 1-0 |
||
|
Emanuel Lasker was undoubtedly one of the most interesting people I came to know in my later years. We must be thankful to those who have penned the story of his life for this and succeeding generations. For there are few men who have had a warm interest in all the great human problems and at the same time kept their personality so uniquely independent. I am not a chess expert and therefore not in a position to marvel at the force of mind revealed in his greatest intellectual achievement - in the field of chess. I must even confess that the struggle for power and the competitive spirit expressed in the form of an ingenious game have always been repugant to me. I met Emanuel Lasker at the house of my old friend, Alexander Moszkowski, and came to know him well in the course of many walks in which we exchanged opinions about the most varied questions. It was a somewhat one-sided exchange, in which I received more that I gave. For it was usually more natural for this eminently productive man to shape his own thoughts than to busy himself with those of another. To my mind, there was a tragic note in his personality, despite his fundamentally affirmative attitude towards life. The enormous psychological tension, without which nobody can be a chess master, was so deeply interwoven with chess that he could never entirely rid himself of the spirit of the game, even when he was occupied with philosophic and human problems. At the same time, it seemed to me that chess was more a profession for him than the real goal of his life. His real yearning seems to be directed towards scientific understanding and the beauty inherent only in logical creation, a beauty so enchanting that nobody who has once caught a glimpse of it can ever escape it. Spinoza's material existence and independence were base on the grinding of lenses; chess had an analogous role in Lasker's life. But Spinoza was granted a better fate, because his occupation left his mind free and untroubled, while, on the other hand, the chess playing of a master ties him to the game, fetters his mind and shapes it to a certain extent so that his internal freedom and ease, no matter how strong he is, must inevitably be affected. In our conversations and in the reading of his philosophical books, I always had that feeling. Of these books, "The Philosophy of the Unattainable" interested me the most; the book is not only very original, but it also affords a deep insight into Lasker's entire personality. Now I must justify myself because I never considered in detail, either in writing or in our conversations, Emanuel Lasker's critical essay on the theory of relativity. It is indeed necessary for me to say something about it here because even in his biography, which is focused on the purely human aspects, the passage which discusses the essay contains something resembling a slight reproach. Lasker's keen analytical mind had immediately clearly recognized that the central point of the whole question is that the velocity of light (in a vacuum) is a constant. It was evident to him that, if this constancy were admitted, the relative of time could not be avoided. So what was there to do? He tried to do what Alexnder, whom historians have dubbed "the Great," did when he cut the Gordian knot. Lasker's attempted solution was based on the following idea: "Nobody has any immediate knowledge of how quickly light is transmitted in a complete vacuum, for even in interstellar space there is always a minimal quantity of matter present under all circimstances and what holds there is even more applicable to the most complete vacuum created by man to the best of his ability. Therefore, who has the right to deny that its velocity in a really complete vacuum is infinite?" To answer this argument can be expressed as follows: "It is, to be sure, true that nobody has experimental knowledge of how light is transmitted in a complete vacuum. But it is as good as impossible to formulate a reasonable theory of light according to which the velocity of light is affected by minimal traces of matter which is very significant but at the same time virtuallt independent of ther density." Before such a theory, which moreover, must harmonize with the known phenomena of optics in an almost complete vacuum, can be set up, it seems that evey physicist must wait for the solution of the above-mentioned Gordian knot - if he is not satisified with the present solution. Moral: a strong mind cannot take place of delicate fingers. But I liked Lasker's immovable independence, a rare human attribute, in which respect almost all, including intelligent people, are mediocrities. And so I let matteers stand that way. I am glad that the reader will be able to get to know this strong and, at the same time, find and lovable personality from his sympathetic biography, but I am thankful for the hours of conversation which this ever striving, independent, simple man granted me. |
||
|
baronderkilt 22-Dec-11, 13:32 |
Thanks BLAKE ! gameknot.com gameknot.com/annotate.pl?id=42438 |
||
|
baronderkilt 22-Dec-11, 13:37 |
Or Non-Interactive = |
||
|
2) Oh man, my resume of skills is pretty lengthy. I could pretty much transfer most of what I do in a day and make it relevant for a large percentage of other jobs. 3) I've only ever worked in two industries...food and veterinary medicine. Working in a kitchen is how I put my way through college and since then I've been working in the veterinary medicine field. |
Log in 
