Forthcoming Kasparov Book

[BrendanJNorman]

If the book is about chess, it'll definitely be worth a look.

But I must say that I'm not a fan of anything Kasparov non-chess that he has done.

And this is coming from somebody who used to stay awake at 3am to watch his games live on FICS back in 1999-2002.

Now he comes across as an arrogant grouch who misses the game, but whose ego couldn't handle returning and being in the #2-5 spot.

Politics - Stupid and short-sighted.

Business and "leadership" type seminars - Without his chess credentials he wouldn't even be invited to give such talks or write such articles. He has no track record or proven authority that I've seen. That's why his "how chess imitates business" (or whatever the book was) flopped. I read it and it was absolute boring garbage. Justl fluff and typical Kaspy metaphorical rhetoric (trying to appear "deep" and "innovative") and little substance. Guys like Drucker would either laugh into hysteria or use it as toilet paper.

Commentary - As a former HUGE fan of his, this has lost my respect for him most. When he commentates on live events, he is mostly throwing insults at all of the new players, as well as guys like Anand (who beat him in events more than perhaps anybody when he was active) for simply playing into his forties (making Kaspy look like a coward for retiring). He uses commentary/his chess influence to praise U.S.A supported players and Magnus (who he loves to remind us he coached), while rubbishing others and pushing his political agenda.

A book on "Machine Intelligence" is bound to be a yawn unless he uses computer chess as it's basis and keeps his B.S conspiracy theories about Deep Blue "cheating" out of it.

I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that.

Kasparov is frequently overemotional and sometimes overreacting, but 100% of what he says is true. He is simply smart, you know.

you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much.

you used to follow Kasparov games in the good old times 1999-2002?? - come on man, spell me the antics.

Kasparov supporting 'Western' guys, like, imagine, Carlsen?? - come one, Carlsen is simply number 1 currently, 50-100 elo on average above his nearest rivals; he does not need support, he is simply the best.

Kasparov's political attitude dubious? Criticising Russia??? - man, where do you live? Are not you an US citizen? Have you ever lived in Russia or any other country of the former Communist bloc, for more than a year? if no, please abstain from making comments, as what you actuaslly support is:

- expropriating people's property at will at any time, with no compensation
- the existence of extermination camps (very much Nazi-like); and yes, China and North Korea, which pretty much side with Russia, still have them
- no freedom of speech; (if you were in Russia, and wanted to post something against the government, you certainly would not be able to do so; Russian net space is largely controlled and censored, public servants even do not have the rigth to open Facebook/twitter accounts)

so, when you try to make (extremely awkward) political comments, it is better to just swallow the bitter pill and not comment.

and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust.

Okay…

So generally I try to be polite and respectful here and, even share some ideas or give praise to my favorite programmers/engines.

But this is the second time this guy has locked horns with me with insufficient foreknowledge, so that’s enough.

Here’s the background:

Some of you might think that he overreacted slightly (“I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that” isn't the most polite thing to say and, might get a guy hospitalized in person, but maybe I too will be a tough guy once I’ve racked up 4000 posts on a computer chess forum…who knows?) but his grievance against me actually began in a discussion (here:http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62210) about whether computers are “draining the beauty out of chess”.

I gave some opinions and as he does, he came in with his opinionated and “anybody who disagrees with me is 'stupid, and very stupid at that'" attitude.

He said that “brilliant” means being the strongest player with consistent results, to which I mentioned Topalov being “brilliant” despite not being consistent.

I also cited Spielman, Marshall, Rubinstein, Nezhmethanov, Geller, Hector and Polgar as examples.

How can one say that these widely celebrated, brilliant players aren't brilliant because they aren't the strongest or most consistent?

Anyway, eventually he coldly said: “Show me a Topalov game from 2002 and I’ll answer you” and when I did (post a brilliant attacking win vs Bareev from 2002) he didn’t answer.

So here, friends, we see him airing his grievance.

Anyway, onto my response from today - just thought I’d fill you guys in on some background.

Mr Tsvetkov…

You have started a war with shamefully little intelligence of your enemy.

I’m stupid? Really? Let’s see…

Let’s look at some things you said:

“he (Kasparov) says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much”

Really?

Kasparov said in 1990 that “nothing would become of Anand” and 25 years later said “he won’t be able to maintain his level”

Truth? Nope. Anand is today 2786 after recently dropping from 2800ish and #6 in the world.

Kasparov spouted some metaphorical garbage about “the stars would need to align in strange way” for Karjakin to become world champion and insulted Sergey saying “His (Carlsen’s) lack of preparation angered the goddess Caissa, but not enough to drive her into the drab Karjakin's arms.”.

Truth? Well… Is Karjakin’s style really more “drab” than Carlsen’s or is GK poking a stick politically? Is Karjakin not classy enough to be World Champion, despite winning the candidates, pushing Carlsen to the limit and later beating Carlsen at the World Rapid and Blitz championships (the latter of which he became World Champ)?

Well, only if you think the same of Tal, Smyslov, Euwe and others who we might say “borrowed” the title. Otherwise, it’d not true

Kasparov said in 1992 that “The Fischer legend has been put to rest” but is that true?

Nope. People still think Fischer was a genius and many players still believe the greatest ever. Was Kasparov just jealous in 1992 that the spotlight was pulled off of him for a moment? Yes.

Kasparov speaks the truth? B.S.

You said “you used to follow Kasparov games in the good old times 1999-2002?? - come on man, spell me the antics.”

Is is really so unbelievable to like a player’s games, but not their behavior/personality?

Heard of Bobby Fischer? Guess not.

I bet I could name 20 Kasparov brilliancies, the year and tournaments they were played in, before you could even load up Stockfish - but that’s another topic.

You think Kasparov only supports Carlsen because he is the best?

So honestly, if Carlsen has never been coached by GK and was a proud Muscovite, rather than a Norwegian, you’re sure Kasparov would still be all praise for Magnus?

Now here’s the best part…

You said: “Are not you an US citizen? Kasparov's political attitude dubious? Criticising Russia??? - man, where do you live? Are not you an US citizen? Have you ever lived in Russia or any other country of the former Communist bloc, for more than a year? if no, please abstain from making comments”

- No. I am not a U.S citizen.

-I am Australian, yet have lived in Communist China for 5 years, in both the North and South.

-I have spent a long evening drinking beer, eating BBQ (both a big deal in Northern China) and discussing geo-politics with Communist Party officials in a quite friendly manner - all in Mandarin Chinese.

-I have friends who are rich elites who benefit from this type of system, and friends who are normal “workers” and live a life which is basically indentured servitude. I know all sides of this particular fence.

-I am fully aware of what soviet Russia was like, since MODERN day China is still stuck using a lot of the same systems. Freedom of speech/thought/assembly - controlled. Internet/Media - censored.

But guess what?

I do not consider myself to have any political or even national alliances.

Rich Western democracies bully other countries and make those people miserable, while authoritarian regimes do this to their own people and make them miserable.

It’s still simply a case of the rich bullying the poor, just with different geo-political battlefields/ideologies.

China is painted black from bullying the Philippines over the South China Sea, while at the same time (look it up), my country, Australia is trying to quietly bully the East Timorese islanders out of their oil.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

There is a lot to history you can’t learn from books but need to learn yourself.

Do you think that any of America’s wars are for "freedom" from “terrorism” and such things, even though it’s been revealed that they themselves created ISIS?

Are you aware that it’s all in order to create an “us vs them” narrative and a reason to bully oil rich nations into selling their oil in U.S dollars?

Are you aware that the sneaky act of moving the U.S dollar away from gold (which they’d already looted in the 60s-70s when breaking their 1945 promise to "entrust" the world's gold to the Federal Reserve) and tying it to oil, forced all oil importing countries to keep a steady supply of U.S dollars (which the Federal Reserve themselves could print at will) and, in order to get those U.S dollars, these countries would have to send real physical goods to America.
As a result of the above financial scam - paper went out, goods came in and, the United States became very rich.

And how’s this for a suspicious timeline:

In November of 2000, Iraq began to sell it’s oil exclusively in Euros, representing a direct attack on the U.S dollar/U.S financial dominance.

In response, the U.S government (with the help of Mainstream Media) began to build a massive propaganda campaign to convince the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was planning to use them.

In 2003, the U.S invaded Iraq and after quickly toppling Saddam, secured the oil fields. Once secured, oil sales were immediately switched back to U.S dollars.

Libyan leader Gaddafi was planning to reestablish a level financial playing field in the region, with the establishment of a new gold backed currency called the “Gold Dinar” (google: "Declassified Emails Reveal NATO Killed Gaddafi to Stop Libyan Creation of Gold-Backed Currency").

In 2011, U.S backed rebels invaded, executed Gaddafi and immediately setup the “Libyan Central Bank”

Lastly, were you aware that Iran hasn’t attacked another country for more than 200 years?

Thought not.

But I'm the one on the “wrong side” making “wrong and unjust” political comments, right?

Lucky you “assured” me that I’m stupid.

I might have got confused and thought I knew something about the world.

- Brendan

P.S. Google: "Ed Bernays"

P.P.S Lyudmil, one more personal attack from you or insult, and I'll fire back at you personally, deal? You might notice I was rather mild here.

[fern]

I wonder what means "creativity" in a field where all is calculation at the end and the bottom.....

Fern

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

If the book is about chess, it'll definitely be worth a look.

But I must say that I'm not a fan of anything Kasparov non-chess that he has done.

And this is coming from somebody who used to stay awake at 3am to watch his games live on FICS back in 1999-2002.

Now he comes across as an arrogant grouch who misses the game, but whose ego couldn't handle returning and being in the #2-5 spot.

Politics - Stupid and short-sighted.

Business and "leadership" type seminars - Without his chess credentials he wouldn't even be invited to give such talks or write such articles. He has no track record or proven authority that I've seen. That's why his "how chess imitates business" (or whatever the book was) flopped. I read it and it was absolute boring garbage. Justl fluff and typical Kaspy metaphorical rhetoric (trying to appear "deep" and "innovative") and little substance. Guys like Drucker would either laugh into hysteria or use it as toilet paper.

Commentary - As a former HUGE fan of his, this has lost my respect for him most. When he commentates on live events, he is mostly throwing insults at all of the new players, as well as guys like Anand (who beat him in events more than perhaps anybody when he was active) for simply playing into his forties (making Kaspy look like a coward for retiring). He uses commentary/his chess influence to praise U.S.A supported players and Magnus (who he loves to remind us he coached), while rubbishing others and pushing his political agenda.

A book on "Machine Intelligence" is bound to be a yawn unless he uses computer chess as it's basis and keeps his B.S conspiracy theories about Deep Blue "cheating" out of it.

I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that.

Kasparov is frequently overemotional and sometimes overreacting, but 100% of what he says is true. He is simply smart, you know.

you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much.

you used to follow Kasparov games in the good old times 1999-2002?? - come on man, spell me the antics.

Kasparov supporting 'Western' guys, like, imagine, Carlsen?? - come one, Carlsen is simply number 1 currently, 50-100 elo on average above his nearest rivals; he does not need support, he is simply the best.

Kasparov's political attitude dubious? Criticising Russia??? - man, where do you live? Are not you an US citizen? Have you ever lived in Russia or any other country of the former Communist bloc, for more than a year? if no, please abstain from making comments, as what you actuaslly support is:

- expropriating people's property at will at any time, with no compensation
- the existence of extermination camps (very much Nazi-like); and yes, China and North Korea, which pretty much side with Russia, still have them
- no freedom of speech; (if you were in Russia, and wanted to post something against the government, you certainly would not be able to do so; Russian net space is largely controlled and censored, public servants even do not have the rigth to open Facebook/twitter accounts)

so, when you try to make (extremely awkward) political comments, it is better to just swallow the bitter pill and not comment.

and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust.

Okay…

So generally I try to be polite and respectful here and, even share some ideas or give praise to my favorite programmers/engines.

But this is the second time this guy has locked horns with me with insufficient foreknowledge, so that’s enough.

Here’s the background:

Some of you might think that he overreacted slightly (“I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that” isn't the most polite thing to say and, might get a guy hospitalized in person, but maybe I too will be a tough guy once I’ve racked up 4000 posts on a computer chess forum…who knows?) but his grievance against me actually began in a discussion (here:http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62210) about whether computers are “draining the beauty out of chess”.

I gave some opinions and as he does, he came in with his opinionated and “anybody who disagrees with me is 'stupid, and very stupid at that'" attitude.

He said that “brilliant” means being the strongest player with consistent results, to which I mentioned Topalov being “brilliant” despite not being consistent.

I also cited Spielman, Marshall, Rubinstein, Nezhmethanov, Geller, Hector and Polgar as examples.

How can one say that these widely celebrated, brilliant players aren't brilliant because they aren't the strongest or most consistent?

Anyway, eventually he coldly said: “Show me a Topalov game from 2002 and I’ll answer you” and when I did (post a brilliant attacking win vs Bareev from 2002) he didn’t answer.

So here, friends, we see him airing his grievance.

Anyway, onto my response from today - just thought I’d fill you guys in on some background.

Mr Tsvetkov…

You have started a war with shamefully little intelligence of your enemy.

I’m stupid? Really? Let’s see…

Let’s look at some things you said:

“he (Kasparov) says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much”

Really?

Kasparov said in 1990 that “nothing would become of Anand” and 25 years later said “he won’t be able to maintain his level”

Truth? Nope. Anand is today 2786 after recently dropping from 2800ish and #6 in the world.

Kasparov spouted some metaphorical garbage about “the stars would need to align in strange way” for Karjakin to become world champion and insulted Sergey saying “His (Carlsen’s) lack of preparation angered the goddess Caissa, but not enough to drive her into the drab Karjakin's arms.”.

Truth? Well… Is Karjakin’s style really more “drab” than Carlsen’s or is GK poking a stick politically? Is Karjakin not classy enough to be World Champion, despite winning the candidates, pushing Carlsen to the limit and later beating Carlsen at the World Rapid and Blitz championships (the latter of which he became World Champ)?

Well, only if you think the same of Tal, Smyslov, Euwe and others who we might say “borrowed” the title. Otherwise, it’d not true

Kasparov said in 1992 that “The Fischer legend has been put to rest” but is that true?

Nope. People still think Fischer was a genius and many players still believe the greatest ever. Was Kasparov just jealous in 1992 that the spotlight was pulled off of him for a moment? Yes.

Kasparov speaks the truth? B.S.

You said “you used to follow Kasparov games in the good old times 1999-2002?? - come on man, spell me the antics.”

Is is really so unbelievable to like a player’s games, but not their behavior/personality?

Heard of Bobby Fischer? Guess not.

I bet I could name 20 Kasparov brilliancies, the year and tournaments they were played in, before you could even load up Stockfish - but that’s another topic.

You think Kasparov only supports Carlsen because he is the best?

So honestly, if Carlsen has never been coached by GK and was a proud Muscovite, rather than a Norwegian, you’re sure Kasparov would still be all praise for Magnus?

Now here’s the best part…

You said: “Are not you an US citizen? Kasparov's political attitude dubious? Criticising Russia??? - man, where do you live? Are not you an US citizen? Have you ever lived in Russia or any other country of the former Communist bloc, for more than a year? if no, please abstain from making comments”

- No. I am not a U.S citizen.

-I am Australian, yet have lived in Communist China for 5 years, in both the North and South.

-I have spent a long evening drinking beer, eating BBQ (both a big deal in Northern China) and discussing geo-politics with Communist Party officials in a quite friendly manner - all in Mandarin Chinese.

-I have friends who are rich elites who benefit from this type of system, and friends who are normal “workers” and live a life which is basically indentured servitude. I know all sides of this particular fence.

-I am fully aware of what soviet Russia was like, since MODERN day China is still stuck using a lot of the same systems. Freedom of speech/thought/assembly - controlled. Internet/Media - censored.

But guess what?

I do not consider myself to have any political or even national alliances.

Rich Western democracies bully other countries and make those people miserable, while authoritarian regimes do this to their own people and make them miserable.

It’s still simply a case of the rich bullying the poor, just with different geo-political battlefields/ideologies.

China is painted black from bullying the Philippines over the South China Sea, while at the same time (look it up), my country, Australia is trying to quietly bully the East Timorese islanders out of their oil.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

There is a lot to history you can’t learn from books but need to learn yourself.

Do you think that any of America’s wars are for "freedom" from “terrorism” and such things, even though it’s been revealed that they themselves created ISIS?

Are you aware that it’s all in order to create an “us vs them” narrative and a reason to bully oil rich nations into selling their oil in U.S dollars?

Are you aware that the sneaky act of moving the U.S dollar away from gold (which they’d already looted in the 60s-70s when breaking their 1945 promise to "entrust" the world's gold to the Federal Reserve) and tying it to oil, forced all oil importing countries to keep a steady supply of U.S dollars (which the Federal Reserve themselves could print at will) and, in order to get those U.S dollars, these countries would have to send real physical goods to America.
As a result of the above financial scam - paper went out, goods came in and, the United States became very rich.

And how’s this for a suspicious timeline:

In November of 2000, Iraq began to sell it’s oil exclusively in Euros, representing a direct attack on the U.S dollar/U.S financial dominance.

In response, the U.S government (with the help of Mainstream Media) began to build a massive propaganda campaign to convince the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was planning to use them.

In 2003, the U.S invaded Iraq and after quickly toppling Saddam, secured the oil fields. Once secured, oil sales were immediately switched back to U.S dollars.

Libyan leader Gaddafi was planning to reestablish a level financial playing field in the region, with the establishment of a new gold backed currency called the “Gold Dinar” (google: "Declassified Emails Reveal NATO Killed Gaddafi to Stop Libyan Creation of Gold-Backed Currency").

In 2011, U.S backed rebels invaded, executed Gaddafi and immediately setup the “Libyan Central Bank”

Lastly, were you aware that Iran hasn’t attacked another country for more than 200 years?

Thought not.

But I'm the one on the “wrong side” making “wrong and unjust” political comments, right?

Lucky you “assured” me that I’m stupid.

I might have got confused and thought I knew something about the world.

- Brendan

P.S. Google: "Ed Bernays"

P.P.S Lyudmil, one more personal attack from you or insult, and I'll fire back at you personally, deal? You might notice I was rather mild here.

-I have spent a long evening drinking beer, eating BBQ (both a big deal in Northern China) and discussing geo-politics with Communist Party officials in a quite friendly manner - all in Mandarin Chinese.




that explains it all.

if you call Kasparov's political views stupid and short-sighted, why am not I allowed to qualify you in more or less the same manner?

man, you are writing whole novels, I will need a week or 2 to read it all.

not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence.

there is one huge difference: Western democracies do not kill their citizens in millions, while the opposite bloc does.

Admittedly, Western democracies have a lot of flaws, while opposite tyrannical regimes are simply flawed at the root. Big distinction.

The Soviet Union already collapsed once, now Russia first accepted change, and then starting moving towards a second collapse along the lines of the first one. If it were not for oil prices, Russia would have defaulted. The Kremlin establishment can not go backwards, because it wants a capitalist system, but at the same time it can not go forward towards fully-fledged democratic capitalism, so it takes middleground by mind-boggling rope-walking, but that can last only a short time. (btw., I would not call capitalism capitalism, just a normal society)

China's proclaimed communism collapsed too: they did accept the reality of capitalist economy in trying to avoid the obvious collapse of the Soviet Union. So the Communist bloc collapsed, and it is only the evil that persists. And hypocricy. China accepts a capitalist system, but will not accept democratic values that go hand in hand with it, by definition. Why so?

why does not Russia allow fair competition? why does not China allow fair competition? Is this a fair and just society?

I will tell you what Communism is all about: let me make your property mine, your hard-earned property mine.
first step: proclaim full equality and equal distribution of property for all by nationalising private property assets
second step: a different-size lullaby period of nationalised property that belongs to all the people, though some comrades of course benefit a lot more
third step: institute a collapse of the communist system and redistribute state property into private hands, by definition the hands of the communist establishment

as a result of this capitalist-communist-capitalist again metamorphosis the former poor have become the new rich and the former rich the new poor. with the provision of course, that while at least half of rich men in democratic societies have become so by hard labour, almost no one in post-communist societies have acquired their property by legal means, rather than by stealing what rightfully belongs to others.

we would be the perfect world society, if only Russia accepted it should follow real democratic values, but it simply will not do so currently, as there is something terribly wrong and evil within.

latest news from a highly developed Western democracy, Germany: a dozen people died in Berlin after an Islamist attack

latest news from Russia: 64 people died after drinking a methanol-based bevarage sold at vending machines for standard alcohol. (the vendors simply poured into the drink large quantitites of very cheap chemical substance instead of paying for natural ingredients; the vendor is happy, he became rich, the state authorities are with him, no one persecutes him, some hundred or so people dies, who cares?)

I guess you spot the difference...

[K I Hyams]

……….I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that…………..

……..you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much……...

……….and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust………...

……….not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence………...

I've just had a look at the profile that you have put on this site. Tell me, are you sure that you are a diplomat?

[Laskos]

……….I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that…………..

……..you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much……...

……….and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust………...

……….not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence………...

I've just had a look at the profile that you have put on this site. Tell me, are you sure that you are a diplomat?

It's possible he is an East European (Bulgarian) diplomat, probably sponsored by the likes of Soros or other NGOs of this inspiration. They select (hire and pay) rabid pro-Americans (and anti-everything non-Western) with very little background in diplomacy, and little general cultural and psychological background. Then, these NGOs have the power to insert them to official state positions.

This Lyudmil is quite an air-mongerer, his tone and claims on chess topics are outright trollish, and he can go at length with it. Check his claims on improvement of Stockfish, on building a super-engine, or that he can easily beat any engine even without handicap. Many of these claims demonstrated at length with his posted "real games" and such.

[K I Hyams]

……….I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that…………..

……..you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much……...

……….and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust………...

……….not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence………...

I've just had a look at the profile that you have put on this site. Tell me, are you sure that you are a diplomat?

It's possible he is an East European (Bulgarian) diplomat, probably sponsored by the likes of Soros or other NGOs of this inspiration. They select (hire and pay) rabid pro-Americans (and anti-everything non-Western) with very little background in diplomacy, and little general cultural and psychological background. Then, these NGOs have the power to insert them to official state positions.

This Lyudmil is quite an air-mongerer, his tone and claims on chess topics are outright trollish, and he can go at length with it. Check his claims on improvement of Stockfish, on building a super-engine, or that he can easily beat any engine even without handicap. Many of these claims demonstrated at length with his posted "real games" and such.

Well, I never agree with many of your political stances, Kai, and so it is my turn to be diplomatic............

Had it not been for the clue in the name, I would have guessed at North Korean diplomat. The final quote, "do not see a reason to take offence", was absolutely delicious, coming from a diplomat.

[Laskos]

……….I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that…………..

……..you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much……...

……….and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust………...

……….not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence………...

I've just had a look at the profile that you have put on this site. Tell me, are you sure that you are a diplomat?

It's possible he is an East European (Bulgarian) diplomat, probably sponsored by the likes of Soros or other NGOs of this inspiration. They select (hire and pay) rabid pro-Americans (and anti-everything non-Western) with very little background in diplomacy, and little general cultural and psychological background. Then, these NGOs have the power to insert them to official state positions.

This Lyudmil is quite an air-mongerer, his tone and claims on chess topics are outright trollish, and he can go at length with it. Check his claims on improvement of Stockfish, on building a super-engine, or that he can easily beat any engine even without handicap. Many of these claims demonstrated at length with his posted "real games" and such.

Well, I never agree with many of your political stances, Kai, and so it is my turn to be diplomatic............

Had it not been for the clue in the name, I would have guessed at North Korean diplomat. The final quote, "do not see a reason to take offence", was absolutely delicious, coming from a diplomat.

I just pointed out that it's not impossible he is a (former?) Bulgarian diplomat. This is the least of concerns about his air-mongering. Looking forward for his super-engine.

[BrendanJNorman]

If the book is about chess, it'll definitely be worth a look.

But I must say that I'm not a fan of anything Kasparov non-chess that he has done.

And this is coming from somebody who used to stay awake at 3am to watch his games live on FICS back in 1999-2002.

Now he comes across as an arrogant grouch who misses the game, but whose ego couldn't handle returning and being in the #2-5 spot.

Politics - Stupid and short-sighted.

Business and "leadership" type seminars - Without his chess credentials he wouldn't even be invited to give such talks or write such articles. He has no track record or proven authority that I've seen. That's why his "how chess imitates business" (or whatever the book was) flopped. I read it and it was absolute boring garbage. Justl fluff and typical Kaspy metaphorical rhetoric (trying to appear "deep" and "innovative") and little substance. Guys like Drucker would either laugh into hysteria or use it as toilet paper.

Commentary - As a former HUGE fan of his, this has lost my respect for him most. When he commentates on live events, he is mostly throwing insults at all of the new players, as well as guys like Anand (who beat him in events more than perhaps anybody when he was active) for simply playing into his forties (making Kaspy look like a coward for retiring). He uses commentary/his chess influence to praise U.S.A supported players and Magnus (who he loves to remind us he coached), while rubbishing others and pushing his political agenda.

A book on "Machine Intelligence" is bound to be a yawn unless he uses computer chess as it's basis and keeps his B.S conspiracy theories about Deep Blue "cheating" out of it.

I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that.

Kasparov is frequently overemotional and sometimes overreacting, but 100% of what he says is true. He is simply smart, you know.

you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much.

you used to follow Kasparov games in the good old times 1999-2002?? - come on man, spell me the antics.

Kasparov supporting 'Western' guys, like, imagine, Carlsen?? - come one, Carlsen is simply number 1 currently, 50-100 elo on average above his nearest rivals; he does not need support, he is simply the best.

Kasparov's political attitude dubious? Criticising Russia??? - man, where do you live? Are not you an US citizen? Have you ever lived in Russia or any other country of the former Communist bloc, for more than a year? if no, please abstain from making comments, as what you actuaslly support is:

- expropriating people's property at will at any time, with no compensation
- the existence of extermination camps (very much Nazi-like); and yes, China and North Korea, which pretty much side with Russia, still have them
- no freedom of speech; (if you were in Russia, and wanted to post something against the government, you certainly would not be able to do so; Russian net space is largely controlled and censored, public servants even do not have the rigth to open Facebook/twitter accounts)

so, when you try to make (extremely awkward) political comments, it is better to just swallow the bitter pill and not comment.

and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust.

Okay…

So generally I try to be polite and respectful here and, even share some ideas or give praise to my favorite programmers/engines.

But this is the second time this guy has locked horns with me with insufficient foreknowledge, so that’s enough.

Here’s the background:

Some of you might think that he overreacted slightly (“I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that” isn't the most polite thing to say and, might get a guy hospitalized in person, but maybe I too will be a tough guy once I’ve racked up 4000 posts on a computer chess forum…who knows?) but his grievance against me actually began in a discussion (here:http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62210) about whether computers are “draining the beauty out of chess”.

I gave some opinions and as he does, he came in with his opinionated and “anybody who disagrees with me is 'stupid, and very stupid at that'" attitude.

He said that “brilliant” means being the strongest player with consistent results, to which I mentioned Topalov being “brilliant” despite not being consistent.

I also cited Spielman, Marshall, Rubinstein, Nezhmethanov, Geller, Hector and Polgar as examples.

How can one say that these widely celebrated, brilliant players aren't brilliant because they aren't the strongest or most consistent?

Anyway, eventually he coldly said: “Show me a Topalov game from 2002 and I’ll answer you” and when I did (post a brilliant attacking win vs Bareev from 2002) he didn’t answer.

So here, friends, we see him airing his grievance.

Anyway, onto my response from today - just thought I’d fill you guys in on some background.

Mr Tsvetkov…

You have started a war with shamefully little intelligence of your enemy.

I’m stupid? Really? Let’s see…

Let’s look at some things you said:

“he (Kasparov) says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much”

Really?

Kasparov said in 1990 that “nothing would become of Anand” and 25 years later said “he won’t be able to maintain his level”

Truth? Nope. Anand is today 2786 after recently dropping from 2800ish and #6 in the world.

Kasparov spouted some metaphorical garbage about “the stars would need to align in strange way” for Karjakin to become world champion and insulted Sergey saying “His (Carlsen’s) lack of preparation angered the goddess Caissa, but not enough to drive her into the drab Karjakin's arms.”.

Truth? Well… Is Karjakin’s style really more “drab” than Carlsen’s or is GK poking a stick politically? Is Karjakin not classy enough to be World Champion, despite winning the candidates, pushing Carlsen to the limit and later beating Carlsen at the World Rapid and Blitz championships (the latter of which he became World Champ)?

Well, only if you think the same of Tal, Smyslov, Euwe and others who we might say “borrowed” the title. Otherwise, it’d not true

Kasparov said in 1992 that “The Fischer legend has been put to rest” but is that true?

Nope. People still think Fischer was a genius and many players still believe the greatest ever. Was Kasparov just jealous in 1992 that the spotlight was pulled off of him for a moment? Yes.

Kasparov speaks the truth? B.S.

You said “you used to follow Kasparov games in the good old times 1999-2002?? - come on man, spell me the antics.”

Is is really so unbelievable to like a player’s games, but not their behavior/personality?

Heard of Bobby Fischer? Guess not.

I bet I could name 20 Kasparov brilliancies, the year and tournaments they were played in, before you could even load up Stockfish - but that’s another topic.

You think Kasparov only supports Carlsen because he is the best?

So honestly, if Carlsen has never been coached by GK and was a proud Muscovite, rather than a Norwegian, you’re sure Kasparov would still be all praise for Magnus?

Now here’s the best part…

You said: “Are not you an US citizen? Kasparov's political attitude dubious? Criticising Russia??? - man, where do you live? Are not you an US citizen? Have you ever lived in Russia or any other country of the former Communist bloc, for more than a year? if no, please abstain from making comments”

- No. I am not a U.S citizen.

-I am Australian, yet have lived in Communist China for 5 years, in both the North and South.

-I have spent a long evening drinking beer, eating BBQ (both a big deal in Northern China) and discussing geo-politics with Communist Party officials in a quite friendly manner - all in Mandarin Chinese.

-I have friends who are rich elites who benefit from this type of system, and friends who are normal “workers” and live a life which is basically indentured servitude. I know all sides of this particular fence.

-I am fully aware of what soviet Russia was like, since MODERN day China is still stuck using a lot of the same systems. Freedom of speech/thought/assembly - controlled. Internet/Media - censored.

But guess what?

I do not consider myself to have any political or even national alliances.

Rich Western democracies bully other countries and make those people miserable, while authoritarian regimes do this to their own people and make them miserable.

It’s still simply a case of the rich bullying the poor, just with different geo-political battlefields/ideologies.

China is painted black from bullying the Philippines over the South China Sea, while at the same time (look it up), my country, Australia is trying to quietly bully the East Timorese islanders out of their oil.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

There is a lot to history you can’t learn from books but need to learn yourself.

Do you think that any of America’s wars are for "freedom" from “terrorism” and such things, even though it’s been revealed that they themselves created ISIS?

Are you aware that it’s all in order to create an “us vs them” narrative and a reason to bully oil rich nations into selling their oil in U.S dollars?

Are you aware that the sneaky act of moving the U.S dollar away from gold (which they’d already looted in the 60s-70s when breaking their 1945 promise to "entrust" the world's gold to the Federal Reserve) and tying it to oil, forced all oil importing countries to keep a steady supply of U.S dollars (which the Federal Reserve themselves could print at will) and, in order to get those U.S dollars, these countries would have to send real physical goods to America.
As a result of the above financial scam - paper went out, goods came in and, the United States became very rich.

And how’s this for a suspicious timeline:

In November of 2000, Iraq began to sell it’s oil exclusively in Euros, representing a direct attack on the U.S dollar/U.S financial dominance.

In response, the U.S government (with the help of Mainstream Media) began to build a massive propaganda campaign to convince the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was planning to use them.

In 2003, the U.S invaded Iraq and after quickly toppling Saddam, secured the oil fields. Once secured, oil sales were immediately switched back to U.S dollars.

Libyan leader Gaddafi was planning to reestablish a level financial playing field in the region, with the establishment of a new gold backed currency called the “Gold Dinar” (google: "Declassified Emails Reveal NATO Killed Gaddafi to Stop Libyan Creation of Gold-Backed Currency").

In 2011, U.S backed rebels invaded, executed Gaddafi and immediately setup the “Libyan Central Bank”

Lastly, were you aware that Iran hasn’t attacked another country for more than 200 years?

Thought not.

But I'm the one on the “wrong side” making “wrong and unjust” political comments, right?

Lucky you “assured” me that I’m stupid.

I might have got confused and thought I knew something about the world.

- Brendan

P.S. Google: "Ed Bernays"

P.P.S Lyudmil, one more personal attack from you or insult, and I'll fire back at you personally, deal? You might notice I was rather mild here.

-I have spent a long evening drinking beer, eating BBQ (both a big deal in Northern China) and discussing geo-politics with Communist Party officials in a quite friendly manner - all in Mandarin Chinese.




that explains it all.

if you call Kasparov's political views stupid and short-sighted, why am not I allowed to qualify you in more or less the same manner?

man, you are writing whole novels, I will need a week or 2 to read it all.

not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence.

there is one huge difference: Western democracies do not kill their citizens in millions, while the opposite bloc does.

Admittedly, Western democracies have a lot of flaws, while opposite tyrannical regimes are simply flawed at the root. Big distinction.

The Soviet Union already collapsed once, now Russia first accepted change, and then starting moving towards a second collapse along the lines of the first one. If it were not for oil prices, Russia would have defaulted. The Kremlin establishment can not go backwards, because it wants a capitalist system, but at the same time it can not go forward towards fully-fledged democratic capitalism, so it takes middleground by mind-boggling rope-walking, but that can last only a short time. (btw., I would not call capitalism capitalism, just a normal society)

China's proclaimed communism collapsed too: they did accept the reality of capitalist economy in trying to avoid the obvious collapse of the Soviet Union. So the Communist bloc collapsed, and it is only the evil that persists. And hypocricy. China accepts a capitalist system, but will not accept democratic values that go hand in hand with it, by definition. Why so?

why does not Russia allow fair competition? why does not China allow fair competition? Is this a fair and just society?

I will tell you what Communism is all about: let me make your property mine, your hard-earned property mine.
first step: proclaim full equality and equal distribution of property for all by nationalising private property assets
second step: a different-size lullaby period of nationalised property that belongs to all the people, though some comrades of course benefit a lot more
third step: institute a collapse of the communist system and redistribute state property into private hands, by definition the hands of the communist establishment

as a result of this capitalist-communist-capitalist again metamorphosis the former poor have become the new rich and the former rich the new poor. with the provision of course, that while at least half of rich men in democratic societies have become so by hard labour, almost no one in post-communist societies have acquired their property by legal means, rather than by stealing what rightfully belongs to others.

we would be the perfect world society, if only Russia accepted it should follow real democratic values, but it simply will not do so currently, as there is something terribly wrong and evil within.

latest news from a highly developed Western democracy, Germany: a dozen people died in Berlin after an Islamist attack

latest news from Russia: 64 people died after drinking a methanol-based bevarage sold at vending machines for standard alcohol. (the vendors simply poured into the drink large quantitites of very cheap chemical substance instead of paying for natural ingredients; the vendor is happy, he became rich, the state authorities are with him, no one persecutes him, some hundred or so people dies, who cares?)

I guess you spot the difference...

I'm going to make this quick...

1. You said "that explains it all" with regard to my enjoying a BBQ and beers while debating geo-politics with a communist party official here in China.

Could you be specific about what it "explains"?

You seem fond of making hasty (and frankly ignorant/insulting) assumptions when expressing yourself.

Do you know what it "explains" to me?

It explains that I am of such a broad mind, that despite being from a "rich western democracy" I can sit with the "enemy" in a culturally agreeable environment and chat in his native language about our national and cultural differences - all in a friendly and humorous manner.

I'm pretty sure this is showing much more diplomacy then you make a habit of, you YOU claim to BE a diplomat!

It's funny how westerners will "never forget" crimes inflicted on us in WW2, 911 or wherever, but the crimes we inflict on others are not to be spoken of?

The Chinese are proud people who never forget humiliation, despite sometimes forgiving.

Take the Opium Wars for instance.

There was a huge demand in Europe for Chinese silks, but no demand in China for foreign goods - they were self-sufficent.

What did the British do?

They setup deals with illegal traders at the ports and flooded the country with opium, thus giving the Chinese people something they'd NEED from the British and that they were addicted to!

This spread and the country faced a terrible drug epidemic and then...

When the Chinese leaders banned the trade and tried to crack down on it, the British smashed them militarily.

And nowadays when the Chinese execute drug traffickers, people like these hypocritical weserners (and you) are crying about "human rights".

You (and Kasparov) remind me of a rap song by Immortal Technique (from the U.S).

He says:

"Everybody wants a piece of the American pie, but that means you gotta cosign America's lies,

You talk about human rights in Cuba and China, but not in Israel, the Philippines and places you find em,

That are allies of the country I live in, whose clothes are made by slave labour women and children,

Yeah I know, I'm part of that hypocrisy too, but I don't pretend like it's democracy dude,

I don't pretend that troops are 'peace keepers' who don't murder, and they don't create colonies whose governments serve us"

Beautifully written.

It comes back to what I said:

Do you think that the "rogue" countries would behave in such a way if they hadn't been victimized and bullied by the west for hundreds of years?

Was Afghanistan a threat before the British went in pushing them around in the mid-1800s? I don't think so.

I'll tell you something...

I don't condone any evil behavior, but...

If my country was poor and had been held down for hundreds of years by economically and militarily superior bullies...

I'm pretty sure people would be being beheaded there.

I'm pretty sure guerrilla warfare tactics (which is exactly what "terrorism" is) would be used regularly.

The average Chinese person I've met (even the communist party guys) don't hate us and often love us and our culture.

One of the communist party guys said to me:

"Brother, personally I think people should be able to put politics on one side and personal things on another. Why should anybody be enemies because they disagree on something? There are many things we can agree upon and be good friends "

Sounds pretty evil huh?

Same with Russians I've met in my travels...

I sat in Thailand with some middle-aged Russian ladies, drank vodka and hilariously learnt Russian from them into the night.

They don't hate us either.

But everyone hates being bullied.

Whether it's my a hypocritical western military powerhouse, or an internet bully like yourself.

Nobody likes it.

Remember, the only reason western countries are so rich and the people can live in such a wealthy and comfortable bubble of ignorance, is because the blood of people they have never met spilled to create that wealth.

Think about that because speaking of hypocrisy.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

……….I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that…………..

……..you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much……...

……….and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust………...

……….not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence………...

I've just had a look at the profile that you have put on this site. Tell me, are you sure that you are a diplomat?

This is called selected quoting.

Pretty sure anything I have said and claimed anywhere on this forum is true.

If you mean natural diplomat, if someone tries to strangle you, you should defend yourself, of course.

My and your level of intelligence are different, so you will never understand me.

In the same way, the great Russian poet Vladimir Vysotsky survived during the harsh Soviet times in spite of openly criticising the regime with every single one of his songs, simply because the Communist comrades were unable to understand what he actually wrote.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

……….I can assure you You are stupid, and very stupid at that…………..

……..you supported and liked Kasparov?? - come on, man, tell us the truth, you hate Kasparov, you have just shown it, you can not stand him, because he says the truth, and you seemingly hate truth very much……...

……….and yes, you sided again on the wrong side. you have the rogth to do that, of course, but just acknowledge you are wrong, and unjust………...

……….not attacking anyone, you shared your views, and I am sharing mine, do not see a reason to take offence………...

I've just had a look at the profile that you have put on this site. Tell me, are you sure that you are a diplomat?

It's possible he is an East European (Bulgarian) diplomat, probably sponsored by the likes of Soros or other NGOs of this inspiration. They select (hire and pay) rabid pro-Americans (and anti-everything non-Western) with very little background in diplomacy, and little general cultural and psychological background. Then, these NGOs have the power to insert them to official state positions.

This Lyudmil is quite an air-mongerer, his tone and claims on chess topics are outright trollish, and he can go at length with it. Check his claims on improvement of Stockfish, on building a super-engine, or that he can easily beat any engine even without handicap. Many of these claims demonstrated at length with his posted "real games" and such.

I can not fully understand you, Kai.

one time you support me, the next time saying things I fully can not understand.

In my whole life, I have not done a single deal with anyone in case I have not fully morally endorsed it. Ethical behaviour is of prime importance to me, other things come second.

btw., would you please share where are you from, I kind of can not deduce your point of origin judging just by the name...