GM Joel Benjamin vs Leela Knight Odds Classical match

[lkaufman]

Good morning Mr. Larry Kaufman. I was thinking about the benefits of having a leaderboard of the best 100 humans playing against the LeelaKnight Odds computer. I remember some very wise considerations by Mr. Uri Blass, in the sense of having scores in accordance with time controls. Mr. Larry Kaufman. I have a question: If I am probably the one who currently has the best results in draws against the Odds, could this mean that I could be number one in the tables? I am not at any time giving my opinion regarding my human level of strength as a chess player, nor my standards of IQ or memory capacity, simply objective game results. Thank you again Mr. Larry Kaufman and team Leela for allowing me to compete, play and be happy. For example... even if I don't currently appear in the standings, it will bring me a lot of joy to know that I am the human with the best results in bullet playing against the Odds.

For queen odds, probably your recent results put you in second place behind Joel Benjamin. For knight odds, you might actually be the leader if the same method is applied, because no one wins more than one game in a hundred or so, so draws are all anyone can get except perhaps at 30' +30" or so.

Joel Benjamin does not play bullet against the queen odds bot so Joel is not relevant for father's last statement:

"it will bring me a lot of joy to know that I am the human with the best results in bullet playing against the Odds."

OK, if we limit the discussion to 1'0" bullet games, his preferred TC, we also need to separate White from Black, they are distinct odds with the first move making a big difference in results. For knight odds, we can only consider Leela White, because Leela Black is rarely played, there is only a single 1'0" with anyone rated over 2422 in bullet! For the Leela White case, "Father" has a 2% draw result out of nearly 400 games. The best result is by a very high rated but anonymous player, "punchen", with 3 draws out of 24 games. For the queen odds case, he has one of the best records playing White, probably not the very best but I'm not sure as there are too many strong players who play queen odds bullet to check this easily. The best results were in the 20-25% with both colors, so probably around 30% with White, whereas if "Father" draws half the time that would be 25% score. So very near the top at both knight odds and queen plus move odds, but probably not the actual top.

[Vinvin]

Thanks. But the main bots (queen, rook, and knight) are all near the very top, as featured bots, next to each other.

The very top of what ? Where ?

[Father]

Good morning Mr. Larry Kaufman. I was thinking about the benefits of having a leaderboard of the best 100 humans playing against the LeelaKnight Odds computer. I remember some very wise considerations by Mr. Uri Blass, in the sense of having scores in accordance with time controls. Mr. Larry Kaufman. I have a question: If I am probably the one who currently has the best results in draws against the Odds, could this mean that I could be number one in the tables? I am not at any time giving my opinion regarding my human level of strength as a chess player, nor my standards of IQ or memory capacity, simply objective game results. Thank you again Mr. Larry Kaufman and team Leela for allowing me to compete, play and be happy. For example... even if I don't currently appear in the standings, it will bring me a lot of joy to know that I am the human with the best results in bullet playing against the Odds.

For queen odds, probably your recent results put you in second place behind Joel Benjamin. For knight odds, you might actually be the leader if the same method is applied, because no one wins more than one game in a hundred or so, so draws are all anyone can get except perhaps at 30' +30" or so.

Joel Benjamin does not play bullet against the queen odds bot so Joel is not relevant for father's last statement:

"it will bring me a lot of joy to know that I am the human with the best results in bullet playing against the Odds."

OK, if we limit the discussion to 1'0" bullet games, his preferred TC, we also need to separate White from Black, they are distinct odds with the first move making a big difference in results. For knight odds, we can only consider Leela White, because Leela Black is rarely played, there is only a single 1'0" with anyone rated over 2422 in bullet! For the Leela White case, "Father" has a 2% draw result out of nearly 400 games. The best result is by a very high rated but anonymous player, "punchen", with 3 draws out of 24 games. For the queen odds case, he has one of the best records playing White, probably not the very best but I'm not sure as there are too many strong players who play queen odds bullet to check this easily. The best results were in the 20-25% with both colors, so probably around 30% with White, whereas if "Father" draws half the time that would be 25% score. So very near the top at both knight odds and queen plus move odds, but probably not the actual top.

... I was looking at my history in bullet time control games since I played with white, a few days ago, against LeelaKnightOdds, and I found that in my last 34 games there are 9 ties. which gives a result of 26.470%.
My final average is more because I didn't know how to play riding with White on my wooden horse, my beloved wooden horse, "Catecan."

[lkaufman]

Thanks. But the main bots (queen, rook, and knight) are all near the very top, as featured bots, next to each other.

The very top of what ? Where ?

I think the problem is that you are probably using the app, whereas I use the browser version of LiChess. With the browser version, you select "community", "players", "online bots", and the odds bots are fourth thru sixth on the list, as "Featured bots". I don't know how to reach this same list on the app, I don't use it. So maybe the app needs to be updated?

[lkaufman]

Good morning Mr. Larry Kaufman. I was thinking about the benefits of having a leaderboard of the best 100 humans playing against the LeelaKnight Odds computer. I remember some very wise considerations by Mr. Uri Blass, in the sense of having scores in accordance with time controls. Mr. Larry Kaufman. I have a question: If I am probably the one who currently has the best results in draws against the Odds, could this mean that I could be number one in the tables? I am not at any time giving my opinion regarding my human level of strength as a chess player, nor my standards of IQ or memory capacity, simply objective game results. Thank you again Mr. Larry Kaufman and team Leela for allowing me to compete, play and be happy. For example... even if I don't currently appear in the standings, it will bring me a lot of joy to know that I am the human with the best results in bullet playing against the Odds.

For queen odds, probably your recent results put you in second place behind Joel Benjamin. For knight odds, you might actually be the leader if the same method is applied, because no one wins more than one game in a hundred or so, so draws are all anyone can get except perhaps at 30' +30" or so.

Joel Benjamin does not play bullet against the queen odds bot so Joel is not relevant for father's last statement:

"it will bring me a lot of joy to know that I am the human with the best results in bullet playing against the Odds."

OK, if we limit the discussion to 1'0" bullet games, his preferred TC, we also need to separate White from Black, they are distinct odds with the first move making a big difference in results. For knight odds, we can only consider Leela White, because Leela Black is rarely played, there is only a single 1'0" with anyone rated over 2422 in bullet! For the Leela White case, "Father" has a 2% draw result out of nearly 400 games. The best result is by a very high rated but anonymous player, "punchen", with 3 draws out of 24 games. For the queen odds case, he has one of the best records playing White, probably not the very best but I'm not sure as there are too many strong players who play queen odds bullet to check this easily. The best results were in the 20-25% with both colors, so probably around 30% with White, whereas if "Father" draws half the time that would be 25% score. So very near the top at both knight odds and queen plus move odds, but probably not the actual top.

... I was looking at my history in bullet time control games since I played with white, a few days ago, against LeelaKnightOdds, and I found that in my last 34 games there are 9 ties. which gives a result of 26.470%.
My final average is more because I didn't know how to play riding with White on my wooden horse, my beloved wooden horse, "Catecan."

9 ties in 34 games may be 26.47% draws, but it is only a 13.235% score, since draws are 1/2 for each side. Even so, that is a very good record for bullet, but unfortunately there is nothing to compare it with since almost no one takes White at knight odds vs. Leela, especially strong players. It is much easier to draw with White, because Leela is generally happy to repeat position as Black, and also because Black has very few playable openings, whereas White has many.

[Vinvin]

Thanks. But the main bots (queen, rook, and knight) are all near the very top, as featured bots, next to each other.

The very top of what ? Where ?

I think the problem is that you are probably using the app, whereas I use the browser version of LiChess. With the browser version, you select "community", "players", "online bots", and the odds bots are fourth thru sixth on the list, as "Featured bots". I don't know how to reach this same list on the app, I don't use it. So maybe the app needs to be updated?

I use the browser but I've never seen this option ! Thanks !

[jp]

...
Final game was a miracle draw by Leela in a losing endgame, so the score was 2 wins for Joel (the first two games!!), one win for Leela, and five draws. All games can be seen either on Matthew Sadler's YouTube channel or simply by searching for the games of "SuperEasy" vs "LeelaKnightOdds" in the LiChess database (just select "tools" and "advanced search") at Classical time controls.

Can someone please post the moves of this miracle draw here?

[Uri Blass]

[pgn][Event "Casual classical game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/EL8f7Hfh"]
[Date "2025.01.27"]
[White "Leela Knight Odds"]
[Black "Benjamin, Joel"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "0"]
[WhiteTitle "BOT"]
[BlackElo "2473"]
[BlackTitle "GM"]
[BlackFideId "2000091"]
[TimeControl "3600+30"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[GameId "EL8f7Hfh"]
[Variant "Standard"]
[ECO "?"]
[Opening "?"]
[Annotator "https://lichess.org/broadcast/-/-/UFaWmaBz"]
[StudyName "Game 8"]
[ChapterName "Leela Knight Odds - Benjamin, Joel"]
[SetUp "1"]

1. e3?? { [%eval -4.27] } { Blunder. e4 was best. } { [%clk 1:00:00] } (1. e4 c5 2. c3 d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. d4 cxd4) 1... e5 { [%eval -4.19] [%clk 1:00:00] } 2. b3 { [%eval -4.98] [%clk 1:00:30] } 2... d5 { [%eval -4.06] [%clk 0:57:28] } 3. Bb2 { [%eval -4.08] [%clk 1:00:59] } 3... Bd6 { [%eval -4.02] [%clk 0:57:53] } 4. c4 { [%eval -3.98] [%clk 1:01:29] } 4... c6 { [%eval -3.64] [%clk 0:56:29] } 5. Bd3 { [%eval -3.97] [%clk 1:01:58] } 5... Nf6 { [%eval -4.14] [%clk 0:56:23] } 6. Ne2 { [%eval -4.21] [%clk 1:02:28] } 6... O-O { [%eval -4.07] [%clk 0:55:03] } 7. Rc1 { [%eval -4.18] [%clk 1:02:53] } 7... Qe7 { [%eval -3.88] [%clk 0:52:58] } 8. Bc2?! { [%eval -4.87] } { Inaccuracy. Ng3 was best. } { [%clk 1:03:20] } (8. Ng3 d4 9. O-O c5 10. f4 exf4 11. Nh5 Nxh5 12. Qxh5 g6) 8... Ba3 { [%eval -4.46] [%clk 0:51:36] } 9. Bxa3 { [%eval -4.55] [%clk 1:03:49] } 9... Qxa3 { [%eval -4.8] [%clk 0:52:03] } 10. O-O { [%eval -4.67] [%clk 1:04:17] } 10... Nbd7 { [%eval -4.38] [%clk 0:43:34] } 11. Bb1 { [%eval -4.82] [%clk 1:04:42] } 11... Re8 { [%eval -4.65] [%clk 0:43:21] } 12. h3 { [%eval -4.87] [%clk 1:05:10] } 12... Qd6 { [%eval -4.83] [%clk 0:43:11] } 13. d4 { [%eval -4.84] [%clk 1:05:36] } 13... exd4 { [%eval -4.98] [%clk 0:39:06] } 14. Nxd4 { [%eval -4.97] [%clk 1:06:04] } 14... dxc4 { [%eval -4.77] [%clk 0:37:43] } 15. Rxc4 { [%eval -4.72] [%clk 1:06:32] } 15... Ne5 { [%eval -4.38] [%clk 0:34:32] } 16. Rc1 { [%eval -4.84] [%clk 1:07:00] } 16... Bd7 { [%eval -4.78] [%clk 0:34:15] } 17. Qc2 { [%eval -4.95] [%clk 1:07:28] } 17... b6 { [%eval -4.43] [%clk 0:30:43] } 18. Rfd1 { [%eval -4.72] [%clk 1:07:55] } 18... Qe7 { [%eval -4.62] [%clk 0:31:08] } 19. Ne2 { [%eval -4.77] [%clk 1:08:25] } 19... Rad8 { [%eval -4.89] [%clk 0:28:54] } 20. Ng3 { [%eval -4.74] [%clk 1:08:54] } 20... Ng6 { [%eval -4.87] [%clk 0:25:56] } 21. Re1 { [%eval -5.0] [%clk 1:09:21] } 21... c5 { [%eval -4.96] [%clk 0:25:37] } 22. Qe2 { [%eval -5.02] [%clk 1:09:49] } 22... Bc8 { [%eval -4.81] [%clk 0:25:00] } 23. a3 { [%eval -4.83] [%clk 1:10:17] } 23... Nh4 { [%eval -4.57] [%clk 0:22:49] } 24. Bd3?! { [%eval -5.93] } { Inaccuracy. e4 was best. } { [%clk 1:10:43] } (24. e4 Ng6 25. b4 cxb4 26. axb4 Nf4 27. Qe3 Qe5 28. Ne2 Nxe2+ 29. Rxe2 Nh5) 24... Bb7?! { [%eval -4.67] } { Inaccuracy. Bxh3 was best. } { [%clk 0:22:14] } (24... Bxh3 25. gxh3 Qb7 26. e4 Qd7 27. Nf5 Nxf5 28. Bb5 Nd4 29. Bxd7 Nxe2+ 30. Rxe2) 25. e4 { [%eval -4.67] [%clk 1:11:12] } 25... Qe5 { [%eval -4.61] [%clk 0:21:51] } 26. b4 { [%eval -4.5] [%clk 1:11:40] } 26... cxb4 { [%eval -4.47] [%clk 0:18:16] } 27. Bb5 { [%eval -4.49] [%clk 1:12:08] } 27... Re6 { [%eval -4.56] [%clk 0:13:50] } 28. Bc4 { [%eval -4.46] [%clk 1:12:36] } 28... Red6 { [%eval -4.54] [%clk 0:11:41] } 29. axb4 { [%eval -4.48] [%clk 1:13:04] } 29... Rd2 { [%eval -4.3] [%clk 0:10:29] } 30. Qe3 { [%eval -4.08] [%clk 1:13:32] } 30... Qd4 { [%eval -4.32] [%clk 0:09:03] } 31. Qxd4 { [%eval -4.32] [%clk 1:14:00] } 31... R2xd4 { [%eval -4.17] [%clk 0:08:58] } 32. f3 { [%eval -4.31] [%clk 1:14:29] } 32... Kf8 { [%eval -4.23] [%clk 0:08:22] } 33. b5 { [%eval -4.19] [%clk 1:14:57] } 33... Bc8 { [%eval -4.28] [%clk 0:06:41] } 34. Be2 { [%eval -4.34] [%clk 1:15:24] } 34... Be6 { [%eval -4.35] [%clk 0:06:28] } 35. Ra1 { [%eval -4.32] [%clk 1:15:53] } 35... R8d7 { [%eval -4.27] [%clk 0:06:21] } 36. Ra3 { [%eval -4.39] [%clk 1:16:22] } 36... Rc7 { [%eval -4.21] [%clk 0:05:09] } 37. Rea1 { [%eval -4.22] [%clk 1:16:50] } 37... Rdd7 { [%eval -4.37] [%clk 0:05:36] } 38. f4 { [%eval -4.25] [%clk 1:17:19] } 38... Bc4 { [%eval -4.07] [%clk 0:04:56] } 39. e5 { [%eval -4.36] [%clk 1:17:47] } 39... Bxe2 { [%eval -4.28] [%clk 0:02:57] } 40. Nxe2 { [%eval -4.23] [%clk 1:18:15] } 40... Nd5 { [%eval -4.36] [%clk 0:03:25] } 41. Ra4 { [%eval -4.31] [%clk 1:18:42] } 41... Nf5 { [%eval -4.32] [%clk 0:03:22] } 42. g4 { [%eval -4.22] [%clk 1:19:10] } 42... Nfe3 { [%eval -4.07] [%clk 0:02:57] } 43. R1a3 { [%eval -4.36] [%clk 1:19:39] } 43... Nc4 { [%eval -4.32] [%clk 0:03:14] } 44. Rb3 { [%eval -4.46] [%clk 1:20:07] } 44... Na5 { [%eval -4.42] [%clk 0:03:30] } 45. Rd3 { [%eval -4.49] [%clk 1:20:36] } 45... Ke8 { [%eval -4.44] [%clk 0:03:30] } 46. Rad4 { [%eval -4.58] [%clk 1:21:04] } 46... Ne7 { [%eval -4.51] [%clk 0:03:42] } 47. f5 { [%eval -4.71] [%clk 1:21:32] } 47... Rxd4 { [%eval -4.33] [%clk 0:04:01] } 48. Nxd4 { [%eval -4.49] [%clk 1:22:01] } 48... Rd7 { [%eval -4.51] [%clk 0:04:15] } 49. f6 { [%eval -4.35] [%clk 1:22:30] } 49... gxf6 { [%eval -4.4] [%clk 0:04:21] } 50. exf6 { [%eval -4.43] [%clk 1:22:59] } 50... Ng6 { [%eval -4.6] [%clk 0:04:36] } 51. Re3+ { [%eval -4.4] [%clk 1:23:27] } 51... Kd8 { [%eval -4.39] [%clk 0:05:01] } 52. Nf5 { [%eval -4.55] [%clk 1:23:56] } 52... Nc4 { [%eval -4.55] [%clk 0:05:21] } 53. Re2 { [%eval -4.71] [%clk 1:24:25] } 53... Rd1+ { [%eval -4.74] [%clk 0:04:38] } 54. Kf2 { [%eval -4.69] [%clk 1:24:53] } 54... Nd6 { [%eval -4.57] [%clk 0:05:03] } 55. Nh6 { [%eval -4.94] [%clk 1:25:21] } 55... Rd4 { [%eval -4.48] [%clk 0:02:15] } 56. Ra2 { [%eval -4.48] [%clk 1:25:47] } 56... Rf4+ { [%eval -4.51] [%clk 0:02:32] } 57. Kg2 { [%eval -4.67] [%clk 1:26:15] } 57... Rxf6 { [%eval -4.38] [%clk 0:02:44] } 58. g5 { [%eval -4.39] [%clk 1:26:44] } 58... Re6 { [%eval -4.35] [%clk 0:02:29] } 59. Rxa7 { [%eval -4.35] [%clk 1:27:12] } 59... Re5 { [%eval -4.27] [%clk 0:02:07] } 60. Nxf7+ { [%eval -4.93] [%clk 1:24:24] } 60... Nxf7 { [%eval -4.85] [%clk 0:02:32] } 61. Rxf7 { [%eval -4.79] [%clk 1:24:53] } 61... Rxg5+ { [%eval -4.72] [%clk 0:03:01] } 62. Kf2 { [%eval -4.47] [%clk 1:25:23] } 62... Rh5 { [%eval -3.72] [%clk 0:01:14] } 63. Rb7 { [%eval -3.61] [%clk 1:25:51] } 63... Rxh3 { [%eval -3.56] [%clk 0:01:23] } 64. Rxb6 { [%eval -3.42] [%clk 1:26:20] } 64... Kc7?! { [%eval -2.67] } { Inaccuracy. Nf8 was best. } { [%clk 0:01:51] } (64... Nf8 65. Ke1 Ke7 66. Rb7+ Nd7 67. Kd2 h5 68. Kc2 Ra3 69. Rc7 Ra5 70. Kd3) 65. Rc6+ { [%eval -2.8] [%clk 1:26:48] } 65... Kb7 { [%eval -2.8] [%clk 0:02:19] } 66. Rf6 { [%eval -2.8] [%clk 1:27:18] } 66... Ne5 { [%eval -2.67] [%clk 0:02:34] } 67. Re6 { [%eval -2.89] [%clk 1:27:46] } 67... Nd3+ { [%eval -3.0] [%clk 0:02:53] } 68. Kg1 { [%eval -2.9] [%clk 1:28:15] } 68... Rg3+ { [%eval -2.89] [%clk 0:02:35] } 69. Kh2 { [%eval -3.02] [%clk 1:28:43] } 69... Rg7 { [%eval -2.8] [%clk 0:03:03] } 70. Rf6 { [%eval -3.07] [%clk 1:29:13] } 70... Ne5 { [%eval -2.99] [%clk 0:03:22] } 71. Kh3 { [%eval -2.99] [%clk 1:29:42] } 71... Rg6 { [%eval -2.92] [%clk 0:03:16] } 72. Rf5 { [%eval -2.87] [%clk 1:30:11] } 72... Re6 { [%eval -2.95] [%clk 0:03:31] } 73. Kh4 { [%eval -2.89] [%clk 1:30:40] } 73... Kb6 { [%eval -2.8] [%clk 0:03:45] } 74. Kg5 { [%eval -2.87] [%clk 1:31:09] } 74... Rg6+ { [%eval -2.8] [%clk 0:04:03] } 75. Kf4 { [%eval -3.11] [%clk 1:31:36] } 75... Nd7 { [%eval -2.96] [%clk 0:04:26] } 76. Rh5 { [%eval -2.91] [%clk 1:32:05] } 76... h6 { [%eval -2.85] [%clk 0:04:19] } 77. Kf5 { [%eval -2.81] [%clk 1:32:34] } 77... Rd6 { [%eval -3.02] [%clk 0:04:24] } 78. Kf4 { [%eval -2.91] [%clk 1:33:03] } 78... Nc5 { [%eval -2.94] [%clk 0:04:44] } 79. Ke5 { [%eval -2.85] [%clk 1:33:32] } 79... Rg6 { [%eval -2.78] [%clk 0:04:30] } 80. Kf5 { [%eval -2.92] [%clk 1:34:01] } 80... Re6 { [%eval -2.87] [%clk 0:04:42] } 81. Rh4 { [%eval -2.77] [%clk 1:34:29] } 81... Kxb5 { [%eval -2.66] [%clk 0:05:05] } 82. Rg4 { [%eval -2.54] [%clk 1:34:59] } 82... Re8?? { [%eval -0.16] } { Blunder. Rd6 was best. } { [%clk 0:04:42] } (82... Rd6 83. Rg2 Nb3 84. Ke5 Rc6 85. Rb2 Kb4 86. Rh2 Rg6 87. Kf5 Ra6 88. Kg4) 83. Kg6 { [%eval -0.14] [%clk 1:35:27] } 83... Re6+ { [%eval -0.12] [%clk 0:03:15] } 84. Kg7 { [%eval -0.12] [%clk 1:35:56] } 84... h5 { [%eval -0.08] [%clk 0:01:58] } 85. Rh4 { [%eval -0.19] [%clk 1:36:25] } 85... Re5 { [%eval -0.24] [%clk 0:02:25] } 86. Kh6 { [%eval -0.11] [%clk 1:36:54] } 86... Kc6 { [%eval -0.11] [%clk 0:02:51] } 87. Rxh5 { [%eval -0.15] [%clk 1:37:24] } 87... Rxh5+ { [%clk 0:03:19] } 88. Kxh5 { [%clk 1:37:24] } 1/2-1/2


[/pgn]

[Father]

Hi !
Yesterday, I challenged Anthony Wirig (whom already play Komodo with knight odd) to win against LeelaKnightOdds. He tried 169 games and he didn't succeed ...
He tried in 3+0 then switched to 1+1 (because h prefer bullet games)
See games here : https://lichess.org/@/LeelaKnightOdds/s ... order=desc

Thanks for persuading him to play the games. Since the node increase on Jan 26, Leela knight odds has only lost two blitz games (excluding crashes/disconnections) out of nearly 1500, one at 5'3" to a strong GM, the other at 3'2" to "Chess-Network" rated around 2700 Lichess blitz, roughly "par" GM level. I would expect Anthony to win an occasional Rapid game if he played it that way, but it is almost unbeatable in blitz, and so far fully unbeatable in bullet. I note that he played all the games (I think) at g1 odds, never b1. Is that because you required it, or because he preferred it, or some other reason? I think it is the more difficult challenge of the two for the human.

Good morning Mr. Larry Kaufman, Leela Team, and other chess and computer lovers.
I have been watching the Odds and I am very happy to have found that LeelaQueenOdds is being invited to dance again by many dancers. The queen sees herself "super valued in the robot market and in the demand for invitations she receives with an upward trend from humans."
In fact, if we measure the popularity of the "girls " by the number of dance pieces danced, the king robot is queen LeelaQueenOdds.
Of course, "in terms of taste there is no disagreement" some prefer blondes, others prefer mixed race.
Personally, I find the greatest future in winning the reign of robots for LeelaQueenOdds, and this perhaps has an explanation: LeelaKnight demand a high level and anti-machine tools for humans who aspire to a draw or a victory. On the other hand, LeelaQueenOdds is more peofilactive and multifaceted... in my opinion, I would pay a lot of attention to everything that means contributions and improvements to LeelaQueenOdds, the favorite candidate to win the first place in robots.

[jefk]

well i tried Lila K(andQ)O twice (*) but both times got the message she wasn't in the
mood for playing 'right now' or something like that (maybe only bullet or so or maybe
she got a headache after all these games with father)? Ah well i'll try later again.

(*) after all that's our reason for existence, isn't it (besides some
neutrino's and/or the fine structure constant (and 42) of course.