After reading a blog column from some chess columnist, filled with great examples of how to thrash your opponent with an utterly crushing attack with the King's Indian Attack (KIA), it looked for a moment that it would be something that I would play. Hence, I tried it.
However, my sheer lack of theorectically knowledge meant that I managed to get myself into not just a losing position, but a defensive position, when the position was supposed to have one clear plan to attack. In fact, out of the 3 games I played as white, I managed to misclick moves in 2 games due to the sheer intensity of stress of failing to attack and failing to tactical traps. (most of the time hanging pieces)
Time to look for some new opening that gives a good sacrifice I guess...
Monday, June 14, 2010
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Friday, April 9, 2010
Qianhong bashing
Qianhong bash much!
(Not sure whether it was level 1, felt easier than before, used a few takebacks (doh))
A mere 93 moves!! :)
(Not sure whether it was level 1, felt easier than before, used a few takebacks (doh))
A mere 93 moves!! :)
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Drumroll!
Could I have a drumroll please, for this blog... is going to be messier from now on, for now there are two authors of the blog! Introducing the new poster... M!
Ok, credentials for M. Hmm... he plays International Chess, Chinese Chess, and shogi on the same or higher level (quantum shell) as me. Which means he can post stuff on that area as well. Also, he was the inventor of the nice theories I have on Chinese Chess, which enable you to play on a level of about a mere 50% lower than the average player!
So, you can expect more shogi coming up, and the replacement of chinese terms for shogi (technically wrong) with japanese terms (eg guima --> kema).
So... this blog will hopefully be more active from now on??
Ok, credentials for M. Hmm... he plays International Chess, Chinese Chess, and shogi on the same or higher level (quantum shell) as me. Which means he can post stuff on that area as well. Also, he was the inventor of the nice theories I have on Chinese Chess, which enable you to play on a level of about a mere 50% lower than the average player!
So, you can expect more shogi coming up, and the replacement of chinese terms for shogi (technically wrong) with japanese terms (eg guima --> kema).
So... this blog will hopefully be more active from now on??
Monday, April 5, 2010
Shogi!
So... new topic. Again. It's ok. I'll just explain the rules. I don't feel like typing particularly much. So... I'll just go by the chinese names, since I can't like read japanese.
bubing (pawn) -- Moves only 1 square forward.
xiangche -- Moves only forward (any number of squares)
Guima -- Moves 2 squares forward and 1 square sideways simultaneously (no dingmajiao)
yinjiang -- Moves 1 square diagonally or forwards by 1 square
jinjiang -- Moves 1 step in every direction except diagonally backwards
yujiang (king) -- Moves 1 step in every direction, and could possibly fly if a player gets disgusted with himself
feiche -- Rook
jiaoxing -- Bishop
Now for dropping rules. You can drop anywhere you like, but keep in mind that the objective is to win your opponent's king before he can win yours so you can't randomly plant while you're in check blah blah blah... Bubings can't be found on the same file. I think you can't plant pieces which can't move until they're captured (etc bubing on opponent's end of the board), but I'm not too sure about that one. For me, stalemate is a win for the side that stales the other person, just because playok.com goes by that rule. Bubings can't be planted in checkmate. Pieces are planted unpromoted.
So... promotion. A piece can promote if it gets to the last 3 ranks of the board (viewed from their perspective). Bubing promotes to jinjiang, xiangche promotes to jinjiang, guima promotes to jinjiang, yinjiang promotes to jinjiang, jinjiang can promote to jinjiang, but nobody really cares. King can possibly promote to jinjiang, but playing without a king is suicidal, so you might as well resign. Bishop promotes to bishop with all the functionalities of a jinjiang, and rook promotes to rook with all the functionalities of a king, jinjiang, yinjiang and a drunken elephant.
There are times that promotion is bad, especially with jinjiang, guima and xiangche, and other promotions can be bad as well, due to the weird rule that says bubings are too fail/awesome to plant in mate with :(.
And that wraps up all the rules I can think of. I might be giving a complete guide to bashing a person who has given you everything but his king soon, but that isn't my point for today. So that ends the post! (OMG short post)
bubing (pawn) -- Moves only 1 square forward.
xiangche -- Moves only forward (any number of squares)
Guima -- Moves 2 squares forward and 1 square sideways simultaneously (no dingmajiao)
yinjiang -- Moves 1 square diagonally or forwards by 1 square
jinjiang -- Moves 1 step in every direction except diagonally backwards
yujiang (king) -- Moves 1 step in every direction, and could possibly fly if a player gets disgusted with himself
feiche -- Rook
jiaoxing -- Bishop
Now for dropping rules. You can drop anywhere you like, but keep in mind that the objective is to win your opponent's king before he can win yours so you can't randomly plant while you're in check blah blah blah... Bubings can't be found on the same file. I think you can't plant pieces which can't move until they're captured (etc bubing on opponent's end of the board), but I'm not too sure about that one. For me, stalemate is a win for the side that stales the other person, just because playok.com goes by that rule. Bubings can't be planted in checkmate. Pieces are planted unpromoted.
So... promotion. A piece can promote if it gets to the last 3 ranks of the board (viewed from their perspective). Bubing promotes to jinjiang, xiangche promotes to jinjiang, guima promotes to jinjiang, yinjiang promotes to jinjiang, jinjiang can promote to jinjiang, but nobody really cares. King can possibly promote to jinjiang, but playing without a king is suicidal, so you might as well resign. Bishop promotes to bishop with all the functionalities of a jinjiang, and rook promotes to rook with all the functionalities of a king, jinjiang, yinjiang and a drunken elephant.
There are times that promotion is bad, especially with jinjiang, guima and xiangche, and other promotions can be bad as well, due to the weird rule that says bubings are too fail/awesome to plant in mate with :(.
And that wraps up all the rules I can think of. I might be giving a complete guide to bashing a person who has given you everything but his king soon, but that isn't my point for today. So that ends the post! (OMG short post)
Friday, March 26, 2010
On SCP-797
SCP-797. It's that red-looking thing. See http://ringmaster-sanctus.blogspot.com/2008/12/scp-797-hydrophobic-string.html. So today I present to you my experiments on SCP-797 as well as my experiences with it.
Since I am by no means a good writer of reports (see arr-ee), I will present the stuff I want to say all over the place, since it is a mere recollection of scattered thoughts.
So firstly, colour is important. To back up what I am going to say (actually to just set the background), I shall quote from an expert on the topic: "Each strand of SCP-797 has been either one of two colours, red or black. However, items woven of it have been observed to be black, green, red, brown, copper or gold, depending on the viewer." However, upon closer experimentation using a high-speed camera, the hair appears to be flashing between black and red at differing frequencies, depending on the situation, and sunlight (although not its constituents individually) appears to make the hydrophobic strings red for longer periods of time as compared to black. However, this extremely rapid changing of colour confuses the eye, and leaves the image open to the brain's interpretation. As a result, there have been people reported arguing over whether the same sample of SCP-797 looks red or black over the same period of time. This is suspected to be linked to an underlying psychological factor, which might lead us to uncover our evolutionary history.
"Such items are also extremely durable, withstanding temperatures upwards of 7000 C and pressures of 400 atmospheres." According to my experiments, hydrophobic string appears to melt at temperatures around 42314.15 degrees Kelvin, or close to 42041 degrees Celsius. However, this has been discovered to be an illusion, as the melting point is close to 424242 degrees Celsius. Why it might exhibit such strange behaviour is still an unknown, but a link has been proposed between that and humor on the part of the creator of the universe, although such a link is possibly inexistent.
Next, on to one of the most important properties of the hydrophobic strings: the hydrophobic-ness. Many many years ago, hopefully before you were born, Newton discovered forces that acted from a distance. Possibly he wasn't the first person, but I think he did discover that. So, whether this hydrophobic properties are able to act from a distance has remained a huge question, and as such I have created specific measurement tools to determine the strength of the repulsion across distance, and have discovered it appears to follow a trend of an inverse aeckerman's function when expressed in picometers. In short, the repulsion reduces quickly over extremely small distances, and only would succeed in keeping itself dry.
Of course, all these experiments are a special class of experiments known to many as thought experiments, and since they are created and carried out by me, their accuracy is suspect, and anybody who chooses to believe this does so at their own risk.
Since I am by no means a good writer of reports (see arr-ee), I will present the stuff I want to say all over the place, since it is a mere recollection of scattered thoughts.
So firstly, colour is important. To back up what I am going to say (actually to just set the background), I shall quote from an expert on the topic: "Each strand of SCP-797 has been either one of two colours, red or black. However, items woven of it have been observed to be black, green, red, brown, copper or gold, depending on the viewer." However, upon closer experimentation using a high-speed camera, the hair appears to be flashing between black and red at differing frequencies, depending on the situation, and sunlight (although not its constituents individually) appears to make the hydrophobic strings red for longer periods of time as compared to black. However, this extremely rapid changing of colour confuses the eye, and leaves the image open to the brain's interpretation. As a result, there have been people reported arguing over whether the same sample of SCP-797 looks red or black over the same period of time. This is suspected to be linked to an underlying psychological factor, which might lead us to uncover our evolutionary history.
"Such items are also extremely durable, withstanding temperatures upwards of 7000 C and pressures of 400 atmospheres." According to my experiments, hydrophobic string appears to melt at temperatures around 42314.15 degrees Kelvin, or close to 42041 degrees Celsius. However, this has been discovered to be an illusion, as the melting point is close to 424242 degrees Celsius. Why it might exhibit such strange behaviour is still an unknown, but a link has been proposed between that and humor on the part of the creator of the universe, although such a link is possibly inexistent.
Next, on to one of the most important properties of the hydrophobic strings: the hydrophobic-ness. Many many years ago, hopefully before you were born, Newton discovered forces that acted from a distance. Possibly he wasn't the first person, but I think he did discover that. So, whether this hydrophobic properties are able to act from a distance has remained a huge question, and as such I have created specific measurement tools to determine the strength of the repulsion across distance, and have discovered it appears to follow a trend of an inverse aeckerman's function when expressed in picometers. In short, the repulsion reduces quickly over extremely small distances, and only would succeed in keeping itself dry.
Of course, all these experiments are a special class of experiments known to many as thought experiments, and since they are created and carried out by me, their accuracy is suspect, and anybody who chooses to believe this does so at their own risk.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
The Geometric Progression Summation... and a block of ice
How do you sum the following numbers?:
1, 1/3, 1/9, 1/27, ... 1/ 3^inf
or even
1, 1/3.14, 1/3.14^2, ...., 1/3.14^ inf?
Answer: Go check up the GP summation formula. It's like... a/1-r (quote a certain math pro). Might be wrong because I typoed, but whatever. The actual derivation can be found online, but I don't really want to talk about it here, so... now comes the block of ice.
Imagine you have a block of ice, a cup of lemonade and a person who sort of fails at physics/math/common sense. So the cup is a perfect cylinder. The top of the liquid surface (this lemonade has no surface tension w.r.t air!) has a surface area of 1dm^2. Now this fail person lowers in a (cubical) block of ice of dimensions r dm by 1 dm by 23452345345 dm with the face that has r dm^2 surface area in first.
Soon, he has lowered the ice block exactly 1 dm into the original water level. By nearly obvious, the liquid would rise by r/1-r dm, since r dm ^3 of lemonade is displaced and the surface area as it rises is 1-r dm^2 (lemonade can't seep through ice). That is also equivalent to ( 1/ r-1 ) - 1.
However, the not-really-that-good-at-physics/math/common sense person tries to find the level the water has risen through this method. First, he takes the displaced amount of lemonade and see how far it would rise without the ice. Then he takes the volume the ice has displaced with the newly risen water level and with that new displaced volume compares how much more the water level would rise again... (not being very clear here, am I? It's ok. I fail)
Anyway, I hope it is somewhat clear that the water level will rise by r+r^2+r^3+...
=( 1/ r-1 ) - 1
and 0<=r<1. Why this bound? Because if r<0, you're possibly working with anti-matter and I don't want to talk to you, and if r>1, you're probably at odds with murderous potatoes and as such are too dangerous to be with. No really, anybody who tries to compress a solid is scary.
So... how to end off? Right. The usual statement. Whatever algebraic manipulations left are left to the reader. That's right. And if any careless mistakes have been made please inform me, but do not expect anything to change (apart from the post being torn apart).
"In exams you have to be soft because the questions are hard."
EDIT!!!: formula is like a/(1-r). Aha! ok thanks to RM-Sanctus, whoever that is.
EDIT!!!!: *tear*
1, 1/3, 1/9, 1/27, ... 1/ 3^inf
or even
1, 1/3.14, 1/3.14^2, ...., 1/3.14^ inf?
Answer: Go check up the GP summation formula. It's like... a/1-r (quote a certain math pro). Might be wrong because I typoed, but whatever. The actual derivation can be found online, but I don't really want to talk about it here, so... now comes the block of ice.
Imagine you have a block of ice, a cup of lemonade and a person who sort of fails at physics/math/common sense. So the cup is a perfect cylinder. The top of the liquid surface (this lemonade has no surface tension w.r.t air!) has a surface area of 1dm^2. Now this fail person lowers in a (cubical) block of ice of dimensions r dm by 1 dm by 23452345345 dm with the face that has r dm^2 surface area in first.
Soon, he has lowered the ice block exactly 1 dm into the original water level. By nearly obvious, the liquid would rise by r/1-r dm, since r dm ^3 of lemonade is displaced and the surface area as it rises is 1-r dm^2 (lemonade can't seep through ice). That is also equivalent to ( 1/ r-1 ) - 1.
However, the not-really-that-good-at-physics/math/common sense person tries to find the level the water has risen through this method. First, he takes the displaced amount of lemonade and see how far it would rise without the ice. Then he takes the volume the ice has displaced with the newly risen water level and with that new displaced volume compares how much more the water level would rise again... (not being very clear here, am I? It's ok. I fail)
Anyway, I hope it is somewhat clear that the water level will rise by r+r^2+r^3+...
=( 1/ r-1 ) - 1
and 0<=r<1. Why this bound? Because if r<0, you're possibly working with anti-matter and I don't want to talk to you, and if r>1, you're probably at odds with murderous potatoes and as such are too dangerous to be with. No really, anybody who tries to compress a solid is scary.
So... how to end off? Right. The usual statement. Whatever algebraic manipulations left are left to the reader. That's right. And if any careless mistakes have been made please inform me, but do not expect anything to change (apart from the post being torn apart).
"In exams you have to be soft because the questions are hard."
EDIT!!!: formula is like a/(1-r). Aha! ok thanks to RM-Sanctus, whoever that is.
EDIT!!!!: *tear*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)