[spam][crazy][fiction][random] Non-Canon MCBoss Spinoffs

[Undescribed Horrific Abuse, One Victim & Survivor of Many]

[i should have done the queen’s side castle because it traps their queen,
when i instead moved the queen and my finger slipped with dissociation. i
wasn’t aware of this, and they didn’t defend against it sufficiently when
my slip gave them the opportunity to. rather, i then responded to their
attempt to push my knight by pressing the queen to protect the knight. —

the finger slip stimulated a situation that revealed why not to move my
queen where i was planning to.]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 16:52 Undescribed Horrific Abuse, One Victim &
Survivor of Many <gmkarl at gmail.com> wrote:

> 14/24
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 16:43 Undescribed Horrific Abuse, One Victim &
> Survivor of Many <gmkarl at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> this is a chess game where i won against someone of much higher rating
>> than me:
>>
>> [Site "https://chess.org/play/cf645a4f-4446-4a83-b2fd-919727966f32"]
>> [Event "Chess"]
>> [Variant "Standard"]
>> [Round "1"]
>> [Date "2023.12.11"]
>> [TimeControl "2m +2s"]
>> [White "RaZacek"]
>> [Black "baffo32_lo"]
>> [WhiteElo "1686"]
>> [BlackElo "1370"]
>> [Result "0-1"]
>>
>> 1. d4 e5 2. dxe5 d6 3. exd6 Bxd6 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. Nc3 Bf5 6. e4 Qe7 7. Bd3
>> Nb4 8. O-O Bg4 9. Be2 Qe6 10. a3 O-O-O 11. Qe1 Nxc2 0-1
>>
>> chess is now a scarred mental battlefield for me. i’ve spent time playing
>> chess puzzles and my otherness has spent time stimulating failures in me
>> despite this. a lot of time on both of these! my rating has dropped on
>> average in p2p and risen in the puzzles some i’d suspect.
>>
>> i totally smashed this game! partly luck, partly skill. i thought i might
>> consider reviewing it a little.
>>
>> 13/24 1413
>>
>> # apk add gnuchess
>>
>> 1418 the apk add command ended up being a little more complicated,
>> involving ish crashing repeatedly, anyway
>>
>> 1444
>>
>> how do i do fixed width font in gmail ipad app, or how else do i access
>> email?
>>
>> 1446
>>
>> maybe i’ll go on website
>>
>> 1504
>>
>> yayy fixed width
>>
>> back to responsive app?
>>
>> 1505
>>
>> 1506
>>
>> yayy fixed width in app. less responsive though.
>>
>> 1509
>>
>> echo -e 'e4\nquit' | gnuchess -q --manual --graphic | tac | sed 's/ /. /g'
>> [note the board is mirrored from tac, a usual board would have the king
>> and queen swapped]
>>
>>   ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
>>   ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>>   . . . . . . . .
>>   . . . ♙ . . . .
>>   . . . . . . . .
>>   . . . . . . . .
>>   ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟
>>   ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ ♝ ♞ ♜
>>
>> i was black. white opened with their queen’s pawn. i usually use a
>> well-known midgrade opening i forget the name of that i learned at a summer
>> camp.
>> noting: since they opened with their queen’s pawn, i get to free my
>> bishop and queen, as well as optionally pin a piece on their king
>>
>>
>> pawn forward 2
>>
>> ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♙ . . . .
>> . . . . ♟ . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ ♝ ♞ ♜
>>
>>
>> pawn takes pawn
>>
>> ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . ♙ . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ ♝ ♞ ♜
>>
>>
>> pawn forward 1
>>
>> ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . ♙ . . .
>> . . . ♟ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ ♝ ♞ ♜
>>
>>
>> pawn takes pawn
>>
>> ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♙ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ ♝ ♞ ♜
>>
>>
>> bishop takes pawn
>>
>> ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> this theoretically exchanges position in my benefit for pieces in theirs;
>> i spend my years trying to figure out how the heck to take advantage of it.
>> one of the last exchanges i had regarding this at that summer camp was
>> something like “why does this opening never work against you (the person
>> who taught it to me)” “because you never make use of it, karl”
>>
>>
>> white next brought their king’s knight out. (i wonder what they were
>> planning or thinking. it could have been a habit to threaten or guard a
>> missing pawn in the middle.)
>>
>> ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . . . . ♘ . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>
> maybe they were erring in the side of threatening spaces my advanced
> bishop could otherwise make use of.
>
>
>> i brought out the opposing knight on my queen’s side. this threatens the
>> same central spaces their knight does, and also moves toward the more
>> difficult queen’s-side castle. i’m not sure what specifically my reasoning
>> was, but i’ve been exploring different things.
>>
>> ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . . . . ♘ . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . ♞ ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . ♝ ♛ ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> something i’ve been thinking of here is -  well
>>
>>
>> they brought out their opposite knight, so maybe this is just how they
>> like to open, or maybe it is some standard approach
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . ♞ ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . ♝ ♛ ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>>
>> i then brought out my bishop. likely i was thinking of controlling the
>> board safely and moving toward opening that queen’s side castle
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . . . ♝ . .
>> . . ♞ ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . ♛ ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> i think i move the second bishop out farther to maybe try to be more
>> aggressive, remember that e-change at summer camp.
>>
> *exchange
>
>> when it’s on the other queen’s/king’s side it threatens a pawn that can
>> be used for a checkmate, building what i’ve been calling initiative, giving
>> the opponent fewer options and yourself more
>>
>>
>> they moved their pawn forward 2 to threaten my overadvanced bishop
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . . ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . . . . ♙ . . .
>> . . . . . ♝ . .
>> . . ♞ ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . ♛ ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>>
>> and here’s where it started getting fancy, i moved my queen in front of
>> my king (very dangerous!) to pin their pawn onto their king, so they
>> couldn’t take the bishop, in an attempt to keep my positional and move
>> investments.
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . . ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . . . . ♙ . . .
>> . . . . . ♝ . .
>> . . ♞ ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♛ ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> i think once there are pins and things going on like this it starts
>> taxing the players’ memories in competition, to remember all the concerns
>> and dependencies.
>> - they can’t use their pawn how they usually expect, so they have to put
>> more cognition into things that involve it (it also pressure them to
>> prioritize moving their king or engaging my queen to threaten my bishop
>> again)
>> - i lose my bishop if i move my queen; all the places it threatens aren’t
>> actually threatened unless the value of moving there is more than a bishop,
>> which i’m likely to not think of
>> (i guess, maybe)
>>
>
>> i likely tried this from the puzzles experience. i’m pretty vulnerable
>> here in my opinion, but i think the unexpectedness and memory loading can
>> also help me win sometimes.
>>
>> the behavior is sadly a habit i have, where i try running a bigger risk
>> to see if it pans out later, kind of a little. intended only for play, not
>> serious situations.
>>
>>
>> they moved out their other bishop to defend the pawn. i forgot i could
>> take it. that’s likely why i risked the queen, cause it let me threaten
>> putting them in check, maybe
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ ♔ . . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . . ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ ♗ . ♘ . .
>> . . . . ♙ . . .
>> . . . . . ♝ . .
>> . . ♞ ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♛ ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> oh no … they were already threatening the pawn with their knight. maybe
>> they were disincentivizing me from pinning their knight on their king with
>> my bishop?
>>
>
> no, if i took the pawn with the bishop, and they took it with the knight,
> i think the queen could then take the knight, check, leaving me a pawn up
> with initiative. the bishop response deters this.
>
>
>> i advanced my knight likely to threaten their bishop and the pawn by
>> their queen, dunno, but both of which were also in line with my scared
>> bishop, tensely relying on their king not moving which would unpin the pawn
>> that could take it
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ ♔ . . ♖
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . . ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ ♗ . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . . .
>> . . . . . ♝ . .
>> . . . ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♛ ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> noting my king is nicely freed by now to castle on the queen’s side too,
>> and there aren’t any pawns between where my rook would land and their queen
>> still is. maybe got more lucky in this game than skillful, unsure.
>>
>> [mistake][separately my memories of this game are worsened further from
>> the mirroring]
>>
>>
>> they castled on their king’s side, away from my advanced knight,
>> threatening my bishop
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ . ♖ ♔ .
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . . ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ ♗ . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . . .
>> . . . . . ♝ . .
>> . . . ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♛ ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>>
>> i moved my bishop to a temporarily safer advancement, pinning their
>> knight on their queen.
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ . ♖ ♔ .
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . . ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ ♗ . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . ♝ .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♛ ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> i might be thinking here that i need to collect pressure near their king
>> to eventually checkmate them as well as build initiative, not sure. anyway
>> it pins their knight which reduces their board control for one move at
>> least i guess. often i have a habit of aggression in the hopes they get
>> confused like me, maybe. people repeat what works.
>>
>> i recall i was pressuring their king.
>>
>>
>> they retreated their bishop to unpin their knight
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ . ♖ ♔ .
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♗ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . ♝ .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ . . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . ♛ ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> i’m guessing this meant i still had the initiative i was seeking because
>> they responded to my move without gaining much position.
>>
>>
>> here i think my finger actually slipped, possibly dissociatively, and i
>> moved the queen forward one when i wasn’t planning to.
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ . ♖ ♔ .
>> ♙ ♙ ♙ . ♗ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> . . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . ♝ .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ ♛ . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> this guards the bishop. i think i would usually have moved it forward two
>> to threaten (and advertise this to the opponent) the checkmate pawn
>> diagonal from the king.
>>
>> this surprise left me unbalanced and i was looking for how to regain more
>> advantage.
>>
>> it’s so nice to review something with a dissociated confusion (i.e.
>> amnesia, [maybe it’s hard to store memories when you’re regaining footing])
>> in it! and we won! together! o_o :)
>>
>>
>> they advanced their pawn 1 to threaten and push my knight to move.
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ . ♖ ♔ .
>> . ♙ ♙ . ♗ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> ♙ . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . ♝ .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ ♛ . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> ♜ . . . ♚ . ♞ ♜
>>
>> i might have felt a little excited here, as if it wasn’t enough of an
>> initiative press back for me to lose mine. i had three diagonal pieces
>> threatening near their king (if i get my queen defended on one of those
>> pawns it’s checkmate, it could do that in 2 moves despite my slip) and the
>> knight they were threatening was distant from them.
>>
>>
>> i used my queen’s side castle to threaten revealing with my bishop, my
>> rook against their queen. this meant my bishop could effectively make two
>> moves in a row if they couldn’t regain initiative rescuing their queen.
>> [possible mistake]
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ ♕ . ♖ ♔ .
>> . ♙ ♙ . ♗ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> ♙ . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . ♝ .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ ♛ . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> . . ♚ ♜ . . ♞ ♜
>>
>> notably i am now threatening taking their queen by moving the bishop to
>> put them in check. this is another trick i learned from the puzzles.
>>
>> i am now very strongly in the advantage, but it involved layering
>> approaches behind strong risks that can easily go poorly if one’s memory
>> falters (which mine —- ); because i am threatening both their queen and
>> their king and they are only threatening more minor pieces.
>>
>> maybe i’d like to play through this game more. i don’t usually pull this
>> off and i think it’s because i run poor risks or lose track of them. maybe
>> i could compare it to a losing game and see what’s different or something …
>> [unsure :s some write mistake—-]
>>
>>
>> i wonder if my finger slip put them in unwarranted ease or something
>>
>>
>> so what happened is they moved their queen toward their king to protect
>> it from my check-reveal. this let me fork it with their rook with my risked
>> knight, and they then resigned the game in defeat, which let me realize how
>> much advantage i had before i lost it in further mistakes maybe ;S
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ . ♕ ♖ ♔ .
>> . ♙ ♙ . ♗ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> ♙ . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . ♞ . . ♙ . ♝ .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ ♛ . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> . . ♚ ♜ . . ♞ ♜
>>
>> ♖ . ♗ . ♕ ♖ ♔ .
>> . ♙ ♞ . ♗ ♙ ♙ ♙
>> ♙ . ♘ . . ♘ . .
>> . . . . ♙ . ♝ .
>> . . . . . . . .
>> . . . ♝ ♛ . . .
>> ♟ ♟ ♟ . . ♟ ♟ ♟
>> . . ♚ ♜ . . ♞ ♜
>>
>> victory. my ranking was 1370 and theirs was 1686.
>>
>> i’m thinking one thing maybe i did here was open multiple aggressive
>> avenues at once (not all of which i was aware of) and then stay flexible
>> about which i pursued as they responded. having them open meant that i had
>> multiple options for pressuring them, since i don’t know what they will do.
>>
>> i guess when my finger slipped with my queen it left them unsure of what
>> avenues i was pursuing. if i had moved my queen all the way as i meant,
>> what usually happens is they immediately fortify their king to prevent
>> checkmate which would have made the reveal that trapped their queen via
>> their king no longer work that way. instead they worked to address the
>> other side of the board.
>>
>> they may have seen something my slip could do that i didn’t, that they
>> were acting on.
>>
>> it’s noticeable that my rook and knight were working together to limit
>> their queen. i don’t think imwas consciously aware of this at the time.
>>
>> doing puzzles with the dissociativ—
>>
>> anyway :)
>>
>> i’m inhibited against reviewing my own behavior so this was awesome to
>> post :D it’s been many years since i’ve had a positive way to feed back
>> around things and improve them.
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 41401 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20231211/d863223d/attachment.txt>