Jan. 8th, 2002

alexpgp: (Default)
Over the next few years, I didn't think much about chess. I suppose that, somewhere along the way, I learned how the pieces moved, but little else.

In the summers, my parents would send me to camp. Nothing fancy, you understand, just a place out in the country, run by a reputable outfit. At one of these camps, during the summer between 8th and 9th grades, one of the senior members of the camp's staff - a truly senior fellow who had fought with Denikin's army in the Russian Civil War - undertook teaching chess to some of us youngsters.

I don't know how many of us were actually interested in chess. I do know that those of us who volunteered for the lessons were vitally interested in being close to where the Good Humor ice cream truck parked once the "rest hour" after lunch was up. That year, I recall, I was trounced rather convincingly in the tournament set up by the old man at the end of the summer.

In the school year that followed, it turned out my stepdad was a chessplayer, too. In fact, it turned out he played chess regularly with fellow employees during lunch hour (there were a lot of European immigrants in my dad's office). In the meantime, I'd saved my cents and bought a book by Fred Reinfeld at the local paperback shop, with some lurid title along the lines of How to Play Devastatingly Winning Chess.

I read the book and reread it. I got to the point where I understood what the various combinations were about (they were, in the final analysis, pretty obvious) and could understand the coordination that had to take place in order to checkmate the opponent's king. My dad started bringing home "adjourned" positions from games he was playing at the office, and we spent evenings together analyzing those positions.

(Someday, when I am in the mood to really reminisce, I shall relate what happened to me in algebra class the year I immersed myself in chess.)

The next summer, I went back to the same camp with the Reinfeld book and a sample issue of the United States Chess Federation's magazine, Chess Life. Over the chess board, I was unbeatable. Even the old man who had taught us the moves could not beat me. But it turned out that the man driving the Good Humor truck was an 1800-rated player, and about two-thirds of the way through the summer, he started to notice my play and nearly always made the time to sit down and play a game with me, and very nearly always beat me.

What's an 1800 player? Well, consider that the best players in the world are rated around 2800 or so, using a formula developed by chess-playing statisticians. Now consider that, in this rating system, a rating difference of 500 points confers about a 97% winning statistical edge to the higher-rated player (out of 100 games, the higher rated player would win 97).

That means that a World Champion like Garry Kasparov will pretty much always beat a 2300-rated player.

And a 2300-rated player will, in turn, pretty much always beat a 1800-rated player. That boggles my mind (mainly because I'm sometimes not sure what it means).

Of all the players in the world who take the game seriously, 1800-level players are about at the 90-th percentile (meaning that only 10% or so of rated players have higher ratings and 90% have lower ratings). That summer, I was well and truly in that bottom group, as the 1800-rated Good Humor man pretty much killed me every time I sat down to play against him.

(And I kept sitting down to play, which is the subject for a completely different essay.)

At the end of the summer, Tom (which was the Good Humor man's name) gave me a souvenir: a book of games played by the Russian champion Alexander Alekhine. He also proposed that we play a set of games by mail, using postcards (which was my first taste of correspondence play).

As an aside, you'd think it'd be hard to play poorly when you can think about what you're going to do, move the pieces around the board, refer to books on the game, etc., which is the case when playing chess by mail, but I did. Tom beat me about as regularly in our mail games as he had over the board. But I digress...

Despite the fact that Tom beat me consistently that summer, I took home the camp's trophy for the end-of-summer tournament, where I had weathered all comers without a defeat. It was a cheesy trophy, no doubt bought at a place that specialized in "World's Greatest Beer Drinker" awards, but hey! it's the thought that counts.

That summer was the last I spent away at camp (if we don't count that little deal when I was with the Marines, but again, I stray...). Dizzy with my success - and despite my defeats at the hands of Tom, the Ice Cream Man - I contemplated taking the next step by actually entering a Real Chess Tournament.

To be continued...

Cheers...
alexpgp: (Default)
So asked today's USA Today headline (though admittedly, I've changed the wording just slightly :^).

In a front-page story, the paper reported that the wife of Frank "Billy" Tyne, Jr. has sued the producers of the film The Perfect Storm for libeling her late husband, who apparently was portrayed (by George Clooney) as a reckless, incompetent ship's captain in the film.

I recall the article said the suit flew in the face of well-established precedents, which hold that the dead cannot be libeled, and that artists have a lot of wiggle room when it comes to rearranging the portrayal of real people in works of fiction.

That Hollyweird has an extensive track record in stretching the truth in most "based on a true story" films is no surprise (and the subject of one of my early LJ posts).

That someone would sue over the misdepiction of a loved one is also no surprise.

* * *
Today I grabbed the bull by the tail and squarely faced the situation regarding what I have come to think of as "the advertising scammers." I responded to their "collection agency" by telling them they were collecting on a bum "order" and to go ahead and try to demonstrate the validity of said "order." As a contract postal station, it is not a problem - having written the letter - to expeditiously send it off as certified mail with a return receipt attached.

* * *
Speaking of George Clooney, I got good and sick and tired of my longish hair today and went off to get it cut at the beauty salon across the parking lot. In a quandary as to what instructions to relay to the young lady who was about to cut my hair, I asked her about the cut the fellow in front of me had gotten.

She called it a "Caesar," and proceeded to administer the same style to my unruly mop. At one point, she noted that it was a cut made popular by George Clooney. Unfortunately, I am afraid that the only way I will ever be mistaken for George Clooney is if I am placed in a room with a blanket over my head, the lights are turned out, and a blind woman is let into the room and asked to identify me. Under those circumstances, I stand as good a chance of being mistaken for Clooney as I do for Rodney Dangerfield.

Ah, well... at least Galina did not scream when I came back to the store.

Cheers...
alexpgp: (Default)
Don't ask me why, but I've been looking at my posts from last September. In my first post of the 13th, I included part of a quote attributed to one Petronius Arbiter, a courtier of the emperor Nero. The "full" quote is:

We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams, we would be reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency and demoralization.
"It ain't so!" says Jim Reeds on what appears to be a well-documented Web page, titled Petronius Arbiter, Time Traveller.

Reed's most telling evidence in debunking the attribution to Petronius is having read "all the surviving works" of Petronius. "The quote just ain't there," notes Reed.

By the way, among those surviving works is Petronius's Satyricon, which was the basis of a Fellini movie. The story structure loosely follows Homer's Odyssey, with a bit of a twist. Quoting Reed: "In Homer's work, every time the hero is about to reach home, the god Poseidon (because of a previous insult) thwarts him with a storm. In Petronius's [story,] every time the hero is about to have sex, the god Priapus (because of a previous insult) thwarts him with impotence." (No wonder it was made into a movie.)

At any rate, it is likely that - despite whatever the truth may be - the quote will forever be linked to Petronius's name. Things could be worse, of course: at least the words seem to find an echo in the minds of many readers.

Cheers...

Profile

alexpgp: (Default)
alexpgp

January 2018

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3456
7 8910111213
14 15 16 17181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 6th, 2025 06:08 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios