Re: Playing to an opponents weaknesses

On May 12, 10:49=A0am, Michael Petch <mpe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On 5/11/08 8:02 PM, in article
> 64233c4a-9d53-48a3-8ba2-0ed6c205d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "pauldepst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <pauldepst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > the "salience" of a 5-2 victory seems bizarre.
> > It's a rather small sample size after all.
>
> If its the same person they have a rating on Fibs of 2200+

I can't figure out gammongang because there's evidence that he's an
incredibly strong player but his analysis is consistently non-existent
(on this thread for example) or expressed in extremely vague non-
technical language.  There's a thread where he says something like
"This is a pass because I wouldn't want to go into a battle with 10
soldiers against 13 soldiers".  (Turns out he was wrong and it was a
clear take.)  Anyone can be wrong but he seems to have a profoundly
non-technical and simplistic way of looking at the game.

Can't figure him out -- perhaps he's a great intuitive player with
poor analytical skills.

Paul Epstein