This dude is fucking made up entirely of class.
He finally gets the initiative and pushes the h pawn.
Lol of course h3.
I’m actually laughing by myself here.
The Magus has decided he will only move pawns this game.
Oh ma gawd what an insane fucking game, So is a beast.
qc8?
yep
lol wut gives up the b
Jesus what a game.
So did it.
That’s two wins each and no draws for the day. For anybody that watches chess, that is extremely rare.
Giving up the bishop was far too ambitious, specially against an assassin like So.
There is such a thing as too nonchalant.
On Technical Analysis in The Markets and The Walking Man
There are tradeable patterns in the buying and selling of financial instruments but, like evolution can only work by virtue of unpredictable accidents, they are only able to exist thanks to what is known as the walking man.
Opponents of the concept of what is known as technical trading, or trading based purely on the patterns that are formed by the price history of an instrument as it is shaped by buying and selling, oppose it on the basis of the walking man. The idea is that at any given time a price for an instrument, if only the price action is taken into account with no consideration for the value of the instrument, is just as liable to go up as it is to go down or stay the same. 50-50. Or 33.33^-33.33^-33.33^. I can’t remember why they call it a walking man, I guess the man walks where he pleases and you can’t predict where he is going or something.
Ostensibly, a technical analyst would counter that the walking man is a falsity, as there are definite predictable patterns in price action. Elliot Wave theorists go to some trouble to prove the essential geometrical nature of it.
But the truth, and what probably most technical analysts would agree with, is that the patterns only work and are tradeable because the walking man is true. If we were talking about mathematical patterns so exact that they can be called geometry, a computer would already exist that could predict every movement, and everybody would trade the computer’s advice, and the whole concept would be negated. For every buy trade there needs to be someone selling, and vice-versa. There are patterns, and they can be traded. But they always form within the context of the walking man, of the price going any which way at any given time. Annoyingly, a bullish pattern can evolve into a bearish pattern seamlessly, that is to say, in a way so that when the bear trend sets there is no incongruity in the bear pattern. There can always be a wider pattern at work. Or you can predict a movement, but if it stops after or before a certain level, it will precipitate a trend in either direction. Nobody ever has access to all of the variables but, the point is, even if you did, the walking man would be there. Proof of this is that IBM doesn’t have a supercomputer that trades with 100% accuracy. It’s not a geometrical event that tends towards randomness, it’s a random event that tends toward geometrical patterns. Like life, like reality. Most people have the unfortunate habit of thinking backwards.
But patterns do form, which makes sense. You always have the same agents, or types of agents, dealing with the same variables, or types of variables. These patterns formed in feudal Japan, and they form today, and they will keep forming as long as public trading of pieces of action of commerce exists. The same patterns formed before supercomputers started being employed for trading as they do now, when billions of dollars are invested in them. After all, prices simply reflect the conditions surrounding the commercial activity being traded. More often than not, it takes the form of a tug-of-war rather than a snake trail. Strength is shown on the buy side or on the sell side, and the extent to which this strength is shown moves the price. Some would prefer to buy, some would prefer to sell, but the majority will win. Since nobody wants to lose money and traders are careful, these movements will happen in tight patterns. You pull as much as you can to your side but, as soon as you realize you are overpowered, you let go of the rope. Or you let go a little bit, and then pull. Etc.
There is a theory that Magnus sometimes loses games against very strong players on purpose for dramatic effect.
I sometimes don’t completely disbelieve it.
Just in case anybody got any ideas of forgetting.
Also, if you need further proof that markets are just humans doing stuff and not precise mathematical equations, just look at what happens near round numbers on any chart for really anything.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4B8_yKfc98[/youtube]
I remember this game, this was genius.
Some relevant recent posts:
Wow, this is a real privilege to have this recording:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6ZEcFSChaU[/youtube]