Getting to vacation
That 3-1-1 policy (severely limiting the amount of liquids one can bring on a flight) is a knee-jerk reaction to a single event. Someone tries to blow up the plane with shoes? Check everybody’s shoes. Next time it’s liquids, so ban the liquids. If Al-Qaeda’s smart, the next plot will prominently feature socks and underwear, leading the FAA to ban socks and underwear on all future US flights.
The electronic chess set I carry on flights seems to give the inspectors fits, as this is the second time in a row they called for a bag check. (For you chess people, game score of the sad miniature below.)
Being an airline employee, I can fly at a nominal price, but on a space available status. Fortunately, the flight was not nearly full, and they even asked whether I wanted a window or aisle seat. The most natural answer, of course, was to request a middle seat to double my chances of sitting next to a cute girl to flirt with.* Of course, there was the flip side (doubling the odds one of those 55-year-old South American men who like me a bit too much would be adjacent), so I stuck with the window.
After we were seated, we discovered we’d be delayed 45 minutes, and we were already at a point where we couldn’t use electronic devices. So, it was time to break out the SkyMall. On the cover was a chick in a bathing suit, which is as close as I’d get to sitting near a cute girl on the plane. Products featured that are useful for someone who’s not me:
- Another “revolutionary” electric razor from Norelco
- GrillAlert, which lets you know when your meat’s done cooking from 300 feet away
- Pop-up hot dog toaster, for those who like eating unidentifiable meat
- Thunderbolt storm detector, to tell you when a storm is coming. Only $430.
The sad game against the crappy computer. The only possible defense is that I haven’t played any serious chess in six months (diagrams made with apronus.com’s diagram editor, since I’m well away from my usual tools)
| White (Me) | |
| Black (Crappy Computer) | |
| 1. d4 | d5 |
| 2. c4 | dxc4 |
|
The Queen’s Gambit Accepted! Most low-level comps don’t handle it very well, making too many positional or developmental sacrifices to keep the Pawn. |
|
| 3. Nc3 | Nc6 |
| 4. d5 | … |
|
The combo of not playing in six months and being generally too lazy to study openings anyway meant I thought for a while about the last two moves. For a long time, my favorite reply to the QGA was 3. e4, trying to establish a classical center and not block my Queen’s Bishop. It seems that move tries for too much, and Black can counterattack the center. This move 4.d5 is probably the same, an overextension. I was eager to kick the Knight around and try to make some central gains (anticipating 4. … Ne5 5. f4 Ng6 6. e4.) |
|
| … | Na5 |
| 5. Qa4+ | c6 |
| 6. dxc6 | Nxc6 |
|
For some reason, I thought Black had to recapture with the Pawn. Put it down to tiredness. |
|
| 7. Bf4 | … |
|
I’m still not sure what’s best. I was eager to bring the Rook to the d-File and stop e5, besides bringing pressure to c7. Perhaps trying to develop the Kingside forces was better, but I thought it might to too slow to take advantage of my slight development advantage. |
|
| … | Qb6 |
|
Seems to be a very strange and bad move. There are probably some tactical reasons the comp played this that I’m not seeing. |
|
 |
|
| 8. Nd5 | … |
|
Shouldn’t 8. O-O-O be considered here? Yes, Black can take on f2, but it sure looks like a time-waster. |
|
| … | Qxb2 |
| 9. Nc7+ | Kd8 |
| 10. Rd1+ | Bd7 |
 |
|
|
Up to here I’d foreseen, and was anticipating picking up the Rook with a winning advantage. But then doubt crept in my mind about this material grab, and Black would end up with heavy initiative due to my lack of Kingside development. I played the next move to try to increase pressure against his King (threatening Qxf7, which then would hit f8 and d7) and guard the c3 square, but it backfires. Qxf7 is a non-threat which is easily parried and gives Black time to consolidate its defenses. |
|
| 11. Qxc4 | e5 |
|
Strangely, the crappy computer still has me up .4 pawns in this position. Must be event horizon. The rest of my moves are rather poor despite thinking forever about them. |
|
| 12. Qxf7 | Bxb4+ |
| 13. Bd2 | Nxd4 |
| 14. Bxb4 | Qxb4+ |
|
Black has forced checkmate in three moves. I resign. |
|
i hate playing against computers. i could have the computer on the lowest, “retarded goat hearder” setting, and it will still kick my ass in under 20 moves. as for flying…i have come to loathe flying, and avoid it at all costs. it’s just no fun anymore….
Comment by chessloser | 19 August 2007
If anyone tried to hijack a plane NOW, even if they managed to make it on board with an AK-47 - they’d get pureed by a bunch of angry Americans. Given that security is too busy yelling at me for my 3.5 oz Sweet Pea Bath and Body Works lotion, I expect a gun or two to slip past. I think security should be more concerned about the airports themselves. It’s a lot easier to suicide-bomb a building.
Heehee…retarded goat herder. I’m putting that in my “funny phrases to use later” vault, CL.
Comment by annie | 19 August 2007
Chessloser: Computers aren’t as fun as humans to play against. The weird thing about them (at least the low-level travel ones) is that once you can beat the lowest setting, it’s not usually that hard to quickly advance against higher levels. It’s almost like knowing the opponent’s style of play is more important.
They are good to keep you on your tactical toes, because they consider every move.
Annie: Again, it seems weird to respond to this post because we just talked about it yesterday.
Comment by Donnie Briggs | 24 August 2007