My level in chess is around 2200 fide, so I'd also be interested to play a game with you Meep Meep.

I can play chess blindfolded, too. That's easy! [I can't win blindfolded, but then I'm probably about 1100 if I got a rating, so I can't win when I see the board, either.]

I'm also around 2200 standard, though my fide rating is lagging an obscenely long way behind my national rating due to not playing many fide rated games. Either way, if you think that neither Julien nor I are worthy of playing you it should be easy for you to turn us over, no?

Alright, a rating above 2000 is worthy to challenge me. My peak rating was above 2000 although I do wan't to note this: I only play for about 100 games to get to that rank then I stopped, I saw no limit in my ranking yet. I learned chess for 2 games and was taken to the state tournament immediately by my coach and I took sixth place in the first debut.

Since I offered proof/demonstration on my ability to play chess blind fold, you need to offer proof/demonstration of your rating 2200 to me. Or else no deal.

@CSeinhardt you get it right, when I play chess blind fold, my dept search reduced from 7 to 3, and I take longer to think too. But most people surrender in mid-game to me in awe. And I played against sucky players for the demonstration purpose.

I would guess CSeinhardt is a better chess player than those two so called 2200 rating for jumping up and down challenging me. When I said I can play chess blind fold, I personally met two other persons who can also do the same, but when they do so, it's only for something simple, not a serious challenge.

If you don't figure this out yet, then you are not that good of a chess player. I cannot take you seriously.

MeepMeep - have you considered that I really don't care about blindfold chess? Blindfold is a silly little gimmick that proves almost nothing. Being able to hold together a semi-sensible game blindfold isn't all that difficult, certainly not when compared to actually getting good at the game to begin with. I obviously can't speak for Julien on this, but I find your claims regarding blindfold chess to be meaningless at best.

For what it's worth, I'll link you to my most recent fide rated tournament:
http://ratings.fide.com/individual_calculations.phtml?idnumber=417513&rating_period=2013-06-01
Admittedly that only gave me a 2131 rating performance, but you can see from the color sequence that the records are missing some games 4 and 8 as my opponents were unrated. I won both of those games, against a 2034 and an 1832 respectively on their national ratings.

You claim to be Habershon, Paul F with a rating of 2131, but on this forum you are mendax, so how do I know you are the real Habershon, Paul F. You could be a fraud for all we know. Now prove to me that you are the real Habershon, Paul F.

I grew up from a hell hole and had many street wise experience, so my common sense is very strong. I only ask common sense questions, nothing fancy.

Do you folks find it's unusual for this website to have so far 3 persons who claim to have chess rating above 2000? And a couple months ago, we also have a couple persons who claimed to understand Quantum Physics. (I was not one of those, and detested anyone who claim to understand Quantum Physics.)

While I have loved the stories, Meep, you have now put yourself in quite a predicament. How can you possibly ask mendax for "proof" of who he is when you have offered zero proof of anything you have said. Now it's time to either put up or shut up. Prove one thing, just one thing, that you have said. If not, this entire thread will go down as pure fiction.

No, I said that my performance for that tournament was 2131, not that my rating was 2131. In fact, you can easily find from that link who I am, and what my fide rating is (spoiler: it's a lot lower as I explained earlier).

It's not at all surprising to have at least 3 people over 2000, given that chess and diplomacy are fundamentally very similar in nature. Indeed, one of my friends from the chess events, an IM in fact, set a record when he was at university for the most games played at his university's diplomacy society. As far as I know he doesn't play diplo online though.

Meep, here's some common sense:
1. Diplomacy is a strategy game, which means that this site is more likely to attract chess players than your average website. Likewise is it more likely to attract those with knowledge of complicated subjects such as quantum physics.
2. As you have failed to offer proof of anything, and mendax has either shown his rating to you or gone to the trouble of finding a highly rated chess player to pretend to be, it really is time for you to prove yourself. Play chess with mendax. If he's lying, you'll beat him easily and you'll be able to tell us all that you've beaten someone ranked 2131. If he's telling the truth, you'll (as you claim) beat him anyway, and you'll still be able to tell us all that you've beaten someone ranked 2131. There is no downside for you.

Apparently you guys are mostly not serious chess players. Like in any form, Martial Arts or any skills, you always need to be in constant training to be in top shape. My peak in chess power happened twice in my late teen years when I competed for my school and in my 20s when I tried to impress this one gal.

I am not here to impress a bunch of Special Olympics who are barking, howling at me. You talk like it's a flip of a hand, do this, do that. Clearly you don't understand what involves to be a great chess player.

Put up or shut up. Are you willing to take me on or not?

So CSeindhart said he can play chess blindfold too. Are you dogs going to bark at him? Why don't you ask him how he does it. I bet you its similar to my technique. I am not going to make any silly Youtube clip as suggest by jmo1121. You guys will quickly claim it's staged moves. In fact, have you seen the latest Superman movie, Man of Steel? You know, it's all fake right?

What's better way to convince you guys is to disclose my techniques how to do it. I can do it, so can you, unless....you are so retarded like the Special Olympics.

mendax, I cannot take you seriously. Prove to me you are Habershon, Paul F. Now go away, go back to your corner. You start to annoy me. You know I have the mute button. I can mute you.

If you won't put up, then shut up. Simples.

Alright, I now mute mendax.

@jimgov
I claimed a few things, and agreed to show proof. But the dogs were not patient, they started barking. All they had to do was to wait, "cool, show it." But they jumped up and down, started barking like dogs. That gives me an excuse not to show anything.

Get the dogs quiet then I show my proof. Now I show you guys I am a very patient guy. I will patiently wait for the dogs to quiet down before doing anything further. Got to walk the talk right? If I am patient and the dogs are not, then what shall I do to differentiate myself from the barking dogs?

lol, I hope you understand my style by now. I am having so much fun kicking the fence at the barking dogs. Remember, they bark first, thus I give myself the right to kick the fence to get back at them.

The real predicament against me is when the dogs suddenly all got quiet and start to meow, "ok, we will be quiet, show your proof."

But you know that's not going to happen. lol, dogs are dogs and always are dogs.

OK, we will be quiet, show your proof.

Alright, let see if others dogs agree. Let's give it a week, if I hear one more dog barks, then I'll wait for another week.

Really? That's how you prove you're right? You kick against the fence until the dogs choose the high road, unlike you? We're not barking, dude. You're kicking, that's all.

Woof woof

@ ghug,
you forget one of Meep Meep's fundamental "lies to himself"
when he gets flogged in any competition, it's " BECAUSE he wanted to lose"
so the pathetic dill will get flogged by Mendax,
& then bob up with his favourite self deception
" I meant to lose"

Meep Meep also exhibits a classic "behaviour" of some "self taught persons"
in that he claims wisdom et al,
whereas the "truly wise" realise how much they do NOT know, despite their aquired
learning & will tend to be much more modest with their claims
Meep Meep is a classic example of the expression :
"a little learning being a dangerous thing"

his path to enlightenment will be long and arduous
& in my opinion, it's doubtful that he will ever attain real enlightenment
either spiritually, or intellectually.
Meep Meep is destined to be one of life's frustrated & angry 'Lance Corporals"
( "Lance Corporal" is the first step from "Private" to "Corporal" then up through the
Warrant Officer ranks, there's no way he'd ever seriously be consider'd
for "Commisioned Officer" rank, & the expression "one of life's Lance Corporals"
is self explanatory & in the past -- pre 1918, they tended to be shot by their own
troops & gratefull Officer's would show a "Nelsonian eye" to the pestilential chaps
demise as it saves them the trouble of transferring him to some other Regiment )

See? Told you, the dogs are being dogs. They bark. It looks to me, I have plenty of excuse to not proving anything, but to demonstrate my greatness in patience. I will patiently wait for the dogs to stop barking. lol

*wink the left eye*

Meep - yeah give it a month before proving anything I'm busy, no please, make it 6 months, I'll tell you what, don't call us, we'll call you ...... you're boring :-)

"...you're boring"
???
Apparently not considering his attractive force here. I remember a year ago when Mujus sparked the same kind of outburst of creative "barking" against his "daily bible reading". Whatever it is, evidently it would be misleading to call it "boring".
But I agree that the thread was more interesting until it bogged down in these chess challenges.