Actually, most games are (even in computer matches, I put Deep Shredder 9 on shootout Or Fritz 7 vs engine match! And do a full analyisis and gives itself ?? marks, and this is not to discourage cheaters from progging, although feel free to take it this way, I have some good winning sacrifices on chess.ac recently, some of which werent accepted, simply making me a pawn up 3 pawns = a knight, so having two pawns in hand I take the h-pawn with a knight, hindering whites castling abilities while keeping the rook away from a central file in an obscure sicilian line, of course I'm a knight down, sorry for digression.)

Second,in chess,relevance and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some Great Games, in my humble opinion,are pure tripe to some people,while the reverse is also true.

Despite his claim to be a genius and a "tactician" (which is, I suspect, a sort of code word as used), I'll wager that his own level of play is not so dramatically higher than that of any of these "Joe Losers" he finds so offensive. Indeed, the vast majority of us Chessgames members are "Joe Losers" (and in my case Proud Of It, in a perverse sort of way).

Anyone can pretend to be anything when communicating with total strangers online. That's a terribly banal observation, I know, but I can't seem to spend much time on this site without being reminded of it. The wannabe geniuses, and the bloviating bios - "Hi; I've been playing chess for three weeks and my rating is 2460" - just strike me as a serious cry for help. But I'm wandering off-topic so I'd best shut up.