Originally posted by gaurav2711Simple.
....a 1700+ player set up an open invite with a rating limit of >2500? To add to that....why would he name the game...."I WILL DESTRUCT YOU"?
If he wins, he gets a major amount of rating points. If he loses, he only loses a few. So he can afford to lose many games while waiting for the one game he might win through time-out, or a mistake, or whatever.
This is why many people on this site *only* play (or try to) people many hundreds of points above them. This mentality is also what makes people post games with micro time controls (1-day, no timebank, etc.). "Anything to win... except learning how to play better, of course."
Originally posted by SuzianneThanks for ur explanation! however, i was pointing at the "2500" figure. There is no player on this site with a 2500+ rating.
Simple.
If he wins, he gets a major amount of rating points. If he loses, he only loses a few. So he can afford to lose many games while waiting for the one game he might win through time-out, or a mistake, or whatever.
This is why many people on this site *only* play (or try to) people many hundreds of points above them. This mentality is also wha ...[text shortened]... -day, no timebank, etc.). "Anything to win... except learning how to play better, of course."
Originally posted by SuzianneNo it isn't, they post them with those time settings because they want quicker games than 1 move a week, etc.
This mentality is also what makes people post games with micro time controls (1-day, no timebank, etc.). "Anything to win... except learning how to play better, of course."
It is also well within the rules at this site, and you have some nerve criticizing them for it.
One move a day is slow enough to learn - if one wants to learn; some people just want to play. ðŸ˜
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveWell said, Dr S 🙂
No it isn't, they post them with those time settings because they want quicker games than 1 move a week, etc.
It is also well within the rules at this site, and you have some nerve criticizing them for it.
One move a day is slow enough to learn - if one wants to learn; some people just want to play. ðŸ˜
Originally posted by Suziannei play 1 day 0 timebanks all the time. ive improved drastically. if 24 hours isnt enough time for someone to analyze a position and make a move then they are a fool and shouldnt be playing anyways. now it's understandable if you have 764 games going as some do on this site. then you need more time. i have only timed out a few people and i usually gave them extra days to move, even after i had the opportunity to time them out before.
Simple.
If he wins, he gets a major amount of rating points. If he loses, he only loses a few. So he can afford to lose many games while waiting for the one game he might win through time-out, or a mistake, or whatever.
This is why many people on this site *only* play (or try to) people many hundreds of points above them. This mentality is also wha ...[text shortened]... -day, no timebank, etc.). "Anything to win... except learning how to play better, of course."
dont act like you know it's like play 1/0 if you dont do it yourself. your practically saying that GM's cant get better because they dont have 7 days to make their moves. they play games in hours, not days. also, playing the game itself is only part of the battle to becoming better in chess. that's why people read books, and do analysis on their games.