Originally posted by powershakerNot true. I timed out with two 1300 players over the past couple of weeks. And, in the past 30 days, I had a 1600 rating. Doesn't raise my eyebrows or give me any concern. My point is: any player can lose to any player on any given day. Rating doesn't mean crap. Chess is life. Even if you're Bruce Lee walking down a dark alley at night... and you can't see the guy with the .38 caliber right behind you hiding behind the dumpster... chess is the same as life. We all make mistakes. There are good days and bad days.
Uh! If a 1600 player lost to a 1300 player, would you be awestruck then also? GIve me a break! 2500 is no push over!
Originally posted by z00tNot much unlike your pretentiousness with a measley 1700s rating. Far from a master, I might add.
Who is accusing who of cheating? Being checkmated by a player 400 points below you is not cheating. Wind-assisted chess is chess without regard for well established principles. Er what's the word ......like someone who is supporting the Anand sac but cannot explain the justification.
He claims that he is at least 100 BCF OTB and supports the Anand sac? Any sense? Whats the conversion between BCF and RHP ratings?
Ahh, but if you believed he played without regard from principles, then he wouldn't be winning games, would he?Someone who can win against 1800 players but is checkmated by a 1400 player is not in grip of the principles of chess. If he indeed has a BCF rating then it is nowhere mre than a 100 since you are not permitted to carry opening books or move pieces.
You remain too stupid to understand that nobody in this thread has claimed that Anand's sacrifice was sound. Get it through your head!
You should be in a position to argue your case without resorting to insults. You said "Meh. Who are you to tell Anand when he can and cannot sac?"
If you read up on any book on chess tactics it tells you when/when not to sac. If Anand or a pea brain like yourself chooses to ignore chess principles, there is only one outcome. I will bet that even in your country the Minister for Transport does not drive on the wrong side of the road just because he is the Minister for Transport.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemGive up! It's moot for zoot! Zoot! Zoot! Toot! Toot! Blow! Blow! Doesn't Know! Doesn't Know! BahAhAHAHAHAH!
Ahh, but if you believed he played without regard from principles, then he wouldn't be winning games, would he?
You remain too stupid to understand that nobody in this thread has claimed that Anand's sacrifice was sound. Get it through your head! You went wrong when you implied that sacking against a 2300 in general was wrong for Anand.
Originally posted by z00tMaybe the 1800 player blundered!?!? I've drawn a 1900 player OTB but I'm only rated 1500 right now. Does that mean he's not really a 1900 and doesn't have an understanding of chess principles? Probably not because he finish 15th in the tournament.
Someone who can win against 1800 players but is checkmated by a 1400 player is not in grip of the principles of chess. If he indeed has a BCF rating then it is nowhere mre than a 100 since you are not permitted to carry opening books or move pieces.
You should be in a position to argue your case without resorting to insults. You said [b]"Meh. Who are you to ...[text shortened]... rt does not drive on the wrong side of the road just because he is the Minister for Transport.
Here's a link to the tournament if you want to check.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?200604099641-12871494
I played in the K9 section.
Nah he just didn't blunder he was actually down on material and got checkmated. Even a half-decent player would not wait for mate but would resign to save himself from embarassment. This is correspondence chess not blitz.
But then again the crappy argument he is advancing might be the same way he plays his chess.
1 edit
Originally posted by z00tSomeone who can win against 1800 players but is checkmated by a 1400 player is not in grip of the principles of chess.
Someone who can win against 1800 players but is checkmated by a 1400 player is not in grip of the principles of chess. If he indeed has a BCF rating then it is nowhere mre than a 100 since you are not permitted to carry opening books or move pieces.
You should be in a position to argue your case without resorting to insults. You said "Meh. Who are you to rt does not drive on the wrong side of the road just because he is the Minister for Transport.
Nonsense. If they're winning against 1800's, they must be doing something right. You can't routinely beat 1800's without using the principles.
If he indeed has a BCF rating then it is nowhere mre than a 100 since you are not permitted to carry opening books or move pieces.
As usual, you're reading waaaaay too much meaning into the result of a single game.
If you read up on any book on chess tactics it tells you when/when not to sac.
Let's test your book knowledge.
White had the move and played 13.Rd1, sacrificing his Knight on c3. In your estimation, is the sacrifice sound?
I will bet that even in your country the Minister for Transport does not drive on the wrong side of the road just because he is the Minister for Transport.
This illustrates the nature of your misunderstanding. Chess is much more complex than just picking a side of the road to drive on. In order to make good sacrifices, it's sometimes necessary to see 10-12 moves ahead or more. The odds of a mistake in calculation go up each ply you look ahead.
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldAh yes, alongside Carson Wang. The Formidable Wang.
Maybe the 1800 player blundered!?!? I've drawn a 1900 player OTB but I'm only rated 1500 right now. Does that mean he's not really a 1900 and doesn't have an understanding of chess principles? Probably not because he finish 15th in the tournament.
Here's a link to the tournament if you want to check.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?200604099641-12871494
I played in the K9 section.
Originally posted by powershakerFirst sign of madness.
Not true. I timed out with two 1300 players over the past couple of weeks. And, in the past 30 days, I had a 1600 rating. Doesn't raise my eyebrows or give me any concern. My point is: any player can lose to any player on any given day. Rating doesn't mean crap. Chess is life. Even if you're Bruce Lee walking down a dark alley at night... and you ...[text shortened]... ster... chess is the same as life. We all make mistakes. There are good days and bad days.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
1 edit
Originally posted by z00tIf you check its an unrated game that was played at blitz speed. For the second time, I didnt support Anands sac I just said you dont know chess.
Black did not make the sac in good timing as the open centre. weakness along A1-H8 and the threat of a Rd8 to win his Queen. However if Black had managed to exchange the white Bishop and could sac inorder to bear pressure on g2 it could pay off. See the games of Petrosian for more info.
EDIT: Bedlam is that you who was checkmated by a 1400 player? does that or 2 munute chess but struggling at slow chess is like a certain top player I will not name.)