You know, after playing on ICC and other web services, I don't think CM is that far off from the rating it claims.
Here's a game I played with a real 2000 rated player on ICC.
[Event "ICC 10 20 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.04.01"]
[Round "-"]
[White "OdeN88"]
[Black "guest4568"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[Opening "Sicilian: closed"]
[ECO "B23"]
[NIC "SI.44"]
[Time "15:42:40"]
[TimeControl "600+20"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 g6 3. d3 Bg7 4. Be3 d6 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6 7. Bg2 O-O 8.
O-O Ng4 9. Nd5 e6 10. Nf4 Nxe3 11. fxe3 Bxb2 12. Rb1 Bg7 13. d4 cxd4 14.
exd4 e5 15. Nd5 Nxd4 16. Nxd4 exd4 17. Qf3 f6 18. Nf4 Rb8 19. Rbe1 Qb6 20.
Nd3 Be6 21. Qe2 Bxa2 22. Ra1 Bc4 23. Rae1 Rbe8 24. h4 d5 25. Rf2 dxe4 26.
Bxe4 f5 27. g4 fxe4 28. Rxf8+ Bxf8 29. Rf1 {White resigns} 0-1
As you can see, the level of play is not that far off. Though it's probable that ICC has inflated ratings anyway.
Originally posted by exigentskyInformation about OdeN88 (Last disconnected Sat Apr 01 2006 16:43):
You know, after playing on ICC and other web services, I don't think CM is that far off from the rating it claims.
Here's a game I played with a real 2000 rated player on ICC.
[Event "ICC 10 20 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.04.01"]
[Round "-"]
[White "OdeN88"]
[Black "guest4568"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[Whi r off. Though it's probable that ICC has inflated ratings anyway.
OdeN88 has not played any rated games yet.
It is curious that a rating appears.
I just used assess and here is what I got:
assess OdeN88
guest4205 OdeN88
---------------------- ----------------------
Win Draw Loss Rating Win Draw Loss Rating
Wild +1804 +1604 +1404 0 -196 -396 -596 2000
Loser's +1804 +1604 +1404 0 -196 -396 -596 2000
Bughouse +1803 +1603 +1403 0 -197 -397 -597 2000
Crazyhouse +1804 +1604 +1404 0 -196 -396 -596 2000
Bullet +1803 +1603 +1403 0 -197 -397 -597 2000
Blitz +1803 +1603 +1403 0 -197 -397 -597 2000
Standard +1804 +1604 +1404 0 -196 -396 -596 2000
5-minute +1800 +1600 +1400 0 +200 +0 -200 1600
1-minute +1801 +1601 +1401 0 +201 +1 -199 1600
Correspond +1789 +1589 +1389 0 +189 -11 -211 1600
You'll have to paste it in notepad or a similar program. RHP deletes all the spaces. But anyway, this clearly shows that he is indeed rated and his 2000 rating was no accident. Just use assess in Blitzin and it will show what it shows above for me.
Originally posted by exigentskyI used "fi OdeN88" to find that he has no rated games, and found your game through "history OdeN88". It does show 2000 next to his name. Perhaps he claimed that rating when he registered?
I just used assess and here is what I got:
assess OdeN88
guest4205 OdeN88
---------------------- ----------------------
Win Draw Loss Rating Win Draw Loss Rating
Wild +1804 +1604 +1404 0 -196 -396 -596 2000
Loser's +1804 +1604 +14 ating was no accident. Just use assess in Blitzin and it will show what it shows above for me.
The assess command is new to me; I'll try it.
In any case, I'd say that his play is not what one would expect from a 2000 player even in bullet, let alone with a 20 second increment.
WOW, are you serious? You can just claim a rating and it starts from there? LOL! I'll start with 2851! 😉 I would think that ICC would make every new account default to some rating, maybe 1200.
Anyway, I also looked at OdeN88's history just now and he is definitely not 2000 material. he had lost/aborted his last 13 games and all of them were against guests. I win probably 85% of the games with guests, that's why I now have a minimum rating restriction of 1500. So a 2000 player should definitely not be losting so much vs guests.
Originally posted by exigentskyBecause, they've done brain scans, and large areas of our brains are not being used. Duh!
LOL, you know, if I could afford hiring a hypnotist and grandmaster, I would definitely try that. It sounds fun. However, the idea that we only use 6%, or 10% of our brains is definitely not one rooted in science. I don't know why people keep repeating this.
Originally posted by exigentskySee. I told you. And, no, ICC is often deflated because of cheaters.
You know, after playing on ICC and other web services, I don't think CM is that far off from the rating it claims.
Here's a game I played with a real 2000 rated player on ICC.
[Event "ICC 10 20 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.04.01"]
[Round "-"]
[White "OdeN88"]
[Black "guest4568"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[Whi ...[text shortened]... r off. Though it's probable that ICC has inflated ratings anyway.
Originally posted by exigentskyA 2000 player must study most every day and continue to play or he'll lose his 2000 rating. Most 2000 players cannot keep their rating without constant study and dedication. That's why 1800-2000 is the most difficult rating gap to cross over. And very few do it in the world.
WOW, are you serious? You can just claim a rating and it starts from there? LOL! I'll start with 2851! 😉 I would think that ICC would make every new account default to some rating, maybe 1200.
Anyway, I also looked at OdeN88's history just now and he is definitely not 2000 material. he had lost/aborted his last 13 games and all of them were against gu ...[text shortened]... ing restriction of 1500. So a 2000 player should definitely not be losting so much vs guests.
yeah but can you beat rusty like that consistantly? sometimes i think the chessmaster feels a bit sorry and plays under its rating. you should do a best out of seven series against him. and i'm not saying pick your best 4 games. i mean a couple of consecutive games. and then tell/show us how you did. ah and maybe do it against another 2000 level player. i think theirs a pun to his name.
Well, I don't know about that. I certainly haven't seen those studies and I've talked to doctors and other people in the medical field about this.
In any case, just because brain scans show that not all areas of our brain are active all the time does not mean that we use only a small percentage of our brain power. It is just as likely that the brain cannot function with all the areas active at once. And of course the type of activity would also change the areas activated.
In any case, I will go up against a few more 2000+ Chessmaster personalities.
Originally posted by powershakerthe statements are not true. I know that chessmaster personalities were rated in a pool of other chessmaster personalities AND a lot of human players.
and what I have learned is that Chessmaster ratings are only based on the USCF ratings of other "computers!"