in my experience, a difference is also the repertoire...
The 2100 were somehow easy to guess until now, playing only 1-2 openings for the colour(black) during an year...
On the other side the 2300+ was changing them very easy, as it seems it was easier for him to prepare for the new onw, already having knowledge over them...
maybe it is not general truth but it happened for me...
Originally posted by MindWarsThis has nothing to do with me, but that's not what his post said at all. Even if it did, you can show a bit more respect for other people when you disagree with them. Your post was abusive and immature. I really don't care what your understanding of chess is or isn't, your attitude sucks.
"I think you completely mis-understood my post"
Not at all my rather simple-minded little friend. It's you who is devoid of any understanding here. You just finished saying that any move that isn't the "best" move is a blunder (??), a mistake (?), or at best dubious (?!). Go re-read YOUR OWN post and see for yourself. This proved beyond any shadow of a d ld you, it's too bad. Please stop polluting this forum with your whining drivel!
86
EDIT- Just noticed that this player was banned. Good riddance. I used to enjoy the forums ages ago, but lost interest due to people like that being able to run rampant over others with no consequences. It's nice to see that at least one has been dealt with accordingly.
Originally posted by Maxwell SmartActually, that was what he said. I don't agree with his method but I do agree with his points.
This has nothing to do with me, but that's not what his post said at all. Even if it did, you can show a bit more respect for other people when you disagree with them. Your post was abusive and immature. I really don't care what your understanding of chess is or isn't, your attitude sucks.
86
EDIT- Just noticed that this player was banned. Good r ...[text shortened]... rs with no consequences. It's nice to see that at least one has been dealt with accordingly.
Originally posted by tomtom232Not really. A more careful reading of his post reveals that his explanation referred to "less than optimal moves", a kind term for mistakes. He did not imply that any move that isn't main line theory is part of this "less than optimal" pool of candidates. In fact, he explicitly said "The best move won't be the same for every player..." This clearly indicates that he is not arguing that there is an objective single best move in a given position, but rather many options including some good, some not as good, and some bad. His explanations of notation were directed at the not-so-good and the just plain bad.
Actually, that was what he said. I don't agree with his method but I do agree with his points.
As far as the other guy's points, he made a great to-do of misreading the post, and then refusing to take a closer look when he was told that he misread it. Of course, he may not have misread it at all, he may have just wanted to be a jerk.
(highest rating 2275)Its interesting, against weaker opponents I avoid book openings at all costs as they are hard to break down and I am rubbish at endgames because I get bored. Other that that I spend ages in the middlegame over each move (often 1-2 hours) until i am completely convinced my opponenet cannot surprise me with the strength of his next move. This is a really good test - how many times are you surprised?? The other thought I would offer is I am sure weaker players imagine strong players can see a way to victory but I rarely can until it is clear. I just keep playing the best moves I can and trust it will work in the end. I am sure weaker players lose confidence becasue they dont really know how they are doing in a game.
Originally posted by carpisteLike poker. I do that sort of thing over the board as well - I try never to show any feelings even if I have just made the most dire blunder - it can ruin peoples ability to concentrate on the position if they feel like they are never threatening you.
(highest rating 2275)Its interesting, against weaker opponents I avoid book openings at all costs as they are hard to break down and I am rubbish at endgames because I get bored. Other that that I spend ages in the middlegame over each move (often 1-2 hours) until i am completely convinced my opponenet cannot surprise me with the strength of his next move. ...[text shortened]... sure weaker players lose confidence becasue they dont really know how they are doing in a game.
I'm [sarcasm]impressed[/sarcasm] by the number of players who have something to say about a subject they know nothing of.
As I read this thread only Carpiste has made a useful contribution.
Sorry for interrupting all the clever guys in their describing differences between 2100 and 2300 players (wish I would get anywhere near those figures some day)
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by BlitzNewbieHuh? TChex was rated 2100+ from Jan 5 to May 22 this year alone. Tell me, exactly how is he not qualified to voice a credible opinion based on experience? Hmm?
I'm [sarcasm]impressed[/sarcasm] by the number of players who have something to say about a subject they know nothing of.
As I read this thread only Carpiste has made a useful contribution...
And yes, you are sorry...
Originally posted by BlitzNewbieI really don't mind - everyone has an opinion.
I'm [sarcasm]impressed[/sarcasm] by the number of players who have something to say about a subject they know nothing of.
As I read this thread only Carpiste has made a useful contribution.
Sorry for interrupting all the clever guys in their describing differences between 2100 and 2300 players (wish I would get anywhere near those figures some day)
And forums are for expressing that opinion - freedom of speech etc etc.
However I thought Mind Wars posted a few sensible things before
he got all het up and resorted to personal attacks.
As for someday getting to 2100-2300?
No trick involved getting to 2000 OTB - TACTICS! (living proof).
Originally posted by BadwaterHe is kind of qualified.
Huh? TChex was rated 2100+ from Jan 5 to May 22 this year alone. Tell me, exactly how is he not qualified to voice a credible opinion based on experience? Hmm?
And yes, you are sorry...
But he didn't voice any credible opinion, did he?
He said that high rated players hate to lose and that
you have to be able to setup a poker face.
I'm quite sure more is required to get to 2300.
And I'd love to know excactly what...
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by BlitzNewbieYou and me both. I think he was agreeing with carpiste, and continuing in that vein regarding his OTB play. Some players like him take their OTB play far more seriously than CC play. 😉
He is kind of qualified.
But he didn't voice any credible opinion, did he?
He said that high rated players hate to lose and that
you have to be able to setup a poker face.
I'm quite sure more is required to get to 2300.
And I'd love to know excactly what...