Greeting players and fellow patzers 🙂
Ok, I fully believe that my "attack" on the exposed King is not in any way convincing, but it seemed at the time a strong enough reason (excuse) to not resign and stubbornly play on...
I guess it goes to show that sometimes a result can go your way if you keep playing, even if you drop a Rook 😀
I play Black.... my lucky colour, as proven time and time again.
It looks like I was going to get some material back, but perhaps White's 21st move was the howler...
Nice mate coming up though, in at least two different ways 🙂
Hi Eladar,
But that is the fun of it all. Hopefully the lower rated player picks up something.
I love playing the 1200 - 1600 group. I have a great time, It can be a good work out.
They get a chance to win and sometimes it happens....my luck runs out.
I play chess because I love playing chess. These are no pressure games.
win, lose or draw I am enjoying myself. I thought we all were.
Originally posted by EladarThe game is from a 1861-2024 banded tournament, and his rating at the time of the game being created was 1830,
If you always play people 200 points below you as black I can see why you consider it lucky.
and he has a highest rating of 2041 - more than 100 points greater than mine.
I'm certainly not good enough to judge how good a player is based on the moves, so I just looked at ratings. Sometimes I was very happy to beat a player more than 100 points greater in rating just to look back later and see he is now lower than my original rating.
I don't play much so my rating doesn't change much.
I suppose I should have looked at his chart before commenting. Moving the f and g pawns after castling kingside seems a bit sketchy and he paid the price.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Hi GP,
Hi 64,
The ratings here mean nothing. The amount of games one plays
it can go from 2000 to 1700 and back up again in a fortnight.
If people start taking the result of the games too seriously then
in my opinion they are in trouble. Experiment, have fun and learn to shrug your shoulders.
I understand this, and only use ratings as a benchmark,
a means of showing improvement over time or a comparison between 2 players,
it's not the be-all and end-all.
I did set a goal to one day achieve 2000 on here, perhaps I'm getting closer,
but I'm never going to be at Master level so I'm really not worried 🙂
This thread was only made to demonstrate why you shouldn't resign too early,
as in battle you never know what could transpire.
Hi 64,
I've always said one should never resign if you have a check left
and I'll defend any player who does not resign. Especially on here.
Re-gradings. They should not be compared with OTB grades where you
only play one game at a time and have no distractions. That is what I
mean by the grades mean nothing. (which is the wrong term).
They do give an indication of a player who blunders the least in multi simultaneous games.
I have seen blunders here that would never occur in OTB games. I've played some myself!
Just recently I resigned against someone in a far from lost position
because I mixed them up with another player who resigned v me in
a totally drawn position. I just wanted to even things up.
These things would never happen OTB.
Elador who is happy to get to 1500 could easily get to 1800-1900 by
maxing at 4 games playing v lads who have loads of games at once.
Originally posted by greenpawn34This is so true. I think a person could be very selective about opponents and raise his or her rating to a very high level on the site, and that ability to select opponents with discretion is why I think ratings are close to meaningless here.
Hi 64,
I've always said one should never resign if you have a check left
and I'll defend any player who does not resign. Especially on here.
Re-gradings. They should not be compared with OTB grades where you
only play one game at a time and have no distractions. That is what I
mean by the grades mean nothing. (which is the wrong term).
They do ...[text shortened]... ld easily get to 1800-1900 by
maxing at 4 games playing v lads who have loads of games at once.
People tend to focus only on possible computer use when targeting the highest rated players, when there are many ways to abuse the system without electronic assistance.
The potential for abuse, regardless of tool or technique used, is why I think it is worthless to invest any personal valuation in the ratings. That said, if it works as a motivational tool for someone, more power to them!
Originally posted by greenpawn34I beat a 2000 playing the blitz on this site. Then I turn around and lose to a 1000.
Hi 64,
I've always said one should never resign if you have a check left
and I'll defend any player who does not resign. Especially on here.
Re-gradings. They should not be compared with OTB grades where you
only play one game at a time and have no distractions. That is what I
mean by the grades mean nothing. (which is the wrong term).
They do ...[text shortened]... ld easily get to 1800-1900 by
maxing at 4 games playing v lads who have loads of games at once.