I see a clear correspondence between number of games and decline of my rating. I had once 40+ games and my rating plummeted like a rock. My blunder rate was increasing, and I was not a joy to play anymore. I hate those small clocks on the "My Games" page. Around 20 games in various phases of the game suits me best.
Originally posted by HomerJSimpsonMy current USCF rating bounces between Class A and Expert. Nothing to brag about, but I have a lot of experience teaching chess and giving simuls. My best result was probably when I gave a simul at Mott College in Flint, Michigan taking on the College students as well as the Flint chess club players. There were 30 boards set up, but as soon as a player lost, another person took his place, so 77 games were played over a 5 hour period. My final standings after the gruesome match was 75 wins - 2 draws - 0 losses.
I find that hard to believe.
20 seconds? Come on.
It's easy to beat 30 players at once. All you have to do is run around the room making quick moves in all the easy games, 5 seconds is the norm, then as you are walking around the room you analyze the position on one of the boards where a good player is playing. Without slowing down you are back on top of him before he/she can figure out the position. Each inaccuracy he/she makes is worked on in your mind as you walk around the circle making automatic moves on the other boards.
The simul opponents don't have a chance.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by arrakisI couldnt really handle more than 30 games at once. I did have something like 32 at once and most of the games had the time-bank clocks ticking. Even with 22 I still use a good deal of time-bank in a lot of games. If I was to take on 100 games im sure my rating would nose dive, I think the people who do this must either have bags and bags of time/no chess burn out limit or are just fantastic at bullet chess 🙂
Well, let's take a look at your games. You have 22 active games and your average opponent strength is 1951. It would've been higher but you have two games with a 1311 player. However, it's actually a good example because everyone has games against high and low opponents.
So in order to continue this correlation if you played nearly 5 times the number of about you but to play at the level you are suggesting, I would find it humanly impossible.
I'm currently at the > 30 level and it isn't great...often in some games I know how I reached a position and have a general idea or plan, but now it's more a case of each game I return to have to figure out what the hell has been happening and try to make a move that simply *doesn't look ridiculous* and made several blunders...I'm thinking about messaging my clam leaders and asking them to sit me out of future games until the pressure wears off!
Originally posted by Fat LadyI usually keep it down to about 20 but if two clan leagues are playing at the same time then it can be double that, I study each move for ages (when necessary) and I have come to realize that my rating is higher than it should be simply because I am spending much longer on the game than my opponent (usually). Which is why I am going to start concontrating on my otb chess now, it's not an equal contest on here as I have an unfair advantage as I have lots of time to spend analysing games, however when players have a demanding job they do not have this luxury (plus my gf has started making noises about it too, not to mention the dog!)
I had thirty games on the go at once at one stage, and I blundered several times.
Personally I don't think I can play more than fifteen or so without a big impact on my results.
I don't tend to think too long over my moves, and the comment earlier about it being like playing a simultaneous display really rang true!
I tend to start taking more time ...[text shortened]... cult games when it is too late! I have three lost positions I'm trying to save at the moment.
I currently have 87 games in progress. I find that far too many and currently trying to cut down.
The length of time I spend on each move depends on the stage of the game. If it is still in the opening phase, about 10 to 20 seconds. After it has left book and there are database moves available, I will spend between a few mins and a few hours while looking through database games and mulling over what I think the best move will be.
After it has left database I consider it a middlegame and likely spend a couple of days while typing out various lines in my notebook (this could vary greatly depending on time controls of the game).
When in the endgame, pretty much the same as the middle game unless I have worked out a winning line, then it will take seconds per move.
Originally posted by onyx2006You type "notes" into it. Then when you submit your move, it saves those notes so that next time you open up the game, you can read/edit them, thereby allowing you to recall your plans.
ok, I've seen "the notebook" but never took any notice of what it's for!?!
how's it work?
Edit: If you're using Greasemonkey, you may also have a notebook link in your menu. I am refering to the one you see when you look at a game,
This brings along another point, how effectively do you use the folders?
Here is a list of mine:
Inbox 50
1. d4392
1. d4 d574
1. d4 Nf615
1. d4 other22
1. e4 c540
1. e4 e5235
1. e4 other27
Endgame4
Italian Game43
Middlegame31
Ruy Lopez39
Set games17
Thematic12
Archive72
Folder name to the left and number of games in that particular folder to the right. All the currently active games I keep in the Inbox (still in opening/database), Middlegame (left database) and Endgame (where I see and end in site, either going to win or get beaten, latter case I will more likely resign).
Archive is for games which do not fit in either of the other openings listed (damn 16 folder limitation!).