Haven't looked at any of the original posters games, but not sure why its so implausible that a casual player could beat 6 players rated <1400. I've never taked the game overly seriously before joining earlier this year, but have tended to find many of the 1300/ 1400 players and less, tend to be a little loose tactically.
Prior to joining, I would have learned how to play 15 years ago, and for 2 years or so, played chess a few times a week with a stronger friend, from whom I learned a bit as well as the terminology. After that I played hardly at all, except the odd social game, and prior to being prompted by a friend to join here on RHP so we could play a few games, played hardly anything except a bit against a cut down version of shredder (which comes with Google Chrome as an add-on).
Originally posted by EladarNot sure. I'm increasingly of the opinion that it is possible for someone with no more than good tactical awareness, basic knowledge of opening principles and the basic mates, could probably quite easily gain a 1400'ish rating here on RHP.
I suppose the real question here is who is his brother? If his brother's name is Mangus, then maybe he's telling the truth!
Originally posted by MurchuHow much study does it take to achieve good tactical awareness and knowledge of basic mates? How about board vision? That doesn't just come natural for a vast majority of us.
Not sure. I'm increasingly of the opinion that it is possible for someone with no more than good tactical awareness, basic knowledge of opening principles and the basic mates, could probably quite easily gain a 1400'ish rating here on RHP.
I suppose that depends on the individual, but for most of us this would require study. It would require a much deeper study in chess than simply knowing how the pieces move and playing only against other beginners.
Originally posted by EladarObviously it has to come from somewhere, but don't rule it out coming from games. Nothing groundbreaking about basic mates, and after being mated a few dozen times, anyone would pick up on the techniques on how to mate with king & queen, king & rook, etc. As for basic tactics, if most of the games you play are tactical in nature, as is common for king pawn games, then who is to say you can't learn the basic tactical devices such as pins, et al from games with a stronger opponent.
How much study does it take to achieve good tactical awareness and knowledge of basic mates? How about board vision? That doesn't just come natural for a vast majority of us.
I suppose that depends on the individual, but for most of us this would require study. It would require a much deeper study in chess than simply knowing how the pieces move and playing only against other beginners.
As regards, board vision, I'm not arguing that it comes naturally, but simply that up to a certain point, tactical awareness, opening principles and basic mates will get you a decent part of the way on their own. Beyond that, things like strategy, an opening book and endgame technique are required to proceed further, beyond the basic building blocks.
Hi Murcho
"Obviously it has to come from somewhere, but don't rule it out
coming from games."
I agree with everthing you say. The best method of improving is
playing and playing and playing.
Anyone can make 1600ish just on what they pick up from playing.
Infact opening a chess book could be the worse they could do at that stage.
So if we all agree the lad in question got to the standard he is at
just by playing. Then he is not "...new to chess."
He's a bit rough around the edges but the games being played are not by
someone who is a beginner. Every reasonable player on here will agree.
He's having a laugh.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Indeed, and very much dependent on ones definition of 'new to chess', of which there seems to be some contradiction from the original poster. I came in where the poster outlined his casual play over a good many years, where it was not surprising that he should have beaten 6 people on the trot upon joining. If the poster had no exposure to chess at all, as he indicated in his original post, that is quite a different matter alright.
Hi Murcho
"Obviously it has to come from somewhere, but don't rule it out
coming from games."
I agree with everthing you say. The best method of improving is
playing and playing and playing.
Anyone can make 1600ish just on what they pick up from playing.
Infact opening a chess book could be the worse they could do at that stage.
So if we ...[text shortened]... ne who is a beginner. Every reasonable player on here will agree.
He's having a laugh.
In any case, we're in agreement. Mostly 🙂
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 23319
Originally posted by Eladarformal training to get to 1600 here, are you mad?
Have you looked through some of his games?
What do you think are the odds that this guy is really new to chess and has had absolutely no formal training? (Assuming of course he's not using a computer)
don't listen to these guys savielly, i believe that you suck.