my thought- why should i care?
but w8 a second, i ve just checked your statistics and i saw something intresting there:
"Average opponent 1685.77 "
aha.. and look mine: Average opponent 1707.97
i wonder why u are playing 99% of your time vs opponents that are much lower rated than you.
but w8 a second, i ve just checked your statistics and i saw something intresting there:
"Average opponent 1685.77 "
aha.. and look mine: Average opponent 1707.97
i wonder why u are playing 99% of your time vs opponents that are much lower rated than you.
Instead of 34 Rd4 he could have played 34 f3 and hope to draw the rook's ending.
@Xo You don't care, you do not comment. Stop this bully behaviour, it is not the first time I see it.
Pretty please
Pretty please
@Xo WTF is up with you? Every time someone shows an achievement (a perfect game, win vs much better player etc), you say something like "Oh well it's easy to get a perfect game vs a noob" or "That game was only 20 moves so it's easy to get a perfect game".... and then you post
en.lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/my-progress-after-some-time#1 which is exactly the sort of stuff you've been putting down when others try to show how they've improved. Then you have a go at Lance for beating SF level 8, which is a great achievement IMO, and you say "Well you only played 30 sec so I don't care"..... not quoting you exactly, but if you don't care about any of these things, why say so? We don't care that you don't care.
en.lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/my-progress-after-some-time#1 which is exactly the sort of stuff you've been putting down when others try to show how they've improved. Then you have a go at Lance for beating SF level 8, which is a great achievement IMO, and you say "Well you only played 30 sec so I don't care"..... not quoting you exactly, but if you don't care about any of these things, why say so? We don't care that you don't care.
U guys are right, maybe i shouldnt project my bad times in this forum at the expense of other users. Positivity is better than the opossite in many cases and i think i was wrong. Sorry.
It's ok man. Tell it to others.
@Xo Looking over blitz records... Comparing mine to yours. Since you insist on having a pissing contest with me.
Your average blitz opponent is 1400.78. You win 26%, draw 3% lose 72% diconnect 2% of the time.
My average opponent is 1676.05. I win 71% of the time, Draw 5% of the time lose 23% of the time.
In other words I play players about 276 points higher rating than you do, and win about 3 times as often s you do when I do so.
This is why I'm 800 points higher rated than you are. To put our rating gap into perspective. Your chances of beating me in a game of blitz chess are similar to mine of beating Magnus Carlsen. In other words, not good at all (Oh, and Magnus only plays lower rated players too... that is the only thing left for him).
As for why most of my opponents are lower rated than myself. The meat in the coconut...
The higher your rating gets the larger the % of total players that are lower rated than yourself. For you the % of players lower rated than you is 14.2%. That means about 85.8% of the time against random opponents they are higher rated than you. For me 93.8% of players are lower rated than me. That means that about 6.2% of the time random opponents are higher rated than myself.
Some players at high rating exclusively or almost exclusively play high rated players, and wait a long time between finding good opponents. I win some, and lose some against higher rated players as well. There are some days where I take this approach myself. If I always took this approach then I would lose much less rating points per loss, and overall be higher rated than I already am thus shrinking up the total number of players higher rated than myself until I came to a peak.
One of the reasons why I am willing to play lower rated players is to help them learn. It gives a 1600 a big smile to have a chance to beat a 2000 which doesn't come along very often.
TLDR summary: You suck, I kick ass
Your average blitz opponent is 1400.78. You win 26%, draw 3% lose 72% diconnect 2% of the time.
My average opponent is 1676.05. I win 71% of the time, Draw 5% of the time lose 23% of the time.
In other words I play players about 276 points higher rating than you do, and win about 3 times as often s you do when I do so.
This is why I'm 800 points higher rated than you are. To put our rating gap into perspective. Your chances of beating me in a game of blitz chess are similar to mine of beating Magnus Carlsen. In other words, not good at all (Oh, and Magnus only plays lower rated players too... that is the only thing left for him).
As for why most of my opponents are lower rated than myself. The meat in the coconut...
The higher your rating gets the larger the % of total players that are lower rated than yourself. For you the % of players lower rated than you is 14.2%. That means about 85.8% of the time against random opponents they are higher rated than you. For me 93.8% of players are lower rated than me. That means that about 6.2% of the time random opponents are higher rated than myself.
Some players at high rating exclusively or almost exclusively play high rated players, and wait a long time between finding good opponents. I win some, and lose some against higher rated players as well. There are some days where I take this approach myself. If I always took this approach then I would lose much less rating points per loss, and overall be higher rated than I already am thus shrinking up the total number of players higher rated than myself until I came to a peak.
One of the reasons why I am willing to play lower rated players is to help them learn. It gives a 1600 a big smile to have a chance to beat a 2000 which doesn't come along very often.
TLDR summary: You suck, I kick ass
@tpr Agreed, I was fortunate to have him in time trouble at this point he slipped, and I pounced on him
blitz and classic i didnt play for ages on this account. This account is meant to play Bullet. I started with chess around 2016 Sept. My other account @UN has higher GLickopoints.
TLDR. I think i was right. Maybe u deserve negativity.
TLDR. I think i was right. Maybe u deserve negativity.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.