As a novice player---do I annoy better rated players by asking for a game?

(It's my honest goal to get better---and i feel i present a challenge)

you should play people within maybe 100-200 points above you. most people are afraid of losing points :) so they might not want to play someone too far below them.

okmrbill, please feel free to challenge me. I consider myself to be a decent player and I would be happy to have a game with you!  

I think better players should be kind to lesser players.  I always like helping people who aren't as good as me, because I like to get the same attitude from better players..

i agree with erik. I think you should start playing with people in your same range or a little above you. In this way you avoid lossing self-steem and if you play and study chess regularly surely you will improve your game day to day.

I have also faced this problem - of people ranked high above me not willing to play - but if you play with people who agree to play with you, say 100-200 points higher or lower, you could improve your rating. And then perhaps challenge higher rated players

dude, i suck, but i have a really high rating (people keep timing out on me). you should play me

Keep in mind that the advanced player would also like to keep improving, so the rule of thumb of playing slightly higher (within 200 points) is what they are looking for as well. Also, to stay in shape, per se, it bodes them well to play against those of comparitive strength.

I enjoy playing people of all levels (higher and lower than me). Sometimes it is also good to play people weaker than you so that you can practice winning games that you `should` be winning along with defending against players who are trying to play for a draw and find a decisive way to breakthrough.

I think all players should be allowed to challenge all  players . A hiearchy based on skill in unfair and makes weaker players feel small , insignificant , unwanted and a pest . 

Don't let the bar-stewards get you down mr megamonkey!  Anyways playing lesser opponents can be good for throwing caution to the wind which can lead to some fun combinations that you wouldn't normally go for against someone closer to your level.

I personally think the ratings are ridiculous. Some people choose to consider one of less value than themselves because of a number. It's like judging a book by it's cover. Too many people do it, and they miss a good story because of a cover. Chess.com members might miss lifelong friends because of a number. I hate ratings.

I don't know.  People who live and die by their rating aren't people I'm particularly fond of playing.

Ratings, whether you like them or not, do indicate a certain level of skill.

However, considering in OTB chess there are defeats with the underdog beating a titled player 300-400 points above them, it just shows that rating isn't always everything.

But, a 2000 USCF player will beat me 99% of the time. 

It should also be pointed out that you get better by playing people of your own skill level or better.  Higher rated players (usually better than you) will be quicker to take advantage of your mistakes and positional (hopefully not piece) blunders, helping you fix up the weak points of your game.

mr-megamonkey wrote: I think all players should be allowed to challenge all  players . A hiearchy based on skill in unfair and makes weaker players feel small , insignificant , unwanted and a pest . 

---

 One monkey to another, I agree.

Personally, I have no problem playing anyone regardless of rating.  However, I can't imagine it is much fun for an absolute beginner to get killed by a much higher-rated player.  I have had games with beginners where I am just taking all their pieces move after move, and it is no fun for me or for them.  I also play Go, and I am a beginner there, and at least there is a handicap system so I can play against much better players and it is still a real game for them and for me.  When you challenge a much higher-rated player, think of them also, what are they getting out of it?  If you are dropping pieces every move, then you need to work on that, and you can't even think about strategy yet, and you are better off playing people your own level.  There is a big difference between a 1100 playing a 1700, and a 1700 playing a 2300, at least the 1700 is going to play a decent game vs the 2300, whereas the 1100 is just going to get killed without even knowing why.

 That being said, I accept all challenges, unless I have too many games going on already, but I never refuse because of rating; however, I will not "take pity" on a total beginner, I WILL eat all your pieces and smack my lips as I do so!  If that is something you enjoy, go for it, but you will get more out of a game vs someone your own level.

 

 

when i started off playing, strong players at my club would play a game with me and this really helps the beginner. now iv been playing for so long i dont mind at all returning the favour to newcomers because i was once in their place.

The beginner should understand that stronger players will want to play against stronger players too mostly but its no harm to ask. whats the worst that could happen, they say no? some might just play the one game with you but thats fair in my opinion, unless its a really quick win, in that case i would show the beginner a few pointers and so on. 

By beginner i mean low grade player (although that can be a grey area, so judge rating value for yourselves). national ratings at least imo regress to what standard people are generally anyway. internet ratings are a different story possibly*.

Every chess player has been a beginner.

ketchuplover wrote:

Every chess player has been a beginner.

---

 

ketchuplover wrote:

Every chess player has been a beginner.

---

I really like this sentence..

oh, that's a good sentence....Thank :)