Do u think u can beat Gary Kasparov?(Yes or No) Why?

I guess what they say is true about the better chess players being really good at pattern recognition... good catch

I refuse to answer stupid questions

http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/15/6/can-i-have-multiple-accounts

Can I have multiple accounts?

No, not only do we strongly discourage the use of multiple accounts; we also consider it a form of cheating. While there are no really good reasons to have more than one account, there are several rather bad reasons for doing so:   to artificially increase one's chess rating by playing fake games with non-existent "members" to vote multiple times per move in a Vote Chess game to allow a player to see comments on their games in progress to create mischief in the forums Please restrict yourself to a single Chess.com account, and avoid all suspicion. Also, if it's just a new username you are after, please see here.  keywords: cheat cheating multiple accounts more one account

Does this answer your question?     Yes No

id give it a go first rule is you only get better by playing a smarter player

Can I beat Kasparov? mmm Let see.

You start to study chess 8 hours a day,keep practicing everyday  for 30 years  and then in the  Kasparov's 80 birthday,if You lucky and he is not as lucid as Korchnoi in his 80's  , and if a lot of new chess theory coming out that Kasparov as retired is not aware of,     You maybe not.

No, because I think he is way better than me.

tassinaro, pls dn't act like a fool, since u think I am cheating, nevermind my online chess rating, take a look at my chess960 tournament and my chess960 rating and my tactic rating, EXACTLY! so please, I dnt wana argue anymore. To people who think I posted this forum to humiliate kasparov, Wrong! I love Gary Kasparov, and I respect him, but ever since I was a child I promised myself that I would be a world/galaxy chess champion, and I am playing this game because I wana strive to be the best. To be the best u have to beat the best, and I so know the struggles and hardships I went through so far to think I can beat GK. IM pfren 'This is a "General CHESS discussion" so please do not post stuff like that about my hero GK'...pfren please delete that post. Another reason why I think I could beat GK is because a south african player rated between 1700-2100 nearly beat him, and missed a perfect 36th move which indicated a win no matter what best reply GK will respond with, and after missing that move, he lost after a few moves.

Let's make it happen!

ur tactics is only 1832... and ur online is 1708. my tactics is 2557 and im only 2006 fide. (2135 uscf) u seriously think you can beat gary kasparov???

and just in case u didn't know kasparov is 2800+ fide. Yeah, you'd have a pretty good chance aginst him.

keep faith in that belief..

and if you still believe at the end of this thread, your faith may be strong enough!

chesskingdreamer my new chess account was born just 2weeks ago, and u expect it to make it to the 2500+, what's the rush? give me 2 months and my rating will already be a 2500+, u'l see, and if u have any opinion about my ratings right now, "I-can-checkmate-you" :)

This is... wtf { Fruit  } so relatively suspicious man; who wants to Risk going out of Chess.com for always by a Chess 960 Game he doesn't even know he is going to play?

I do not understand.
plausibly he is one of those who takes used words lightly.

Anyway, nuff said. I do not like to team-up against one person unless Neccesary/Mandatory etcetera etcetera. 

I'd probably lose in the opening - he has a sizeable opening book and I have virtually none. Plus he has the strategic grasp to know why my patzer move in the opening is bad and he knows how to demonstrate that it is a mistake.

But lets say we reach move twelve and I'm still alive and developed. Well maybe I have some plans now, but for sure he does. Whose will be the better plans? Just maybe I have an outsider's chance here. You can luck into a good plan sometimes. (But mostly his plans will be good and mine mediocre or worse).

Anyway now some tactical opportunities will come up. This I know about beause in the long ago I used to play against my old Novag Diamond machine.  Wow the knots that thing always tied me in. Always. I think it claimed about 2,100 strength (which was a lie, I've played some human 2,100 opponents and they did not treat me as that machine did). Of course Kasparov will still be playing above 2,100, maybe not 700 rating points above but still.

So I survive the tactics, I lucked into some good plans, what next.

Oh s... the end game looms!!

My nemesis. I struggle against 1800 opponents in the end game. I need days of analysis to avoid even trivial mistakes. I have NO book learning at all. Mr K on the other hand has spent his professional life turning the most minute advantage into a win against almost equally strong end game players. He would eat me for breakfast.

So could I win?  Sure, one time in a million. Or a very, very large number anyway.

Kinda nice to think of that one time, tho'.

At bridge, playing with my favourite partner, he'd have about the same chance against me as I have against him at his game.

Those things prove nothing. 960 is easier to cheat at than standard. There aren't nearly as many good programs to detect it due to the irregular castling. Also with multiple accounts, it is rather simple to take a few cracks at the tactics trainer problems, before taking credit for getting them right on the 1st try, with the account you've chosen to feature as having you most skilled. Most above average players can easily solve tactics trainer problems quickly and accurately once they've seen them a time or two...

see if you can find something more convincing...

BTW, another bad thing about having had multiple accounts is...you will find yourself more often questioned for the proof of your innocence...

I can think of a few decent reasons to have multiple accounts, inspite of chess.com's assertions...if you were able to tell me them, perhaps I'd think differently about why you had yours...BTW, your answers can either be substantiated or contrasted by your previous accounts...so it will be quickly evident as to whether you had those accounts for the reasons you might understand and share, as legitimate ones.

Just thought you'd like to realize a few us are more perceptive than you realize and are willing to call you out on these boasts...

Surely I could: I just need him to be blindfolded, to have fever and a heave headache, and just 5 seconds to think every move. If you give me that, I and my chess books collection will beat Kasparov. Or so I hope!

Perhaps everybody on Chess.com could beat him. That's why he won't become a member here.

Moral of the story ....

Never! ever! reveal your dreams on a website!

who knows....maybe he did go online for the hell of it anonymously and got skull drug by someone using rybka and it was even more haunting than losing to deep blue...so he went nuts and thought politics was a better pursuit, instead of trying to beat computers...

personally I prefer the computer...I can atleast shut that off