Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

They get so excited when beating a weak player


  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1

    now_and_zen

    When a player blunders or plays a generally bad game, it's easy to take advantage of them.  Doesn't take many slips to make a win against them inevitable.  It commonly goes down like an avalanche; the winner tears-up the opponent and picks off pieces move-after-move without even blinking.  Most of us know this and understand the dynamics.

    But I still chuckle when I see people posting games and boasting of their mastery because of all the 'brilliant' plays they scored, when everything was lined-up right for them, due to the decreasing piece strength and positional disadvantage of the disabled opponent.  It's so obvious when it stemmed more from the loser's ineptness than the skill of the winner.  Similarly, often, if you analyze the prevailing player's game you find all kinds of errors and missed opportunities.

    I wonder if that's how a player like Bobby Fisher would see many of what we lower-eschelon players would consider our best games :-)

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #2

    AndyClifton

    Say, you don't have anyone in particular in mind when you say this, do you...? Smile

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #3

    now_and_zen

    AndyClifton wrote:

    Say, you don't have anyone in particular in mind when you say this, do you...? 

    I don't if you don't.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #4

    now_and_zen

    LongIslandMark wrote:

    I have no illusions about my wins - I've had a few good games, but mostly I played somewhat less poorly than my opponent. However, I can pretend to take a bit of pride in being able to see and take advantage of that first blunder (if it's not blindingly obvious).

    But we do see the sorts of posts you imply. And I do see the posting community gets rightly annoyed when a game obviously won because of big blunders is presented as "brilliant" - especially when it's the blunder by the opponent that gave the game away and not the strategy or tactics the poster is lauding. And most especially when the poster refuses to acknowledge any of that.

    And then everyone gets even more annoyed if they take the time to analyze and offer suggestions or point out flaws, only to have the OP say they don't see the point in any of that.

    Sorry for the rant - seemed like your OP invited it.

    I am in no position to judge you for ranting :-) I'm already in trouble here for starting too many threads in two days.  I'm trying to simmer down now.  Cheers

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #5

    AndyClifton

    Not that LIM has anyone in particular in mind either. (heehee!)

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #6

    Estragon

    What's more annoying is that there is a dedicated forum for a Game Showcase, and another for Games Analysis.  .

    This forum is for General Discussion.  So if you don't want to discuss generals, just shut the heck up.

     

    I don't know any generals myself - except for a couple of Attorneys General, and those records are sealed now - so I'll mention a colonel or two.  David Niven was inspiring in Bridge Over The River Kwai.  And Hogan, of course - nasty business about his personal life, though.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #7

    pt22064

    A friend and fellow chess player once told me that his objective was to make the second to last mistake in a game rather than the last mistake (i.e. the losing move that leads to checkmate). Actually, he used the word "penultimate" since he was rather bombastic.

    LongIslandMark wrote:

    I have no illusions about my wins - I've had a few good games, but mostly I played somewhat less poorly than my opponent. However, I can pretend to take a bit of pride in being able to see and take advantage of that first blunder (if it's not blindingly obvious).

    But we do see the sorts of posts you imply. And I do see the posting community gets rightly annoyed when a game obviously won because of big blunders is presented as "brilliant" - especially when it's the blunder by the opponent that gave the game away and not the strategy or tactics the poster is lauding. And most especially when the poster refuses to acknowledge any of that.

    And then everyone gets even more annoyed if they take the time to analyze and offer suggestions or point out flaws, only to have the OP say they don't see the point in any of that.

    Sorry for the rant - seemed like your OP invited it.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #8

    red-lady

    Estragon wrote:

      So if you don't want to discuss generals, just shut the heck up.

     

    And he was nice here Wink

    Just do what he says...

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #9

    AndyClifton

    pt22064 wrote:

    Actually, he used the word "penultimate" since he was rather bombastic.

    Not to mention derivative (since I believe Tartakover said that first).

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #10

    varelse1

    And they say, winning a won game can often be the hardest thing to do in chess. When a player consolidates his position, holds onto his advantage, prevents his opponents counterplay, resists making any of those tempting sacs, and converts his win, he should be able to take a little pride in that. Because it doesn't always work out that cleanly.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #11

    landwehr

    This forum is for General Discussion.  So if you don't want to discuss generals, just shut the heck up.

    strongly agree

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #12

    AndyClifton

    varelse1 wrote:

    ...he should be able to take a little pride in that. Because it doesn't always work out that cleanly.

    And indeed it probably wouldn't have (if he'd been playing somebody with opposable thumbs and vertebrae and stuff).

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #13

    AndyClifton

    LongIslandMark wrote:

    "penultimate" is one of my favorite words.

    I've always been amazed at "malinger"--I mean, that there's one word that means all that. Smile

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #14

    varelse1

    AndyClifton wrote:
    LongIslandMark wrote:

    "penultimate" is one of my favorite words.

    I've always been amazed at "malinger"--I mean, that there's one word that means all that. 

    Enigma, and Gargantuan are great words, as well.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #15

    pt22064

    Hey, that's my friend's name! :-)

    AndyClifton wrote:

    pt22064 wrote:

    Actually, he used the word "penultimate" since he was rather bombastic.

    Not to mention derivative (since I believe Tartakover said that first).

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #16

    AndyClifton

    lol

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #17

    now_and_zen

    pt22064 wrote:

    A friend and fellow chess player once told me that his objective was to make the second to last mistake in a game rather than the last mistake (i.e. the losing move that leads to checkmate). Actually, he used the word "penultimate" since he was rather bombastic.

    I shun your friend for being bombastic.  He shouldn't be bombastic. We must  protect the people of Bastic!  For what are chess players if not valiant and medieval?


Back to Top

Post your reply: