Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Closed


  • 23 months ago · Quote · #21

    melogibbo

    yeah, it seems you can't preempt the trolls and stop them, it's just like poking a bees nest with a stick, you've antagonised them.
    I think it's a good idea, it's kinda annoying waiting for the abort. 

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #22

    wbilfc

    I believe the opposite may be true

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #23

    Scottrf

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #24

    wbilfc

    Exactly

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #25

    chessman1504

    Um, this doesn't seem to be a typical practice.... aborting games due to lower rating. Typically, when I play someone 30 points above me, they don't abort. I'm guessing this happens in blitz more often?

    And, how do you know they are just as available as any of the other players? For all you know, they could be playing during there break time in a job, lose track of time, and find that they have less time than they thought, prompting them to leave. But, addressing the "annoying case," is it really that annoying that you must bring it here? I'm not trying to say this site has no problems.... it's just that they aren't really all that debilitating. Then again.. I've seen some of the other threads you've made, and I know this probably won't be received too pleasantly.. oh well, that's how the world works. 

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #26

    learningthemoves

    Estragon wrote:

    Perhaps some prospective opponents are dissuaded not by rating but by annoying personality traits?

    In chess, to be accepted as a diva you must either be very strong or an attractive female. Ofer 2.

    Yeah, I think it must be their annoying personality traits that dissuades them from playing. You may be onto something. 

    In regards to you attempting to be accepted as a diva and striking out with an 0 for 2 record, I've never been interested in that kind of thing, and I'm sorry to hear it was a painful experience for you, but it's probably for the best.  

    @DrDeal My approach to communication has proven this one maxim extremely effective for discussion topics time and time again..."trolls will troll and haters gonna hate." It seems to be the price one must pay for decent discussion amidst the plebians.

    @Totodile77 Yes, thanks. I thought it was worth saying too and hence shared it. As for the critics you mention, perhaps if they tried a similar approach of trying to increase the value and relevance of the content they posted, they could also have something worthwhile to say posted.     

    (But we'll let them grow up and discover this idea for themselves on their own time. Seems you can lead a horse to the water, but, unfortunately at times, can't make it drink once it arrives.)

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #27

    learningthemoves

    @Melogibbo - Yes, thanks. My sentiments exactly. Perhaps some will begin to preemptively correct their rating settings instead of waiting until it's game time and then wondering why they have an opponent at that rating there.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #28

    ChessisGood

    The problem is, most people want to play someone rated higher than themselves. They set the rating range to (+0,+200) and try to start a game. However, in my experience, I often have to change this because all of the higher-rated players are using the same setting.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #29

    eddysallin

    after 70 years i can safely say-----the world is out too get me! Mostly those in power,the evil and the rich.I'm also watching those bigger then me and people w/ higher ratings.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #30

    learningthemoves

    eddysallin wrote:

    after 70 years i can safely say-----the world is out too get me! Mostly those in power,the evil and the rich.I'm also watching those bigger then me and people w/ higher ratings.

    Sage strategy sir. I believe it's time for me to adopt this approach too. Mustn't leave these kinds of things to chance. It's time to save nine.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #31

    chessman1504

    learningthemoves wrote:
    Estragon wrote:

    Perhaps some prospective opponents are dissuaded not by rating but by annoying personality traits?

    In chess, to be accepted as a diva you must either be very strong or an attractive female. Ofer 2.

    Yeah, I think it must be their annoying personality traits that dissuades them from playing. You may be onto something. 

    In regards to you attempting to be accepted as a diva and striking out with an 0 for 2 record, I've never been interested in that kind of thing, and I'm sorry to hear it was a painful experience for you, but it's probably for the best.  

    @DrDeal My approach to communication has proven this one maxim extremely effective for discussion topics time and time again..."trolls will troll and haters gonna hate." It seems to be the price one must pay for decent discussion amidst the plebians.

    @Totodile77 Yes, thanks. I thought it was worth saying too and hence shared it. As for the critics you mention, perhaps if they tried a similar approach of trying to increase the value and relevance of the content they posted, they could also have something worthwhile to say posted.     

    (But we'll let them grow up and discover this idea for themselves on their own time. Seems you can lead a horse to the water, but, unfortunately at times, can't make it drink once it arrives.)

    Discussion amidst the plebeians..... that's a gem that doesn't sound arrogant or cocky at all! It's also not at all obvious why people respond to you in such a way, since you're writing most certainly doesn't invite such responses! You're doing marvellously. Let's see how the rest of this trainwreck plays out....

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #32

    wbilfc

    I cant understand why learningthemoves seems to come under attack everytime he creates a thread...most of the time the topics are genuinely open for debate and he expresses his opinion....isn't that what the forums are for?

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #33

    Ziryab

    I dream of a site where everyone refuses to play anyone lower rated.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #34

    learningthemoves

    chessman1504 wrote:
    learningthemoves wrote:
    Estragon wrote:

    Perhaps some prospective opponents are dissuaded not by rating but by annoying personality traits?

    In chess, to be accepted as a diva you must either be very strong or an attractive female. Ofer 2.

    Yeah, I think it must be their annoying personality traits that dissuades them from playing. You may be onto something. 

    In regards to you attempting to be accepted as a diva and striking out with an 0 for 2 record, I've never been interested in that kind of thing, and I'm sorry to hear it was a painful experience for you, but it's probably for the best.  

    @DrDeal My approach to communication has proven this one maxim extremely effective for discussion topics time and time again..."trolls will troll and haters gonna hate." It seems to be the price one must pay for decent discussion amidst the plebians.

    @Totodile77 Yes, thanks. I thought it was worth saying too and hence shared it. As for the critics you mention, perhaps if they tried a similar approach of trying to increase the value and relevance of the content they posted, they could also have something worthwhile to say posted.     

    (But we'll let them grow up and discover this idea for themselves on their own time. Seems you can lead a horse to the water, but, unfortunately at times, can't make it drink once it arrives.)

    Discussion amidst the plebeians..... that's a gem that doesn't sound arrogant or cocky at all! It's also not at all obvious why people respond to you in such a way, since you're writing most certainly doesn't invite such responses! You're doing marvellously. Let's see how the rest of this trainwreck plays out....

    Yeah, I just put that one in there for fun. But as you know the truth is it all started when I had posted some wins in the game showcase forum and some people enjoyed the games. Well, that was all it took for some to rush in and point out mistakes, say it was only because the opponent blundered and obvious things everyone already knew but just generally trying to be antagonistic.

    There's no "train wreck". It's just get your ratings settings correct.

    If you choose to try to join the trolls, that's on you, but once again, contributing something of value...this time in the form of a way to adjust your ratings setting to save yourself and others time.

    You can choose to be like me and stay on the solution side of things or gravitate to the lower level of living the trolls seem to enjoy. Your call.

    No one can make it for you.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #35

    learningthemoves

    Ziryab wrote:

    I dream of a site where everyone refuses to play anyone lower rated.

    I share the same dream. And I'm not sure about your variation of the dream, but in mine, those who refuse to play anyone lower rated have adjusted their ratings settings to accurately reflect this so it doesn't waste anyone's time.

    See, that's the thing. Once you set your settings to the range of ratings you want to play (higher), then you will no longer have anyone lower rated appear as a challenge because the system sorts it for you according to your specifications.

    Some haven't realized that and then sit there and wonder why lower rated players appear "across from them". lol.

    That's all.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #36

    wbilfc

    I think he was being sarcastic...

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #37

    chessman1504

    To be honest, I'm not sure anyone is actually trolling... the only thing I've seen is that their standard for a brilliant game and yours don't seem to agree. From what I've seen, they're only here to point things out that may or may not be obvious. From what you've written, they get the impression that you don't know these things, even if you know them. Therefore, they point out things that demonstrate that it doesn't work for them... and that should be okay. What's it to you that they didn't really think you're game was all that great?

    Regarding you're solution side approach, most people have experienced this problem and don't see it as all that important. And that should be okay. Some people know what you've said before and make comments based on their perception of you're attitude. Ultimately, someone else's opinion shouldn't matter all that much. People will say what they want, and the real problem caused is in being all the more combative and accusatory. But, noting that, I know that your responses and approach are both up to you. I know what I say probably won't be fully read, but I'm entertained at the moment. Carry on :)

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #38

    learningthemoves

    Likewise my chess brethren.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #39

    madvilain

    boring

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #40

    zborg

    Set your OPEN SEEK at -150 on the lower side.  You will (typically) get lots of opponents near the bottom of this 150 range, or whatever range you set.

    In the -150 case, you'll need to win roughly 2 (or more) games out of 3 to advance your rating, because the typical rating gain will be +5 when you win, or -11 when your opponent wins.

    It doesn't matter much what you set for the upside of your rating range.  The bulk of responses to your Open Seek will typically come from the lower side.

    If you add a 5 second bonus to your time controls, be prepared to wait longer to get an opponent.

    In my experience, if you want to play slower than Game in 15/5, be prepared to wait a fair amount of time in order to secure an opponent from your Open Seek.

    Or just "go blind" playing Bullet Chess.

    Opponents for Bullet are everywhere, and quite willing.  Smile

    Yes, this really is a lame thread, with the OP pretending it's somehow a public service announcement.  He should know better.


Back to Top

Post your reply: