Now to be honest, I deleted everything a few months ago that was on my profile, but alot of my mental thoughts have been shared via threads we know as forums.
Well, recently i have learned that i am a terrible online chess player, isn't that funny? The point being is that, i play better over the board, because of a few strange reasons.
I have better awareness of tactics when i have the board in reality not in some other place such as chess.com live. I am terrible witht tactics online, i can not really explain it, but for some reason, my games almost never have the tactics that many instructive puzzles contain. Is it strange that i am terrible in standard chess? I think not, because standard is not even long here on chess.com. It's pretty short if you ask me.
Something managable for me would be like Game 90, delay5.
One other thing is in, OTB, i feel more lazy strangely. Here is what i mean, i have better intuition over the board than online. It is a terrible thing to admit, but that is the truth, I sometimes lack the will to persevere and calculate until i see something i like in a position. I rely on my intuition (the chess 6th sense), to guide me alot.
Other than this, I just learned the french a few months ago, and i have liked my results with it. It suits my style and personality with a strong compact central pawn structure you get. It goes well with the dutch too.
I do offer coaching services, but i am not a crazy person who broadcasts/markets his services (Pawnpusher3), i just try to build up credibility as time goes on. I coach you openings; only the french and dutch.
My first lesson is free, if you want to become one of my students. I do this because people generally are sometimes not satisfied with the first lesson, and feel like it was a waste of money; so i show my improvisation and coaching skills while i do such. Hopefully you are satisfied if you choose to become my student and continue recieving lessons from me.
For the record, my uscf rating is 1580, but i know it should be higher than this, but you never know
like one young blood Elubas (a chess.com member) said
" Rating is based on results. I used to think I was underrated when... well actually, at many points in my pseudo-career, but to pick one moment... when I was 1600. Now, I am convinced today that there were things that I understood better than expert level players (certain positional ideas)... but it didn't matter. Experts were blundering less, and, no matter how crudely they were able to beat people like me, they did. They were simply more consistent. That's probably why you're at a lower rating than you would like. You might be higher than 1580, but no assumptions should be made -- it's possible to understand some very high level ideas well, but still get bad results due to lack of consistency.
In this case, you probably lost energy at the point where you traded queens, and playing ...exf5 was a crack. Up to that point you played solidly, but if you crack just once, you lose games -- that's why consistency is so important.
To be honest this sounds pretty accurate about my chess career so far in life; i can beat an NM if you give me enough time to prepare, but i can also lose to a random 1400; I just am inconsistent as a chess player.
I tend to lose positions i have good advantages in. Atleast the middlegame is my only problem.
My strong suits are Opening and Endgame, middlegame not so much, not much of a tactical player, so much i am a positional player, but not too positional. I am a little worried though about my rating, let's just say I am a wild card, because i fail at random moments but i can be brilliant at points.
If you are interested in anything and need to ask me, just post a note on my chess.com home profile page, or send me a message in private.
" For next time profile, Firepower8 out"