QTo was a nice guy....I was sorry he left this forum.
Show us your everyday chess set
Sort:
Dec 16, 2022
0
#183
@MCH818 I'm not 100% sure to be honest. He gifted it to me one of the times we met up. If I remember correctly I believe he said it was off of Etsy. I rotate my sets and boards for my studies and this is one of the nicer combos. Had multiple OTB wins over 2000 USCF players recently so maybe it's mojo is working on me.
Dec 16, 2022
0
#184
It's 1721 USCF currently. But I think after my current tournament is over I'll be in the 1800s. My goal us 2000 USCF.
Dec 16, 2022
0
#185
KineticPawn wrote:
Hold on that's an electronic set @Deathnote101? More info please.
My current study set is another set gifted to me by QtoQlevel3. I really like how the antiqued light side and the cherry wood border inlay subtlety compliment each other.
Yep. It's the Certabo electronic chess board, with the rfid tags under the pieces. I showed it in my previous posts already.
Dec 16, 2022
0
#186
MCH818 wrote:
Wow! 1721 is really high and on top of that you also beat players in the 2000 range. That’s amazing. I’m sure you will get to 2000.
1721 uscf isn't that high. I am about that myself. It's above average but there are plenty of people who are above that rateing. I consider 2000 uscf and above to be the real experts.
Dec 17, 2022
0
#187
MCH818 wrote:
Deathnote101 wrote:
MCH818 wrote:
Wow! 1721 is really high and on top of that you also beat players in the 2000 range. That’s amazing. I’m sure you will get to 2000.
1721 uscf isn't that high. I am about that myself. It's above average but there are plenty of people who are above that rateing. I consider 2000 uscf and above to be the real experts.
I suppose it depends upon your perspective. Someone who is rated 2000 would probably say same thing you just said... that it is not a big deal to be at 2000 because there are plenty of better players out there. Of course, it is a big deal when you are not there and not so much when you are there already. I guess we always admire what we wish we could do and see what we can do as being just the norm. I of course include myself in this and at times lack the appreciation for where I am at that moment.
I guess...but it just always seemed like that to me, even when I used to be a weak player in the 1400s-1500s ratings. I still didn't really considered 1700s to be experts, even tho I did considered them to be strong players. Now that I am in the 1700s, I feel like it is a conformation of my original beliefs of 1700s being decent above average players but below experts. This is because of the fact that it's becoming more harder to improve, and I have a lot more to learn. I feel like the people in the 2000s are the actual people trying and studying to improve. Meanwhile, I just play casually for fun and don't bother spending hours trying to analyze my games.
Dec 18, 2022
0
#188
DesperateKingWalk wrote:
MCH818 wrote:
DesperateKingWalk wrote:
I agree. 1700 is better then 80% of people with a chess rating. Meaning they play rated OTB chess. And most likely better then 99% that know the rules on how to play chess.
I also define it by the stats. The average rating of rated of chess players is below 1000.
But it is all relative. To the best chess computers. GM Magnus Carlsen, and a 1000 Elo chess player are both equally bad at chess. Meaning they would both lose all the games to the best chess computers.
That’s interesting. Is it 80%? Did not know that. I also did not not the average was below 1000.
Yeah to chess computers humans are just not in the same league.
If you are talking about Chess.com ratings for blitz and not USCF ratings. It gets even crazier how strong a 1700 player really is on Chess.com
There are only 76,442 players with a rating of 1700 out of 10,480,844 total players.
Average Blitz rating on Chess.com is 786.75.
You are a almost a chess god by percentile on Chess.com with a 1700 rating.
Lol. In the chess discords I have been, they never considered 1700s to be particularly anything special. It was just considered to be above average. I guess everything depends upon perspective.
@MCH that’s an all time favorite board!!!!
Dec 18, 2022
0
#191
Deathnote101 wrote:
MCH818 wrote:
Deathnote101 wrote:
MCH818 wrote:
Wow! 1721 is really high and on top of that you also beat players in the 2000 range. That’s amazing. I’m sure you will get to 2000.
1721 uscf isn't that high. I am about that myself. It's above average but there are plenty of people who are above that rateing. I consider 2000 uscf and above to be the real experts.
I suppose it depends upon your perspective. Someone who is rated 2000 would probably say same thing you just said... that it is not a big deal to be at 2000 because there are plenty of better players out there. Of course, it is a big deal when you are not there and not so much when you are there already. I guess we always admire what we wish we could do and see what we can do as being just the norm. I of course include myself in this and at times lack the appreciation for where I am at that moment.
I guess...but it just always seemed like that to me, even when I used to be a weak player in the 1400s-1500s ratings. I still didn't really considered 1700s to be experts, even tho I did considered them to be strong players. Now that I am in the 1700s, I feel like it is a conformation of my original beliefs of 1700s being decent above average players but below experts. This is because of the fact that it's becoming more harder to improve, and I have a lot more to learn. I feel like the people in the 2000s are the actual people trying and studying to improve. Meanwhile, I just play casually for fun and don't bother spending hours trying to analyze my games.
Are you speaking of chess.com or USCF? I train and play seriously with other accounts on .com and lichess with them in the 2000s online. I use my real name with this account and I'm fairly open. However, I and the majority of active tournament players I know use secret accounts that are used to train, play seriously and try out new lines.
Dec 18, 2022
0
#192
KineticPawn wrote:
Deathnote101 wrote:
MCH818 wrote:
Deathnote101 wrote:
MCH818 wrote:
Wow! 1721 is really high and on top of that you also beat players in the 2000 range. That’s amazing. I’m sure you will get to 2000.
1721 uscf isn't that high. I am about that myself. It's above average but there are plenty of people who are above that rateing. I consider 2000 uscf and above to be the real experts.
I suppose it depends upon your perspective. Someone who is rated 2000 would probably say same thing you just said... that it is not a big deal to be at 2000 because there are plenty of better players out there. Of course, it is a big deal when you are not there and not so much when you are there already. I guess we always admire what we wish we could do and see what we can do as being just the norm. I of course include myself in this and at times lack the appreciation for where I am at that moment.
I guess...but it just always seemed like that to me, even when I used to be a weak player in the 1400s-1500s ratings. I still didn't really considered 1700s to be experts, even tho I did considered them to be strong players. Now that I am in the 1700s, I feel like it is a conformation of my original beliefs of 1700s being decent above average players but below experts. This is because of the fact that it's becoming more harder to improve, and I have a lot more to learn. I feel like the people in the 2000s are the actual people trying and studying to improve. Meanwhile, I just play casually for fun and don't bother spending hours trying to analyze my games.
Are you speaking of chess.com or USCF? I train and play seriously with other accounts on .com and lichess with them in the 2000s online. I use my real name with this account and I'm fairly open. However, I and the majority of active tournament players I know use secret accounts that are used to train, play seriously and try out new lines.
Chess.com ofc. I am 2000s on lichess. Lichess ratings are inflated. Ofc I had to train a bit too, but I only ever reed like half a chess book, and don't really bother analyzing my games for more than about 10 minutes. I am sure the 2000s USCF are the people doing real hard work in comparison. I am certain that I could probably be in the 2000s rateing in chess.com too if I actually tried hard enough like them, but I am too lazy to do so. Let's be real here...2000s is not something you can reach without trying really hard. 1700s online rateing tho, is reachable with a bit of studying about the positional basics and lots of game experience without being a try hard.
Wow. The chavet set indeed looks stunning. Can't take my eyes off the pieces.
Dec 28, 2022
0
#194
Powderdigit wrote:
That’s a very stylish combination Chessmaster.
👍👍👍
👍👍👍
Agreed! Those pieces really contrast that board in a complimentary fashion. I really dig the black border as well. It's subtle, but really ties it all together. Good stuff all around. 👍
Dec 29, 2022
0
#195
This morning's rotation consists of my latest aquisition, the HoS Liberty Series (Lacquered) on a 2022 U.S. Chess Championship vinyl board. It's set #12 since I got hooked in May. Fear not, I don't blame any of you for my newfound "addiction". 
On that note, I have two sets en route, with more sitting in virtual shopping carts as I contemplate endlessly. 
Dec 29, 2022
0
#196
Thanks for posting @VTVXIV - I really like the contrast - I’ve seen some beautiful green and blue boards … so many options, so little time!! 😆😉😊
Dec 29, 2022
0
#197
DesperateKingWalk wrote:
I love the chess board. But I hate the chess pieces.
For some reason if the chess design does not have the correct proportions for all the pieces. I just do not like the design.
Yep. King base divided by 0.78 plus 1/8th inch for maximum square size. King no taller than two squares. No more than two pawns diagonally across a square. Or at a minimum four pawns have to fit touching the boundaries of a square.
Dec 29, 2022
0
#198
Agreed, profile adds to the aesthetics. So many places sell misfit sets. Travel sets are hopeless. The pawn base matches the pieces.
Hold on that's an electronic set @Deathnote101? More info please.
My current study set is another set gifted to me by QtoQlevel3. I really like how the antiqued light side and the cherry wood border inlay subtlety compliment each other.