Challenging a higher-rated player

What's the recommended way to get a game with a higher-rated player? Is it:
a) berate all higher-rated players generally in the forums, claiming not one of them will play you
b) belittle a specific player with whom you would like a game
c) just challenge the player
d) other (please specify)

pay them ££££....

take thier family hostage?

in honesty, it would be hard ... high rated players do not have much to gain...in terms of ratings points, or in terms of challenge.

challenge them in an unrated game first, chat to them during the game and convince them to play in a rated challenge.

The best way is to enter tournaments. I entered a tournament and was drawn against a National Master. Good experience - I guess the NM would never have played me if I had challenged him directlty.

rooboy166 wrote: challenge them in an unrated game first, chat to them during the game and convince them to play in a rated challenge.

Helpful advice - but what happens if they are the sort of player who despises chatting during the game?

it is an interesting question, since we all want to play higher rated players to learn, and gauge how far we have to go to compete with such a player.  I too have been often rebuffed in my challenges.  That said, I have found many that are willing to play....  It is a numbers game....  speaking not from a ratings standpoint but from a "sales" viewpoint.....  If your closing ratio is 1 out of 10 then you need to challenge 10 before getting one who accepts.  I tend to always thank them for accepting, because of their "higher risk". 

For those who follow college basketball this is a common problem for smaller schools from smaller conferances who try to schedule the better known schools.  Does NC or Kansas want to risk playing Davidson or GW, or a division II school and risk getting beat?  The flip side is that a coach who experienced that when they were on the other side of that issue when they were coaching the smaller schools and were continuosly rebuffed when attempting to schedule are often more willing to do so when they are at the big school ..... 

Like them, the experience of having my challenges turned down by higher rated players, has led to me being willing to accept challenges from lower rated players.  I don't want to perpetuate the behavior which I did not appreciate in a similar situation.  I look at it as an obligation if nothing else.  So I try to strike a balance of the number of games I will play vs lower rated players.....  Kind of like a reader who feels obligated to read 1 classic or nonfiction for every 3 or 4 page turning suspense novels......         

look under "open seeks" a few times. If you're lucky there are unspecified seeks from higher rated players

Just create an open seek with parameters. You can specify a certain rating range. So make it like, 50 points below you, to 200 above. This way you push yourself little by little.

Let's not forget to welcome new members, under Chess Online settings:

Chess.com Greeter

I think the best way to improve is to get a game with someone about 200 pts higher than you. If you are a 1400, and challenge a 2200, what'll happen is that in the opening or soon thereafter you'll get a marked disadvantage, and then the rest of the game won't teach you much.

Comments?

yeah kind of ridiculous you can challenge directly a player rated much higher than you but you cant put out an open game ad for games higher than your own rating in Start New Game. Hopefully they fix that soon.

I dont know wether u consider me as one of the higher rated or not at 1900+ but i generly preffer unrated against much lower players. Sometimes it depends on amount of games i have and sometimes i just preffer to play stronger opponents more my level for a while. Dont ever be rude to anyone regardless of there rating  especially when u want to play them hahaha. If they dont want to talk its not always because they dont want to it might be because there english isnt very good. So if u challange someone higher, better i think unrated to start with and build a repoir and go from there. Unless they of course dont care much who they play hahahaha....

littleman wrote:

I dont know wether u consider me as one of the higher rated or not at 1900+ but i generly preffer unrated against much lower players.

 ok..... maybe I still do not get the importance of ratings to many people.  It does not effect me outside my ability to guage how I am progressing.....  But let's evaluate the ratings "risk" factor for a moment as if it were $$$.  Let's say the higher rated player gets +$2 for the win, -$12 for the draw, and -$25 for a loss.....  The liklihood of losing to a player 500 pts less should be pretty unlikely, so playing 10 games vs them nets you $20..... where playing someone the same level may get me higher payoff fo a win....you are also much more likely to lose as well....

If I am at a poker table and I want to win $$$$ .....  I evaluate the skills of the players around me so I can avoid playing pots with the 'best" players, and build my stacks taking the chips from the weaker players.....  

I just think if I am only concerned about ratings I can build them by "feasting" on the weaker players.  It may go up in smaller increments per game, but I feel much more confident in winning 10 in a row vs opponents 3 or 400 points below me than winning 4 out of 10 vs players 200 points above me......  So I just don't get littleman's  reasons for playing unrated vs lower rated opponents unless he plans to test some new openings that he is not too confident in..... 

I don't challenge higher ranked players expecting a boost in my ratings.....  I in fact expect to lose ratings points.......  But what I learn may allow me to increase my "rating" vs opponents I play later of = ranking...... it is an investment!  But maybe it comes down to whether you are playing to win..... or not to lose...... 

Because on there is a chance they might lose which believe me is possible no matter how good u r they would lose alot more then 25points to someone 400 points below, try doubling that and u would be closer to the mark which loses all the 1-3points u gained from beating them anyway. I get more of a challange playing people my own level for one thing, and if ur rating is high purely because of much lower players then ur skill in the long run gets worse with them. U can learn against higher players without having to make it rated. And they can feel free to coach u wheres in a rated game are alot less likely to...

Yes i agree with the 200 points  either way idea for the majority of ur games and only once in a while play someone alot higher for coaching purposes mostly. In which i generaly would ask unrated so no pressure on them and i still get a great game from it. Tournaments would work also thats true if its open for eg....

littleman wrote:

Because on there is a chance they might lose which believe me is possible no matter how good u r they would lose alot more then 25points to someone 400 points below, try doubling that and u would be closer to the mark which loses all the 1-3points u gained from beating them anyway. I get more of a challange playing people my own level for one thing, and if ur rating is high purely because of much lower players then ur skill in the long run gets worse with them. U can learn against higher players without having to make it rated. And they can feel free to coach u wheres in a rated game are alot less likely to...

 if they are no challenge then you will never lose....right?

I have not hesitated to coach when requested, even in a rated game.....  it is usually on the basis of a move already made by them.....

no arguement on how your skill level will improve by playing the better players, which is precisely why they want to play you.  I am perplexed by your logic that YOU benefit from playing it unrated!  You are the one that should win virtually every time, and if you find that is not the case because you take them for granted and make blunders that do make you lose......  then perhaps you NEED to play the lower rated players more often so THAT does not happen to you in a tourny.... Just a thought.....   For that matter, does your focus change whether the game is rated or unrated?

littleman wrote:

Because on there is a chance they might lose which believe me is possible no matter how good u r they would lose alot more then 25points to someone 400 points below, try doubling that and u would be closer to the mark which loses all the 1-3points u gained from beating them anyway.

Littleman, I do not understand why so many points are lost.  You are saying you will lose 50 vs a win of 1?  that surprises me, just because I am playing someone rated 345 points below me and I only lose 17 vs winning 2.....which means I have to win 9/10 to never lose points correct?  I am beating a player rated 450 points above me and I only win 18 vs -1 if I lose.......  Are you suggesting that he will lose 50 points when I beat him?  hmmmm......  maybe that explains why he is drawing the game out lol.......  but perhaps your math is suspect.....I made sure I used opponents that have played more than 225 games, since I know the glick ratings used here reflect the variances for # of games played.....  Anyone else ever have a 50/1 game?  

I joined a team on gameknot, played some games, won a few, reviewed my captains games and discovered he played the queens pawn opening frequently...my standard opening for white. He's rated 1550 me 1285. I asked him for a teaching game where i play d4. He was happy to play me and when I got 5 points down and had learned all I thought I could from the game..I resigned. Mate wasn't immiment, but it was unstoppable.

If you want to play higher rated players, be willing to play lower rated players that want to play you!

i'm a average score and want to play a higher score but no one accepts rated or unrated. can someone play me one or the other, I don't know who to ask? Plus if someone is kind enough to challenge me I can only do a time control of 14 days.

I normally move quicker than that, but...

By the way what do you consider a 1400 score player?