He probably had chat blocked before the game started
You were still winning but you lost on time.
This is why it's pointless playing on this site
Sort:
I’m sorry to say it, but this loss is on you. You were up on time and winning, but you let your time run out. Your opponent is a legitimate 1600, which means they can still make mistakes. Grandmasters sometimes blunder mate in one. Your opponent can choose to play on if they want. Sometimes it has good results, sometimes it doesn’t. However, that’s for them to decide.
15 hrs ago
0
#5
He is questioning pidixtras1704 real competence in ches game. Is it realy what we know as a 1665 on chess.com? Because the guy blundered like a 1000, pushed some buttons off a other buttons on, then started playing like he is around... what? ... a nearly 2000 on this site? He dominates the 1600s when it suits him, opening an account for the ocasions. At least it is what it AnnaHar2012 is pointing at. That Rb8 by the way was just the first stone for a powerful and beautiful back rank + vertical atack strategy. Clearing the way on the f file as setting the red carpet for the waiting Queen to enter, only after the King's Rook show the Royal Power completes the tactics arranjement. Of course it's up to each one of us to evaluate this type of identity and use of the site situation. Quite frankly, we have a handful of htis sort of problems here. And if AnnaHar is right, pidixtras1704 his having a good time in his own amusement park.
5 hrs ago
0
#6
David, thank you for your thoughtful explanation. You are maybe right, maybe not…The only thing which might happen next - chesscom will catch this guy.
5 hrs ago
0
#7
David8x8x8x8 wrote:
He is questioning pidixtras1704 real competence in ches game. Is it realy what we know as a 1665 on chess.com? Because the guy blundered like a 1000, pushed some buttons off a other buttons on, then started playing like he is around... what? ... a nearly 2000 on this site? He dominates the 1600s when it suits him, opening an account for the ocasions. At least it is what it AnnaHar2012 is pointing at. That Rb8 by the way was just the first stone for a powerful and beautiful back rank + vertical atack strategy. Clearing the way on the f file as setting the red carpet for the waiting Queen to enter, only after the King's Rook show the Royal Power completes the tactics arranjement. Of course it's up to each one of us to evaluate this type of identity and use of the site situation. Quite frankly, we have a handful of htis sort of problems here. And if AnnaHar is right, pidixtras1704 his having a good time in his own amusement park.
This strikes me as a classic example of observer bias. The opponent's blunder is regarded as 'true' and a marker of their 'actual' level (even though it was probably a result of an ill-advised pre-move). Then all subsequent play is judged against this perceived standard. OP blunders their own knight on move 15, leaving it hanging just as much as their opponent did theirs. But the opponent seeing this and taking it is now seen as implausibly perfect play from a player who 'should' be incapable of spotting a hanging piece. Rather than two players at the same level making equally bad blunders, this is now characterised as clear cheating by one party, when there's no evidence of anything of the kind.
The OP has left the building after 15 hours and one game played.
This is my very first game. A much weaker opponent blunders a piece immediately for no reason, muted chat, blocked me, and decided to "play on". Guess who wins less than 20 moves later.
Chess: pidixtras1704 vs AnnaHar2012 - 138723160808 - Chess.com
His account, of course, is a day old. Despite not seeing that he had blundered a bishop as soon as move 3, like a 1000, he somehow finds a way to win the vast majority of his games against 1600s.
I'm not sticking around for more of the chess.com experience.