... You dont just become titled by wanting it you have to want to totally destroy your opposition totally. Why do you think levy will never be a GM
Levy probably did the math and chose differently. He's probably more popular than Carlsen among the kids, making money off YouTube, enjoying life at the same time. Perhaps he "optimized forward" for the life he wanted.
I keep my chat open in the event the other player wishes to thank me for the game. If I do happen to read a foul message instead, then I thank them for the game, win or lose. Either way you are the better player for it - if not in skill, then in tact and class.
This is one reason I play online. I hate the oneupmanship in clubs and tournaments - the little putdowns and the way players treat each other based on their ratings. Its like high school jocks but for the socially awkward.
Obviously, Im not suggesting you should be toxic, its just the byproduct of the game, its the byproduct of anything really. think capitalism you have winners and losers. Billionaires get everything and the poor us we get nothing. Sound familiar
Billionaires don't waste time insulting people for ego, or talking about how poor and disadvantaged they are, they hustle. Even someone like trump insults for "clickbait" type publicity, he doesn't quietly insult someone in a private chess game.
nice 2400elo is good!
chess is a toxic competitive game where the objective is to destroy your opponent mentally
Why do you think people tilt when they lose because you have no one to blame but yourself and you just lost and they won. Loosing in chess is like the worse feeling you can feel. Winning is great however.
Wow. Since chess players usually lose half the time, that means you're miserable a lot. For me, I love losing because I pick a game apart and find out why. There is NO GREATER learning opportunity, in my opinion. Just a thought.
Within the traditionally austere domain of chess, the strategic deployment of trash talk may be understood as a subtle yet potent extension of psychological play. Far from mere frivolity, carefully calibrated verbal provocations can function as instruments of cognitive disruption, nudging an opponent away from optimal calculation and toward emotionally influenced decision-making. When executed with precision, such rhetoric introduces an additional layer of complexity to the contest, transforming it from a purely analytical exercise into a richer, more dynamic engagement of human faculties. Indeed, the grandmasters of competitive thought have long recognized that the mind under pressure is susceptible not only to positional threats on the board but also to suggestive pressures from beyond it.
Moreover, the practice of refined trash talk may be framed as a performative art that underscores the deeply interpersonal nature of chess competition. In this light, it serves not as a descent into unsportsmanlike conduct, but as a controlled expression of wit, confidence, and strategic acumen. The discerning practitioner understands that the goal is not crude insult but rather the cultivation of an atmosphere in which the opponent’s composure is gently eroded. Such exchanges, when bounded by mutual respect, can invigorate the match, heightening both tension and spectacle. Thus, far from undermining the intellectual dignity of chess, sophisticated trash talk may, paradoxically, illuminate the profound interplay between logic and psychology that defines the game at its highest levels.
Trash talk, not to be confused with smack talk, takes years to properly master. I'm sure we all appreciate the dedication it takes to reach Grand Master Trash Talker. Ask Larry Bird what it takes.
Proper Trash Talk is an art AND a science. I confess I suffer from Trash Talk Envy. I've been in therapy but it doesn't help. I still go on Forums and leave my litter everywhere I go. Thank you so much, Be3, for making others aware of this unique talent!!!
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.
Dude. A word you and I REALLY need to learn ... concise. 
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.
Dude. A word you and I REALLY need to learn ... concise.
It's a matter of opinion. It's your opinion, not mine.
cochinola
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.
Dude. A word you and I REALLY need to learn ... concise.
It's a matter of opinion. It's your opinion, not mine.
What a shockingly true statement! I certainly can't give your opinion ... I can only give my own! In fact, that's what we ALL DO ... give our own opinions. Just my opinion ...
Everyone hates bullet like I just want to flex my (used to be) 1000 elo
Everyone hates bullet
Nah
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.
Dude. A word you and I REALLY need to learn ... concise.
It's a matter of opinion. It's your opinion, not mine.
What a shockingly true statement! I certainly can't give your opinion ... I can only give my own! In fact, that's what we ALL DO ... give our own opinions. Just my opinion ...
Not everything is opinion, actually.
You can give it, but given that it's the antagonistic noise of a self-proclaimed artful troll there's no reason for me to listen or care about it. So why provide an opinion if you don't expect me to listen or care? What is the point? You're wasting time, go outside.
Sharing an opinion is, essentially, expressing ones feelings. People try to wrap their opinions up in expertise, but at their core they're always arbitrary. So giving your opinions relies on someone else sharing and reciprocating your feelings. Otherwise, you can't communicate.
So you're always asking for reciprocation and validation when you give an opinion. That's inescapable although I'm sure it bothers you.
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.
Dude. A word you and I REALLY need to learn ... concise.
It's a matter of opinion. It's your opinion, not mine.
What a shockingly true statement! I certainly can't give your opinion ... I can only give my own! In fact, that's what we ALL DO ... give our own opinions. Just my opinion ...
Not everything is opinion, actually.
You can give it, but given that it's the antagonistic noise of a self-proclaimed artful troll there's no reason for me to listen or care about it. So why provide an opinion if you don't expect me to listen or care? What is the point? You're wasting time, go outside.
Calling me a troll. Dude, get a life. You are now blocked.
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.
Dude. A word you and I REALLY need to learn ... concise.
It's a matter of opinion. It's your opinion, not mine.
What a shockingly true statement! I certainly can't give your opinion ... I can only give my own! In fact, that's what we ALL DO ... give our own opinions. Just my opinion ...
Not everything is opinion, actually.
You can give it, but given that it's the antagonistic noise of a self-proclaimed artful troll there's no reason for me to listen or care about it. So why provide an opinion if you don't expect me to listen or care? What is the point? You're wasting time, go outside.
Calling me a troll. Dude, get a life. You are now blocked.
World's most ridiculous dispute has escalated to the block level!
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.
Dude. A word you and I REALLY need to learn ... concise.
It's a matter of opinion. It's your opinion, not mine.
What a shockingly true statement! I certainly can't give your opinion ... I can only give my own! In fact, that's what we ALL DO ... give our own opinions. Just my opinion ...
Not everything is opinion, actually.
You can give it, but given that it's the antagonistic noise of a self-proclaimed artful troll there's no reason for me to listen or care about it. So why provide an opinion if you don't expect me to listen or care? What is the point? You're wasting time, go outside.
Calling me a troll. Dude, get a life. You are now blocked.
I guess thanks, for letting me know. I will make a post-it note of that and put it on my screen.
Bro this whole thing is delusional. Everything is pointless at the end of the day. You realize that isnt my attitude those are the facts. It is zero sum in accordance to game theory buddy. Everyone is toxic in some form or another. You clearly dont have the will to win thats why someone like myself will be a titled FM and you will not. You have to be a bit toxic and borderline egomaniacal to really want to destroy your opponent. I approach ju jitsu and everything else the same way. Guess who makes the most progress. I do. My next goal is to humble these highschoolers. They are the ones with the real ego. Why do you think tilting is thing. Why do people slam their table and break things when they lose. Because chess is an incredibly cruel game at its. Its beautiful but it is about having the will to win. It is the same when tom brady talked about never being friends with his competition he is their to absolutely crush them and to win at all costs. Thats the mentality you can have if you really focus. Obviously being toxic is not a good thing. I will probably be much stronger than you in a year or so because attitude does matter. You dont just become titled by wanting it you have to want to totally destroy your opposition totally. Why do you think levy will never be a GM
Obviously, Im not suggesting you should be toxic, its just the byproduct of the game, its the byproduct of anything really. think capitalism you have winners and losers. Billionaires get everything and the poor us we get nothing. Sound familiar
Its arguable that wealth envy is toxic but its only natural to want what they want and to become better and surpass them. If he had a yacht and you don't have one I think you'd get a little envious probably then start a company.
"Pointlessness" is not a physical property, it is an interpretation of meaning and purpose (or the lack thereof). By calling your interpretation a fact, you just commit a category error again.
Furthermore, if everything were pointless then winning would also be pointless, but I think what you mean is that nothing matters other than winning.
In game theory, a zero sum game describes the way a games scoring works, not the players social environment... You're using a mathematical definition of an aspect of a specific game as a model for your social behavior, it's yet another category error.
High level skill acquisition is usually motivated by an internal desire for mastery. Social comparison isn't a very reliable motivator. After all, if your goal is social status, there are much better ways to attain that... you're not going to be satisfied by what chess brings you, ultimately. Your skill will probably just plateau once you become more focused on perceived status / humbling highschoolers than correcting mistakes and truly mastering the game.
Winning is not contingent on emotional dysregulation. If anything, it requires discipline - it's the opposite.
Winning is good, but it's very important to *channel* the desire to win into something productive - something that'll actually pay off... for you, and others. Otherwise you're taking all that drive and energy, pouring it into something useless - flushing your real "potential" down the drain.
Again, I'm not critiquing chess - I would probably accept an argument that chess had some inherent value, at least subjectively. I'm following *your* logic to its natural conclusion - you are the one suggesting chess has no inherent value.
If that's true, and winning is all that matters, then you are wasting your time with chess. Because in reality your reward for winning at chess is *nothing*. This is the major difference between yourself and the billionaires / Tom Brady, etc. - they're playing a game where winning carries with it an actual payoff. That is my point.
You speak as if chess is the only avenue in your life that you can even fathom channeling your energy into. I'm 39 years old - when I was a teenager, I was the same way - I lived in a basement mostly alone, had no social connections, I'd lived in probably 25 different places... and I spent my entire life playing competitive RTS games. I was actually quite good - was ranked GM in a particular popular RTS. It took about 16 hours a day to get to that level. But that's all I did.
I really lived in a bubble... my Dad was cheating on my Mom for a decade, we hadn't found out yet... my brother became schizophrenic... my sister was an anorexic meth addict. The family had problems. The only thing I cared about was my game, and winning at it. Really I had focused into my game, as a way of zoning everyone else out.
In hindsight, the amount of time and energy I poured into RTS games was a massive waste of time. I could have had 2 PHDs instead, in the mean time. Fortunately, I got very lucky because much of the computer skills I developed transferred over into software engineering... But that was pure luck.
Nowdays I channel my competitive instinct into my career. Or my health. I spend most of my off days these days reading textbooks, in order to acquire higher level career certifications, to advance myself... I have much more money, independence, I'm much healthier, much happier... at work people look to me for answers. I've actually "won" in reality. That is something chess, or RTS, or any game - could never have done for me.
Going back to "life being RTS", or chess, sounds like a living hell. The drive for winning must be channeled into something worthwhile. And if, for you, chess is about nothing other than "social domination" - then it's actually a complete waste of time for you. And it's probably a compensation for some deep emotional problem that you have. And you should address it... which will mean, ultimately, giving up chess. In your case, I would highly recommend giving it up. Pursue something that will actually advance yourself socially.
If you were to argue chess had some inherent value the logic would be different, but in that case, your argument falls apart.