Well thats part of hetting better at chess, blundering and learning from that
Yeah, but can't argue that under 1000 elo you realy don't know what you're doing in chess. I make these blunders, missed tactics that were very easy in hindsight. I don't really know what i'm doing in chess anyway
But where did the fact that at 1500 your ok and not good until 2000, like the words
By 2000, so many games, we see players that actually know what they're doing and they're actually quite decent.
Above that goes from quite decent to excellent... and then even "out of this world"
1500, there are still some key mistakes that are made. Just look at Nelson Lopez's series. Even at 1500 there are still significant mistakes you're making.
It's 2000+ rating when the significant mistakes start going away, and then it's a small mistake that could decide winning or losing
To me being ok at something is relative, it can change depending on the subject
Yeah, but considering how <1000 elo blunder so much and miss many easy tactics (including myself) we really are crap at chess at that level
1500 is considered advanced
Source?
When you sign to chess.com it has new to chess, beginner, intermediate and advanced. When I clicked advanced I started out as 1500
I've played games against 700 that know what they are doing, and having few blunders
At 600 you develop planning
But your just crap at it
But your just crap at it
Me? I'm crap at it?
Nah... I trust the opinions of the much stronger rated players playing against people like us. They can see so many easy blunders and tactics. That just shows how bad we are at chess, unless we actually practice
What was that NM yaking source from, like if he takes source from bullet, your far more likely to blunder then in a 30 minute game
Think of a chess game as a slice of pizza. Eating the crust of the pizza is the same as playing on, while throwing away the crust is the same as resigning early.
You would still have planning. Like moving a knight to try make a fork and hope the other player wouldn’t notice. That would be 600 rated gameplay
But you eat the crust last
You would still have planning. Like moving a knight to try make a fork and hope the other player wouldn’t notice. That would be 600 rated gameplay
To some extent, although at 1000 elo, and to lesser extent 1500 elo these plans simply aren't very good.
People like Hikaru, GothamChess have played against these players. We can clearly see their hugely flawed planning, using their explanations
You would still have planning. Like moving a knight to try make a fork and hope the other player wouldn’t notice. That would be 600 rated gameplay
how tf are forks 600 rated gameplay??? I'm 500 rated and I fork all the time
That would explain the troll face, am i wrong?
i played a 2200 that hung all his pieces for no reason after losing 1, he wasrefusing to resign
i played a 2200 that hung all his pieces for no reason after losing 1, he wasrefusing to resign
Who was it, which game?
To me being ok at something is relative, it can change depending on the subject