I’m failing to see the big time sink atm.
Why dumb? Because in the end it’s not logical to pursue a game which isn’t that rewarding in correlation to time.
Is the juice worth the squeeze? Maybe more luck getting blood out of stone I guess
Dumb Game
Sort:
Dumb time controls, dumb formats
I’m failing to see the big time sink atm.
Why dumb? Because in the end it’s not logical to pursue a game which isn’t that rewarding in correlation to time.
Is the juice worth the squeeze? Maybe more luck getting blood out of stone I guess
I’m failing to see the big time sink atm.
Why dumb? Because in the end it’s not logical to pursue a game which isn’t that rewarding in correlation to time.
Is the juice worth the squeeze? Maybe more luck getting blood out of stone I guess
I also say those who are great at it have a complex too.
If you're not having fun anymore I suggest taking a break, short or long.
Did take a break came back to it with a fresh set of eyes it’s a bit of a con job game imo.
Now what's this? Some kinda spam?
Nah just an honest opinion
Anyone under 2000+ isn’t playing “chess” that’s my whole point, playing a different game so why sell it as is. Huge con job across the board to sell the fantasy idea. It’s a reality proposition
Lot like tennis or any other extremely young or given activity which requires beginning startups at distinct points in time.
Only difference is the outlets try to sell bogutry for a minuscule improvement and the tools to help you themselves are archaic at best.
Why make something that seems “alien” seem more alien? It’s dumb. Even the quote unquote beginners hand book for example Chernevs Logical book has so much irony in it. It’s not logical at all.
To a beginner you might as well read the manual for rocket fuel.
Why struggle for notation/algebraic/descriptive? Seems to me in chess things are made harder to make it harder to stroke the players that created the bogus to boost the self ego.
Simplify! H4, H5, yadadadada in teeny tiny writing. Stupidity of the highest order
And diagrams which well duh is sometimes even smaller!
I find great humour in Zero destroying Stockfish after learning Chess in 4 hours... why? Because Engines are fundamentally flawed. It’s a friggin sorting algorithm that’s it that’s all that it is. Zero came from GO which has a way higher understanding of position and a much more simplistic game but it’s harder a game funnily enough. But to understand the propositions much much clearer. Put rocks on table get more space that’s it.
I dunno I think in essence Chess is a very flawed all the way. Flawed in a sense there’s so much fat on it it becomes just a little fruit bearing hobby to 99.9% of people that play. Now tell me where’s the fun in that?
Lot like tennis or any other extremely young or given activity which requires beginning startups at distinct points in time.
Only difference is the outlets try to sell bogutry for a minuscule improvement and the tools to help you themselves are archaic at best.
Why make something that seems “alien” seem more alien? It’s dumb. Even the quote unquote beginners hand book for example Chernevs Logical book has so much irony in it. It’s not logical at all.
To a beginner you might as well read the manual for rocket fuel.
Why struggle for notation/algebraic/descriptive? Seems to me in chess things are made harder to make it harder to stroke the players that created the bogus to boost the self ego.
Simplify! H4, H5, yadadadada in teeny tiny writing. Stupidity of the highest order
And diagrams which well duh is sometimes even smaller!
I find great humour in Zero destroying Stockfish after learning Chess in 4 hours... why? Because Engines are fundamentally flawed. It’s a friggin sorting algorithm that’s it that’s all that it is. Zero came from GO which has a way higher understanding of position and a much more simplistic game but it’s harder a game funnily enough. But to understand the propositions much much clearer. Put rocks on table get more space that’s it.
I dunno I think in essence Chess is a very flawed all the way. Flawed in a sense there’s so much fat on it it becomes just a little fruit bearing hobby to 99.9% of people that play. Now tell me where’s the fun in that?
Feb 17, 2022
0
#9
Dcasey91 wrote: Did take a break came back to it with a fresh set of eyes it’s a bit of a con job game imo.
I don't know if this is so, maybe you should quit if you don't like because if you've already tooken a break and you don't like it, maybe find something else to do instead of complaining about it here
Feb 17, 2022
0
#10
Dcasey91 wrote: Anyone under 2000+ isn’t playing “chess” that’s my whole point, playing a different game so why sell it as is. Huge con job across the board to sell the fantasy idea. It’s a reality proposition
Lot like tennis or any other extremely young or given activity which requires beginning startups at distinct points in time.
Only difference is the outlets try to sell bogutry for a minuscule improvement and the tools to help you themselves are archaic at best.
Why make something that seems “alien” seem more alien? It’s dumb. Even the quote unquote beginners hand book for example Chernevs Logical book has so much irony in it. It’s not logical at all.
To a beginner you might as well read the manual for rocket fuel.
Why struggle for notation/algebraic/descriptive? Seems to me in chess things are made harder to make it harder to stroke the players that created the bogus to boost the self ego.
Simplify! H4, H5, yadadadada in teeny tiny writing. Stupidity of the highest order
And diagrams which well duh is sometimes even smaller!
I find great humour in Zero destroying Stockfish after learning Chess in 4 hours... why? Because Engines are fundamentally flawed. It’s a friggin sorting algorithm that’s it that’s all that it is. Zero came from GO which has a way higher understanding of position and a much more simplistic game but it’s harder a game funnily enough. But to understand the propositions much much clearer. Put rocks on table get more space that’s it.
I dunno I think in essence Chess is a very flawed all the way. Flawed in a sense there’s so much fat on it it becomes just a little fruit bearing hobby to 99.9% of people that play. Now tell me where’s the fun in that?
Here are some reasons how chess is fun, Chess is one of the most interesting sports because it never repeats itself, there are never two equal matches, and it never bores you. (if you are interested in the game) You can even play it online! There are many impressive internet sites in which you can play chess and have a pleasant time. And to that there's more and again maybe you should just quit
Feb 17, 2022
0
#11
It's fun till it's not fun. It's competitive puzzle solving that has some long-established patterns you have to learn to be competitive. Having a big ego over knowing how a puzzle box works is bad for sure and it happens in chess. So it can be fun if you enjoy the game but can also be super frustrating. It's understandable if you feel like this puzzle box was made by the cenobites. But it's fun if it's not taken too seriously. We'll never be Steph Curry but we can shoot some hoops and get a little bit better at threes and free throws.
Thanks Smaller Circles I just truly believe the fundamental concepts and teaching methods are borderline unusable. It’s not to end up like Curry because inherit talent for any discipline must exist beforehand. I don’t like the false propositions that I keep encountering. Just do xyz and viola.
Yes even the Polgar experiment was so flawed from the parents and to the children as Judit herself wasn’t the most talented etc. Everyone starts off at a base to work from in anything.
But I believe there is a very simple method to learn chess that is out there and actually usable instead of the diatribe of excess and non usefulness so to speak. Like Chess Habits is a probably the best thing in Chess I’ve ever come across.
One quote not moving the same piece twice in the opening is asinine also. The static value of pieces is the same flawed logic. I bet ya knights and bishops have won 1000x more games than a queen. I mean in all games yes even queen is borderline useless and sometime even “valuable” pieces become liabilities and non factors in the end.
I enjoy games from centuries ago and hopefully it goes back to that aspect. I do think Morphy/Anderssen has it dead right.
The class aspect turns me off greatly it can be a very selfish/self consuming endeavour.
Yes even the Polgar experiment was so flawed from the parents and to the children as Judit herself wasn’t the most talented etc. Everyone starts off at a base to work from in anything.
But I believe there is a very simple method to learn chess that is out there and actually usable instead of the diatribe of excess and non usefulness so to speak. Like Chess Habits is a probably the best thing in Chess I’ve ever come across.
One quote not moving the same piece twice in the opening is asinine also. The static value of pieces is the same flawed logic. I bet ya knights and bishops have won 1000x more games than a queen. I mean in all games yes even queen is borderline useless and sometime even “valuable” pieces become liabilities and non factors in the end.
I enjoy games from centuries ago and hopefully it goes back to that aspect. I do think Morphy/Anderssen has it dead right.
The class aspect turns me off greatly it can be a very selfish/self consuming endeavour.
I’m failing to understand the point of such a stringent but ultimately ridiculously flawed value based puzzle game it doesn’t seem all that worthwhile after all
What is the point oif trolling here? You decided that chess is not good for you, OK, fine, move on with your life.
Over it.