Stuck at the 700-900 range for a while now. Why?! - Chess Forums - Page 2

Cobra2721

Aug 10, 2023

0

#21

Stop blundering

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#22

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#23

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

But you will be cracked If I start to tell u this.

Facts:

Your rapid rating is a little under 1100.

My rapid rating is a little under 1400.

You can not use the quote button.

Whatever records you claim, I do not care, your rating is what it is and it is under 1100.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#24

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Btw, Hannah Can you unblock me so I can private message? I won't be rude again. I promise. sry for earlier

No I can’t. You are rude right now and will be reported to chess.com.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#25

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#26

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Btw, Hannah Can you unblock me so I can private message? I won't be rude again. I promise. sry for earlier

No I can’t. You are rude right now and will be reported to chess.com.

chess.com does nothing lmfao stop the believing

I guess we'll see about that.

Kind of odd to me that you found it necessary to write these comments. The whole thing had absolutely nothing to do with you after all...

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#27

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

you should get to at least 1700 before you can say that you are better than someone

That makes no sense. 1300 is going to be way better than 800 and 800 better than 400...

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#28

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

I know this guy, I've played with him OTB in some tournament, his rating is actually higher than yours. Btw, 1300 is trash, it's 100 points higher than the people who drop a queen and create so many holes in their position it looks like Stamford Bridge in 2003

Whatever. That guy came here and started being rude for no reason. Then you come to his aid like some prince that comes to the rescue of a princess.

Do you not see that the dude is just annoying me and calling me Hannah and all that bs? Are you blind?

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#29

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

But you will be cracked If I start to tell u this.

Facts:

Your rapid rating is a little under 1100.

My rapid rating is a little under 1400.

You can note use the quote button.

Whatever records you claim, I do not care, your rating is what it is and it is under 1100.

You don't even play otb. What are you talking about? If you ask top gms in the world, they willl say rapid doesn't matter. Is blitz and bullet.

Wrong. I do play OTB and my rating at the moment is a little over 1500 in the Finnish national rating system. The time control I have played has been 70 minutes with 30 second increment which is considered classical.

You just say random stuff without knowing anything about what you are talking about. i guess because you just want to be annoying. Keep it up, I will keep reporting you.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#30

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

But you will be cracked If I start to tell u this.

Facts:

Your rapid rating is a little under 1100.

My rapid rating is a little under 1400.

You can note use the quote button.

Whatever records you claim, I do not care, your rating is what it is and it is under 1100.

You don't even play otb. What are you talking about? If you ask top gms in the world, they willl say rapid doesn't matter. Is blitz and bullet.

And yeah, maybe for GMs, bullet and blitz make sense. Even masters.

But for beginners, like you and me, bullet is just pointless piece shuffling and has very very little to do with actual chess.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#31

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

I know this guy, I've played with him OTB in some tournament, his rating is actually higher than yours. Btw, 1300 is trash, it's 100 points higher than the people who drop a queen and create so many holes in their position it looks like Stamford Bridge in 2003

Whatever. That guy came here and started being rude for no reason. Then you come to his aid like some prince that comes to the rescue of a princess.

Do you not see that the dude is just annoying me and calling me Hannah and all that bs? Are you blind?

Where is it?

Where is what?

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#32

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

you should get to at least 1700 before you can say that you are better than someone

That makes no sense. 1300 is going to be way better than 800 and 800 better than 400...

no, you all play the same

No, they do not.

I was 400 when I started and I know pretty damn well that there is a huge difference between 400 and 1300.

You can deduce this from the percentiles and rating distribution graphs even if you bother to use half a brain.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#33

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

I know this guy, I've played with him OTB in some tournament, his rating is actually higher than yours. Btw, 1300 is trash, it's 100 points higher than the people who drop a queen and create so many holes in their position it looks like Stamford Bridge in 2003

Whatever. That guy came here and started being rude for no reason. Then you come to his aid like some prince that comes to the rescue of a princess.

Do you not see that the dude is just annoying me and calling me Hannah and all that bs? Are you blind?

Where is it?

Where is what?

the name-calling

Comments number #23 and #24. Ask your mom to read them out for you.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#34

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

you should get to at least 1700 before you can say that you are better than someone

That makes no sense. 1300 is going to be way better than 800 and 800 better than 400...

no, you all play the same

No, they do not.

I was 400 when I started and I know pretty damn well that there is a huge difference between 400 and 1300.

You can deduce this from the percentiles and rating distribution graphs even if you bother to use half a brain.

you all hang pieces and make so many holes in your position it's like Milan's field

According to the ”insights” I hung exactly 1 piece and 1 pawn in my last 11 games. Those were all the games I played these last 7 days.

Believe it or not, but that’s the way it is.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#35

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

I know this guy, I've played with him OTB in some tournament, his rating is actually higher than yours. Btw, 1300 is trash, it's 100 points higher than the people who drop a queen and create so many holes in their position it looks like Stamford Bridge in 2003

Whatever. That guy came here and started being rude for no reason. Then you come to his aid like some prince that comes to the rescue of a princess.

Do you not see that the dude is just annoying me and calling me Hannah and all that bs? Are you blind?

Where is it?

Where is what?

the name-calling

Comments number #23 and #24. Ask your mom to read them out for you.

I don't know bro, I'm not seeing anything wrong there, it looks like a normal and helpful comment. Could you emphasize the rudeness?

My name is not Hannah. I am male. Calling me Hannah repeatedly is definitely rude.

What part of his comment was helpful?

Also, you have hung 196 pawns, 12 Knights, 19 Bishops, 25 Rooks and 8 Queens in your last 580 Blitz games. I used Blitz here because you do not seem to play a lot of rapid.

That is a piece hung every 9 games or so. Basically you hang pieces quite a lot yourself.

And yes, I am sure there are plenty of mistakes in my games, if there were not I would be rated way higher. I am trying to improve however.

Why you feel the need to point out my mistakes, I really do not understand...

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#36

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

you should get to at least 1700 before you can say that you are better than someone

That makes no sense. 1300 is going to be way better than 800 and 800 better than 400...

no, you all play the same

No, they do not.

I was 400 when I started and I know pretty damn well that there is a huge difference between 400 and 1300.

You can deduce this from the percentiles and rating distribution graphs even if you bother to use half a brain.

you all hang pieces and make so many holes in your position it's like Milan's field

According to the ”insights” I hung exactly 1 piece and 1 pawn in my last 11 games. Those were all the games I played these last 7 days.

Believe it or not, but that’s the way it is.

I just checked ur games because I'm pretty sure insights is on crack, but not only did you trap your own rook in one game, you then proceeded to make his rook godly. And yes, there were so many holes in your positions it was too much for me, and I don't want to see the remaining 6 losses.

Do you know how to calculate?

My last game was a draw, then there are 4 losses and then 2 wins.

Somehow you check one game and come to the conclusion, there are 6 remaining losses.

Pay some attention in your next math class, boy.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#37

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

you should get to at least 1700 before you can say that you are better than someone

That makes no sense. 1300 is going to be way better than 800 and 800 better than 400...

no, you all play the same

No, they do not.

I was 400 when I started and I know pretty damn well that there is a huge difference between 400 and 1300.

You can deduce this from the percentiles and rating distribution graphs even if you bother to use half a brain.

you all hang pieces and make so many holes in your position it's like Milan's field

According to the ”insights” I hung exactly 1 piece and 1 pawn in my last 11 games. Those were all the games I played these last 7 days.

Believe it or not, but that’s the way it is.

I just checked ur games because I'm pretty sure insights is on crack, but not only did you trap your own rook in one game, you then proceeded to make his rook godly. And yes, there were so many holes in your positions it was too much for me, and I don't want to see the remaining 6 losses.

Do you know how to calculate?

My last game was draw, then there are 4 losses and then 2 wins.

Somehow you check one game and come to the conclusion, there are 6 remaining losses.

Pay some attention in your next math class, boy.

1+4+2 does not equal 11. When you consider that red = 'loss', grey = 'draw and green = 'win' (as per experimental tests where the results of a 'chess' game relate to the color based off 580 blitz games.

Considering this, and the terminology used in your post, we can conclude that the best way to find reds is to count 11 down from your game, and then use basic kindergarten counting skills to find that the amount of losses in this dataset is 7. Precisely, you have 2 wins, 1 draw, and 9 losses.

This experimental test has concluded, where you have had 8 losses in your last 11 games.

OK. So you were referring to the 11 games in the last 7 days. I thought you were just looking at my last played games in chronological order. My bad in this case.

How about the amount of pieces you hang though? Any comment on that?

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#38

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

you should get to at least 1700 before you can say that you are better than someone

That makes no sense. 1300 is going to be way better than 800 and 800 better than 400...

no, you all play the same

No, they do not.

I was 400 when I started and I know pretty damn well that there is a huge difference between 400 and 1300.

You can deduce this from the percentiles and rating distribution graphs even if you bother to use half a brain.

you all hang pieces and make so many holes in your position it's like Milan's field

According to the ”insights” I hung exactly 1 piece and 1 pawn in my last 11 games. Those were all the games I played these last 7 days.

Believe it or not, but that’s the way it is.

I just checked ur games because I'm pretty sure insights is on crack, but not only did you trap your own rook in one game, you then proceeded to make his rook godly. And yes, there were so many holes in your positions it was too much for me, and I don't want to see the remaining 6 losses.

Do you know how to calculate?

My last game was draw, then there are 4 losses and then 2 wins.

Somehow you check one game and come to the conclusion, there are 6 remaining losses.

Pay some attention in your next math class, boy.

1+4+2 does not equal 11. When you consider that red = 'loss', grey = 'draw and green = 'win' (as per experimental tests where the results of a 'chess' game relate to the color based off 580 blitz games.

Considering this, and the terminology used in your post, we can conclude that the best way to find reds is to count 11 down from your game, and then use basic kindergarten counting skills to find that the amount of losses in this dataset is 7. Precisely, you have 2 wins, 1 draw, and 9 losses.

This experimental test has concluded, where you have had 8 losses in your last 11 games.

Your math went wrong though.

There are 3 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

So maybe still, pay a little more attention in the math class.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#39

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

thechessgod5454 kirjoitti:

Hannah hope you get ur rating back again

I am just a forum guy who post every single forum that is posted.

It is luck that I bumped into u who post on this too.

Your rapid rating is lower than mine and I don’t care about your bullet rating.

Anyone can go check and your rating is lower.

And my name is not Hannah, so at least try to get that in your head.

Also, are you really not able to learn how to use the quote button correctly, so you don’t write your comments into the quote?

I don’t care what you hope. Rating climb is not always linear but I will climb some day, when I have improved enough.

1400 hundred using the rating excuse

What excuse? I am not making any excuses here. And I was only talking about ratings after the dude brought it into the conversation.

you should get to at least 1700 before you can say that you are better than someone

That makes no sense. 1300 is going to be way better than 800 and 800 better than 400...

no, you all play the same

No, they do not.

I was 400 when I started and I know pretty damn well that there is a huge difference between 400 and 1300.

You can deduce this from the percentiles and rating distribution graphs even if you bother to use half a brain.

you all hang pieces and make so many holes in your position it's like Milan's field

According to the ”insights” I hung exactly 1 piece and 1 pawn in my last 11 games. Those were all the games I played these last 7 days.

Believe it or not, but that’s the way it is.

I just checked ur games because I'm pretty sure insights is on crack, but not only did you trap your own rook in one game, you then proceeded to make his rook godly. And yes, there were so many holes in your positions it was too much for me, and I don't want to see the remaining 6 losses.

Do you know how to calculate?

My last game was draw, then there are 4 losses and then 2 wins.

Somehow you check one game and come to the conclusion, there are 6 remaining losses.

Pay some attention in your next math class, boy.

1+4+2 does not equal 11. When you consider that red = 'loss', grey = 'draw and green = 'win' (as per experimental tests where the results of a 'chess' game relate to the color based off 580 blitz games.

Considering this, and the terminology used in your post, we can conclude that the best way to find reds is to count 11 down from your game, and then use basic kindergarten counting skills to find that the amount of losses in this dataset is 7. Precisely, you have 2 wins, 1 draw, and 9 losses.

This experimental test has concluded, where you have had 8 losses in your last 11 games.

OK. So you were referring to the 11 games in the last 7 days. I thought you were just looking at my last played games in chronological order. My bad in this case.

How about the amount of pieces you hang though? Any comment on that?

I also try to create art when I'm not trying, so I'm just going to hang 20 zillion pieces in order to go h4-h5, and then I anyway win because 1700s suck. Maybe check my rapid games, even if you wish for more accuracy go to lichess d4isnotcrazy and try to ignore blitz because same situation except worse.

I absolutely will NOT do that.

Habanababananero

Aug 10, 2023

0

#40

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

d4iscrazy kirjoitti:

I know this guy, I've played with him OTB in some tournament, his rating is actually higher than yours. Btw, 1300 is trash, it's 100 points higher than the people who drop a queen and create so many holes in their position it looks like Stamford Bridge in 2003

Whatever. That guy came here and started being rude for no reason. Then you come to his aid like some prince that comes to the rescue of a princess.

Do you not see that the dude is just annoying me and calling me Hannah and all that bs? Are you blind?

Where is it?

Where is what?

the name-calling

Comments number #23 and #24. Ask your mom to read them out for you.

I don't know bro, I'm not seeing anything wrong there, it looks like a normal and helpful comment. Could you emphasize the rudeness?

My name is not Hannah. I am male. Calling me Hannah repeatedly is definitely rude.

What part of his comment was helpful?

Also, you have hung 196 pawns, 12 Knights, 19 Bishops, 25 Rooks and 8 Queens in your last 580 Blitz games. I used Blitz here because you do not seem to play a lot of rapid.

That is a piece hung every 9 games or so. Basically you hang pieces quite a lot yourself.

And yes, I am sure there are plenty of mistakes in my games, if there were not I would be rated way higher. I am trying to improve however.

Why you feel the need to point out my mistakes, I really do not understand...

Have you considered that people may have issues in development, brain, etc.? No, you didn't, because you aren't considerate. Even if he doesn't, it could be because he wants to express frustration, and seeing as you are repeatedly complaining about non-existent issues and then trying to express 'superiority' as a person, it's understandable.

Also, consider this: I literally don't give two sh*ts about my blitz rating right now, because my main focus is hitting 2600 bullet. Blitz is just training and opening practice.

No, I have not considered possible development issues.

Just read the conversation. He just comes up, and starts saying I am wrong and that I am lying and calling me Hannah.

I did absolutely nothing, but comment on this thread, trying to give advice to the OP. The chessgod-guy was not even in this thread before he came in with a comment, saying that I am lying.

Scroll back in the conversation and see for yourself.