Stuck at the 700-900 range for a while now. Why?!

Sort:
Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

In my last 12 games, there are 4 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

Can you really not count? 8 + 2 + 1 = 11. But, there are no 8 losses in the last 11 games. There are only 7. Also in the last 12 games there are only 7 losses.

Go take the kindergarten math again, kid.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

No I am not afraid of your chess stats. I just do not care enough to do that.

Habanababananero
d4iscrazy kirjoitti:
Habanababananero wrote:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

In my last 12 games, there are 4 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

Can you really not count? 8 + 2 + 1 = 11. But, there are no 8 losses in the last 11 games. There are only 7. Also in the last 12 games there are only 7 losses.

Go take the kindergarten math again, kid.

No, in your last 12 games there are 8 losses, 5 draws and -1 wins due to timeout (in which you were losing), which adds up to 12.

Go hang some more pieces, kid.

Habanababananero
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:

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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

In my last 12 games, there are 4 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

Can you really not count? 8 + 2 + 1 = 11. But, there are no 8 losses in the last 11 games. There are only 7. Also in the last 12 games there are only 7 losses.

Go take the kindergarten math again, kid.

No, in your last 12 games there are 8 losses, 5 draws and -1 wins due to timeout (in which you were losing), which adds up to 12.

Go hang some more pieces, kid.

Not only am I much more skilled than you at chess, this statement is incorrect, as you might have noticed, I've hung 0 pieces in my rapid games. And even if I hung pieces against you, I'd still create a mating net and tangle you in your words (and pieces).

Also, calling me 'kid' is disrespectful to almost anybody in the tone you use it, so I would like if you refrained from calling me that in the future, please.

I will, once you accept, that the chessgod-guy was being rude to me and accept that what you just wrote is also very rude.

Deal?

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

I'm a minor, and you're suggesting for me to get into druhgs? Shameful, but as a person with a clear mind and maturity at it's finest, I'd rather not.

Well, what is inappropriate about me calling a minor a kid? I mean that is what minors are. They are kids.

And no, I do not suggest drugs, only medication prescribed by a doctor.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

I'm a minor, and you're suggesting for me to get into druhgs? Shameful, but as a person with a clear mind and maturity at it's finest, I'd rather not.

Well, what is inappropriate about me calling a minor a kid? I mean that is what minors are. They are kids.

And no, I do not suggest drugs, only medication prescribed by a doctor.

When did I say I was a minor? I'm actually a major

comment #75

Memory issues that bad?

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

In my last 12 games, there are 4 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

Can you really not count? 8 + 2 + 1 = 11. But, there are no 8 losses in the last 11 games. There are only 7. Also in the last 12 games there are only 7 losses.

Go take the kindergarten math again, kid.

No, in your last 12 games there are 8 losses, 5 draws and -1 wins due to timeout (in which you were losing), which adds up to 12.

Go hang some more pieces, kid.

Not only am I much more skilled than you at chess, this statement is incorrect, as you might have noticed, I've hung 0 pieces in my rapid games. And even if I hung pieces against you, I'd still create a mating net and tangle you in your words (and pieces).

Also, calling me 'kid' is disrespectful to almost anybody in the tone you use it, so I would like if you refrained from calling me that in the future, please.

I will, once you accept, that the chessgod-guy was being rude to me and accept that what you just wrote is also very rude.

Deal?

What I just wrote is not rude, it's true. Although I do believe that you can improve a lot, so there's that. You have potential, my friend, you just need to use it in the right way.

I do consider putting people down because of their rating rude and very lame behavior.

And I only ever do it myself after people do it to me first, which is basically, what the chessgod-guy did by saying that I have gotten stuck etc. and in private messages earlier, before I blocked them.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

I'm a minor, and you're suggesting for me to get into druhgs? Shameful, but as a person with a clear mind and maturity at it's finest, I'd rather not.

Well, what is inappropriate about me calling a minor a kid? I mean that is what minors are. They are kids.

And no, I do not suggest drugs, only medication prescribed by a doctor.

When did I say I was a minor? I'm actually a major

comment #75

Memory issues that bad?

Check it again, I wrote down major man. Also stop insulting me, not only is it not considerate it's not true, in fact I have GREAT memory.

Sorry, but the comment editing doesn't work, because I quoted you before you edited the text and the quote can be found for example in comments #77 #78 #79.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

I'm a minor, and you're suggesting for me to get into druhgs? Shameful, but as a person with a clear mind and maturity at it's finest, I'd rather not.

Well, what is inappropriate about me calling a minor a kid? I mean that is what minors are. They are kids.

And no, I do not suggest drugs, only medication prescribed by a doctor.

When did I say I was a minor? I'm actually a major

comment #75

Memory issues that bad?

Check it again, I wrote down major man. Also stop insulting me, not only is it not considerate it's not true, in fact I have GREAT memory.

Also, it would not make a lot of sense, to say something like this "I'm a major and you are suggesting for me to get into drugs?".

It sounds like you would find it more acceptable to suggest drug use to minors than it would be to suggest drug use to majors.

Now, I do not suggest drug use at all, for anyone, but prescribed medication for getting mad easily could be a good idea.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

In my last 12 games, there are 4 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

Can you really not count? 8 + 2 + 1 = 11. But, there are no 8 losses in the last 11 games. There are only 7. Also in the last 12 games there are only 7 losses.

Go take the kindergarten math again, kid.

No, in your last 12 games there are 8 losses, 5 draws and -1 wins due to timeout (in which you were losing), which adds up to 12.

Go hang some more pieces, kid.

Not only am I much more skilled than you at chess, this statement is incorrect, as you might have noticed, I've hung 0 pieces in my rapid games. And even if I hung pieces against you, I'd still create a mating net and tangle you in your words (and pieces).

Also, calling me 'kid' is disrespectful to almost anybody in the tone you use it, so I would like if you refrained from calling me that in the future, please.

I will, once you accept, that the chessgod-guy was being rude to me and accept that what you just wrote is also very rude.

Deal?

What I just wrote is not rude, it's true. Although I do believe that you can improve a lot, so there's that. You have potential, my friend, you just need to use it in the right way.

I do consider putting people down because of their rating rude and very lame behavior.

And I only ever do it myself after people do it to me first, which is basically, what the chessgod-guy did by saying that I have gotten stuck etc. and in private messages earlier, before I blocked them.

That's not what I was doing

What exactly were you doing then, when you wrote this: "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" in comment #40?

Please elaborate.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

I'm a minor, and you're suggesting for me to get into druhgs? Shameful, but as a person with a clear mind and maturity at it's finest, I'd rather not.

Well, what is inappropriate about me calling a minor a kid? I mean that is what minors are. They are kids.

And no, I do not suggest drugs, only medication prescribed by a doctor.

When did I say I was a minor? I'm actually a major

comment #75

Memory issues that bad?

Check it again, I wrote down major man. Also stop insulting me, not only is it not considerate it's not true, in fact I have GREAT memory.

Sorry, but the comment editing doesn't work, because I quoted you before you edited the text and the quote can be found for example in comments #77 #78 #79.

That was me mis-typing.

Yeah right, kid.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

In my last 12 games, there are 4 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

Can you really not count? 8 + 2 + 1 = 11. But, there are no 8 losses in the last 11 games. There are only 7. Also in the last 12 games there are only 7 losses.

Go take the kindergarten math again, kid.

No, in your last 12 games there are 8 losses, 5 draws and -1 wins due to timeout (in which you were losing), which adds up to 12.

Go hang some more pieces, kid.

Not only am I much more skilled than you at chess, this statement is incorrect, as you might have noticed, I've hung 0 pieces in my rapid games. And even if I hung pieces against you, I'd still create a mating net and tangle you in your words (and pieces).

Also, calling me 'kid' is disrespectful to almost anybody in the tone you use it, so I would like if you refrained from calling me that in the future, please.

I will, once you accept, that the chessgod-guy was being rude to me and accept that what you just wrote is also very rude.

Deal?

What I just wrote is not rude, it's true. Although I do believe that you can improve a lot, so there's that. You have potential, my friend, you just need to use it in the right way.

I do consider putting people down because of their rating rude and very lame behavior.

And I only ever do it myself after people do it to me first, which is basically, what the chessgod-guy did by saying that I have gotten stuck etc. and in private messages earlier, before I blocked them.

That's not what I was doing

What exactly were you doing then, when you wrote this: "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" in comment #40?

Please elaborate.

I'm not putting anyone down, I'm also bad, but a better bad. I'm just talking from experience, and that comment was helpful as it showed that if you stop creating holes in your position you might improve a bit.

Calling people trash, is definitely rude. And your comment was not given as advice, but as dissing. Even if it were advice, it is so general and vague, that it would be of no use.

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

I'm a minor, and you're suggesting for me to get into druhgs? Shameful, but as a person with a clear mind and maturity at it's finest, I'd rather not.

Well, what is inappropriate about me calling a minor a kid? I mean that is what minors are. They are kids.

And no, I do not suggest drugs, only medication prescribed by a doctor.

When did I say I was a minor? I'm actually a major

comment #75

Memory issues that bad?

Check it again, I wrote down major man. Also stop insulting me, not only is it not considerate it's not true, in fact I have GREAT memory.

Sorry, but the comment editing doesn't work, because I quoted you before you edited the text and the quote can be found for example in comments #77 #78 #79.

That was me mis-typing.

Yeah right, kid.

Could you not be that rude? I don't know what I did to you, but you are being really hurtful to me.

I said, I will stop calling you kid, when you accept, that the chessgod-guy was being rude to me calling me Hannah.

Me calling you kid is not any more rude than that at least.

So do we have a deal or not?

Habanababananero
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:
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.

Because you are afraid of the truth.

Also I counted, there are 8 losses, 2 draws and 1 win in 12 games, so you lost 9 times bro.

In my last 12 games, there are 4 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses.

Can you really not count? 8 + 2 + 1 = 11. But, there are no 8 losses in the last 11 games. There are only 7. Also in the last 12 games there are only 7 losses.

Go take the kindergarten math again, kid.

No, in your last 12 games there are 8 losses, 5 draws and -1 wins due to timeout (in which you were losing), which adds up to 12.

Go hang some more pieces, kid.

Not only am I much more skilled than you at chess, this statement is incorrect, as you might have noticed, I've hung 0 pieces in my rapid games. And even if I hung pieces against you, I'd still create a mating net and tangle you in your words (and pieces).

Also, calling me 'kid' is disrespectful to almost anybody in the tone you use it, so I would like if you refrained from calling me that in the future, please.

I will, once you accept, that the chessgod-guy was being rude to me and accept that what you just wrote is also very rude.

Deal?

What I just wrote is not rude, it's true. Although I do believe that you can improve a lot, so there's that. You have potential, my friend, you just need to use it in the right way.

I do consider putting people down because of their rating rude and very lame behavior.

And I only ever do it myself after people do it to me first, which is basically, what the chessgod-guy did by saying that I have gotten stuck etc. and in private messages earlier, before I blocked them.

That's not what I was doing

What exactly were you doing then, when you wrote this: "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" in comment #40?

Please elaborate.

I'm not putting anyone down, I'm also bad, but a better bad. I'm just talking from experience, and that comment was helpful as it showed that if you stop creating holes in your position you might improve a bit.

Calling people trash, is definitely rude. And your comment was not given as advice, but as dissing. Even if it were advice, it is so general and vague, that it would be of no use.

The vague comments would probably be gold to some 1300s. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean others won't.

Let me know when you find a 1300 who likes that advice given exactly in the words you used.

Habanababananero
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:
d4iscrazy kirjoitti:
Habanababananero wrote:
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.

Exactly, you aren't considerate. One man argued with me about how a knight can block a check, and after some convincing he told me he had autism, and taught me a valuable lesson on being considerate.

Well, the chessgod-guy should be considerate enough to not call me Hannah after I have told him not to do that.

Autistic or not, that does not matter.

Oh, so if I am mad at certain points due to a condition, maybe high blood pressure or smth, and you come here and accuse me of doing things I never did, maybe that would trigger me? But it doesn't matter to you, as you haven't learned to be considerate.

Oh, are you mad? Try some pills to calm yourself.

I'm a minor, and you're suggesting for me to get into druhgs? Shameful, but as a person with a clear mind and maturity at it's finest, I'd rather not.

Well, what is inappropriate about me calling a minor a kid? I mean that is what minors are. They are kids.

And no, I do not suggest drugs, only medication prescribed by a doctor.

When did I say I was a minor? I'm actually a major

comment #75

Memory issues that bad?

Check it again, I wrote down major man. Also stop insulting me, not only is it not considerate it's not true, in fact I have GREAT memory.

Sorry, but the comment editing doesn't work, because I quoted you before you edited the text and the quote can be found for example in comments #77 #78 #79.

That was me mis-typing.

Yeah right, kid.

Could you not be that rude? I don't know what I did to you, but you are being really hurtful to me.

I said, I will stop calling you kid, when you accept, that the chessgod-guy was being rude to me calling me Hannah.

Me calling you kid is not any more rude than that at least.

So do we have a deal or not?

Yeah, although I didn't know if y'all had like a discussion in PM or not.

We did, and I blocked him. Him asking me to unblock can be found in comment #30 so you can confirm this yourself quite easily.

SriyoTheGreat

Believe me when I say this I've been in your place. I've dropped from 820 to 680 in a month. What I suggest is to play 2 - 3 games and then take a break, that is play a different time control, play variants or do puzzles. This has helped me to rise upto 920. What happens is when you lose a game your mood gets ruined and because you keep thinking about the lost game that you don't play the current game mindfully and end up making silly mistakes. It becomes a chain reaction. So, my advice is to take breaks between every 2 or 3 games.

arosbishop

Get yourself a good beginners book and work through it with a real chessboard. Play only 15 min games and analyze them.

Stuckfish
KnifeParty1302 wrote:

let me know if you want a coach. i will help. 8$ for a 2 hours class

That's a really good value offer. Have you coached before?