Yeah I don't know what y'all are doing in this topic
Did this guy take me seriously?
Sort:
Nov 11, 2021
0
#123
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
alphaous wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
1. Yes, but because players have almost no time to think, bullet is a chess variant.
2. Yes, you are not. Just because you beat some higher rated player in a variant, doesn't make you good at chess. Even if you want to be good at the variant, just because you beat someone higher rated than you doesn't make you as good as a 2000 rated player.
3. I did read the thread, but I just wanted to point out that regardless this is irrelevant.
4. I don't understand what you mean???
Technically, I am much better than you in chess.
1. I guess it's a matter of opinion. I don't think it's very meaningful, but I don't think it should be called a variant. At the same time, it does not really have the same necessary skills as regular chess.
2. I can, and my question was rhetorical. Whether you think I should not be getting too excited is a different story, and by all means up for debate, and I probably should not. And nowhere did I claim to be 2000 strength.
3. If you read the thread, then you know that I asked a question that has mostly been answered. I respectfully disagree with you on the relevance of this topic.
4. If you think bullet isn't chess, why have you played 1400 games of it?
I know you are better at chess, that's not a question, but it's also not the point.
2. If you are excited after beating a 2000 rated player, you likely will think that you are under rated.
4. I played 1400 games before I decided to stop my addiction to this variant and actually play chess
2. You assumed that it appears because I did not say that I'm underrated, I only made a joke or two about it. Next time please limit your arguments to what I have said, not what you think I am thinking.
4. I understand. Bullet can be addictive. But I rarely play bullet because as I said earlier, bullet does not really have the same necessary skills as regular chess, but I still don't think it's a variant. No rules have been changed, you just get less time. High level players can even play very good games in bullet.
It appears that you did not have a sufficient counter for any of my other arguments.
alphaous wrote:
Yesterday I accepted an unrated 1 min game from a 2000 rated bullet player. I am 1500 blitz and 1000 rated bullet. I expected to get destroyed and maybe learn something, but to my shock, I won four out of our five games! I was ahead on time for most of the games, but I didn't just win on time, in most of the games I was dominating! So am I a secret prodigy, Is he overrated, or was he messing around since it was unrated?
He might be new man, people can chose their ratings for their own type of chess
Nov 11, 2021
0
#125
YangyangShen wrote:
alphaous wrote:
Yesterday I accepted an unrated 1 min game from a 2000 rated bullet player. I am 1500 blitz and 1000 rated bullet. I expected to get destroyed and maybe learn something, but to my shock, I won four out of our five games! I was ahead on time for most of the games, but I didn't just win on time, in most of the games I was dominating! So am I a secret prodigy, Is he overrated, or was he messing around since it was unrated?
He might be new man, people can chose their ratings for their own type of chess
The guy has played 40000 games. I suggest you read the first five pages of this thread so you can see some interesting thoughts and then look at my hypothesis on post #124.
The second theory is that person plays to much rapid or blitz and has a mouse that is slow, so he's q slowpoke at moving these pieces. Also, you might've made him think or check his premoves. Or, in fact, he doesn't put on the premove on button.
Nov 11, 2021
0
#127
YangyangShen wrote:
The second theory is that person plays to much rapid or blitz and has a mouse that is slow, so he's q slowpoke at moving these pieces. Also, you might've made him think or check his premoves. Or, in fact, he doesn't put on the premove on button.
Possibly. But that wouldn't explain some suspicious games on his account. His level based off the games he has played appears to be much lower than 2000.
which means that he chose an overrated rating for himself and is a very easy player, with no improvement
Nov 11, 2021
0
#129
His account was founded years ago, he skyrocketed from 1000 to 2000 in a less than a year, and has stayed there ever since. I have a hypothesis on post #124 on why this might have happened.
Then might have played a few games an stayed there by playing unrated then, so rated to unrated
Nov 11, 2021
0
#131
alphaous wrote:
I looked at his account one more time, and have come to this conclusion (NOTE THAT THIS IS ONLY A HYPOTHESIS): This account was made by a weak player, who let a strong player (let's say older brother) play games on his account for while. Well, his brother played rated games and catapulted his rating rather quickly to 2000. Now the little brother is left with a problem: he doesn't want to lose all those nice rating points, but he still wants to play some chess. So he decides to play only unrated until he can become strong enough to stay at 2000. He has been trying this for years now, and occasionally plays a rated game to test his strength, and gets promptly destroyed. He licks his wounds and tries again, and sometimes he beats strong players and sometimes loses to weak players. I was somewhat of an anomaly, as I have a stronger rating on other time controls. I have no explanation for the 3 move wins against an account that was promptly closed, nor other strange and downright suspicious games on his account, but this is the best explanation I can give that would cover the varying strength of his games, and why he has such a strong rating.
My theory.
Probably the guy cheated the rating by only playing against opponents he knows, who will let him win. For example look at this rare rated game:
https://www.chess.com/game/live/28406463937
His opponent did not play like a 1938 and is banned for abuse.
Nov 11, 2021
0
#133
Numquam wrote:
Probably the guy cheated the rating by only playing against opponents he knows, who will let him win. For example look at this rare rated game:
https://www.chess.com/game/live/28406463937
His opponent did not play like a 1938 and is banned for abuse.
That's very possible.
Nov 11, 2021
0
#135
Goyael wrote:
π PLEASE STOP π
No! We aren't doing anything wrong, we're simply exchanging ideas.
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
alphaous wrote:
alphaous wrote:
I looked at his account one more time, and have come to this conclusion (NOTE THAT THIS IS ONLY A HYPOTHESIS): This account was made by a weak player, who let a strong player (let's say older brother) play games on his account for while. Well, his brother played rated games and catapulted his rating rather quickly to 2000. Now the little brother is left with a problem: he doesn't want to lose all those nice rating points, but he still wants to play some chess. So he decides to play only unrated until he can become strong enough to stay at 2000. He has been trying this for years now, and occasionally plays a rated game to test his strength, and gets promptly destroyed. He licks his wounds and tries again, and sometimes he beats strong players and sometimes loses to weak players. I was somewhat of an anomaly, as I have a stronger rating on other time controls. I have no explanation for the 3 move wins against an account that was promptly closed, nor other strange and downright suspicious games on his account, but this is the best explanation I can give that would cover the varying strength of his games, and why he has such a strong rating.
My theory.
Terribly unlikely. Your deduction skills are poor. How old are you?
Why so toxic? Relax lmao
Nov 11, 2021
0
#140
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
alphaous wrote:
alphaous wrote:
I looked at his account one more time, and have come to this conclusion (NOTE THAT THIS IS ONLY A HYPOTHESIS): This account was made by a weak player, who let a strong player (let's say older brother) play games on his account for while. Well, his brother played rated games and catapulted his rating rather quickly to 2000. Now the little brother is left with a problem: he doesn't want to lose all those nice rating points, but he still wants to play some chess. So he decides to play only unrated until he can become strong enough to stay at 2000. He has been trying this for years now, and occasionally plays a rated game to test his strength, and gets promptly destroyed. He licks his wounds and tries again, and sometimes he beats strong players and sometimes loses to weak players. I was somewhat of an anomaly, as I have a stronger rating on other time controls. I have no explanation for the 3 move wins against an account that was promptly closed, nor other strange and downright suspicious games on his account, but this is the best explanation I can give that would cover the varying strength of his games, and why he has such a strong rating.
My theory.
Terribly unlikely. Your deduction skills are poor. How old are you?
I'm so sorry! I should allow you to exhibit your genius methods instead of giving a reasonable explanation that covers the varying strength of his games, and his suspicious leap in a short time in 2017, and why he appears to be afraid to play rated. But by all means, search his account and give a better hypothesis. Now I suggest you refrain from attacking my deduction skills without even giving ONE reason why my hypothesis was unlikely. Why are you being so toxic? Your demeanor suggests that you are simply trying to lord over us and be arrogant and are failing miserably. First, you tell me to slap myself with a fly swatter (which I suggest you do to slap sense into yourself because I have no idea why you are being so rude), then you say that you are better than me in chess, which was NOT related to our conversation. Now you say I have bad deduction skills, and say that it is obvious. It is not. I gave a perfectly plausible explanation but you apparently wanted to continue being rude. Then you inquire about my age! That has very little to do with deduction skills, which you, as a twelve-year-old who is acting like a toddler, should know. I am happy to hear your deduction if it is not a pile of toxicity like everything else you have put on this thread.
Yesterday I accepted an unrated 1 min game from a 2000 rated bullet player. I am 1500 blitz and 1000 rated bullet. I expected to get destroyed and maybe learn something, but to my shock, I won four out of our five games! I was ahead on time for most of the games, but I didn't just win on time, in most of the games I was dominating! So am I a secret prodigy, Is he overrated, or was he messing around since it was unrated?
It is not chess, it is a chess variant. If you are excited about this go slap yourself in the face with a fly swatter and comeback.
And why a filthy fly swatter and not a number of far more sanitary objects?