I'm just saying, it's not the BEST game, EVER.
My best game EVER!
Sort:
May 6, 2018
0
#43
Bullet? This was a daily game. I was taking three or four hours on every move. That's why it's played at such a high level.
Bullet???? Obviously not. No way I would've come up with these moves in a mere second!
Feels like you two are the same person... both have a similar vocabulary and humor, unless you're twins/bffs/clones... :thinking:
My only question is how your main account is only 1800+ rating, instead of 4000. These moves contain intricacies so complex, so sophisticated, that even stockfish couldn't even begin to contemplate the simplest of your strategical strategies. There is only one logical explanation, and I applaud you for willingly giving the rest of us rookies a chance to live and settling for only 1800 ELO.
Though still, you may be surpassed by engines one day, because you made a couple inaccuracies, such as 20. a4 messing up your perfectly horizontal pawn structure when you should've taken out d5 to improve those pawns.
Anyara wrote:
Feels like you two are the same person... both have a similar vocabulary and humor, unless you're twins/bffs/clones... :thinking:
My only question is how your main account is only 1800+ rating, instead of 4000. These moves contain intricacies so complex, so sophisticated, that even stockfish couldn't even begin to contemplate the simplest of your strategical strategies. There is only one logical explanation, and I applaud you for willingly giving the rest of us rookies a chance to live and settling for only 1800 ELO.
Though still, you may be surpassed by engines one day, because you made a couple inaccuracies, such as 20. a4 messing up your perfectly horizontal pawn structure when you should've taken out d5 to improve those pawns.
Thank you for your advice, great sir. You definitely know what you’re talking about, unlike my opponent over here.
14. Rd4?? is a blunder -- you allow 15. Bf7#.
May 8, 2018
0
#48
We're actually not the same person, and I'm insulted that you think we are. My opponent was obviously complimented, as you can see; this is because I am far his superior, as this game proves.
Reepicheep14 wrote:
We're actually not the same person, and I'm insulted that you think we are. My opponent was obviously complimented, as you can see; this is because I am far his superior, as this game proves.
That makes no sense.
Reepicheep14 wrote:
We're actually not the same person, and I'm insulted that you think we are. My opponent was obviously complimented, as you can see; this is because I am far his superior, as this game proves.
Ah, but both of you enjoy utilizing the word "touchdown", which is such a rare word seen amongst Chess players that it can be reasonably assumed either you are both one or this is a coincidence that hints you should each buy a lottery ticket.
Anyara wrote:
Reepicheep14 wrote:
We're actually not the same person, and I'm insulted that you think we are. My opponent was obviously complimented, as you can see; this is because I am far his superior, as this game proves.
Ah, but both of you enjoy utilizing the word "touchdown", which is such a rare word seen amongst Chess players that it can be reasonably assumed either you are both one or this is a coincidence that hints you should each buy a lottery ticket.
Everyone should know about the touchdown tactic.
Junebug444 wrote:
Anyara wrote:
Reepicheep14 wrote:
We're actually not the same person, and I'm insulted that you think we are. My opponent was obviously complimented, as you can see; this is because I am far his superior, as this game proves.
Ah, but both of you enjoy utilizing the word "touchdown", which is such a rare word seen amongst Chess players that it can be reasonably assumed either you are both one or this is a coincidence that hints you should each buy a lottery ticket.
Everyone should know about the touchdown tactic.
But few people do.
Unless, theory #3, you are part of the Chess Touchdown cult?
Anyara wrote:
Junebug444 wrote:
Anyara wrote:
Reepicheep14 wrote:
We're actually not the same person, and I'm insulted that you think we are. My opponent was obviously complimented, as you can see; this is because I am far his superior, as this game proves.
Ah, but both of you enjoy utilizing the word "touchdown", which is such a rare word seen amongst Chess players that it can be reasonably assumed either you are both one or this is a coincidence that hints you should each buy a lottery ticket.
Everyone should know about the touchdown tactic.
But few people do.
Unless, theory #3, you are part of the Chess Touchdown cult?
Actually, it’s theory 4. The rest of you are all nonbelievers.
Well, what else is it called when a piece gets to the end zone? A field goal?
May 26, 2018
0
#55
NonSequitur7 wrote:
The reason you find this game absurd is because you don't fully understand the full beauty of it. You can't understand it because you're not on their level.
Take science for example, this is an example of a string theory equation:
To an average person this is nothing more than a few doodles but only highly intellectual scientists understand what it means.
The same concept applies here. Most ignorant chess players will think this is utter non sense. Only those with an advanced knowledge of chess can understand this masterpiece.
That's cool that you can type these symbols out. So that's what string theory looks like ?
M =M subset 0 minus the summation of the entire polynomial inside the bracket as ij goes from 1 to n w/ N being I don't know, someone's age ?
wow some game
Agreed.
Aug 28, 2018
0
#59
I was laughing when Reep didnt play Bf7#
You think that was a forfeit, Reep?? Then how are people able to do
1. f3 e6 2. g4 Qh4# ?
Wow.
Also, you just drew a 1400 in what I assume is bullet.
"The better player"...