Sometimes opponents lose, sometimes they win...
2000 rated opponent didn’t acknowledge my attack AT ALL?!
Sort:
12 hrs ago
0
#3
MrChatty wrote:
Sometimes opponents lose, sometimes they win...
True! But losing in that Caro-kann line (which I often play myself and is rlly solid and quite interesting) in 13 moves is impressive.
I am too dumb for Caro-Kann and similar stuff. But who knows what mood, troubles etc an opponent has while you both are playing against each other
11 hrs ago
0
#5
Yk, CK sucks. It's too passive, which is the reason why I left it for Sicilian. Active and guarantees good games. Perfect for my new style. PLus the opponent could respond with 3 f3 after e4 c6 d4 d5, preserving the center.
11 hrs ago
0
#6
BTW, that opponent wasn't 2000. Its a 1900 elo opponent, rated at 1989.
11 hrs ago
0
#7
Yeah same, I'm gonna switch to the Sicilian from the CK. I also switched from 1. Nf3 to 1. e4 for the same reason.
11 hrs ago
0
#8
ChessAce1111 wrote:
BTW, that opponent wasn't 2000. Its a 1900 elo opponent, rated at 1989.
Well they’re 2005 currently, so it counts 
Also, the Caro-kann has a load of great lines that aren’t passive. I’ve spent a lot of time learning ways to bend the Caro-kann to my tactical playstyle (which I’ve had to do because I’m far too lazy to study the Sicilian properly). I’ve got some sidelines that are actually rlly quite dynamic in all time controls.
11 hrs ago
0
#10
ChessAce1111 wrote:
Such as?
You want me to leak my entire repertoire? 😂😂
The botvinnik-carls (excuse spelling) gets a bad rep ‘cos levy recommends it, but it has some rlly interesting lines that allow you to open up the position. With perfect play it’s not super fun, but that’s the same for every opening.
against the panov, there’s an excellent line where you can fiancetto and give up a pawn, but you can build back for it slowly and then your dsb comes alive.
the fantasy is always interesting.
and the g6 line against nc3 has some rlly fun ways to play once you can facilitate c5 later. I won’t go into details but there’s interesting lines whatever option white chooses!
Obviously the higher rated you get, the less fun you’ll have with sidelines against well-prepared opponents, but I’ve beaten people with similar ratings to you with the Caro-kann, so can’t be all bad 😅)
10 hrs ago
0
#13
Fet wrote:
#11 on your level, yes. But on higher (2000+) levels it's just too passive.
The Caro-kann is played at all levels of the game including at master level. Magnus has played it in important games, even. And to further illustrate the point, I’ve won three out of the last four games I’ve played against 2000+ opponents in the Caro kann as black.
10 hrs ago
0
#14
This is Bullet. I’ve been pulverized like this too as a 2k in bullet. Although I also play the Caro, and it’s never failed me this much
10 hrs ago
0
#17
FelixG711 wrote:
This is Bullet. I’ve been pulverized like this too as a 2k in bullet. Although I also play the Caro, and it’s never failed me this much
This was rapid, although he did seem to play like it was bullet haha
Thank you for sharing this game and your thoughts. It's very insightful and encouraging to see that even at the highest levels I aspire to, these kinds of one-sided games can happen.
Your point about acknowledging your opponent's threats is absolutely fundamental. At my level, I see a similar phenomenon, though it often stems from a different root cause than in your game.
I've noticed that sometimes an opponent plays significantly weaker than their displayed rating. In my experience, this frequently happens when a new user registers on Chess.com and, perhaps being new to the platform or overestimating their skills, selects an advanced level like “Expert” during profile setup. The system then grants them a starting rating of, for instance, 1500 or higher. However, their actual playing strength might be much lower, perhaps at a beginner level, where they might even fall for a Scholar's Mate.
When paired against them, the game becomes a stark reminder of the importance of solid, fundamental chess. They typically pursue their own small plans with no regard for the immediate dangers on the board. While the tactics are less complex, the principle is the same as in your game: a failure to respect the opponent's ideas leads to a quick collapse.
It's a good, albeit simpler, case study for players at my stage, reinforcing that the first rule of chess is to watch what your opponent is doing. Congratulations again on breaking the 2000 barrier - that's a tremendous achievement and a real inspiration.
10 hrs ago
0
#19
Morkovka86 wrote:
Thank you for sharing this game and your thoughts. It's very insightful and encouraging to see that even at the highest levels I aspire to, these kinds of one-sided games can happen.
Your point about acknowledging your opponent's threats is absolutely fundamental. At my level, I see a similar phenomenon, though it often stems from a different root cause than in your game.
I've noticed that sometimes an opponent plays significantly weaker than their displayed rating. In my experience, this frequently happens when a new user registers on Chess.com and, perhaps being new to the platform or overestimating their skills, selects an advanced level like “Expert” during profile setup. The system then grants them a starting rating of, for instance, 1500 or higher. However, their actual playing strength might be much lower, perhaps at a beginner level, where they might even fall for a Scholar's Mate.
When paired against them, the game becomes a stark reminder of the importance of solid, fundamental chess. They typically pursue their own small plans with no regard for the immediate dangers on the board. While the tactics are less complex, the principle is the same as in your game: a failure to respect the opponent's ideas leads to a quick collapse.
It's a good, albeit simpler, case study for players at my stage, reinforcing that the first rule of chess is to watch what your opponent is doing. Congratulations again on breaking the 2000 barrier - that's a tremendous achievement and a real inspiration.
Thank you for the very kind words, and I wish you the best of luck in all your chess pursuits. Keep grinding!
Wanted to share a quick game I played today as a two-part reminder.
a) sometimes 2000 elo players get completely pulverised with no resistance - there’s hope for everyone after all!
b) if your opponent is attacking your king, you should probably acknowledge it rather than just let them…
this was not a particularly impressive game from me (though is beyond cool that I’m currently at 2025 rated after being stuck below 1900 for around 18mths at some point!!) but is a rlly good case study for why it’s important to think about more than just your own plans…