98% accuracy in this 1 min bullet game!

I find it amazing Hikaru can play so well in 1 min games to a much higher standard than i can with days of thinking. In this game you can see by clicking the link below he got 98% accuracy 

https://www chess.com/club/champions-of-the-world1/join?key=f3us28

do y’all agree?

You're playing with fire........................when you're playing with hikaru

Absolutely. What did you think of that game?

Yeah really smooth, I don't play that well in classical lol

Guess he has much more enhanced pattern recognition 

This game is not the best showcase. White had the better structure from the opening, could play quiet normal moves building against c5 and Black immediately wrecked his position trying to do something.

lol, I didn't click on it at first because of the url.

Funny that it's actually a game.

Honestly the game is not very impressive. Hikaru plays that opening a lot, and then the structure gave white a very standard plan. I mean, I could see myself playing this game (or at least someone much worse than Hikaru).

Well... yeah. That's exactly what pattern recognition is

Here's a puzzle

--

Most experienced players can solve this mate in 5 in under 5 seconds.

Mate in 5 that fast? Are they a genius? No. It's a well known pattern. Like you said they don't have to calculate every move, they just notice a few key aspects.

Like if I tell you to do 2 + 2 you don't count on your fingers, the answer "four" just pops into your head no work necessary.

But someone more experienced might be asked to do 60 / 12 in their head, and the answer "five" pops up because it's a well known relationship (just think of a clock, 12 sections of 5 minutes each make an hour and an hour is 60 minutes).

It's only hard if you've never seen something like it before. And sure, they can show nonsense positions to a GM that are mate in 1, and the GM has a very hard time solving it. Meanwhile on puzzle rush you can see GMs do "complicated" tactics in just a few seconds.

Fair enough, I guess I’m not the best judge as a 1200 player, although the computer analysis seems to think he made the right calls

To be honest chess.com's analysis function is pretty forgiving. I've analyzed games of mine where a move causes me to lose 0.4 but it's not labeled as an inaccuracy because the engine needed to think for 10 seconds on that one move (vs chess.com's analysis which might give 10 seconds for the whole game).

It's a nice function, and I've used it myself, but it doesn't mean 98 or 99% of Hikaru's moves were best.

Not to talk crap on Hikaru of course. He's actually better than I can even imagine. And I mean that literally, as if I imagined the best player I could, what would they know, what could they do, etc.

Sure I could be silly and say I imagine someone who wins every game, but when it comes down to it, you really can't imagine much higher (or lower) than 400 points from your rating.

Stockfish is not trustworthy until it reaches depth 35.

Seems arbitrary.

It depends on the position, but most of the time you should aim for at atleast 35.

Based on... what?

Yeah you should aim for 35

No thanks.

How complex is the position.