one possibility is that a lower rated player tries harder v a higher rated player but the higher rated player treats the lower rated player casually ie doesnt take them as seriously
so one player is giving it all theyve got while the other understimates who they face
Only very-highly rated players are able to play consistently at their best. The rest of us have good games and bad games. It's normal for players to actually perform at levels 200-300 points above or below their average strength for any single game. For a 1300 player to beat a 1700 player the lower-ratef player would have to play one of their best games and the stronger player one of their worst, but such things happen more frequently than you might imagine. Of course, the higher-rated the players are, the greater likelihood they will play near their normal strength, but at lower levels performance fluctuates wildly.
Are you kidding ??? What the **** are you talking about man ? You are a biggest looser i ever seen in my life ! You was doing PIPI in your pampers when i was beating players much more stronger then you! You are not proffesional, because proffesionals knew how to lose and congratulate opponents, you are like a girl crying after i beat you! Be brave, be honest to yourself and stop this trush talkings!!!
You said "stop this trash-talking", but you're trash-talking the other player yourself. Please, do unto others as you would have done unto you.
I just don't understand. Is it normal for chess players rated from 850 to 1050 to make the same moves? More often than not when I play games I find that they do the same moves. I get it from 950 to 1050 because you are familiar with openings and general knowledge. But 850? I mean, I had to study a lot to improve my rating, but I struggle to make it past 1050.
Isn't it strange that I get to 1050 in rating and then all of a sudden I fall back again to 850? I mean what's the deal here? Am I that lousy of a player that I study my way to 1050 and then people beat me?
I honestly do not know what to think of players in this platform
Perhaps you can share your thoughts on cheating and losing in Chess.com. I mean, I have zero problem admiting defeat, but more often than not the way in which I lose are definitedly fishy
800s, 900s, and 1000s typically have quite similar opening knowledge. It's often sourced from one of Stockfish's favorite openings: e4, e5, Nf3, Nc6, Bc4, but also Bb5 is another favorite third move. Stockfish also likes countering with c5, Nf3, d6. At this level, it's generally not the opening knowledge that wins the game, but rather the level of tactical knowledge the players have that determines the outcome. Also, it usually takes a large number of losses to drop back down if you've won a lot of games at that level. However, if you won only a few games, your rating will drop fast upon losing.
Is it normal for 900 rated players to hit 75-85% accuracy in a 30+ move game? I see it all the time lately. I looked at my game history once and found that the 800-900 players were averaging 70%+ accuracy against me while 1000+ players were only averaging 65% accuracy. It was fairly large sample size too. It just seems odd that once you clear the 1000 mark games seem to get easier. Perhaps players at lower levels are more apt to cheat? Or maybe they get busted before they get to high in ratings?