And bad years.
Can chess players have bad days?
Sort:
Luvrug wrote:
Can even grandmasters and the such have bad days too?
Look up "Vassily Ivanchuk."
Dec 12, 2013
0
#4
If I think I'm having a good day of playing chess, then what if my opponents were just having bad days? Will I ever know if my bad day is just a good day for them?
trysts wrote:
If I think I'm having a good day of playing chess, then what if my opponents were just having bad days? Will I ever know if my bad day is just a good day for them?
Well, if u win 5 ganes in a row against 5 different people who have ratings similar to yours, then it's more likely that you're having a good day then that those 5 people were all having bad days.
Deep thoughts,
by trysts.
I'm disappointed that this question was not asked by superking500...
Crazychessplaya wrote:
I'm disappointed that this question was not asked by superking500...
Why? This doesn't seem like the type of question that superking normally asks.
Scottrf wrote:
And bad years.
+1
trysts wrote:
@macer: Why is it more likely?
Actually it depends. If on any given day it is 90% likely that a person has a "bad" day, 9% likely that they have an "ok" day, and 1% likely that they have a "good" day, then in your scenario it is more likely those 5 people all had bad days and you had an ok day, then that you had a "good" day and they all had "ok" days.
I imagine macer was working on the assumption most days are ok, with good and bad days being a tiny minority. Probably a good assumption.
Dec 12, 2013
0
#12
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
@macer: Why is it more likely?
Actually it depends. If on any given day it is 90% likely that a person has a "bad" day, 9% likely that they have an "ok" day, and 1% likely that they have a "good" day, then in your scenario it is more likely those 5 people all had bad days and you had an ok day, then that you had a "good" day and they all had "ok" days.
I imagine macer was working on the assumption most days are ok, with good and bad days being a tiny minority. Probably a good assumption.
Where are you getting these percentages from?
trysts wrote:
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
@macer: Why is it more likely?
Actually it depends. If on any given day it is 90% likely that a person has a "bad" day, 9% likely that they have an "ok" day, and 1% likely that they have a "good" day, then in your scenario it is more likely those 5 people all had bad days and you had an ok day, then that you had a "good" day and they all had "ok" days.
I imagine macer was working on the assumption most days are ok, with good and bad days being a tiny minority. Probably a good assumption.
Where are you getting these percentages from?
I am making them up out of thin air, as an example.
Dec 12, 2013
0
#14
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
@macer: Why is it more likely?
Actually it depends. If on any given day it is 90% likely that a person has a "bad" day, 9% likely that they have an "ok" day, and 1% likely that they have a "good" day, then in your scenario it is more likely those 5 people all had bad days and you had an ok day, then that you had a "good" day and they all had "ok" days.
I imagine macer was working on the assumption most days are ok, with good and bad days being a tiny minority. Probably a good assumption.
Where are you getting these percentages from?
I am making them up out of thin air, as an example.
How about each game you play that there is a 50% chance that you'll have a good game, and 50% chance of having a bad game? Wouldn't that be more accurate fantasizing?
Hahahaha. ....even I was wondering from where you got these %.
Sometimes you give lesson 2 ur opponent.....n on some day you get 2 learn new thing from ur opponent. ....Chess is very dynamic game in a sence position do change drastically. ...I remembered a game wherein I was 2 pawns up n had very nice winning advantage & then I relaxed a bit n my opponent turned d game....it was very disappointing moment. ..:(
trysts wrote:
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
@macer: Why is it more likely?
Actually it depends. If on any given day it is 90% likely that a person has a "bad" day, 9% likely that they have an "ok" day, and 1% likely that they have a "good" day, then in your scenario it is more likely those 5 people all had bad days and you had an ok day, then that you had a "good" day and they all had "ok" days.
I imagine macer was working on the assumption most days are ok, with good and bad days being a tiny minority. Probably a good assumption.
Where are you getting these percentages from?
I am making them up out of thin air, as an example.
How about each game you play that there is a 50% chance that you'll have a good game, and 50% chance of having a bad game? Wouldn't that be more accurate fantasizing?
I dont know...someone should figure out how to do a statistical study to find out.
Just good and bad though...no in-between?
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
Ubik42 wrote:
trysts wrote:
@macer: Why is it more likely?
Actually it depends. If on any given day it is 90% likely that a person has a "bad" day, 9% likely that they have an "ok" day, and 1% likely that they have a "good" day, then in your scenario it is more likely those 5 people all had bad days and you had an ok day, then that you had a "good" day and they all had "ok" days.
I imagine macer was working on the assumption most days are ok, with good and bad days being a tiny minority. Probably a good assumption.
Where are you getting these percentages from?
I am making them up out of thin air, as an example.
How about each game you play that there is a 50% chance that you'll have a good game, and 50% chance of having a bad game? Wouldn't that be more accurate fantasizing?
I dont know...someone should figure out how to do a statistical study to find out.
Just good and bad though...no in-between?
Actually, 85% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Dec 12, 2013
0
#18
Tactical_Battle wrote:
I remembered a game wherein I was 2 pawns up n had very nice winning advantage & then I relaxed a bit n my opponent turned d game....
I play most of my games like that. My opponent is winning me in position, then gets a physical advantage--a pawn, an exchange, etc. But then they change the way that they're playing? OR, I change the way I'm playing? Has my opponent relaxed and lost focus? OR, have I become more focused? Are we both misjudging the position, the advantages and disadvantages?
I think, in the realm of my understanding of chess, "good days" and "bad days" are an ego-centric view. It's a point of view which doesn't include the opponent.
No, it is against the rules.
Hi again all! Me again!
Just had a few horrific games where i've been soundly beaten by players a few hundred points below me. Played really poorly! Just figured I had a bad day. Can even grandmasters and the such have bad days too? I know people can have bad days in other games and sports, but chess? What do you guys and girls think?