disappointing site chess.com

Sort:
Avatar of sgs1

Disappointing site: chess.com

 

 

I tried to play live chess. my experience has been disappointing. everybody I play with seems to be either:

1.  lying about there ratings (i.e. their true ratings are much higher than what they show)

2.  using computer chess programs. or themselves are really a computer program. 

I think the site allows it. I think this is immoral

Avatar of waffllemaster

If you don't have a specific game, then "super strong players that may be cheating" just comes off as "I'm a beginner and forks both surprise and impress me" or "I'm mad that my opponent notices forks so quickly"

Computer play is strong beyond simple tactics.  I hope you're talking about a game or games where your opponent displayed incredibly strong play, not something like punishing a simple mistake.

Avatar of Noobiest
sgs1 wrote:

Disappointing site: chess.com

 

 

I tried to play live chess. my experience has been disappointing. everybody I play with seems to be either:

1.  lying about there ratings (i.e. their true ratings are much higher than what they show)

2.  using computer chess programs. or themselves are really a computer program. 

I think the site allows it. I think this is immoral


Something definitely seems to be off. If I were you, I'd contact Chess.com staff and request my money back. That is just not fair.

Avatar of Knightmage

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Avatar of Beester

looked at your last game against 'ouch'...  you blundered away your queen.. I can see how he was using a computer to trick you into losing your queen to a rook..

B

Avatar of DavidMertz1
sgs1 wrote:

Disappointing site: chess.com

 

 

I tried to play live chess. my experience has been disappointing. everybody I play with seems to be either:

1.  lying about there ratings (i.e. their true ratings are much higher than what they show)

2.  using computer chess programs. or themselves are really a computer program. 

I think the site allows it. I think this is immoral


1) Everyone you play is underrated?  How would you even know?  Maybe ratings here are just lower than you're used to.  1200 here is not the same as 1200 on other sites.  They were actually discussing ways to lower bullet ratings not too long ago.

2) If you think a particular player is cheating, report them properly.  But "everyone is cheating" is not quite convincing from someone who's won over half of their games.  Either you're better than the computers, or most of your opponents are in fact NOT cheating.  Also, I looked at your last 2 games, and it certainly looked like you lost all by yourself, without your opponent needing to do any special cheating.

Avatar of kco

Avatar of 1pawndown

Hanging pieces seems to be the problem, not computers!

Avatar of Skwerly

heh, at under 1500, most everyone is going to seem "strong".

Avatar of Fasaa

How can such a short-tempered person even play chess O.o

Avatar of kco
Estragon wrote:

Looking at three of your games, your opponents didn't even play very well and still beat you.  Quit whining and improve your game.


 not in a good mood today Estragon ?

Avatar of kco

I don't have a problem with you mate but with that guy like the OP he's sure suck Laughing 

Avatar of Crazychessplaya
sgs1 wrote:

Disappointing site: chess.com

 

 

I tried to play live chess. my experience has been disappointing. everybody I play with seems to be either:

1.  lying about there ratings (i.e. their true ratings are much higher than what they show)

2.  using computer chess programs. or themselves are really a computer program. 

I think the site allows it. I think this is immoral


 It is difficult to believe that an adult would post such a juvenile comment.

Avatar of OnionTerror

Fellow members.  It's time to put our hands up.  We've been discovered...  To our accuser, sgs1:

Every other chess.com member is involved in an elaborate conspiracy to ensure that you never win a live chess game.  To do this, we artificially reduce our ratings by intentionally losing against others, just so we can make you believe you are playing someone of equivalent chess ability, when, in fact, you may be playing someone 10, 20 or even 25 rating points stronger than you.

There are in fact only forty-one other chess.com members, each of whom manages thousands of chess.com accounts.  All of this intended to pull the wool over your eyes.

We ALL use chess computers. I personally have the Rybka engine running on IBM's "Watson" supercomputer, which I have to rent at great expense each time we play.  I also employ eight grandmasters to prepare me for our battles.  Other members have even greater resources at their disposal.

However, despite our best efforts, your supreme chess ability has thwarted us time and time again. With a 55% win rate, and following your discovery of our plot, we have no choice but to say "well done", accept defeat and close down the site.

Avatar of lordhypnoz

Successful troll is successful

Avatar of TrueFiction
Obvious op troll is obvious.
Avatar of artfizz

Troll OP is codswallop.

Avatar of derek

                         

Avatar of Kolegamackaa

He's dissapointed, don't blame him.I used to be very mad every time i lost i'm sure he will overcome this

Avatar of Archaic71

umm, you've won 9 out of 10 games today . . .