The root of your question is wondering what's....
Thank you very much you've been very helpful. You saw exactly what I was asking. I certainly hope more will respond, though I think this gives me a pretty clear Idea of what to expect.
Whenever I play chess, I expect to blunder and lose, regardless of who the opponent is. Thus, I make a point of being extra careful, to try and prevent that from happening. That doesn't mean I won't play aggressive lines. I just play them very carefully, and make sure I know what I'm doing before going into them, especially if there's a material sacrifice involved.
I've found that since adopting this careful attitude, I've been very disappointed with myself, because I don't meet my expectations as much as I used to...
--Fromper
Given the responses since I posted this, I think I want to clarify what I meant.
First off, I want to make it clear that I wasn't kidding. Seriously. I might have presented what I said in a tongue in cheek manner, but I really meant it.
I really do go into every game expecting to blunder if I don't stay sharp and play carefully. Focusing on that expectation really does help me remember to blunder check before moving on every single move, and eliminates the most obvious blunders that I used to make all the time.
And that's all I ever expect. I don't expect my opponent to blunder. I don't expect my opponent to outplay me. Ratings don't matter. My opponent's rating might be out of date, because they haven't played in a while and they're completely rusty, or maybe they play constantly somewhere unrated, so they're improving faster than their rating can keep up with.
I can't make assumptions or change the way I play based on my opponent's rating. All I can do is play the best possible game of chess that I'm capable of playing.
--Fromper
First off, I want to make it clear that I wasn't kidding. Seriously. I might have presented what I said in a tongue in cheek manner, but I really meant it.
What you said is very valid imo. Didn't even think it could be any joke or anything. I think many has the same experience (and may express it in a bit different way). Or at least, many should check if they miss this important aspect in their games.
Any opponent 2000 (official rating, like USCF) or lower I expect that I have a chance to win. Obviously playing a 2000 I would think it's more likely to lose, but I would feel that if I play my best and he maybe makes some errors I can get the win. Just play your best, don't be affected by the rating (ok, at the end of the game when 'm about to win I get really nervous, but at least most of the game I'm calm!) and you certainly have your chances to draw or even win against much stronger players, even if you need some luck. The reason for this is that much higher rated players make mistakes just like you, you just have to make sure you find them when they come. But ideally you want to learn from your likely loss against them.
There definitley comes a point though where the odds are so stacked against you, that you have to play for the challenge and not for results, like playing a GM for example. Most people would have to be extremely lucky just to barely hold out for a draw, and a win is out of the question.
No matter the opponent I expect to put my best effort forward. Whether this translates to a win or not, well, that is a different matter. Having an optimistic attitude going into a game definitely helps your play!
No matter the opponent I expect to put my best effort forward. Whether this translates to a win or not, well, that is a different matter. Having an optimistic attitude going into a game definitely helps your play!
A fine outlook. I am afraid however that this post has absolutely nothing to do with the Original post.
No matter the opponent I expect to put my best effort forward. Whether this translates to a win or not, well, that is a different matter. Having an optimistic attitude going into a game definitely helps your play!
A fine outlook. I am afraid however that this post has absolutely nothing to do with the Original post.
I disagree. While worded differently, Cutebold is saying the same thing I've said in this thread. The original question was whether you expect to win or lose based on the opponent's rating. We're saying that we ignore the opponent's rating and just try to play our best chess regardless. There is no expectation of winning or losing. We can only have expectations of our own play, not of what the result will be based on the opponent's play.
Yes, I apologize for not articulating that well.
It does wonders when you hide the persons rating whenever possible; at school tournaments, I never ask what their rating is as well. Against lower-rated players a tendency to underestimate and not put your best effort forward is a habit that should never be developed. Against a higher-rated player, the fear that they calculate deeper may keep you from playing what you believe to be a sharp but strong continuation, or something similar. While not worded well, my outlook and previous post have everything to do with the original post: there is no expectation of victory or loss, but the expectation of excellent play from yourself. Whether they meet this standard or not is up to them.
The root of your question is wondering what's a reasonable expectation, if enough people answer, you'd have a good idea. Since ratings are merely statistics, maybe this will help you:
A 100 point difference is a 64% chance. This means in a 10 game match the higher rated player would be expected to score about 6.5 out of 10.
200 points is 77%
300 is 85%
400 is 92%
500 is 96%
Of course this depends on if the ratings are accurate and if said players are on top of their game. If I'm rated 100 points higher I expect to have a favorable but not winning position, and if I'm careful I'll win. If I'm 100 points lower I expect to get a slightly worse position but if I can hang tough I'll get that win or draw.
If I'm 200 points higher I expect to win without too much trouble, but I'm not lazy, I play my best in order to win. If I'm rated 200 points lower, I focus more on strategy/position because it seems players rated 200 points higher than me don't play for a tactical blow but try for a strategically winning position first and will sometimes even pass up a tactical shot to aim for a long term advantage. Also I expect them not to leave themself open to a tactic I'm able to see, at least not without eating a considerable amount of my clock. I find I have the best chances trying to match them strategically and leave it up to them whether or not to hash out the tactics... this is only for online games, I wouldn't do this at a tournament.
300 points I expect to win from a tactical blunder, I'll play tough but basically just wait for it to happen. If I'm 300 points lower I do the best I can and try to learn something... I'm still very focused trying to play for a win, but I don't expect it.
Plus or minus 400 points I don't see as a real game. If the lower rated player wins, I think of it as a fluke in any case. Either their rating was wrong, or someone got lucky.