Extreme Opponents

Sort:
waffllemaster
Davidjordan wrote:
chessbuzz wrote:

Heisman recommends playing opponents that are in the range of -50 points to +200 points better than you. Anything higher than 200 points is masochism.


 but if everyones doing this then won't going the extra mile prove benefitting cause to evryone who's my rating if they did the same I did they ould be playing like the people I'm suppose to play thats 100-200 elo higher than me.


It doesn't scale that way.

e.g. baking cookies for 30 minutes at 300 degrees is not the same as 1 minute for 9000 degrees or for 90 minutes at 100 degrees.  There is actually an ideal time+temperature and that's where heisman's recommendation lies.  If it were that much better to play much higher then he would have said so.

Or were you saying something different?  Your post was a bit hard to understand.

Davidjordan
waffllemaster wrote:
Davidjordan wrote:
chessbuzz wrote:

Heisman recommends playing opponents that are in the range of -50 points to +200 points better than you. Anything higher than 200 points is masochism.


 but if everyones doing this then won't going the extra mile prove benefitting cause to evryone who's my rating if they did the same I did they ould be playing like the people I'm suppose to play thats 100-200 elo higher than me.


It doesn't scale that way.

e.g. baking cookies for 30 minutes at 300 degrees is not the same as 1 minute for 9000 degrees or for 90 minutes at 100 degrees.  There is actually an ideal time+temperature and that's where heisman's recommendation lies.  If it were that much better to play much higher then he would have said so.

Or were you saying something different?  Your post was a bit hard to understand.


 no you summed it up very well.

chessbuzz
Azukikuru wrote:
chessbuzz wrote:

Heisman recommends playing opponents that are in the range of -50 points to +200 points better than you. Anything higher than 200 points is masochism.


If everyone followed that recommendation, nobody would find opponents over +50 better than them to play against.


Of course everyone doesn't follow it, but if you want to improve quickly you should play better players the majority of time and this guideline would payoff.

ScottBarnesss
Totally agree with Shivsky. I am a cm and I don't believe you would beat a candidate master at all. Only reason the cm offered the draw was to escape from a bad position. Let you know if I think of anything else.don't get overexcited just cuz you drew a cm.
Arctor
ScottBarnesss wrote:
I am a cm

 Forgive me for not taking your word Scott. Proof? Sealed

knightedmagiiu

I'm playing in a tournment now in the U2100 section and im rated 1550 (so far i've lost one and drew one). I think that it is a great idea to play aganist the strongest opposition possible and personally I'm learning alot more then i would be from the U1600 section.

chessmaster102
ScottBarnesss wrote:
Totally agree with Shivsky. I am a cm and I don't believe you would beat a candidate master at all. Only reason the cm offered the draw was to escape from a bad position. Let you know if I think of anything else.don't get overexcited just cuz you drew a cm.

I played a 15 game training match with a local CM coach and lost (+5,=4,-6) judt by one game so how is it I wouldn't beat a CM at allWink

ScottBarnesss

@Chessmaster102,

Just because you almost won doesn't mean you won.  They also may be better next time, so don't get your hopes up. Beating a Candidate Master requires a lot of experience and reading chess books.  If you read Alex Dunne's How to Become a Candidate Master, then you may be able to draw the games you lost to your coach and beat him even more. Trust me, beating a chess coach is not easy.

ScottBarnesss

@Arctor,

I forgive you for not taking my word. Also, what did you say about me because I can't find it on this post?

BobbyRaulMorphy

grunch

As a C player you're not going to get a lot of games against experts or masters.  To move up a class you have to consistently beat the players in your class.  So playing C-A should be good practice.

chessmaster102
zkman wrote:

Hi chessmaster,

The reason that playing a titled player as a C-class player is not very useful for you to improve is that their level of chess is, simply put, too strong. They will not make many mistakes and their moves will not make much sense to you. It is much more useful for these reasons to play players who are slightly stronger than you (such as A and B class players). The games will still be competitive and you will have a greater grasp of your opponents plan, and, in turn, learn more from the game afterwards. I hope this makes sense and if you have any further questions, just message me!

 

-Zach

does this still apply now that im 1786 just curious

blueemu
ScottBarnesss wrote:

Beating a Candidate Master requires a lot of experience and reading chess books.

Beating a CM just requires playing good moves.