Fake Rating - Chess Forums - Page 4

polydiatonic

Sep 26, 2011

0

#61

...because some of like to play unrated and some like to play rated:

frrixz

Sep 26, 2011

0

#62

GMLoveJr wrote:

roguepawns wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

I dont care who you are or what your rating is, if you dont accept and play challenges from any and all people then you havent truly earned your rating!! That means if you are rated 1737 and you don't accept and play a challenge or challenges from people 200 points or more below you then you are not truly a 1737! The whole idea of having a rating is to show where you sit accurately on a scale of ALL chess players in the entire world not who you choose to play. Now i know your scared to lose 14 or 15 points if you lose but if you are scared to lose a game in the first place then you need to get better plain and simple. And i also know most of you out there who decline challenges from extremely lower people dont want to play them because they make severely stupid openning moves and its very frustrating but if you cant defeat that then you are not a true "good" chess player. Furthermore, my "True" rating in Bullet is 1300 and Blitz is 1311 so dont think this is coming from someone who's rating is 500. Man up or Woman up and play Chess! Stop being scared chess players and play! If you went to a tournament right now and someone was matched against you with no rating or title and in all realness would only be 900 or something you couldnt just choose not to play them you would have to and would probably take a loss because you are not truly as high as you purport yourself to be. There are a whole lot of people out there rated 100-300 points higher then they really should be!

You sound upset because higher rated players won't play you.

Playing higher rated players should make your rating more accurate, not less. I generally don't play rated games against players 200 points below me because it takes too long to gain points at 2-3 points per game. But I would gladly enter into a cash prize tournament where all of my opponents are rated 200 points below me!

I am very mad. I had 7 straight games aborted by players who in none of the cases were rated more than 300 points above me and it made me start this topic. I get so mad because if they are so much better than me then they should win. And i only play bullet anyway so thats 2 minutes max that it would take for us to play a game anyway. And my best wins for Bullet and Blitz are over 1900 so its not like i couldnt take someone who is 1500 or 1600 and really and truly my best win in blitz is 2015 but we played an unrated game so come on man PLAY CHESS.

Bullet and Blitz hardly count (esp. unrated). You can't say you beat someone rated [high number] until you beat them at a long, relaxed game. I myself have beat a 2300 at a short game unrated, but I accredit it to the quickness (increasing blunders), not my skill.

I would much rather play someone better than me so I actually learn and get better, although I never would turn down a challenge (unless I really don't have time to play).

Elona

Sep 27, 2011

0

#63

I enjoy 'choosing' who to play. Far too many creeps about on the web to be forced to play everyone.

GMLoveJr

Sep 27, 2011

0

#64

bigpoison wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

trysts wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

I dont care who you are or what your rating is, if you dont accept and play challenges from any and all people then you havent truly earned your rating!! That means if you are rated 1737 and you don't accept and play a challenge or challenges from people 200 points or more below you then you are not truly a 1737! The whole idea of having a rating is to show where you sit accurately on a scale of ALL chess players in the entire world not who you choose to play. Now i know your scared to lose 14 or 15 points if you lose but if you are scared to lose a game in the first place then you need to get better plain and simple. And i also know most of you out there who decline challenges from extremely lower people dont want to play them because they make severely stupid openning moves and its very frustrating but if you cant defeat that then you are not a true "good" chess player. Furthermore, my "True" rating in Bullet is 1300 and Blitz is 1311 so dont think this is coming from someone who's rating is 500. Man up or Woman up and play Chess! Stop being scared chess players and play! If you went to a tournament right now and someone was matched against you with no rating or title and in all realness would only be 900 or something you couldnt just choose not to play them you would have to and would probably take a loss because you are not truly as high as you purport yourself to be. There are a whole lot of people out there rated 100-300 points higher then they really should be!

I don't think 1 0 games mean anything. And I don't think I have to play players 300-400 points below my rating(unless they're nice), in order to prove my rating. The rating is only fun for me if it remains a measure of progress. To cheat the rating by playing tons of people that are not very good at chess, is not fun. Since almost anyone can be good at this game with serious effort, I don't see why we wouldn't all just have to work harder to play higher rated players? Like one of the other posters said, 'you have to pay your dues'.

What is your definition of not very good at chess? If you were to play 10 games against people rated 500-600 points below you and you lost one of them could that person then claim that YOU are not very good at chess? Its all relative sir. Ratings tell you nothing. The only thing that matters between two people who sit down to play is who won the game. A rating is not going to tell you if you are automatically guaranteed to win the game or not. I have painfully paid my dues already.

Then why do you care if folks with big numbers next to their names won't "play down".

Its the principal of the whole thing. Why cant people just play chess and not play games based on a rating. If you always shun games from lower rated players then maybe your not supposed to be at the level you're at in the first place. Ratings tell you nothing and they mean nothing when the person doesnt play all challenges but if someone has then the rating can tell you where that person truly is.

GMLoveJr

Sep 27, 2011

0

#65

daw55124 wrote:

GMLoveJr - just so I'm not missing anything, you're argument seems to boil down to:

"The world doesn't work the way I imagine it should. anyone who doesn't conform to my ideals isn't as morally upright as I am. you all owe me. OH, and just because I out "GM" in my name doesn't mean I'm trying to have people confuse me with a real chess player."

Does that about sum it up?

Has nothing to do with morals. Just pisses me off when people who claim to be chess players refuse to play someone in chess. If you are a CHESS PLAYER then you play chess doesn't matter who its against. And im a very real chess player. You wont have to read my name and try to figure it out you can find out how real or fake i am by sitting down and playing a game with me. Unless your scared of losing or think you are so high and mighty that i wouldnt have a chance in this universe to beat you.

mschosting

Sep 27, 2011

0

#66

GMLoveJr wrote:

daw55124 wrote:

GMLoveJr - just so I'm not missing anything, you're argument seems to boil down to:

"The world doesn't work the way I imagine it should. anyone who doesn't conform to my ideals isn't as morally upright as I am. you all owe me. OH, and just because I out "GM" in my name doesn't mean I'm trying to have people confuse me with a real chess player."

Does that about sum it up?

Has nothing to do with morals. Just pisses me off when people who claim to be chess players refuse to play someone in chess. If you are a CHESS PLAYER then you play chess doesn't matter who its against. And im a very real chess player. You wont have to read my name and try to figure it out you can find out how real or fake i am by sitting down and playing a game with me. Unless your scared of losing or think you are so high and mighty that i wouldnt have a chance in this universe to beat you.

If only Fischer would think like you maybe he would have some more games!

GMLoveJr

Sep 27, 2011

0

#67

Maxx_Dragon wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

GeordiLaForge wrote:

I refuse to play people with fake titles (GMLoveJr) in their user names.

Fake titles huh? How do you know that i am not already a GM?

How do you know We are not Kasparov? Anyone can claim to be anyone or anything, besides real GMs wouldn't have to claim anything, their rating would reflect exactly who they are; as your does. >:[

A bunch of people as Kasparov huh? Thats funny, but once again I have NEVER once claimed to be a GM. Never made a statement claiming to be a GM have never made a statement claiming that i wasnt. Never have made any comment on the topic whatsoever until i was challenged about it. I just came up with the name GMLoveJr just like hundreds of others on this site with GM in the usernames thats all. And its funny how you use my rating to gage the level at which i play. SO sure for 100% that my rating is accurate. Since you are so sure why dont you challenge me to a game. whatever kind of game you want. Bullet, Blitz, Standard heck if you live close enough to me ill come to where you are and play you then you can determine for yourself if i am up to the task of defeating you or not.

PrawnEatsPrawn

Sep 27, 2011

0

#68

GMDude,

you are a weak player and no amount of bluster can dismiss that fact.

GMLoveJr

Sep 27, 2011

0

#69

socket2me wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

PrawnEatsPrawn wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

heinzie wrote:

For higher-rated players there's no real point in playing games with you. Practice against other 1400s and 1500s first.

Would you like to play me Heinzie so you can see that there is a point? If not then you can keep your mouth shut.

Easy Tiger! you devalue your own argument with gutter talk like this.

Not gutter talk at all im simply challenging someone who feels like playing me would be some kind of easy victory or the quickest checkmate they have ever given someone. Im challenging him so he can see that there would be a point to playing me and that he would learn something from our game. I was actually offended by his previous statement. Especially seeing as he doesnt know me and has never played me. Thats why i told him he could either play little old me or shut his mouth.

Chip on your shoulder? You have a Napolian complex in the chess world.

It's actually Napoleon complex. And im assuming you are meaning since my chess playing is so horrible i have to compensate that by talking load of trash of forums such as this? I like that. Its amazing to me all the people who have responded negatively to the things i have said but still have yet to actually play me. Looks to me like a bunch of people so supreme at the game of chess that they dont have to actually play people anymore they can just talk crap to them for days and its the same as beating them on the board.

GeordiLaForge

Sep 27, 2011

0

#70

GMLoveJr wrote:

Maxx_Dragon wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

GeordiLaForge wrote:

I refuse to play people with fake titles (GMLoveJr) in their user names.

Fake titles huh? How do you know that i am not already a GM?

How do you know We are not Kasparov? Anyone can claim to be anyone or anything, besides real GMs wouldn't have to claim anything, their rating would reflect exactly who they are; as your does. >:[

A bunch of people as Kasparov huh? Thats funny, but once again I have NEVER once claimed to be a GM. Never made a statement claiming to be a GM have never made a statement claiming that i wasnt. Never have made any comment on the topic whatsoever until i was challenged about it. I just came up with the name GMLoveJr just like hundreds of others on this site with GM in the usernames thats all. And its funny how you use my rating to gage the level at which i play. SO sure for 100% that my rating is accurate. Since you are so sure why dont you challenge me to a game. whatever kind of game you want. Bullet, Blitz, Standard heck if you live close enough to me ill come to where you are and play you then you can determine for yourself if i am up to the task of defeating you or not.

Why would anyone want to play chess with you?

GMLoveJr

Sep 27, 2011

0

#71

GeordiLaForge wrote:

Hey thanks for blowing up my picture for me Kinkos:)

GMLoveJr

Sep 27, 2011

0

#72

ploboo wrote:

Notes - To a possible GM!! (Belvin to be exact)

I just don't understand. Why not just resign? For your game, I had to wait over a minute. I wouldn't do that to you.by xxxxxx 14 days ago Hi Kelvin You say you just let the clock run out instead of resigning. Chess is a game between TWO players. It's just common courtesy to resign when you are done. How would you like it if every player you beat just left you hanging until the time ran out? by xxxxxx 15 days ago

The name is actually Kelvin. Its amazing you went to my actual page and smooth missed that part. Yeah me and that person are actually friends now. Played many more games after this. At the time he just didnt understand why i let the remaining 30 seconds run off my clock instead of resigning but he knows now. As you can see the notes stopped.

TheGrobe

Sep 27, 2011

0

#73

GMLoveJr wrote:

bigpoison wrote:

Then why do you care if folks with big numbers next to their names won't "play down".

Its the principal of the whole thing. Why cant people just play chess and not play games based on a rating. If you always shun games from lower rated players then maybe your not supposed to be at the level you're at in the first place. Ratings tell you nothing and they mean nothing when the person doesnt play all challenges but if someone has then the rating can tell you where that person truly is.

I could understand this argument if they refused to play people rated higher than them, but your take is just dumb.

Games against significantly weaker players offer little outside of wasted time to stronger players. They're not challenging, they're not intellectually stimulating and they're not going to teach the higher rated player anything they don't already know.

Markle

Sep 27, 2011

0

#74

Why is it that when some people think ratings in bullet chess mean anything? Bullet chess is just that 1 Min chess, beating someone rated 2000 in Bullet chess does not mean you stand a chance in hell of beating someone raed 2000 in a regular game.

Kkidplayer

Sep 27, 2011

0

#75

This is ridiculous! You don't decline lower rated players because you are afraid of losing the game or points. You play to learn and to have a good time. If you play opponents rated 200+ points below you, then you don't learn anything, and probably won't have a satisfying win at the end. You play players similarly rated to you to give yourself a challenge. If 1700's play 1300's, they just blow them out of the water with tactics. Just face it, you don't belong playing 1700s. And if you did, you would have a rating much closer to 1700 instead of 1300s. Face it. You're wrong.

whirlwind2011

Sep 27, 2011

0

#76

GMLoveJr wrote:

bigpoison wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

trysts wrote:

GMLoveJr wrote:

...

... Ratings tell you nothing and they mean nothing when the person doesnt play all challenges but if someone has then the rating can tell you where that person truly is.

With all respect, this premise is wrong. Ratings do mean something regarding the person's skill, generally. As long as I play against people both above and below my rating, then my rating will be fairly accurate, even if I decline challenges from people rated far below or far above me. Part of the purpose of ratings is to direct people to opponents most ideally suited to them.

Of course, no rating is ever completely accurate. It is always an estimate.

GMLoveJr

Sep 27, 2011

0

#77

IMDeviate wrote:

I don't care what your rating is, I'll accept your challenge...but what I have found is that sportsmanship and chess skills are more or less commensurate with rating.

Does get a little annoying having to explain ep or castling to such players, annoying when they offer me draws instead of resigning when they are dead lost positions, annoying when they don't see that the position is a forced draw, annoying when they don't see unstoppable mates in 1, 2, 3 or 4 moves.

Things like that can be annoying, even moreso when these players expose their ignorance in forum threads about these topics (or vacation or clock usage).

However, when obvious beginners (chess.com seems to attract them like flies on excrement) who don't know the rules surface in the forums, in live chess or elsewhere on the site it's up to us more experienced players to help them learn and if a little bit of snarkiness is needed to help deliver the message then so be it.

Sir i agree with everything you have said and understand your frustrations but are you insinuating that i am a beginner? If so, i would implore you to rethink your position on that.

TheGrobe

Sep 27, 2011

0

#78

Yeah, he's got "GM" next to his name while you've only got "IM".

PrawnEatsPrawn

Sep 27, 2011

0

#79

TheGrobe wrote:

Yeah, he's got "GM" next to his name while you've only got "IM".

polydiatonic

Sep 27, 2011

0

#80

GMLoveJr wrote:

Its the principal of the whole thing. Why cant people just play chess and not play games based on a rating. If you always shun games from lower rated players then maybe your not supposed to be at the level you're at in the first place. Ratings tell you nothing and they mean nothing when the person doesnt play all challenges but if someone has then the rating can tell you where that person truly is.

Are you dumb, just a troll or just acting dumb? This question has been answered in several posts. To your way of thinking why should high baseball players just be allowed to play in the major leagues? Or why shouldn't college footballers be allowed to play in a junior high school girls league? It's all about the game, according to you, so just play..right? MEH.

In fact I think you are just a meathead.