I think for most people playing against a computer is a recipe for humiliation. I'm sure there must be one or two people online here you could beat up on to feel better. Win or lose, I find playing real people much more interesting than being taken apart by Houdini. As far as succeeding with women goes, I'm not sure my advice is always the best, so I'll spare you it.
Frustrated - Computerized Chessboard
A widespread opinion in that nobody is so untalented that he can't become at least FM with some hard work. Keep trying and you will certainly improve. However it must be said not playing strong human opponents is a huge problem; a strong opponent will destroy you just like the board does, but at the end of the game he will likely give you suggestions about what your mistakes have been. This is a great, if not the best, way to improve.
What is the playing strenght of your board? Most likely it's so hight that very good players would have problems getting a draw, it's obvious that you can't match it at you level (i suppose you are relatively new to chess?). However most boards can be set on various levels of playing strenght; is it possible on your board?
I hover between 1100 andd 1200 on this site. The computer set at 1200 takes me apart. Iv'e only beaten it twice out of 25 games. I understand that to beat a computer you have to play like your playing a computer. Playing people is different.
There is speculation that Bobby Fischer is said to have had a form of autism.
I'd practice tactics and study chess mentor here. Play some peers. Build competence and confidence.
Also, maybe the computer can be set for lower levels of play.
the fact is that "1200" is not such a standardized evaluation of your strenght. The chess.com ratings are rather inflated, the declared computer ones usually closer to the "real" OTB FIDE strenght.
It's off topic, but the fact that fisher suffered of a form of autism is just another legend on the subject. It's not your fault of course; the fact is that it's easy for a journalist to build a story like "Look the guy is very obsessed with XXXX (chess in this case), he must be an asperger, I also heard that he was not very social when he was at school so that's conclusive proof".
Hello,
A while ago I bought a computerized chessboard from Excalibur Electronics for a hefty two hundred or more dollars. Unlike others, I live in a remote area, hence am unable to attend chess clubs and whatnot, therefore I play against computers about 99.99% of the time. (I’m also incredibly shy and not too fond of clubs and being around others.)
What frustrates me is that I repeatedly lose against the chessboard. It seems like an inevitability, and it makes me feel discouraged and, for lack of a better word, stupid.
Is chess really a lost cause for me? Am I too stupid to do it well? Sometimes, and I mean no offense to anyone from saying this, chess seems a lot like women - complicated and I never succeed. (I’m on the autism spectrum and have no luck with socializing and relationships.)
Actually socializing and chess is an appropriate analogy I find. In both situations I lack the capacity, or so it seems, to see what is not there and understand or predict what will happen based on what I do.
So, really, what is the deal? Why do I lose so much against this computerized chessboard?
Thanks.