Ignore polarbear, he is a well known troll and a hater
Does anyone else out there get totally INFURIATED playing Blitz?
Sort:
Feb 9, 2021
0
#23
@TinFoilHat911
Players who have no idea what they are doing rated 1400-1600 -> Skill related
Play the weirdest openings -> Skill related
I usually have a big advantage after the opening -> Skill related
Win on time -> Skill related
Force a blunder out of me -> skill related
Speed masters out there who know enough about tempos and forks and discovered attacks to grab a win -> Skill related
Good with knights -> Skill related
Discovered attacks -> Skill related
I hardly ever see players use the famous checkmating patterns, or tactics like decoys, deflection, overloading, undermining, clearance sacrifices or any thing like that -> Skill related
Basic chess, played really fast -> Skill related
Not enough time to think about these more advanced elements of chess -> Skill related
I should be able to beat them if I was any good. -> Skill related
Cmon, tell me where he's claiming it's all about luck? You are just as bad as the other 2091 guy who can't comprehend a simple text.
Feb 9, 2021
0
#24
TinFoilHat911 wrote:
I already told you, more than once. For the last time, he doesn't have to actually say the word "luck". He's claiming that his opponents don't have any idea what they are doing. Those are his exact words. He's putting himself in a position of superiority when he says that, because if he admitted that he's the weaker player, which he is, he wouldn't be able to make such an assessment about his opponents. The problem here is that you don't know how to actually read. You're incapable of understanding context and word meaning. That other guy is right about you. You're as dumb as a doorknob!
And THEN he rationalises why a seemingly lower rated player who has no idea what he's doing, manages to beat him. And none of the things he mentions imply "luck", not even remotely.
You need to read the full text, not just the first 2 sentences of the 1st paragraph. Even if he had only written the first paragraph only, you are assuming he means by "luck".
Speed chess is vomit
TinFoilHat911 wrote:
I already told you, more than once. For the last time, he doesn't have to actually say the word "luck". He's claiming that his opponents don't have any idea what they are doing. Those are his exact words. He's putting himself in a position of superiority when he says that, because if he admitted that he's the weaker player, which he is, he wouldn't be able to make such an assessment about his opponents. The problem here is that you don't know how to actually read. You're incapable of understanding context and word meaning. That other guy is right about you. You're as dumb as a doorknob!
Are you kidding? Everyone can say if his opponent knows or doesn't know what is doing. There is something called Stockfish that you turn on after the game and tells you the good and bad moves. Maybe you haven't heard about it.
IMHO the post can be summarised to "The skillset that Blitz needs in intermediate rating is not to my liking" which is very clear to be misread
The right question should be “Who doesn’t get infuriated at blitz?”
TBH, I get infuriated at rapid and bullet but blitz is just chill.
Feb 9, 2021
0
#31
lmao.
just go to custom challenge option, choose ur time and do "9 minutes" then click search. although it'll probably take longer to find
Soniasthetics wrote:
lmao.
just go to custom challenge option, choose ur time and do "9 minutes" then click search. although it'll probably take longer to find
thanks, I guess!
You seem very smug, but your info actually does help
Feb 9, 2021
0
#33
in my opinion, speed chess is a different game, based on chess rules. but it has different rules to win actually. it's like you are playing a game with a soccer ball and being good at it then thinking you are a good football player.
Feb 9, 2021
0
#34
PolarBearAttakk wrote:
xor_eax_eax05 wrote:
PolarBearAttakk wrote:
xor_eax_eax05 wrote:
PolarBearAttakk wrote:
Just as you're not bright enough to be able to get to a level in chess that isn't embarassing, you aren't capable of learning how to read and comprehend English.
Ah the irony. 2109 ELO in online chess, 500 elo in life. Typical.
You continue to demonstrate that your pathologically low IQ doesn't just manifest itself in your inability to learn how to play chess, but in every other aspect of life as well. You're the one who isn't even capable of learning how to read and comprehend English at the level of an elementary school student. And I'm not 2109 in online chess. I'm 2353. You can't even get your rating to 1100, LMAO! If it wasn't for the server doing it for you, you wouldn't be able to figure out how to set up the pieces! I pity you little fella!
Why are u quoting my post before I edited it? That's a new low, even for you. At least I can recognise a typo and fix it. You on the other hand, didn't, because you actually think the word is spelt "embarassing". And yes, it's not 2109, it's even lower, 2091. xD
Still, the 500 from my comment was not a typo. I really meant 500.
Seriously little man...go beg for attention somewhere else, and take your little 1064 rating with you, lol. You don't even belong here! And no, my online rating is 2353, not what you are claiming. And even the number you are making up is higher than you could even dream about being. Again...chess is an intelligence game. That's very bad news for you!
Seriously, in the real world, no one cares about chess unless you're at least a titled a player. And again, if I had a student (I've taught university chemistry in graduate school before medical school) do well in chess as an "untitled" player, that wouldn't be seen as that impressive. The only place being an untitled player where its even impressive is on a chess forums, in which you leverage your ok chess ranking to only make fun of others. You don't contribute to the community at all.
Feb 9, 2021
0
#35
@TinFoildHat911
You are completely wrong in one thing. You claim bullet rating should be higher than OTB rating. Not true. Some players are good at slower time controls, others are better at shorter time controls. You can't just go around throwing such a statement as a fact when everyone's different.
And what's with you pawn pushers claiming someone is "lying" when they dont like what they hear? In some other thread I claimed I was a 1600-1900 player in Daily time controls in another site that's exclusively dedicated to Daily chess, and I even posted games about them, and because people like you could not go around that argument, they decided to claim I was "lying". I even posted games I had won and I was told I made up the games in my head.
Chess community is terrible. You guys think you rating make you a better person than everyone else. Maybe that's why many people laugh at chess players and look at them in contempt. Can't understand a short text, make up facts, disregard other opinions they dont like or can't counter as "lying", and still claim to be intellectually superior to everyone else because they can move pieces on a board better than the average. What a joke.
@TinFoilHat911 No he's not, one paragraph later he rationales the reason why he loses:
"I usually have a big advantage after the opening but they keep playing and win on time or force a blunder out of me. I am pretty sure the quality of chess on Blitz is far lower, especially below the 1700 level, but there are just so many speed masters out there who know enough about tempos and forks and discovered attacks to grab a win.
Another thing I noticed is that a lot of these speed players are really good with knights and discovered attacks but dont really excel at much else. I hardly ever see players use the famous checkmating patterns, or tactics like decoys, deflection, overloading, undermining, clearance sacrifices or any thing like that. It is just really basic chess, played really fast. Maybe there is not enough time to think about these more advanced elements of chess? I am not sure what the point of Blitz is. (I guess really high rated players do play decent chess in 3 mins and someone like Nakamura is capable of some amazing moves under time pressure.)"
All those things imply he recognises he's being outplayed one way or the other. Either by time, or forcing a blunder, or playing simpler chess, etc.
OP concludes "and I should be able to beat them if I was any good.", which clearly means he recognises he's being outplayed in his losses.