almost impossible to recover from the first blunder. he was probably flustered and angry with himself after that. plus I took a lesson from an IM years ago. he said something like, "don't give someone respect because of a rating. even IMs are terrible chess players."
How could a 2100 play so badly?
Sort:
everyone can have a bad day. in this game kramnik was over 2800 playing against fritz 10 but he was tired after a long game and didnt see the mate in one in t
he end
he end
I got that beat by a mile.
Played in a 1 day tournament last Saturday. Beat a master, and drew with a 1900. Now we go to this past Tuesday. Started an 8 week/8 round tournament at our club. Round 1...lost to a 564 player. That is not a typo.
Everyone has off days. That game looks pretty standard for an off day.
On a really good day he could probably draw/beat a 2400.
Or you are not the only stronger player who lost to him.
George Salwe, number 2 player in Poland, in the early 20th century, didn't start playing in major events until he was 42. English Master Joseph Henry Blake achieved his best result at the age of 63. Oscar Shapiro (1910-2000) became a chess master at the age of 74. In 1991. Chigorin started his tournament career at the age of 27. It's not always a patzer.
YuriSenkevich escribió:
The dude just blundered, he had a bad day, and if you had played in serious tournaments you should know how much frustrated a chess player gets.
Once I lost a game to a patzer in a Delayed Alapin where I was black, I was black in the game and the Sicilian Defense is my territory, I was totally outplaying him just to stupidly hang a piece. I got so mad I even went to say to the dude:
"Good game, I blundered a totally winning position". After that day I couldnt live, not because of my opponent (f#$k him!) but because I blundered in a very stupid fashion.
It is normal to sometimes miss things like that and just keep blundering the game. Being able to not want to kill yourself, keep calm and objectively try to comeback, or fight for a draw is a hard thing to do that even experienced tourament players cant do.
It also helps having some real problems in your life. To me the game is an outlet, mainly because of two features:
- If something bad happens, it's only my fault.
- At the end, there are no real consequences.
I enjoy OTB over all, but I couldn't keep playing with your approach. What did your opponent do to deserve such warm feelings?
YuriSenkevich wrote:
Pulpofeira wrote:
YuriSenkevich escribió:
The dude just blundered, he had a bad day, and if you had played in serious tournaments you should know how much frustrated a chess player gets.
Once I lost a game to a patzer in a Delayed Alapin where I was black, I was black in the game and the Sicilian Defense is my territory, I was totally outplaying him just to stupidly hang a piece. I got so mad I even went to say to the dude:
"Good game, I blundered a totally winning position". After that day I couldnt live, not because of my opponent (f#$k him!) but because I blundered in a very stupid fashion.
It is normal to sometimes miss things like that and just keep blundering the game. Being able to not want to kill yourself, keep calm and objectively try to comeback, or fight for a draw is a hard thing to do that even experienced tourament players cant do.
It also helps having some real problems in your life. To me the game is an outlet, mainly because of two features:
- If something bad happens, it's only my fault.
- At the end, there are no real consequences.
I enjoy OTB over all, but I couldn't keep playing with your approach. What did your opponent do to deserve such warm feelings?
I didnt really get your point. Are you saying I should get a life if I get mad over a game? For me the game is not an outlet but more like the thing I want to get good at to crush everyone.
If somethinng bad happens I do know it is my fault.
At the end, true, there are no real consequences but I want to win the game, I dont see a problem with it.
And how do you deducted my approach? I know I acted like a kid that time and that hasnt repeated yet. What did my opponent did to deserve warm feelings? Nothing lol, he just happened to be in front of me when I was about to explode. Korchnoi did kind of the same to Sofia Polgar so I guess I should be proud about my attitude.
If I lose to a higher rated opponent or a dude that I saw showed good play I usually dont get mad and take it as a learning experience, I usually say good game and discuss the game with them. If I lose against a dude that had no clue about what he is doing and then I just flaout blunder, well that is a different story.
In chess you are playing by the rules, if you are cheating you are dead for good. Nobody is exempt from losing. You are doing it right and nobody gets hurt.
YuriSenkevich wrote:
Peste Balinca, I thought you were a trolly scientist but now I am starting to doubt it.
Dyslexia?
"And how do you deducted my approach? I know I acted like a kid that time and that hasnt repeated yet. What did my opponent did to deserve warm feelings? Nothing lol, he just happened to be in front of me when I was about to explode. Korchnoi did kind of the same to Sofia Polgar so I guess I should be proud about my attitude".
The f**k him thing helped a bit.
Ok, just don't forget that works on both ways.
*no comment...*
:)
My friend is a master and competely destroyed his 2100 opponent. I got a copy of the game and am just shocked at how someone 2100 could play so badly:
If I didn't know better I would have thought black was a 1200. What could account for such poor play from a very strong player?