You cant win against Anand!
I could hypothetically beat Vishwanathan Anand if I really wanted to
Sort:
MervinHenderson wrote:
blueemu wrote:
MervinHenderson wrote:
Dude...only 6 moves? I can think ten moves ahead.
Then why have you lost six of your last eight games?
Did you get paired against opponents who can look eleven moves ahead?
Lol look closely at my games I was in winning positions for most of them even the ones I lost. Those were like blitz games and I blundered in time pressure
Your second game you lost by not taking a queen when you had plenty of time on the clock, that disproves your own statement.
CeviLevita wrote:
MervinHenderson wrote:
blueemu wrote:
MervinHenderson wrote:
Dude...only 6 moves? I can think ten moves ahead.
Then why have you lost six of your last eight games?
Did you get paired against opponents who can look eleven moves ahead?
Lol look closely at my games I was in winning positions for most of them even the ones I lost. Those were like blitz games and I blundered in time pressure
Your second game you lost by not taking a queen when you had plenty of time on the clock, that disproves your own statement.
Ok so I wasn't playing seriously. But if I was plagin against Anand I would be and id probably of can see more moves ahead of him
Jan 30, 2021
0
#25
blueemu wrote:
MervinHenderson wrote:
Dude...only 6 moves? I can think ten moves ahead.
Then why have you lost six of your last eight games?
Did you get paired against opponents who can look eleven moves ahead?
Yes Anonymous Dragon I agree
You won on time Not by Checkmate
Siddharth20112014 wrote:
You won on time Not by Checkmate
Dude I got his king cornered and I had three passed pawns
Jan 30, 2021
0
#32
" I could hypothetically beat Vishwanathan Anand if I really wanted to"
Yeah, you can hypothetically stop trolling too.
Jan 30, 2021
0
#33
MervinHenderson wrote:
Deranged wrote:
You could beat Anand if you studied a very specific opening in great detail and he happened to go down that exact path.
Or if he disconnects and loses on time.
I have a pretty good opening theory knowledge....I'm quite good at the e4 and d4 openings
d4 and e4 are not the only openings that exist, theres c4(English) Nf3(Reti) b3(Larson) g3(Hungarian) and thats only the first move.
Jan 30, 2021
0
#34
RagingRook1747 wrote:
" I could hypothetically beat Vishwanathan Anand if I really wanted to"
Yeah, you can hypothetically stop trolling too.
Emphasis on the hypothetically
I agree RagingRook1747
Jan 30, 2021
0
#36
MervinHenderson wrote:
Doesn't Vishwanathan Anand only see three moves ahead? I read somewhere that he does. Well, I can see more than like ten moves ahead sometimes more. That's what I mean when I say Elo rating isn't everything. You can't just measure ability and talent with a rating.
So anyway if I played Anand all I would need to do was go through every since variation on the board and if I had enough time on the chess clock and since I could see more moves ahead than him I would hypothetically win that game
You could HYPOTHETICALLY win the game. You are assuming you make no blunders or mistakes. Anand, Hikaru and Carlsen can all play perfectly(mostly) if you make a single mistake, you lose, and even if you play perfectly, the game would probably be a draw.
PunchboxNET wrote:
MervinHenderson wrote:
Deranged wrote:
You could beat Anand if you studied a very specific opening in great detail and he happened to go down that exact path.
Or if he disconnects and loses on time.
I have a pretty good opening theory knowledge....I'm quite good at the e4 and d4 openings
d4 and e4 are not the only openings that exist, theres c4(English) Nf3(Reti) b3(Larson) g3(Hungarian) and thats only the first move.
So your in a supermarket. There loads of goods to buy. But would you buy every thing or only the good stuff? Same with chess openings i I only study the good ones. e4 and d4 are the best others are just for show.
PunchboxNET wrote:
MervinHenderson wrote:
Doesn't Vishwanathan Anand only see three moves ahead? I read somewhere that he does. Well, I can see more than like ten moves ahead sometimes more. That's what I mean when I say Elo rating isn't everything. You can't just measure ability and talent with a rating.
So anyway if I played Anand all I would need to do was go through every since variation on the board and if I had enough time on the chess clock and since I could see more moves ahead than him I would hypothetically win that game
You could HYPOTHETICALLY win the game. You are assuming you make no blunders or mistakes. Anand, Hikaru and Carlsen can all play perfectly(mostly) if you make a single mistake, you lose, and even if you play perfectly, the game would probably be a draw.
I could play perfectly if I had loads of time on the chess clock..then I would play perfect chess too. I only blunder in time pressure it's like my style of blundering. I never blunder in long games. Also, many people have beaten Anand you can't say he would definitely draw with me if others could beat him so could I.
Jan 30, 2021
0
#39
You are saying e4 and d4 are the only good ones, so why do c4 and Nf3 have equal or higher win rates?
Doesn't Vishwanathan Anand only see three moves ahead? I read somewhere that he does. Well, I can see more than like ten moves ahead sometimes more. That's what I mean when I say Elo rating isn't everything. You can't just measure ability and talent with a rating.
So anyway if I played Anand all I would need to do was go through every since variation on the board and if I had enough time on the chess clock and since I could see more moves ahead than him I would hypothetically win that game
The bunny believes you although you just joined and have no credentials. However there are too many skeptics here, so please just first get your GM title registered here first and then proceed to beat him. Unless your claim is that you can only beat Anand and not other masters. Thank you. Please don't let the bunny down.
A title is just a title it means nothing. Even Elo rating is overrated. You can't measure how good a person is at chess by a number system. It's more complex than that. Elo ratings and titles are faulty.