I meant professional kind of chess.
I HATE my Rating
Sort:
ohhh
DontTalkAnymore wrote:
If you want sincere advice then...
This game means nothing. You aren't going to make a career out of it most likely. Don't focus so much time and effort on something meaningless. Treat it as a hobby and don't take it too seriously.
read one book in tactics, doing all the exercises. Any book. Believe me, your rating will go way up.
winning chess tactics, back to basic tactics, chernev winning chess and littewood chess tactics are all good books.
Jun 26, 2017
0
#46
After all that tactical regimen...you will feel like-'I should cook my brain,nail it to a board and throw darts on it!'
If you`re rated between 1000 and 1500, you might find my educational blog of interest: https://www.chess.com/blog/FangBo
Chessboogie wrote:
After all that tactical regimen...you will feel like-'I should cook my brain,nail it to a board and throw darts on it!'
lol
Do tactics
for the life of me I can't nor care to comprehend why someone would come to a site to play chess by cheating.
what do they get from knowing they actually never played but looked to have?
as well their time.
madtime strange
Jun 26, 2017
0
#51
If you want to discuss cheating, please join the Cheating Forum: https://www.chess.com/club/cheating-forum. Discussion of cheating is not permitted in the main forums, because it tends to get heated and result in lots of public accusations. Please don't derail this thread and force me to lock it like other threads about cheating. 
But do be aware that it's entirely normal for low-rated players to have the occasional good game. I had a near-perfect one the other day, although it was pretty short.
PieceOfPoo wrote:
Don't quit. Realize there's a bunch of cheaters on this site, and really anywhere. I once played a guy who was rated under 1000, and he killed me. He played a flawless game all excellent moves. Found out he destroyed me with Stockfish 8. That's why you can't take these ratings seriously. Also people have an extension that comes with chrome that has garbochess (a weak engine that plays at 2500 elo) suggesting moves in real time while they play. I evaluate all my games, ( I get the PGN) and I find that most people above 1400 on this site play with a surprisingly low centipawn loss indicating a quality of play equivalent to that of international masters or candidate masters. Some especially over 1600 playing as strong as GMs. Which I call BS on, I believe they're using engines or databases. Never the less, it still helps me improve, because I think I'm playing a human being. So don't cry about it, just keep playing. :)
Sure, internet ratings are not official. That being said, unless you have some solid proof that specific users are cheating, I suggest you quit throwing accusations around! Sure, it happens, but I doubt it's even remotely as widespread as you portray it. Chess.com has got programs scanning the games in progress for un-normal rows of "computer moves", so anyone using an engine, is likely to get caught and banned after a few games. (I know a guy who tested it out.) BTW: You do know one can get banned for throwing around baseless accusations of cheating on this site too, don't you?
Just bc someone is playing well, or even well above their normal level (or maybe you were playing below yours?), doesn't automatically mean they're using an engine. Summing up, unless you got solid proof, I think you're just a bad loser.
Oh, I didn't see your post as I was typing, MGleason. Yeah, let's take it there instead!
PieceOfPoo wrote:
216751 wrote:
for the life of me I can't nor care to comprehend why someone would come to a site to play chess by cheating.
what do they get from knowing they actually never played but looked to have?
as well their time.
madtime strange
Narcissism is what drives them. 1upping their fellow man. The thought they screwed someone's day up. To drive up their rating. Bragging rights. Dopamine release, reward / pleasure center brain stimulation. It's the same reason people abuse narcotics, to feel good.
daaaaaamn
and MGleason's right so I'ma zip it.
yes, my apologies too, lil mouse
I thank everybody that gave me advice. I think I now have some helpful ideas of WHERE I am going wrong...which MEANS that perhaps I can begin to work on those areas.
that's great
And I just would like to say I hope you decide to follow what I shared to you my 1st post and make some unknown tactic that you yourself can build with every time you that particular color, as well think of doing sacrifices due many do not.
Here's a great example what I'm meaning by this recent win with my Queen early off board.
https://www.chess.com/live/game/2174537633?username=216751
PieceOfPoo wrote:
Don't quit. Realize there's a bunch of cheaters on this site, and really anywhere. I once played a guy who was rated under 1000, and he killed me. He played a flawless game all excellent moves. Found out he destroyed me with Stockfish 8. That's why you can't take these ratings seriously. Also people have an extension that comes with chrome that has garbochess (a weak engine that plays at 2500 elo) suggesting moves in real time while they play. I evaluate all my games, ( I get the PGN) and I find that most people above 1400 on this site play with a surprisingly low centipawn loss indicating a quality of play equivalent to that of international masters or candidate masters. Some especially over 1600 playing as strong as GMs. Which I call BS on, I believe they're using engines or databases. Never the less, it still helps me improve, because I think I'm playing a human being. So don't cry about it, just keep playing. :)
That is exactly the way I look at it too. Losing a game where I was incredibly outplayed doesn't bother me one bit. So I lose to a computer, so what. Even the world chess champion loses to a computer so there is no reason to feel bad about it. It makes no difference to me, since it's still just a game. I was trying to think of a sports analogy and the only thing I coud think of was basketball where one person is trying to shoot, and the other person is guarding him. But then 3 other players come to help with defense. Now the shooter is incredibly overpowered and has no chance to shoot. It's not cheating, it's just the other side doing something to their advantage. Not a big deal, you just pass the ball to someone else. Or in the case of playing chess here, play someone else.
Possibly of interest:
Simple Attacking Plans by Fred Wilson (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090402/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review874.pdf
Logical Chess: Move by Move by Irving Chernev (1957)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104437/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/logichess.pdf
The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Irving Chernev (1965)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/most-instructive-games-of-chess-ever-played/
Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld (1949)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093415/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review919.pdf
Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233537/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review585.pdf
Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf
Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014)
http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/openings-for-amateurs/
https://www.mongoosepress.com/excerpts/OpeningsForAmateurs%20sample.pdf
Chess Endgames for Kids by Karsten Müller (2015)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/chess-endgames-for-kids/
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Chess_Endgames_for_Kids.pdf
A Guide to Chess Improvement by Dan Heisman (2010)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708105628/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review781.pdf
Seirawan stuff
http://seagaard.dk/review/eng/bo_beginner/ev_winning_chess.asp?KATID=BO&ID=BO-Beginner
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-winning-chess-endings
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
http://www.nystar.com/tamarkin/review1.htm
lol if I were part of your estimation I wouldn't have a profile or type this.
based on your claim there