I smash 1400+ players, I got rekt by 1100-1300 players: Smurfs and Sandbaggers

So...this game vs a 1400 player is pretty standard for I easily I mow through these players:

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2979847919

The 1400-1600 players play exactly as I expect them to...and I usually win.

However, there is a great mystery concerning these 1100-1300 players. I either annihilate them in the first 10 moves (and get barely any points) or instead, they play with GM level precision and execution. After analysis it shows that they are INDEED humans players, since they make errors and inaccuracies all over the place. So I know they aren't cheating.

I beleive that they are high level players making ALT accounts to test new openings or straight up troll the bracket. In Starcraft 2 we call this "smurfing", in Rated battlegrounds in World of Warcraft, we call it the same (we get on low rated alt characters). In OTB chess it's called sandbagging.

Seeing sub 1300 players became so frightening that I aborted every game, black or white, when I saw them below 1300. Eventually I was resigning for a few games not realizing that I was being penalized for excessive abortions and took a 25+ point loss, and now I'm forced into this twilight zone bracket again where master level players are on the prowl and straight up making the 1100-1300 bracket unplayable.

I used to be 1700+ in 30 minute chess, so I can see that these players clearly not 1100-1300 noobs.  Analysis of these games show that they were planning their attacks and defenses 10-ply ahead and/or with prior experience in these positions.

I cannot for one believe how easily these players fight the Bird opening (f4), while 1400-1600 players get confused and stomped out by the otherwise inferior opening.

Anyway, the game I linked at the start is demonstrative of how TRUE 1300-1400 players play (really bad) and doesn't at all compare to the level of precision and calculation and cruelness of half of these 1100-1300 players (the other half being so bad it hurts and is boring).

So I'm currently in bracket where I win so easily that it's boring or I lose so hard, that I can't even tell what I did wrong and log off for the day.

Does anyone else notice this?

The only thing I can suggest to fix this is to allow 1100-1300 players with 100+ games played to opt out of playing new accounts.

ty

Bro my record is higher than yours and I learnt how to play chess 4 months ago lol don't complain, if you lose it's becouse they are better

Anywway, here's my latest game agianst a sub 1300 player.

I made 0 blunders and only one mistake, and he played like monster down a piece from the opening and equalized twice... this is NOT 1200 level play

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2982023238

And yes, you read that right, he equalized twice without me making ANY blunders while he was a down piece the entire game.

... And missed an obvious mate in one at the end. This game was exactly how 1200s play. Drop a piece by move 8, then just play normal for a few moves before opponent blunders. Then come back to game, make a gazillion queen moves while opponent keeps chasing your queen all over the board and eventually fall for a mate in one.

What do you expect will happen if you keep attacking his queen? He made 17! queen moves in that game. It's kinda hard to blunder moving a queen out of one move threats...

By the way, according to engine you made one bad blunder, one mistake, and 7 inaccuracies. If you think you should just steamroll over 1200s with a play like that, you're mistaken.

Wait... you went from 800 to 1100 in 3 months, but 1200 to 1500 in, like, a week or so? How does this happen, I thought the early elo was the easiest to gain, did you get coached by a GM?

 According to Stockfish, you made 15 blunders.

 According to Stockfish, you made 15 blunders.

 No you record isn't actually. I held 1700-1800 in standard 30 minute chess on this site for years.

Also, no one jumps 500+ ELO point in a month (i just looked at your record) unless you were a sandbagger for begin with (or you're using a blunder checker while otherwise making your own moves).

Your account history is a perfect example for this thread. Thank you for posting.

btw someone else notice this too.

How do you go from 1100 rating to smashing 1500+ players, unless you've always been this good?

Do you wanna play? I already talked about my progress in another thread

 Yes. 10 minutes or half hour?

... And missed an obvious mate in one at the end. This game was exactly how 1200s play. Drop a piece by move 8, then just play normal for a few moves before opponent blunders. Then come back to game, make a gazillion queen moves while opponent keeps chasing your queen all over the board and eventually fall for a mate in one.

What do you expect will happen if you keep attacking his queen? He made 17! queen moves in that game. It's kinda hard to blunder moving a queen out of one move threats...

By the way, according to engine you made one bad blunder, one mistake, and 7 inaccuracies. If you think you should just steamroll over 1200s with a play like that, you're mistaken.

Taskinen is exactly right.  You by no means played perfectly, and yet you still got the win, so you should go out and celebrate instead of griping at the losing player's strong game. 

You are rated around 1000 in tactics, so it is going to be hard to play at a 1400 level consistently.  The problem isn't everybody else.  It's you.  When we start to compare ourselves to GMs or engines, we all are noobs at the game, but appreciate that most of the time when you lose in chess, it's your fault - not that someone is cheating, smurfing an account, your computer is slow, or anything else.

 According to Stockfish, you made 17 blunders.

LOL  I did not count correctly the first time.