Do you heard about Procust bed? you need all players to play all time at the same level.
if you intentionaly resign in positive situation you can be charged of rating manipulation!
Do you understand the concept? It is intentionaly loosing points to seem to be weak and entering in tournaments with lower rating... In what you write you accuse yourself of this "crime"
players with less then 800 rating are 99.(9)% with no training... without no theory, analyze skills... nothing...play by the ear...
because theyre cheating
You are probably right. Funny thing is I started off well on here and now I am getting bombarded with losses from people with low ratings like mine who are playing with great precision. I get it that I have made mistakes, and that I am not that good at chess. But it is suspicious that I am suffering so many losses so suddenly.
Probably you should start ACTUALLY playing as a pose to asking forums for excuses?????
players with less then 800 rating are 99.(9)% with no training... without no theory, analyze skills... nothing...play by the ear...
100% wrong. Been 1700-1800 for years at Daily on another chess. Have beaten FIDE rated players at slow Daily chess in their 1600s and 1700s.
Found the profile of a 1900+ guy from the other site on this site. Im 3-2-2 against him. Very even strength. Same name, profile name, country and city, so I assume it's him.
Do you know what his rating is on this site? 1800-1900 elo at all time controls. Im one game up against him yet on this site Im struggling at 1000 elo lower. Why? How come half the players at 800 elo play so strong?
i can make anyone with 1 contest. pay one year tax and have FIDE rating.
#20
That's not the correct argument.
The point is not that I blundered or missed a tactic, I can live with that, the point is these players dont play at the standard of players at 800 elo.
It's not about my play, it's about how strong they are. Do you really consider it normal that half the players at 800 elo play positional chess? That they can keep an eval bar at 0.0 for 20, 30 moves, and when the games get analysed post match, they did play with almost no inaccuracies? That they play at 50 centipawn loss on a bad day, some even go to 30 or 20 centipawn loss accuracy score?
Moreover, as I said, Ive been playing Daily for years at 1800 elo on another site, and have played players beyond that rating, even in the 2000s, we are talking about players who are already club players with a FIDE rating and making use of databases, and playing slow chess... yet a big percentage of these 800 elo players on this site play equally if not stronger than those.
And they are not cheaters, because if they were using an engine I would lose all my games and it would not be even close.
So rating is really pointless in the lower elo. You never know what you are going to get. Are you going to get the 800 elo who plays at 100+ centipawn loss within 15 moves, and you will be 10+ points by move 15, or are you going to play the 800 elo who can play 30 moves at 25 centipawn loss and hold you at 0.0 IF and ONLY IF you play your best ... have one minor inaccuracy and you are done?
It is of course not normal, but you are exaggerating the percentage of the players of this level who play the way you describe. In one game you posted, you resigned in an ok position pretty early because you probably decided that something is off. In some cases people at 800 play ok in the first 10 moves and then they fall apart completely.
When I play against this rating range in unrated games, they usually play the way they are expected to.
I can lose of course, and it mostly comes in 2 ways. I can play really badly and miss something, and I tend to do that more often in unrated games. Or there might be something fishy, but that is not that often.
The truth is that on this level if one knows the principles and gets better, he will get to higher level.
I can't speculate why are you at this level. To me it seems you are doing it on purpose as your profile says, and I do not know why is it tolerated. I've seen a game where you had a win basically, and you just resigned without any reason.
So perhaps you are indeed in some poor sports pool, and no wonder that you have more bad experiences.
Moreover, as I said, Ive been playing Daily for years at 1800 elo on another site, and have played players beyond that rating, even in the 2000s,
Another site"s rating are not identical to chess.com's ratings.
You have played more than 300 daily games on chess.com. Your rating is accurate, unless you were sandbagging all the time.
By the way, what you are doing right now (resigning games without a cause) is exactly that. Sandbagging. Cheating.
https://www.chess.com/game/live/132997157083
1900 rating player loosing chess mate in 14
I lost games in 10... there are large oscilations in rating... I ganed in real life with MI (part of national team of Italy and next round lost to 1000 rating) - real games....we are human....make briliant moves andd then blunders next round
#29
I no longer carry on playing games against players this strong. Resign on the spot, regardless of the position. If the site can't fix their elo ladder what's even the point?
My question is why are there so many players at this level who play so strongly? Imagine playing a high accuracy game and having to define an endgame by just a pawn because of how accurate both players are... at 700 elo. Makes no sense to even say it.
#29
I no longer carry on playing games against players this strong. Resign on the spot, regardless of the position. If the site can't fix their elo ladder what's even the point?
My question is why are there so many players at this level who play so strongly? Imagine playing a high accuracy game and having to define an endgame by just a pawn because of how accurate both players are... at 700 elo. Makes no sense to even say it.
Don't you see the problem here? If you keep resigning games where you are equal or better, you are going to keep yourself at an artificially low level. Looking through your recent losses I can see plenty of examples where you were ahead and would have won if you'd kept playing, or (presumably) ragequit after a blunder that only restored you to equality, or the position was equal but you were well up on the clock, etc, etc.
The reality is that while some players are low because they're consistently mediocre, others are low elo because they're very inconsistent. A lot of people are capable of high level chess but then struggle to reproduce it consistently. You're always going to run up against players like that - and particularly around 800 you are also going to run into new accounts that aren't correctly rated yet. But if you stopped resigning games that you should or could still win, you would definitely be significantly higher rated than you are now.
#29
I no longer carry on playing games against players this strong. Resign on the spot, regardless of the position. If the site can't fix their elo ladder what's even the point?
My question is why are there so many players at this level who play so strongly? Imagine playing a high accuracy game and having to define an endgame by just a pawn because of how accurate both players are... at 700 elo. Makes no sense to even say it.
This is a case of self fulfilling prophecy. You start by thinking you should be 1 700 rated here, because somewhere else you are (which is incorrect as ratings do not transfer). Then you lose some games and probably get lower then you should be.
You are on a tilt, lose some more. Then you decide that the strength of players around you is unrealistic, and this is the reason why you are now significantly lower than you should be.
But then you lose on purpose and your rating plummets completely. Then you say that a big percentage of 700 rated people are playing way too strong for their rating, but in many cases you resign early not actually knowing if one is a legit 700 or not.
Another game I saw you resign is a game where you had a free pawn, you didn't take it, become worse, then recover, all in like 10 moves and you just resign because it is an equal game, because you decided that something is odd. And it really wasn't in that game. You simply didn't take the free pawn, allowed a pawn push, the opponent didn't follow it up in the best way bringing the game to equality, and you resigned because you didn't already win that game.
The truth is that if you had played it serious afterwards, a bunch of such games you would win and your rating would go up.
Instead, you are basically not even trying when you are suspicious of someone. Sometimes you might be correct in your assumptions, but in many cases you would just win.
On top of it all, you play a game like this:
Completely winning position and then resignation. Of course you are around 700 instead of whatever is your real rating. You are not allowing yourself to win games, and you are artificially affecting the rating pool in this manner.
players with less then 800 rating are 99.(9)% with no training... without no theory, analyze skills... nothing...play by the ear...
100% wrong. Been 1700-1800 for years at Daily on another chess. Have beaten FIDE rated players at slow Daily chess in their 1600s and 1700s.
Found the profile of a 1900+ guy from the other site on this site. Im 3-2-2 against him. Very even strength. Same name, profile name, country and city, so I assume it's him.
Do you know what his rating is on this site? 1800-1900 elo at all time controls. Im one game up against him yet on this site Im struggling at 1000 elo lower. Why? How come half the players at 800 elo play so strong?
I have a theory
I think many chess players start playing more seriously because of GothamChess at COVID 19. Remember that in that time so many players starts playing chess, probably also online. Then they learn at the same time and their real elo goes up at the same time. So if they was 400 then get to 800 (real elo) then they beat another person with the same fate. They will stuck in 400 because their actual elo is the same. Also don't forget that chess is addictive to some people, those people will have a lose streak because of bad state of mind and then win with high accuracy in a good state of mind.
How is it that there are players on here with a low rating (below 900) who have been here for years—some as far back as 2017—and play with a precision that appears to be much higher than their rating?
I ran into a player yesterday as you described who was 800 blitz but a solid 1600 rapid player; I get it.
in covid...during almost all evenings there where error in connection...too many contentions error to server...it was abnormal to connect at first try
i dont understand the reason to cheat... what one gate from here? a cup?
Im sorry but that's chasing a red herring. Most people try to deviate attention from the problem saying, "well, you blundered in this game etc. etc.". That's not the point. That does not explain the strength in many of these players at 700 - 900 elo.
A bracket in which players should be learning to move the pieces. As I mentioned you never know if you are going to get the 800 elo who is -15 by move 10, or the 800 elo who can play 30 moves at 30 centipawn loss. At 800 elo.
As for elo comparison, I will just say that I've talked to a player on that other side on a similar topic about elo comparison, and when I said 1800 there is like 800 elo here, he was deeply offended and pointed me to his account at 1700 elo here - his rating was similar.
I've also found the profile of a 1900+ player over there, on this site - same account name, same name, country and city, so I assume it's him, and he's 1800-1900 here too in all time controls. Im 3-2-2 against that player, which makes us very even in playing strength.
A long time ago I explained this to people here and everyone laughed. I showed some of my games and people told me I was making up games or stealing games from other players and passing them off as mine. Community is stupid.
And, again, playing strength among players at 800 elo makes no sense. Im not saying they are cheaters, and Im not saying they are playing like 2000 elo players, but they certainly dont play like players learning to move the pieces.
I mean, in many cases if I dont play at 90 accuracy, my opponent will crush me because they may have just 1 blunder and 1 mistake in a 30 move game. At 800 elo:
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/122815839134?tab=review
they certainly dont play like players learning to move the pieces.
I mean, in many cases if I dont play at 90 accuracy, my opponent will crush me because they may have just 1 blunder and 1 mistake in a 30 move game. At 800 elo:
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/122815839134?tab=review
People who are rated 800 are not "players learning to move the pieces". That's just insulting and dumb.
In the game that you linked, your opponent lost a piece and lost the game. If anyone could be suspected of cheating in that game, it's certainly not your opponent.
they certainly dont play like players learning to move the pieces.
I mean, in many cases if I dont play at 90 accuracy, my opponent will crush me because they may have just 1 blunder and 1 mistake in a 30 move game. At 800 elo:
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/122815839134?tab=review
People who are rated 800 are not "players learning to move the pieces". That's just insulting and dumb.
In the game that you linked, your opponent lost a piece and lost the game. If anyone could be suspected of cheating in that game, it's certainly not your opponent.
Im not accusing them of cheating. These are NOT CHEATERS, they dont play like engines. But they dont play like 800 elo players either.
Which brings me to the point I have been making, the low elo bracket is in shambles because there's such a huge disparity in playing strength, at similar elo.
Which is similar to what many others have already pointed out across many other threads.
Some even go paranoid and try to rationalise it saying we are playing site bots or whatever.
#20
That's not the correct argument.
The point is not that I blundered or missed a tactic, I can live with that, the point is these players dont play at the standard of players at 800 elo.
It's not about my play, it's about how strong they are. Do you really consider it normal that half the players at 800 elo play positional chess? That they can keep an eval bar at 0.0 for 20, 30 moves, and when the games get analysed post match, they did play with almost no inaccuracies? That they play at 50 centipawn loss on a bad day, some even go to 30 or 20 centipawn loss accuracy score?
Moreover, as I said, Ive been playing Daily for years at 1800 elo on another site, and have played players beyond that rating, even in the 2000s, we are talking about players who are already club players with a FIDE rating and making use of databases, and playing slow chess... yet a big percentage of these 800 elo players on this site play equally if not stronger than those.
And they are not cheaters, because if they were using an engine I would lose all my games and it would not be even close.
So rating is really pointless in the lower elo. You never know what you are going to get. Are you going to get the 800 elo who plays at 100+ centipawn loss within 15 moves, and you will be 10+ points by move 15, or are you going to play the 800 elo who can play 30 moves at 25 centipawn loss and hold you at 0.0 IF and ONLY IF you play your best ... have one minor inaccuracy and you are done?