my mind is blown that any chess player could be below a 1300

Sort:
Mr_Moblhak

Live Chess - Blitz

1850

Live Chess - Bullet

1880

Online Chess

1107

Chess960

1542

Tactics

1301

Chess Mentor

Unra
Mr_Moblhak

there is the stats 24 games 6 wins 17 loss. so you are not just an asshole, you are a lier too. Not that smart with statsshowing.You must be so stupid!!

0random
Mr_Moblhak wrote:

there is the stats 24 games 6 wins 17 loss. so you are not just an asshole, you are a lier too. Not that smart with statsshowing.You must be so stupid!!

Says the guy with 1358 online rating. OH WAIT THATS HIS HIGHEST RATING LOL
1100's or 1000's in all other ratings, you are so smart huh? 

Akatsuki64

Congratulations for making everyone feel bad Kasparov_Jr. You already have a high enough chess rating, you clearly aren't making fun of other people to up your status, but to make yourself feel good.

0random

I bet you make fun of Kasporov_Jr too to make you feel good huh?

Akatsuki64
0random wrote:

I bet you make fun of Kasporov_Jr too to make you feel good huh?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Idiot.

Till_98

orandom are you kasporovs second account?

ProfessorProfesesen

Are still going with this Gung Ho Project K.Jr? Really? I don't think you are this dumb? Why you playing this out? What you fighting? What you angry about? 

Daniel_Persson
Kasporov_Jr wrote:
elonater wrote:

If you were 1400 at 6 or 7 then you must suck at chess to be Sub 2000 many years later.

obviously I do not play competively anymore, I stopped playing serious after I finished elementary. 1870 was my peak rating 4th grade

 

and I'm still higher rated than you have ever been in your life

And your ego seems to be higher than average also, good for you.

MRM60

HEY!! all you dumb asses it is not a matter of IQ it is a matter of logic and reasoning !! Some people git it and some dont . My IQ is only 97 but despite this I still manage to find my NUT in this world of chess players

0random
Till_98 wrote:

orandom are you kasporovs second account?

till_98 do you know what an IP address is?

JGambit

Blitz ratings are a better measure of skill than online ratings.

0random
JGambit wrote:

Blitz ratings are a better measure of skill than online ratings.

Exactly, too many cheaters in online chess.

Akatsuki64
MRM60 wrote:

HEY!! all you dumb asses it is not a matter of IQ it is a matter of logic and reasoning !! Some people git it and some dont . My IQ is only 97 but despite this I still manage to find my NUT in this world of chess players

No need to disclose your IQ score, and IQ = Logic and reasoning. Just because you have a low iIQ score, that doesn't mean you automatically suck at chess. My spatial intelligence is pretty low compared to my logical intelligence.

Akatsuki64

Although, chess-wise I was an average to above average beginner, and I don't play much, so don't say anything Kasparov__Jr.

astronomer999
Akatsuki64 wrote:
MRM60 wrote:

HEY!! all you dumb asses it is not a matter of IQ it is a matter of logic and reasoning !! Some people git it and some dont . My IQ is only 97 but despite this I still manage to find my NUT in this world of chess players

No need to disclose your IQ score, and IQ = Logic and reasoning. Just because you have a low iIQ score, that doesn't mean you automatically suck at chess. My spatial intelligence is pretty low compared to my logical intelligence.

And your arithmetical intelligence is not dialed in too well. Average IQ is 100. 97 is not low. It may even be above median.

Why above median? An example. Say a normal person like you or me has an IQ about 130. It takes 3 people with an IQ of 90 to keep the average at 100, so median is 90. This deviation between median and average will occur whenever there is a distribution which is bounded at only one end, eg intelligence. Some people have IQ measured at 160+. At an IQ of 40, you never learn to talk or even feed youself

Of course, we are informed that IQ scores have been rising a few points per generation for the last century, so more people think of themselves as geniuses than once did

Akatsuki64
astronomer999 wrote:
Akatsuki64 wrote:
MRM60 wrote:

HEY!! all you dumb asses it is not a matter of IQ it is a matter of logic and reasoning !! Some people git it and some dont . My IQ is only 97 but despite this I still manage to find my NUT in this world of chess players

No need to disclose your IQ score, and IQ = Logic and reasoning. Just because you have a low iIQ score, that doesn't mean you automatically suck at chess. My spatial intelligence is pretty low compared to my logical intelligence.

And your arithmetical intelligence is not dialed in too well. Average IQ is 100. 97 is not low. It may even be above median.

Why above median? An example. Say a normal person like you or me has an IQ about 130. It takes 3 people with an IQ of 90 to keep the average at 100, so median is 90. This deviation between median and average will occur whenever there is a distribution which is bounded at only one end, eg intelligence. Some people have IQ measured at 160+. At an IQ of 40, you never learn to talk or even feed youself

Of course, we are informed that IQ scores have been rising a few points per generation for the last century, so more people think of themselves as geniuses than once did

Okay, I agree with some/most of this (depending on how you see it). However, I disagree with your assumption that I am deficient in arithmetic. I also disagree with your statement about the average IQ  increasing a few points per generation, because actually, the Flynn Effect is suggested to end soon. You are right that 97 is not a low IQ score, but 97 is still below average.

Kasporov_Jr
Mr_Moblhak wrote:

Live Chess - Blitz
1850
Live Chess - Bullet
1880
Online Chess
1107
Highest: 1307 (Apr 9, 2014) Avg. Opp.: 1309 Best Win: 1459 (OttoNemia) Today‘s Rank: #290,997 of 424,160 (29.8%) Timeouts: 32% (last 90 days) Time/Move: 4 hr Total Games: 24 (6 W/ 17 L / 1 D)
Chess960
1542
Tactics
1301
Chess Mentor
Unra

if your idiot mind actually went through my games, you would see that I lost 10+ games in a chess.com tournament due to stupid 24 hour format where I had to go; your case is invalid.

 

thats why bullet/blitz > online chess, any high rated player would know that, apparently, you dont which figures why your rating is low

Akatsuki64
Kasporov_Jr wrote:
Mr_Moblhak wrote:

Live Chess - Blitz
1850
Live Chess - Bullet
1880
Online Chess
1107
Highest: 1307 (Apr 9, 2014) Avg. Opp.: 1309 Best Win: 1459 (OttoNemia) Today‘s Rank: #290,997 of 424,160 (29.8%) Timeouts: 32% (last 90 days) Time/Move: 4 hr Total Games: 24 (6 W/ 17 L / 1 D)
Chess960
1542
Tactics
1301
Chess Mentor
Unra

if your idiot mind actually went through my games, you would see that I lost 10+ games in a chess.com tournament due to stupid 24 hour format where I had to go; your case is invalid.

 

thats why bullet/blitz > online chess, any high rated player would know that, apparently, you dont which figures why your rating is low

I would suggest you improve your online chess rating before you start making claims about us being low rated players. Your highest rating was 1309, use whatever excuse you wish, you are still not excused, idiotic hypocrite.

JGambit

it is funny when you see comments and can almost predict chess rating based on the content of the comment.

This forum topic has been locked