Ratings is the sole reason we play - Chess Forums - Page 4

NM TheOldReb

Jun 1, 2009

0

#61

I also have a uscf floor of 2000. I earned the NM title in the US and since coming to Portugal have earned it here as well....... those two titles and 50 cents ( euro cents) will get me a cup of coffee !

Subrosian

Jun 1, 2009

0

#62

I only play to win tournaments. Whatever the rating I have does not matter, but I prefer winning tournaments with larger prize pots, and thus stronger players.

So I don't care about ratings; I only care about how much I improve. If I disconnect and lose rating because of that, it's no big deal, and I don't care if I let myself lose on time in blitz games to think more cohesively of my move choices. I also only play against higher rated players.

I do not play against computers because they do not play like humans, and if you want to beat humans, you have to practice against humans. Unlike computers, humans develop plans and can sometimes make better moves than computers with long-term positional principles. This allows you to learn good moves from computers as well as humans. Also, humans make tactical mistakes, allowing you to practice swindling in theoretically lost positions.

NM ozzie_c_cobblepot

Jun 1, 2009

0

#63

Gonnosuke wrote:

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

At that point I could even play 1.e4 e5 2.f4 from the black side against Gonnosuke in a USCF tournament!

You know you'd still play the Caro-Kann. Otherwise I might trick you into playing your first Ruy Lopez.

By the way, you have no idea how awesome I think it is that you've never played a single Ruy or Sicilian. It's so awesome I *almost* don't believe you.

I'm so flattered that you read my bait-post, I'm almost teary eyed! :-)
If I had to win then sure I'd play the Caro-Kann. But if I were in the right mood, I might just take my shiny new FM title out for a spin and play the black side of the royal gambit.
I'd be ok playing the black side of the Ruy Lopez. Would probably still lose, but you never know. You might be blinded by my FM title.
I can't remember the last time I've played 1.e4 in an OTB tournament game. I'm sure I did sometimes back in some scholastic games. That being said, there is one line which I play which transposes into the Sicilian. So it's not that I don't have any experience at all in it.
Of course there was a chess.com Sicilian Najdorf tournament I entered. (Bad idea, btw, especially bad idea trying to wing it w/o any opening DB.)

NM ozzie_c_cobblepot

Jun 1, 2009

0

#64

Reb wrote:

I also have a uscf floor of 2000. I earned the NM title in the US and since coming to Portugal have earned it here as well....... those two titles and 50 cents ( euro cents) will get me a cup of coffee !

I'd buy you coffee if you came to Northern California.

NM TheOldReb

Jun 1, 2009

0

#65

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

Reb wrote:

I also have a uscf floor of 2000. I earned the NM title in the US and since coming to Portugal have earned it here as well....... those two titles and 50 cents ( euro cents) will get me a cup of coffee !

I'd buy you coffee if you came to Northern California.

Thanks Ozzie. If I am ever in your neck of the woods done be surprised if I take you up on that. Its a long way from Lisbon though ! If you ever come to Lisbon let me know and I will buy you a meal ! There is a catch though, you have to play some blitz with me.

NM ozzie_c_cobblepot

Jun 1, 2009

0

#66

Thanks for the offer, of course there would be blitz involved!

EternalChess

Jun 1, 2009

0

#67

socket2me wrote:

AfafBouardi wrote:

sole reason...nope. not even close. If I divulged the reason I play...you'd think I was even more nutty than the people who care about ratings...so I'll just...say no, it's not for ratings.

Then please share why not? It isn't wrong to play for ratings, as someothers seem to think. Playing without care of ratings shows a lack of passion.

I agree, i play for rating..

BUT in real life i have like 8 people that i play with and i have no clue what there rating is, but i know whos the best and whos the suckiest..

and i still enjoy to play, even it theres no rating involved.

spoiler1

Jun 1, 2009

0

#68

I play to get better, I play to learn, I play 'cause I like to play. I play to kill time.

Ratins?

What da fk can I do with that?

Tell me socketman?

Iattacked

Jun 1, 2009

0

#69

I play here and other websites mostly to get a good rating..

aadaam

Jun 2, 2009

0

#70

Some people play chess aiming for a collection of 'good' games before they die, a small number of 'works of art'. Ratings are nothing to do with it.

NM ozzie_c_cobblepot

Jun 2, 2009

0

#71

paul211 wrote:

Iattacked wrote:

I play here and other websites mostly to get a good rating..

And what do you do with a good rating?

Impress girls.

IM kosmeg

Jun 2, 2009

0

#72

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

paul211 wrote:

Iattacked wrote:

I play here and other websites mostly to get a good rating..

And what do you do with a good rating?

Impress girls.

Somewhere between joking and being serious I agree with that.

erikido23

Jun 2, 2009

0

#73

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

paul211 wrote:

Iattacked wrote:

I play here and other websites mostly to get a good rating..

And what do you do with a good rating?

Impress girls.

I don't even like chess. You have to do what you can to impress the ladies.

NM ozzie_c_cobblepot

Jun 2, 2009

0

#74

richie_and_oprah wrote:

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

paul211 wrote:

Iattacked wrote:

I play here and other websites mostly to get a good rating..

And what do you do with a good rating?

Impress girls.

How's that workin for you?

It was 51% suggestion and 49% declaration

IM kosmeg

Jun 2, 2009

0

#75

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

richie_and_oprah wrote:

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

paul211 wrote:

Iattacked wrote:

I play here and other websites mostly to get a good rating..

And what do you do with a good rating?

Impress girls.

How's that workin for you?

It was 51% suggestion and 49% declaration

I though joking was involved.

erikido23

Jun 2, 2009

0

#76

richie_and_oprah wrote:

rich wrote:

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

paul211 wrote:

Iattacked wrote:

I play here and other websites mostly to get a good rating..

And what do you do with a good rating?

Impress girls.

What the heck ?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=wor&defl=en&q=define:joke&ei=WVIlSuKnNpPhtgfowO3ZBg&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

Definitions of joke on the Web:

a humorous anecdote or remark intended to provoke laughter; "he told a very funny joke"; "he knows a million gags"; "thanks for the laugh"; "he laughed unpleasantly at his own jest"; "even a schoolboy's jape is supposed to have some ascertainable point" jest: activity characterized by good humor tell a joke; speak humorously; "He often jokes even when he appears serious" antic: a ludicrous or grotesque act done for fun and amusement act in a funny or teasing way a triviality not to be taken seriously; "I regarded his campaign for mayor as a joke"
A joke is a short story or ironic depiction of a situation communicated with the intent of being humorous. These jokes will normally have a punch line that will end the sentence to make it humorous. A joke can also be a single phrase or statement that employs sarcasm. ...
Joke is a given name, and may refer to: * Joke Jay (21st century), German electronic DJ and artist * Joke van Beusekom (born 1952), retired ...
(given_name) Music Choice has confirmed that The Joke will be Lifehouse's third single off the band's fourth studio album Who We Are. This has been confirmed since the music video has been added to their setlist for the week of May 26th 2008.
(song) The Joke is Milan Kundera's first novel, originally published in 1967.
(novel) An amusing story; Something said or done for amusement; A worthless thing or person; To do or say something for humourous amusement rather than seriously
joking - (colloquial) kidding, trying to fool
jokes - (slang) Really good
humorous oral narrrative that varies in length.
Humorous tales that can be very short or very long. The older, longer humorous narratives, called Schwänke by folklorists, present stereotyped ...

Take a bow richie.

And you do know that 75 percent of statistics are made up on the spot

Flamma_Aquila

Jun 2, 2009

0

#77

Ratings are to chess as grades are to school. They are a measure of your progress, nothing more, nothing less.

onosson

Jun 2, 2009

0

#78

Just my own personal experience...

When I joined this site, I hadn't really played much chess for 20+ years. So, I was mainly here to learn at first. As I started to improve, like many others I became focused on pushing my rating up and up. About a year ago, I managed to cross the 1800 mark briefly.

However, I realized sometime after the turn of the new year, that ratings didn't really matter, and there were a lot of things offline that I had been neglecting. So I resigned a pile of games, started taking it all much less seriously, and dropped 400 points in just a few months. Now, I'm just here for the game of chess, and not the ratings game.

Again, this is just my own personal experience and thoughts...

IM kosmeg

Jun 2, 2009

0

#79

richie_and_oprah wrote:

erikido23 wrote:

And you do know that 75 percent of statistics are made up on the spot

67% of all people know this.

I am one of the 33% that will remain ignorant.

Of all those who will read this post 12% will just ignore it 37% will have a giggle and 51% won't be able to stop laughing

littlehotpot

Jun 2, 2009

0

#80

if chess.com thought that ratings were the most inportant part of the game then they wouldn't the button to play an unrated game