i actually cannot believe we are arguing about what classifies as "advanced" now
The Queen's Gambit is not a gambit. Change my mind.
Sort:
Aug 9, 2021
0
#63
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
mrfreezyiceboy wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
And don't get me wrong, I respect those who are higher rated than me.
not really, you say you are a advanced player but the fact of the matter is that its way far from the actual reality and 1600 aint much at all. if you are saying that you have the skill of a advanced beginner i would agree with that but i never would say that you are a advanced player or close to being one. i agree still has quite solid points on your behavior and i wont deny that you are decent but the statement you have made about higher rated players really doesnt seem to be clear with me given our interactions.
It depends on what you consider advcacned
what would you mean by that? thats another line that doesnt make much sense, you are calling yourself a advanced player right? that seems really bonkers to me and some others as we mostly would disagree with that logic so what are you even trying to state at all?
One may consider a 1650 rated player advanced. Another may consider a GM is advanced. And another may consider 1400 is advanced. I simply believe that 1650 is an advanced rating because It is considered that 1600 is Class B and Class A is Expert so what is below expert? Advanced.
but aren't those classes for otb?
Yes but I consider OTB to be similar to a chess.com rating, although maybe there is a small difference.
By ‘small’ you mean a couple hundred points?
Aug 9, 2021
0
#64
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
mrfreezyiceboy wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
And don't get me wrong, I respect those who are higher rated than me.
not really, you say you are a advanced player but the fact of the matter is that its way far from the actual reality and 1600 aint much at all. if you are saying that you have the skill of a advanced beginner i would agree with that but i never would say that you are a advanced player or close to being one. i agree still has quite solid points on your behavior and i wont deny that you are decent but the statement you have made about higher rated players really doesnt seem to be clear with me given our interactions.
It depends on what you consider advcacned
what would you mean by that? thats another line that doesnt make much sense, you are calling yourself a advanced player right? that seems really bonkers to me and some others as we mostly would disagree with that logic so what are you even trying to state at all?
One may consider a 1650 rated player advanced. Another may consider a GM is advanced. And another may consider 1400 is advanced. I simply believe that 1650 is an advanced rating because It is considered that 1600 is Class B and Class A is Expert so what is below expert? Advanced.
but aren't those classes for otb?
Yes but I consider OTB to be similar to a chess.com rating, although maybe there is a small difference.
By ‘small’ you mean a couple hundred points?
Truth is no one knows the answer. My CFC rating is 1600 and my rapid here is 1650.
Interesting. Is your OTB provisional?
Aug 9, 2021
0
#65
SlumChessHustler wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
@Stil1 is that Starscream in your profile picture? Or Megatron?
🤔 I think...it's a Gundam Robot...
Yes, it's a Gundam.
Aug 9, 2021
0
#66
Stil1 wrote:
SlumChessHustler wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
@Stil1 is that Starscream in your profile picture? Or Megatron?
🤔 I think...it's a Gundam Robot...
Yes, it's a Gundam.
Ugh, I was so wrong…
Aug 9, 2021
0
#67
If you like Transformers, you might like Mobile Suit Gundam even more. Just saying ...
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
mrfreezyiceboy wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
And don't get me wrong, I respect those who are higher rated than me.
not really, you say you are a advanced player but the fact of the matter is that its way far from the actual reality and 1600 aint much at all. if you are saying that you have the skill of a advanced beginner i would agree with that but i never would say that you are a advanced player or close to being one. i agree still has quite solid points on your behavior and i wont deny that you are decent but the statement you have made about higher rated players really doesnt seem to be clear with me given our interactions.
It depends on what you consider advcacned
what would you mean by that? thats another line that doesnt make much sense, you are calling yourself a advanced player right? that seems really bonkers to me and some others as we mostly would disagree with that logic so what are you even trying to state at all?
One may consider a 1650 rated player advanced. Another may consider a GM is advanced. And another may consider 1400 is advanced. I simply believe that 1650 is an advanced rating because It is considered that 1600 is Class B and Class A is Expert so what is below expert? Advanced.
but aren't those classes for otb?
Yes but I consider OTB to be similar to a chess.com rating, although maybe there is a small difference.
By ‘small’ you mean a couple hundred points?
Truth is no one knows the answer. My CFC rating is 1600 and my rapid here is 1650.
1600 cfc would be around 1500 uscf which would be around 1400 fide. that's as REAL of a chess rating as it gets
Aug 10, 2021
0
#69
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
mrfreezyiceboy wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
And don't get me wrong, I respect those who are higher rated than me.
not really, you say you are a advanced player but the fact of the matter is that its way far from the actual reality and 1600 aint much at all. if you are saying that you have the skill of a advanced beginner i would agree with that but i never would say that you are a advanced player or close to being one. i agree still has quite solid points on your behavior and i wont deny that you are decent but the statement you have made about higher rated players really doesnt seem to be clear with me given our interactions.
It depends on what you consider advcacned
what would you mean by that? thats another line that doesnt make much sense, you are calling yourself a advanced player right? that seems really bonkers to me and some others as we mostly would disagree with that logic so what are you even trying to state at all?
One may consider a 1650 rated player advanced. Another may consider a GM is advanced. And another may consider 1400 is advanced. I simply believe that 1650 is an advanced rating because It is considered that 1600 is Class B and Class A is Expert so what is below expert? Advanced.
but aren't those classes for otb?
Yes but I consider OTB to be similar to a chess.com rating, although maybe there is a small difference.
By ‘small’ you mean a couple hundred points?
Truth is no one knows the answer. My CFC rating is 1600 and my rapid here is 1650.
Interesting. Is your OTB provisional?
Yes, but in a few games it won't.
So it is.
Aug 10, 2021
0
#70
royalknight101 wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
mrfreezyiceboy wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
And don't get me wrong, I respect those who are higher rated than me.
not really, you say you are a advanced player but the fact of the matter is that its way far from the actual reality and 1600 aint much at all. if you are saying that you have the skill of a advanced beginner i would agree with that but i never would say that you are a advanced player or close to being one. i agree still has quite solid points on your behavior and i wont deny that you are decent but the statement you have made about higher rated players really doesnt seem to be clear with me given our interactions.
It depends on what you consider advcacned
what would you mean by that? thats another line that doesnt make much sense, you are calling yourself a advanced player right? that seems really bonkers to me and some others as we mostly would disagree with that logic so what are you even trying to state at all?
One may consider a 1650 rated player advanced. Another may consider a GM is advanced. And another may consider 1400 is advanced. I simply believe that 1650 is an advanced rating because It is considered that 1600 is Class B and Class A is Expert so what is below expert? Advanced.
but aren't those classes for otb?
Yes but I consider OTB to be similar to a chess.com rating, although maybe there is a small difference.
By ‘small’ you mean a couple hundred points?
Truth is no one knows the answer. My CFC rating is 1600 and my rapid here is 1650.
Interesting. Is your OTB provisional?
Yes, but in a few games it won't.
So it is.
you dont know that dude
He just said it was lol
Aug 11, 2021
0
#71
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
By "Think before you talk again," I meant that maybe you should take everything in the position into consideration and think of it like it is in a classical game, not a blitz.
By your own admission, you're 1650 at chess. That's a relatively low level of play, when you consider the full spectrum of chess abilities.
Heck, even I, at the 2200 range, still have a lot to learn. When it comes to the master's range, I'm essentially a beginner at chess.
So when a stronger player than me talks about chess, I do my best to listen.
If you truly want to do better at chess, you should do the same. Argue less. Listen more. Be open to the possibility that your current beliefs are wrong. This is how you'll learn.
Stil1 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
By "Think before you talk again," I meant that maybe you should take everything in the position into consideration and think of it like it is in a classical game, not a blitz.
By your own admission, you're 1650 at chess. That's a relatively low level of play, when you consider the full spectrum of chess abilities.
Heck, even I, at the 2200 range, still have a lot to learn. When it comes to the master's range, I'm essentially a beginner at chess.
So when a stronger player than me talks about chess, I do my best to listen.
If you truly want to do better at chess, you should do the same. Argue less. Listen more. Be open to the possibility that your current beliefs are wrong. This is how you'll learn.
Having looked at your latest blitz game, you lost because you made a very elementary mistake but you only had about 3 seconds left. You seem to be using premove and you play people who use it. I wonder how that would translate into an otb rating at slowplay, say 2 hours each per game. Or perhaps Daily 3-day here? ChesswithNickolay does talk down to people but that's what kids do because other people do it to them and therefore it seems normal to them. He seems ok to me. Still, your comments were positive and they're what he should be hearing from others.
Aug 11, 2021
0
#73
Stil1 wrote:
If you like Transformers, you might like Mobile Suit Gundam even more. Just saying ...
Interesting. Might watch it.
Aug 11, 2021
0
#74
Optimissed wrote:
I wonder how that would translate into an otb rating at slowplay, say 2 hours each per game. Or perhaps Daily 3-day here? ChesswithNickolay does talk down to people but that's what kids do because other people do it to them and therefore it seems normal to them. He seems ok to me. Still, your comments were positive and they're what he should be hearing from others.
I play better at slower timers (as I assume most people do). More time to blunder-check and properly calculate.
Blitz is certainly a different beast, I agree with you there.
I have no idea what my OTB classical rating would be. We'll probably never know, as my wife would never tolerate me running off to play in a chess tournament.
You make a good point about Nickolay being young. Didn't realize that until now. Explains some things.
<<<I have no idea what my OTB classical rating would be. We'll probably never know, as my wife would never tolerate me running off to play in a chess tournament.>>>
Seriously? I used to get round that by taking her with me when it was somewhere nice, like Chester. But most chess tournaments are in sweaty halls in industrial towns. Other positives were winning prize money, providing entertainment for our son and stretching his mind. He became quite good and then gave it up to play on bmx bikes.
THIS IS MY MOVE I WANT CHECK PEOPLES
checked: xe6 b5
And don't get me wrong, I respect those who are higher rated than me.
not really, you say you are a advanced player but the fact of the matter is that its way far from the actual reality and 1600 aint much at all. if you are saying that you have the skill of a advanced beginner i would agree with that but i never would say that you are a advanced player or close to being one. i agree still has quite solid points on your behavior and i wont deny that you are decent but the statement you have made about higher rated players really doesnt seem to be clear with me given our interactions.
It depends on what you consider advcacned
what would you mean by that? thats another line that doesnt make much sense, you are calling yourself a advanced player right? that seems really bonkers to me and some others as we mostly would disagree with that logic so what are you even trying to state at all?
One may consider a 1650 rated player advanced. Another may consider a GM is advanced. And another may consider 1400 is advanced. I simply believe that 1650 is an advanced rating because It is considered that 1600 is Class B and Class A is Expert so what is below expert? Advanced.
but aren't those classes for otb?