wouldn't that be like a group of the lowest rated players on chess.com.
there needs to be a group that.....
Sort:
Not everyone who has yet to read a chess book is a poor player
no just the people that don't use the "real" moves
wat u mean by "real"....i neva read a book on chess....and im in the 1300s.....and average chess.com player rating
I mean by instinct and losses
Gards wrote: Not everyone who has yet to read a chess book is a poor player
This would depend on your definition of "poor" I suppose.
I learned all my chess from the "articles" in Playboy, fascinating stuff :)-
add wrote:
wouldn't that be like a group of the lowest rated players on chess.com.
I actually resent this comment because I have never read a book on tactics or openings or anything about chess...I play from experience nothing more nothing less and my rating is at 1700
I am not saying I am a great chess player but I consider myself above average
Apr 11, 2008
0
#10
monalisa wrote: I learned all my chess from the "articles" in Playboy, fascinating stuff :)-
Are you for real? Do I actually have a reason to subscribe to Playboy? I can't wait to tell my girlfriend. For real though, do they actually have chess articles?
Reb wrote: Gards wrote: Not everyone who has yet to read a chess book is a poor player
This would depend on your definition of "poor" I suppose.
I am imagining your definition of poor covers quite a few more people than mine, as it should
Wait a minute... I'm an 1800 player and I've never read a chess book... I learned at about 3 by watching my Grandpa play my older cousins. Soon after I started playing him, with a good idea of the rules (except en passant).
The point is, being a 'good' chess player doesn't have to involve study.
Well a lot of the ideas, are already real, but I did like the peice about learning from your grandpa.
so there can be a group?
shadowslayer wrote:so there can be a group?
sure why not...only how could you know if the people that join are being honest?
i am another one who has never touched a chess book. All I know is from real game experience, both online and offline, and I'm in the 1500s
I also have never read a chess book, just a small number of online articles.
I learned to play 'better' chess, from playing (several years ago) 'club' OTB games in addition to regular OTB games with a much stronger player (around 140 BCF - www.englishchess.org.uk equates that to FIDE 1950).
I don't know that I would class myself as a 'good' player, possibly average ability? (subjective depending on which group you are measuring yourself against I suppose) but my rating at a number of different 'Correspondence' sites is between 1550-1850.
My feeling at the moment is that I am around 1600-1700 Online Correspondence Chess.
Here at Chess.com I am around 1650-1750 yet I am in the 90th percentile (I know this is lower on other sites I play at).
I suspect I would improve if I studied, in particular openings.
wjones4 wrote: shadowslayer wrote:so there can be a group?
sure why not...only how could you know if the people that join are being honest?
why would they join otherwise?
uve got a point....but they wuld to beat every1 and get free points
is made intrely of people that have never looked at a real chess book and learned averything from playing other people