When "Chomping On Hanging Pieces" is a TERRIBLE Idea...
Sort:
Heliocrab
25 days ago
0
#121
I mostly perused this forum, but I believe the problem is that chesssblackbelt thinks that chess wins at levels before a rating of 1400 are based on material blunders, while others are arguing the contrary. After that it just escalated to some meaningless debate. Even though I have a beginner’s bias, I personally believe that although many games at lower levels of chess are based on material blunders, it does not mean that other strategies cease to exist until beyond that level.
chuan-xun23 wrote:
ya chess is all about capturing hanging pieces so none of their army can stop ur checkmate
No! bad idea, because often you will learn the hard way, pieces are intentionally left to be taken, because 3 or 4 moves later it gives opening for a check mating sequence, or a sequence leading to the capture of a valuable piece. Unless you calculate every possible trade off, never be quick to take a piece even if it looks free, because it's a tactic...
25 days ago
0
#124
chuan-xun23 wrote:
Just_an_average_player136 wrote:
That was a stupid puzzle
no
Yes
25 days ago
0
#127
chuan-xun23 wrote:
Just_an_average_player136 wrote:
You somehow managed to drag out a M2
how do u become a blunder master
By being bad at chess like me
chuan-xun23 wrote:
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
ya chess is all about capturing hanging pieces so none of their army can stop ur checkmate
No! bad idea, because often you will learn the hard way, pieces are intentionally left to be taken, because 3 or 4 moves later it gives opening for a check mating sequence, or a sequence leading to the capture of a valuable piece. Unless you calculate every possible trade off, never be quick to take a piece even if it looks free, because it's a tactic...
no man later ur opponent will mate you with his pieces and he or she will take ur pieces before you know it
I don't wanna shame your low elo, but its relevant here, if you don't wanna objectively look at the advice people, far better then you at the game( then you) , by evidenced that my elo is 1250 higher then yours and around 950 to 1000 blitz higher then yours you will never improve yor game play. Now since your (100) elo and nearly everyone in here commenting are literally (1000s) of elo higher (then you) , perhaps since you are, so much (better), you could tell all of us how just grabbing any piece regardless of what happens in the next couples moves is a great idea!
25 days ago
0
#129
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
ya chess is all about capturing hanging pieces so none of their army can stop ur checkmate
No! bad idea, because often you will learn the hard way, pieces are intentionally left to be taken, because 3 or 4 moves later it gives opening for a check mating sequence, or a sequence leading to the capture of a valuable piece. Unless you calculate every possible trade off, never be quick to take a piece even if it looks free, because it's a tactic...
no man later ur opponent will mate you with his pieces and he or she will take ur pieces before you know it
“I don't wanna shame your low elo, but its relevant here, if you don't wanna objectively look at the advice people, far better then you at the game( then you) , by evidenced that my elo is 1250 higher then yours and around 950 to 1000 blitz higher then yours you will never improve yor game play. Now since your (100) elo and nearly everyone in here commenting are literally (1000s) of elo higher (then you) , perhaps since you are, so much (better), you could tell all of us how just grabbing any piece regardless of what happens in the next couples moves is a great idea!”
but at150 elo what he said is true to an extent. Yeah chess is really all about checkmating your opponent before they checkmate you. At the same time 100s aren’t leaving pieces hanging for a checkmate sequence. They don’t see that stuff. You absolutely should take free pieces but only after checking all checks, captures, and threats. If there’s no reason not to take the free piece you take the free piece.
JimLake1 wrote:
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
ya chess is all about capturing hanging pieces so none of their army can stop ur checkmate
No! bad idea, because often you will learn the hard way, pieces are intentionally left to be taken, because 3 or 4 moves later it gives opening for a check mating sequence, or a sequence leading to the capture of a valuable piece. Unless you calculate every possible trade off, never be quick to take a piece even if it looks free, because it's a tactic...
no man later ur opponent will mate you with his pieces and he or she will take ur pieces before you know it
“I don't wanna shame your low elo, but its relevant here, if you don't wanna objectively look at the advice people, far better then you at the game( then you) , by evidenced that my elo is 1250 higher then yours and around 950 to 1000 blitz higher then yours you will never improve yor game play. Now since your (100) elo and nearly everyone in here commenting are literally (1000s) of elo higher (then you) , perhaps since you are, so much (better), you could tell all of us how just grabbing any piece regardless of what happens in the next couples moves is a great idea!”
but at150 elo what he said is true to an extent. Yeah chess is really all about checkmating your opponent before they checkmate you. At the same time 100s aren’t leaving pieces hanging for a checkmate sequence. They don’t see that stuff. You absolutely should take free pieces but only after checking all checks, captures, and threats. If there’s no reason not to take the free piece you take the free piece.
Literally that's what I said, did you read my original comment to him, I said to take only after the exchanges were calculated, I was trying to give decent advice and he stuffed me..
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
JimLake1 wrote:
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
ya chess is all about capturing hanging pieces so none of their army can stop ur checkmate
No! bad idea, because often you will learn the hard way, pieces are intentionally left to be taken, because 3 or 4 moves later it gives opening for a check mating sequence, or a sequence leading to the capture of a valuable piece. Unless you calculate every possible trade off, never be quick to take a piece even if it looks free, because it's a tactic...
no man later ur opponent will mate you with his pieces and he or she will take ur pieces before you know it
“I don't wanna shame your low elo, but its relevant here, if you don't wanna objectively look at the advice people, far better then you at the game( then you) , by evidenced that my elo is 1250 higher then yours and around 950 to 1000 blitz higher then yours you will never improve yor game play. Now since your (100) elo and nearly everyone in here commenting are literally (1000s) of elo higher (then you) , perhaps since you are, so much (better), you could tell all of us how just grabbing any piece regardless of what happens in the next couples moves is a great idea!”
but at150 elo what he said is true to an extent. Yeah chess is really all about checkmating your opponent before they checkmate you. At the same time 100s aren’t leaving pieces hanging for a checkmate sequence. They don’t see that stuff. You absolutely should take free pieces but only after checking all checks, captures, and threats. If there’s no reason not to take the free piece you take the free piece.
Literally that's what I said, did you read my original comment to him, I said to take only after the exchanges were calculated, I was trying to give decent advice and he stuffed me..
His response to my advice was basically if your opponent has more pieces they will win, that might be true at 150, but that way of thinking isn't going to improve them.
25 days ago
0
#132
Sololevelingsirjohn wrote:
chuan-xun23 wrote:
ya chess is all about capturing hanging pieces so none of their army can stop ur checkmate
No! bad idea, because often you will learn the hard way, pieces are intentionally left to be taken, because 3 or 4 moves later it gives opening for a check mating sequence, or a sequence leading to the capture of a valuable piece. Unless you calculate every possible trade off, never be quick to take a piece even if it looks free, because it's a tactic...
Exactly the point of this thread - did you have a look at some of the examples on the original post and since? Feel free to add other fun examples if you’d like 
I don't wanna shame your low elo, but its relevant here, if you don't wanna objectively look at the advice people, far better then you at the game( then you) , by evidenced that my elo is 1250 higher then yours and around 950 to 1000 blitz higher then yours you will never improve yor game play. Now since your (100) elo and nearly everyone in here commenting are literally (1000s) of elo higher (then you) , perhaps since you are, so much (better), you could tell all of us how just grabbing any piece regardless of what happens in the next couples moves is a great idea!
Lol so why is this acceptable for a 1400 to say to a 100 rated player but it's unacceptable for a 2400 to say it to an 1400?
Also yes I got to 2400 like an hour after that guy here said I couldn't.
chesssblackbelt wrote:
I don't wanna shame your low elo, but its relevant here, if you don't wanna objectively look at the advice people, far better then you at the game( then you) , by evidenced that my elo is 1250 higher then yours and around 950 to 1000 blitz higher then yours you will never improve yor game play. Now since your (100) elo and nearly everyone in here commenting are literally (1000s) of elo higher (then you) , perhaps since you are, so much (better), you could tell all of us how just grabbing any piece regardless of what happens in the next couples moves is a great idea!
Lol so why is this acceptable for a 1400 to say to a 100 rated player but it's unacceptable for a 2400 to say it to an 1400?
Also yes I got to 2400 like an hour after that guy here said I couldn't.
I'm not trying to shame him, I had to point out that I have a much higher elo to give some weight to my words. Second, I'm actually trying to give some helpful advice and the player I gave it to rejected it, but with no real information, so I felt trolled a bit...Thus my snarky response.
Lmao this is literally what happened to me. I tried to give advice and someone called me a troll so I gave snarky responses.
25 days ago
0
#136
Blackbelt, they were trolling and being sarcastic toward you because you were being dismissive---right from the start, not as a reaction to anything anyone posted--- and you somehow completely missed what the thread was actually about. You started out behind the curve and went downhill from there.
Crazy how I looked at one of the 1400s games here and the very first one they hang a pawn, rook and blunder a 1 move tactic to lose their queen.
It's almost like they would improve if they learned to chomp on hanging pieces.
25 days ago
0
#138
chesssblackbelt wrote:
Crazy how I looked at one of the 1400s games here and the very first one they hang a pawn, rook and blunder a 1 move tactic to lose their queen.
It's almost like they would improve if they learned to chomp on hanging pieces.
Aaaand he said the line. That’s a shame.
25 days ago
0
#139
chesssblackbelt wrote:
He could be an only child
Anyway I improved in chess because I listen to people better than me. I'll be happy to listen to you on things you're better than me at... like sh**ting people and eating doughnuts or whatever it is Americans do.
thats just racist man