tbh its better losing to streamer than someone else xd
Why are speedruns even allowed?
Sort:
Oct 25, 2021
0
#43
CooloutAC wrote:
I think I can see a little more now - as you've paid, you thoughts towards people using side accounts or speed runs you see not only as cheating, but people ripping you off.
You seem like a good guy, and although I am certainly not an expert I would guess you are the type of person who will make progress; this site does have a lot of people who know about this site, and chess in general (I don't count myself as one, but I do aspire to be!)
If you have a paid sub use the puzzle rush, it is a good way to train you to spot the tactics that end the games quickly, bank rank mates, hanging pieces, winning exchanges, different types of mates etc. Seeing how you improve with that is a nice way of testing yourself too.
You sound like a gamer, chess is slightly different EVERYTHING you do and your opponent does is recorded in EVERY game - use that, use the analysis tool (Game Report) and go through the game, look for the moves highlighted in red (blunders) and in golden (quite bad moves) and the yellows are places where you missed a winning move.
I am not being patronising, but I think you have a mistaken idea in your head and it is affecting you; but let me close by saying that I think that amount you seem to be bothered by it is an indication that you have a real interest for the game, and that much tells me you will keep improving. Let me wish you the best of luck.
It's mindboggling that someone can go to such lengths to make excuses instead of just trying to improve.
You are at ~400 rapid because that's where you deserve to be. If you didn't blunder so much and focused a bit harder you would be higher... easily. It has nothing to do with you being undermined by speedruns or at accounts. The issue you claim to be having is non-existent and shows your lack of understand about how it all functions.
CooloutAC wrote:
Yes if we all just ignored wrongdoing and stuck our head in the sand, what a wonderful world we would have. naive and detrimental imo. Plenty of quotes related to good men who do nothing, including in the bible.
Yes if we all just ignored wrongdoing and stuck our head in the sand, what a wonderful world we would have. naive and detrimental imo. Plenty of quotes related to good men who do nothing, including in the bible.
OMG, a fighter for world justice and a bible guy too. All makes more sense now😂
If speedrunner and alt accounts didn't exist, you would be the exact same rating and you would find some other excuse to waste your energy on.
CooloutAC wrote:
but then again maybe I'm totally wrong. Maybe the mm is just totally screwed up and they should ask the other site for theirs lol. Whatever the problem, something is very wrong at my level. Because this site has more players, the matchups should be much better, not much worse. I'm pointing out the only immoral and unsportlike feature of the site I can find, that the other site outright bans on principle. and for good reason.
They aren't messed up, at all. Your interpretation is. They both use the same rating system, slightly adjusted.
What exactly is your definition of a fair matchup? One where your opponent blunders and tries to throw the game away more than you? This is how your games go anyways.
CooloutAC wrote:
nTzT wrote:
It's mindboggling that someone can go to such lengths to make excuses instead of just trying to improve.
You are at ~400 rapid because that's where you deserve to be. If you didn't blunder so much and focused a bit harder you would be higher... easily. It has nothing to do with you being undermined by speedruns or at accounts. The issue you claim to be having is non-existent and shows your lack of understand about how it all functions.
why do you keep referring to my rating number. Is that the only thing you focus on and play chess for? Are you not reading anything I'm saying. Is there something wrong with you? Or are you just attempting to deflect from the issue i'm bringing up.... You sayh you looked at my account? do you not see me steadily climbing in rating points? Do you not see how sometimes i go 10 losses and then 10 wins? did you not see how I smashed some first timer a couple matches back? as a truly competitive player, unlike you, I don't want to play newbs either. Don't you understand its not about what number my rating is, but how good the matchups are at whatever you think my rating is "supposed" to be? You are part of the problem of why online chess could never be respected, its simply because it cannot be trusted. I don't know if its a problem of too many people making multiple accounts, or something wrong with their matchmaker. But its definitely an obvious problem. And there is only one obvious thing going on that encourages behavior that could undermine whatever system they have in place if that is not the problem itself.
Stop telling others in the thread they are obsessed with ratings when you are the one mindlessly obsessed about it and the one that initiated the discussion around it.
Losing and winning streaks are perfectly normal, coinflip variance can be rough and your skill will vary on some days.
CooloutAC wrote:
nTzT wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
but then again maybe I'm totally wrong. Maybe the mm is just totally screwed up and they should ask the other site for theirs lol. Whatever the problem, something is very wrong at my level. Because this site has more players, the matchups should be much better, not much worse. I'm pointing out the only immoral and unsportlike feature of the site I can find, that the other site outright bans on principle. and for good reason.
They aren't messed up, at all. Your interpretation is. They both use the same rating system, slightly adjusted.
What exactly is your definition of a fair matchup? One where your opponent blunders and tries to throw the game away more than you? This is how your games go anyways.
The fact you have to ask this question says it all. You are simply not a real competitive player. A good match is one that is competitive. The definition being when each side has equal chance to win. You are also now confirming you are not reading a dam thing I type. I already told you i have mostly "CLOSE" maches on the other site. When I say i close i mean equal number of pieces of points throughout the match till one of us wins. That gives me the most satisfying feeling. Not a blowout whether i win or lose, which does not. :The accuracy is meaningless ju8st as much as the rating is bud. wow.
Read the post again, it was a rhetorical question... since you seem to have no idea what it is yourself. You are simply too naive and clueless to try to reason with.
CooloutAC wrote:
No my friend. YOU are. I could care less about the rating. Time for you to walk away since you clearly don't care about the issue and to try and deflect and distract from it. I find that suspicious and its obvious.
Oh, look out guys... he is suspicious of me too now. 
CooloutAC wrote:
No my friend. Read MY post again where I gave you the exact definition of what a comeptitive match is. you response will be for me to stop crying about rating totally ignoring the issue. And if you ignore what I type, of course that makes you suspicious and to everyone else watching. You fool noone but yourself.
"You are simply not a real competitive player. A good match is one that is competitive. The definition being when each side has equal chance to win. You are also now confirming you are not reading a dam thing I type. I already told you i have mostly "CLOSE" matches on the other site. When I say i close i mean equal number of pieces or points throughout the match till one of us wins. That gives me the most satisfying feeling. Not a blowout whether i win or lose, which does not. "
You really are the type of donkey who would try to answer a rhetorical question twice. I know what a good matchup is, my point was that you don't.
nTzT wrote:
If speedrunner and alt accounts didn't exist, you would be the exact same rating and you would find some other excuse to waste your energy on.
Precisely.
CooloutAC wrote:
Call me a donkey all you want, but you literally said my definition was wrong. But if you now concede that point, then yes you must also concede if the match is not competitive at my level that means the rating system is inaccurate.. Again, go look at my match history on the other site.
I went to the other site and looked up your games. It seems to me, the level of play at 950 there corresponds to 300-400 here quite well. Full blown blunder fest, with both sides completely oblivious towards it.
On lich, you are at 7.5%, here you're at 16.8%. You are actually doing better on chess.com, beating more players and being twice as good on a site that wrongs you so badly 😂😂😂👌
Seriously though, in the best spirit possible, forget about all crap that bothers you now and focus on improving your chess. Before you know it, you'll be 1000 here and 1500 on there and you'll laugh looking at your old games, where you lost by checkmate because you moved your king instead of taking the opponent's queen🤞😊
Oct 25, 2021
0
#54
n0time4chess wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
Call me a donkey all you want, but you literally said my definition was wrong. But if you now concede that point, then yes you must also concede if the match is not competitive at my level that means the rating system is inaccurate.. Again, go look at my match history on the other site.
I went to the other site and looked up your games. It seems to me, the level of play at 950 there corresponds to 300-400 here quite well. Full blown blunder fest, with both sides completely oblivious towards it.
On lich, you are at 7.5%, here you're at 16.8%. You are actually doing better on chess.com, beating more players and being twice as good on a site that wrongs you so badly 😂😂😂👌
Seriously though, in the best spirit possible, forget about all crap that bothers you now and focus on improving your chess. Before you know it, you'll be 1000 here and 1500 on there and you'll laugh looking at your old games, where you lost by checkmate because you moved your king instead of taking the opponent's queen🤞😊
If CooloutAC has any doubts with regards to the variable nature of ratings, and how arbitrary they are, have a look at the top Blitz ratings on this site - Hikaru is nearly 3300 which is a Stockfish (of a few years ago) level elo; I like Hikaru (I know some don't!) but if he were to play 100 games against Stockfish at blitz time controls he would not even draw 1.
And if CoolOut's rating level on this site is full of speedrunners and smurfers.....wouldn't they all get annoyed, because surely they'd just be playing each other!
One more time CoolOut - NONE of your opponents that I have looked at have had a sudden shoot up the ratings.
CooloutAC wrote:
if you paid attention to what I typed you would see that most of my matches result in very close matches on the other site, Unlike most of my matches on chess.com. Again, wins/losses, accuracy and rating number don't matter. that fact you focus on that says alot about you though.
It's amazing how everyone who wants to play and improve their chess is perfectly capable of doing so here, facing exactly the same conditions and environment. You're at a higher percentage here and played 10x more games here, you have hit a certain level of competitiveness which to overcome simply requires improvement and effort. Do the same on lich, and you'll be on their forum complaining about cheaters and alt account all the same.
But whatever dude, I have already paid more attention to what you said than anyone ever should. Be well, good luck🤞
crocodilestyle1 wrote:
If CooloutAC has any doubts with regards to the variable nature of ratings, and how arbitrary they are, have a look at the top Blitz ratings on this site - Hikaru is nearly 3300 which is a Stockfish (of a few years ago) level elo; I like Hikaru (I know some don't!) but if he were to play 100 games against Stockfish at blitz time controls he would not even draw 1.
And if CoolOut's rating level on this site is full of speedrunners and smurfers.....wouldn't they all get annoyed, because surely they'd just be playing each other!
One more time CoolOut - NONE of your opponents that I have looked at have had a sudden shoot up the ratings.
He doesn't want to have any doubts or understand how ratings work, he just wants to have nice and pleasantly competitive matches without having to put much effort into improving his game which he thinks he could have had at lich but oh no, he already paid for membership here😂
CooloutAC wrote:
My stats and progress should tell you its not about what you think its about. And that i'm sincere in bringing up the issue. You simply want to sweep it under the rug. You do more harm then good imo for the future and longevity of the sport and site. And imo, its all about that ad money. Such a shame.
I respected alot what Wesley so said at his acceptance speech for the US Championship, "It should not be about the money"
Your stats and progress tell me it's exactly about what I think it's about. Even out the situation, play 800 games on lch, improve by 200 points there like you did here and we'll talk
CooloutAC wrote:
n0time4chess wrote:
crocodilestyle1 wrote:
If CooloutAC has any doubts with regards to the variable nature of ratings, and how arbitrary they are, have a look at the top Blitz ratings on this site - Hikaru is nearly 3300 which is a Stockfish (of a few years ago) level elo; I like Hikaru (I know some don't!) but if he were to play 100 games against Stockfish at blitz time controls he would not even draw 1.
And if CoolOut's rating level on this site is full of speedrunners and smurfers.....wouldn't they all get annoyed, because surely they'd just be playing each other!
One more time CoolOut - NONE of your opponents that I have looked at have had a sudden shoot up the ratings.
He doesn't want to have any doubts or understand how ratings work, he just wants to have nice and pleasantly competitive matches without having to put much effort into improving his game which he thinks he could have had at lich but oh no, he already paid for membership here😂
You already admitted in your last post I am improving my game. lol. make up your mind. Keep trying to sweep under the rug the fact the site can never be taken seriously because of the amount of manipulation that is literally encouraged by the site themselves.
And listen to what you just said i just want "nice and pleastant competitive matches" . Are you saying you are not competitive and competitive matches are not the ultimate goal. Simply raising your rating score is? Thats suspect!
OMG, how anyone ever was able to play chess on chess.com😂😂😂
I want to have competitive matches, you want "nice and pleasant" competitive matches.
What concession, you fool?😂 I was just saying I accept competitiveness as being challenging and improving at chess as being hard. Your idea of competitiveness is the kind where you have nice, pleasant and even games that don't make you feel like a loser. It's ironic you don't like Hikaru, he's as much of a crybaby as yourself😂 I don't like him either, I like Chessbrah and Aman Hambleton is my favourite GM. You should check out his Building Habits series, especially level one and two are for players of our rating.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8N8j2e7RpPnpqbISqi1SJ9_wrnNU3rEm
Watch, learn, practise, improve your chess and you'll understand your foolishness😂
Oct 25, 2021
0
#60
CooloutAC wrote:
I think something has got under your skin on this site - which is fine, chess can be a frustrating game*. What I would say to you is that if you don't like playing here, don't forget that is NOT at all what you have paid for with a subscription - make use of the puzzles, and the lessons; and the analysis tools, you can play a game on another site (or OTB) and use the game report here.
Point 2 - you've had a disagreement with a few people here, it happens: DO NOT let that put you off from posting or asking advice in future; if you have a question lots of people will still try to answer, there is A LOT of good help to be found on this board.
*When I was a lot younger, seemingly out of nowhere I found I could beat just about anyone in casual games, then I started to beat my dad whose was a reasonable club player in the 60s; I would not say that I was a prodigy, but I never too the game seriously, yet it was not until I was at uni I am started playing casual games against players who were actively seeking titles that my 'party trick' stopped working. I gave up the game for a long long time, and came here - and I expected to smash everyone in sight, and when I didn't my first thought is that they were all cheating. But no, I have lost a lot of my ability, and make stupid blunders; and for the most part I was playing people who play 10-100 games a day. I can still at times get some of that old vision back (I am reasonable at puzzles for example), but I know now that I will have to work on it; and it made me mad at first because 20 years late I have decided I want to play chess, but now I am enjoying the journey.
If nothing else remember it is only photons and gluons that don't interact with the Higgs field, you are not a photon or a gluon, so the Higgs field will always be a part of your life. Although I guess you could be a product of neutrino oscillation....but I think that unlikely.
Having alt accounts is literally human nature that mu8st be curbed, not encouraged.
This, what you wrote, speaks for everything 😂 Basically, everyone should be put in place and things should be controlled, allowed and forbidden in a way, that you see right and fit. Kim would be proud of you🤣🤣
So what are you saying? its not necessary to have governments and laws. nobody needs to be taught right from wrong? lmao...
No, it was a hyperbola. I understand the need for supervision, rules, laws and education. You use the perceived lack of it as a reason to explain your personal failings.
Your constant obsession with your rating on the other site is proof of it. What if there was no other site, what would be your argument then? I looked up one of your games, you lost a completely won game by blundering your pieces and queen for free with plenty of time on a clock. I'm not saying that to mock you, we've all been there. The point being, well... it has been said here many times, no point repeating it really😂