now_and_not-very-zenlike this thread and the other recent one in which you vent your emotions about having to wait 120 seconds to claim a win does not paint a very pretty picture of you.
For whatever reason you remind me of the steer angrily trying to push its way further ahead in the line of cattle entering the chute to a slaughter plant.
You remind me of an adolescent troll and nothing more.
So what has cultivating constraints got to do with being relatively retarded at blitz ?
I've noticed that when I'm playing above approx 1250, the players tend to be more sane and predictable, and one can have a more enjoyable game. But after sliding back on a losing streak when playing fatigued, stressed or distracted, and having to fight my way back up again, I get nailed by people of considerably lower ratings.
Besides me being an idiot (obviously), and chess trolls slumming the lower profiles, what else could explain such a phenomena, and is it common? Is a common phenomena of the game sticking within your own rating realm to create the illusion of strength, and that, left to the chaos of the masses, the average so-called chess expert, could (and often do) easily fall?
I would say quit with the excuses. If youre playing while fatigued, stressed or distracted, and you still dont understand why youre losing? I would start there.
@eriuam - yes! And no ... No in the sense that the question I'm really finding compelling now is, what would happen (on average) if the typical 1500+ blitz players suddenly started playing everyone, including the lowest ranks -let's say they were suddenly dropped down to ELO 900... and had to keep defending/proving their "title" (rank), against the riff-raff. How many would stumble and fall and struggle for a long time to regain their current rank, if ever? What % of the players do you think would win consistently back up to their currently perceived level of incompetance?
37.459 %
You're currently rated 113x in blitz. The highest rated player you've beaten was rated 1493. Losing to someone rated more than 350 points lower than you should also be expected. You've played more than 18,000 blitz games. If anything, you could expect to have had more wins against higher rated opponents. If you were to play twenty games against someone rated 1610, you could expect to win at least one!
So, use the law of averages in your favor and try to play higher rated opponents more!
now_and_not-very-zenlike this thread and the other recent one in which you vent your emotions about having to wait 120 seconds to claim a win does not paint a very pretty picture of you.
For whatever reason you remind me of the steer angrily trying to push its way further ahead in the line of cattle entering the chute to a slaughter plant.
You remind me of an adolescent troll and nothing more.
I think it is probably because your limited imagination is mostly populated with images of people you regard as being lower than you.
You don't have a lot of choices to select from.
OH, if only I were the age of an adolescent again :)
You're currently rated 113x in blitz. The highest rated player you've beaten was rated 1493. Losing to someone rated more than 350 points lower than you should also be expected. You've played more than 18,000 blitz games. If anything, you could expect to have had more wins against higher rated opponents. If you were to play twenty games against someone rated 1610, you could expect to win at least one!
So, use the law of averages in your favor and try to play higher rated opponents more!
And try and get a good night's sleep before-hand
A nice cup of Camomile tea would help, and make sure the television and radio are switched off....maybe switch off your phone too....
Perfect. Thanks.
You're currently rated 113x in blitz. The highest rated player you've beaten was rated 1493. Losing to someone rated more than 350 points lower than you should also be expected. You've played more than 18,000 blitz games. If anything, you could expect to have had more wins against higher rated opponents. If you were to play twenty games against someone rated 1610, you could expect to win at least one!
So, use the law of averages in your favor and try to play higher rated opponents more!
Good grief. 18,000 games and no higher than 113x!!
How does one develop the temerity to publicly gripe about losing to slightly lower rated players with such abysmal evidence of his own greatness?
Good grief. 18,000 games and no higher than 113x!!
How does one develop the temerity to publicly gripe about losing to slightly lower rated players with such abysmal evidence of his own greatness?
My 'gripe' and the 'idiots' comment was in jest. I don't think people are really idiots if they don't play chess well. I was mocking the swearing or momentary frustration I'm sure many feel when losing to a lower ranked player.
And why the F do I need 'temerity' to post a tempest in this teapot? I know I'm not a great chess player. I've never been under any illusions about that. One look at my ELO vs. the higher ELOs and ethos and informedness of the stronger players here would quickly rip away any delusions of grandeur.
I don't have the yearning, the temperment, or the willingness to study and focus and do all the things that would be required to be a great player even if I was capable of it, and I don't know, and probably never will know, how capable I am of being a consistently strong player, even if I could set aside my other proclivities and really put my mind to it.
Proclivities! Where do you get those words?!!
I'd probably be a better writer than chess player. Particularly if it involved humor or some forms of light banter.
Proclivities! Where do you get those words?!!
I'd probably be a better writer than chess player. Particularly if it involved humor or some forms of light banter.
Stick to blitz
@ericuam wrote: "Stick to blitz"
But there's a great big world out there!
@ericuam wrote: "Stick to blitz"
But there's a great big world out there!
...with lots of big words waiting to be gathered and used inappropriately
@ericuam wrote: "Stick to blitz"
But there's a great big world out there!
...with lots of big words waiting to be gathered and used inappropriately
Oh you poor sensitive soul. Still not over that time you got your poetic license revoked?
1 movers? You mean people who think one move ahead?
people who literally hang pieces to be taken in 1 move...
It happens but people are different. For example i tend to win a piece and lose on time. 
@eriuam - yes! And no ... No in the sense that the question I'm really finding compelling now is, what would happen (on average) if the typical 1500+ blitz players suddenly started playing everyone, including the lowest ranks -let's say they were suddenly dropped down to ELO 900... and had to keep defending/proving their "title" (rank), against the riff-raff. How many would stumble and fall and struggle for a long time to regain their current rank, if ever? What % of the players do you think would win consistently back up to their currently perceived level of incompetance?