Why do these types of chess players exist and whats the point?

Have you guys ever encountered the people online who play the more boring, dry, passive play you have ever seen? Im talking about those people who play Nf3 agianst the alekhine, the people who play d6 agianst the ruy lopez, the people who play d3 agianst in sicilian, and so on...

i ask people here who may know about these people; what is the purpose and intent of playing this way in the game of chess, below master level the goal of the game is to outplay and checkmate your opponent, not sit around in an endgame or let your oppoment strangle you to death.... I have seen that many people who play like this let you attack them and  let you gain an initiative for hopes of you messing up and failing. is hope chess the only pupose to playing like this? or do people these days not know how to play chess?

you got an issue with what i said here?

dont try to hide it with metaphors or sarcasm and say it

you must have had a bad day today

you were so quick to fire insults at me. look at you now being quiet

seems like you just needed to burn off some steam

Some people are just new to chess. If they don't try those pointless moves, they'll never learn. They'll try the scholar's checkmate again and again until they realize that most people on this site weren't born yesterday. And I'm sure you went through a lot of trial and error before reaching your level, so try to cut them some slack. It's better to tell them nicely that they're doing it wrong. The more people that decide they wanna learn chess, the better.

can u please show us some examples from your games? I am not really getting what you are saying

I use to care about those “types” of games but now I’ve learned to overcome dry games by learning middle game ideas, plans/for both sides, build up the positional pressure and set-up an end game.

As much as I prefer sharp middle games and check maté finishes, I expect and prepared for end game finishes.

i mean swapping pieces is generally a decent idea, you just keep the game equal if you don`t know what to do

id rather be boring than blunder a piece lol

i mean you could always try bullet or blitz

Bullet and blitz are both different time controls, not rapid

In blitz you only get 3 mins, in bullet you only get one

One of the funniest Mr. Bean clips ever!

https://youtu.be/9BWjIkG6x8U

Just here to point out that this isn't technically what "hope chess" is.

Hope chess is playing a move (or moves) that you know for sure is/are wrong, or losing by force - but hoping your opponent doesn't find the correct response.

Like sac'ing a piece just to make things messy, even though you know the sac is a losing move - but trusting that your opponent doesn't have the time to find the right defense. That's hope chess.

What you're talking about is more of a style choice ...

Some players put better pawn structure and advantageous endings first and try to win in the long run. Perhaps they are less adept at combinational tactics. If you wish for more excitement try sacrificing a pawn for space, open lines, attacking chances.

Don't think of moves in terms of boring, exciting, beautiful, ugly, inspiring or dull. Think of them in terms of good or bad, the only thing that matters (undisclosed Karpov's quote).

yall be treating chess as its a boring job that you must do 3 hours a day no matter what

chess is a game where one persons ideas goes agianst another. You are supposed to create sharp, lively games and end with checkmating. not some boring karpov middlegame in the caro kan or some exchange french middlegame

There are people who simply do not care about opening theory and just play what seems logical to them. They will not know what is the best move against Alekhine, but they surely can still beat people who play Alekhine if they outplay them later on.

By the way... Nf3 against Alekhine? You should be grateful to be a pawn up (unless you meant Nc3).

I think they have a word for it... try self-taught

i played that game on tilt

ignore it