Isn't worstfish on lichess?
Worst possible chess game
Sort:
Weirdest challenge ever possible
Jun 5, 2024
0
#25
user78003413 wrote:
E4orce wrote:
Yeah, it's even in Bullet Arenas now, I would love to list the usernames of some "players" who I know were really unfair sports in the Bullet Arenas, but then that would be against the "naming and shaming" rule here. Lol.
I recommended [another site -- VP] for features instead of getting a diamond membership and chess.com censored that name. They're probably going to censor it right now, but hint: that website starts with a l
Bro what?
Incredible !
Jun 5, 2024
0
#27
The award for the Worst Tournament Player (before the age of computers) must go to Colonel Charles Paul Narcisse Moreau, who competed in the 14-player Monte Carlo 1903 tournament alongside such Masters as Tarrasch, Pillsbury, Maroczy, Schlechter, Teichmann...
... and lost all 26 games. Final score for the tournament: 0-0-26.
well losing really isn't so bad--- its how you lose that's the feature i guess
when you are 100 elo and in a chess game and yakutza 5 baka mitai music comes on:
Chess with hikaru be like.
Im white and hikaru is black. (no offence)
Im white and hikaru is black. (no offence)
Feb 22, 2025
0
#32
Do you mean both players are trying to lose, out both players are trying to lose and they both know the other is trying to lose?
There’s a difference
There’s a difference
BlitzBirdy wrote:
Isn't worstfish on lichess?
Worstfish is stockfish 14. came out..
Is it really the worst possible game though? It's very easy to lose to "WorstFish", which means there are worse strategies than WorstFish.
Stockfish evaluation assumes you want to win, but just flipping that the evaluation doesn't take into account that if you want to lose, the best strategy given high enough skill is actually to dominate your opponent leaving just a pawn left, and forcing the loss. This avoids the risk of your opponent stalemating you by accident, as probably would happen to WorstFish, and I imagine that engines with this strategy would lose to humans 100% of the time (if resignations are flipped too)
StevenEmily wrote:
Is it really the worst possible game though? It's very easy to lose to "WorstFish", which means there are worse strategies than WorstFish.
Stockfish evaluation assumes you want to win, but just flipping that the evaluation doesn't take into account that if you want to lose, the best strategy given high enough skill is actually to dominate your opponent leaving just a pawn left, and forcing the loss. This avoids the risk of your opponent stalemating you by accident, as probably would happen to WorstFish, and I imagine that engines with this strategy would lose to humans 100% of the time (if resignations are flipped too)
You are correct,its easy to lose, but Worstfish played all the worst moves, and the move that made it win is the only move. So technically, since you made a mate in 1 for you a mate in 1 for him. You played better than it. So what you have to do for SF , its lengthy, but play moves continously until you see the lowest eval, it would take hours and maybe days. I am working on it rn
Apr 5, 2025
0
#38
Once I saw a game here with 3% accuracy 
Or 8%, I dont remember exactly...
May 3, 2025
0
#39
ChessBoy513 wrote:
The following game is the worst game ever:
How is this even possible 💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
Put the game example in post #3 into game analysis - haven't seen so much red since donating blood at the local blood bank!!!
Look at arsenal fc