I’m bored of this…
Sort:
Dec 27, 2021
0
#24
And what are you implying with that statement? I dont think people who have 700cc rating can be NMs
Dec 27, 2021
0
#26
Zinc-Man wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Zinc-Man wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Zinc-Man wrote:
Just want to add a word of caution. I personally know a couple of chess.com members as I;ve played them couple of times. One Douglas, is a much better player than I am over the board and his grade shows this, yet on the site he is usually graded about 100 points lower than me?
The reason is that he uses the site to experiment and has no interest in what grade it gives him. So is capable of beating 1800's and losing to 1200's.
Yeah we are well aware of that . But this is certainly not one of those cases . You can look at his profile and his games and judge for yourself
Wonder how well Anonymous Dragon understands English.
Enough to understand what your point was
Are you guessing that you're correct, because I don't think you are? I know a 2200 fide rated player across the board yet on chess.com he is 1900.
Good sir, I’m TALKING about a 700
In the starting part, I said ‘ATLEAST 1800’
Dec 27, 2021
0
#27
valcteicksstrhibrid wrote:
And what are you implying with that statement? I dont think people who have 700cc rating can be NMs
Yeah
Dec 27, 2021
0
#28
The difference of cc rating and fide rating would be way too big, and this guy is actually trying based on his games
Dec 27, 2021
0
#29
SoulCrusher0103 wrote:
Zinc-Man wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Zinc-Man wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Zinc-Man wrote:
Just want to add a word of caution. I personally know a couple of chess.com members as I;ve played them couple of times. One Douglas, is a much better player than I am over the board and his grade shows this, yet on the site he is usually graded about 100 points lower than me?
The reason is that he uses the site to experiment and has no interest in what grade it gives him. So is capable of beating 1800's and losing to 1200's.
Yeah we are well aware of that . But this is certainly not one of those cases . You can look at his profile and his games and judge for yourself
Wonder how well Anonymous Dragon understands English.
Enough to understand what your point was
Are you guessing that you're correct, because I don't think you are? I know a 2200 fide rated player across the board yet on chess.com he is 1900.
You have a point but the difference here is too much for eg I don't expect you to loose someone that's below 1500
Exactly!
Dec 27, 2021
0
#30
Im just making the most out of the information i have, and if epic-doge is magnus carlsen, its his fault for making troll posts and questioning why people arnt believing him
Dec 27, 2021
0
#31
Zinc-Man wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Zinc-Man wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
Zinc-Man wrote:
Just want to add a word of caution. I personally know a couple of chess.com members as I;ve played them couple of times. One Douglas, is a much better player than I am over the board and his grade shows this, yet on the site he is usually graded about 100 points lower than me?
The reason is that he uses the site to experiment and has no interest in what grade it gives him. So is capable of beating 1800's and losing to 1200's.
Yeah we are well aware of that . But this is certainly not one of those cases . You can look at his profile and his games and judge for yourself
Wonder how well Anonymous Dragon understands English.
Enough to understand what your point was
Are you guessing that you're correct, because I don't think you are? I know a 2200 fide rated player across the board yet on chess.com he is 1900.
As I already said, we are aware of those cases where people actually experiment with stuff and are rated below their actual strength. But this isn't one of those cases. No matter how people try to experiment, there's a certain threshold and anyone who has a decent understanding of the game can make out that this guy is nowhere near a master level. You are 2400, so I don't think I need to explain too much to you. Just go through his profile and you will see what we are trying to say.
I can tell you right now by epicdoges first statement that he was a liar lol
Dec 27, 2021
0
#33
M1m1c15 wrote:
I can tell you right now by epicdoges first statement that he was a liar lol
[IF MIMIC ENTERS A FORUM, ITS TIME TO GET ROASTED xD]
Welcome back Mimic 
Dec 27, 2021
0
#34
epic-doge wrote:
Oh yeah? I have more rating than you think in other websites.
Show me proof
Then nobody would be suspecting you
Dec 27, 2021
0
#35
warrior-vik wrote:
epic-doge wrote:
Oh yeah? I have more rating than you think in other websites.
Show me proof
Then nobody would be suspecting you
Dude he's talking about lichess and other sites. Ratings are inflated over there
Dec 27, 2021
0
#36
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
warrior-vik wrote:
epic-doge wrote:
Oh yeah? I have more rating than you think in other websites.
Show me proof
Then nobody would be suspecting you
Dude he's talking about lichess and other sites. Ratings are inflated over there
Ratings aren't inflated there
Those ratings make the starting harder and the GMs and IMs are rated around the same
Dec 27, 2021
0
#37
warrior-vik wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
warrior-vik wrote:
epic-doge wrote:
Oh yeah? I have more rating than you think in other websites.
Show me proof
Then nobody would be suspecting you
Dude he's talking about lichess and other sites. Ratings are inflated over there
Ratings aren't inflated there
Those ratings make the starting harder and the GMs and IMs are rated around the same
It is inflated with respect to the ratings here on chess.com . And if you have a little bit of knowledge of how things work you would realise that titles are not obtained by playing online chess
Dec 27, 2021
0
#38
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
warrior-vik wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
warrior-vik wrote:
epic-doge wrote:
Oh yeah? I have more rating than you think in other websites.
Show me proof
Then nobody would be suspecting you
Dude he's talking about lichess and other sites. Ratings are inflated over there
Ratings aren't inflated there
Those ratings make the starting harder and the GMs and IMs are rated around the same
It is inflated with respect to the ratings here on chess.com . And if you have a little bit of knowledge of how things work you would realise that titles are not obtained by playing online chess
Okay
So then just show us your FIDE or USCF account of rating
Then that will show us the proof
Dec 27, 2021
0
#39
warrior-vik wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
warrior-vik wrote:
Anonymous_Dragon wrote:
warrior-vik wrote:
epic-doge wrote:
Oh yeah? I have more rating than you think in other websites.
Show me proof
Then nobody would be suspecting you
Dude he's talking about lichess and other sites. Ratings are inflated over there
Ratings aren't inflated there
Those ratings make the starting harder and the GMs and IMs are rated around the same
It is inflated with respect to the ratings here on chess.com . And if you have a little bit of knowledge of how things work you would realise that titles are not obtained by playing online chess
Okay
So then just show us your FIDE or USCF account of rating
Then that will show us the proof
?? How tf is this even related to my FIDE and USCF ?
I’m gonna ask chess.com mods about this…