The Student Room Group

Chess games

Scroll to see replies

Original post by IrrationalRoot
Well I'm not playing blitz online again for a long time. I just lost to a 248. Yes, you read that right: https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718785374.
This is beyond pathetic.


They seem slightly underrated..
Well it seems in blitz anyone can beat anyone. I know he's a very good player himself, but IM Rensch has taken down Hikaru in blitz for instance. I've taken down 2100s if I recall correctly (at least on lichess lol).
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
They seem slightly underrated..
Well it seems in blitz anyone can beat anyone. I know he's a very good player himself, but IM Rensch has taken down Hikaru in blitz for instance. I've taken down 2100s if I recall correctly (at least on lichess lol).


I know, I saw him beat Hikaru, it was awesome. That said I'm still gonna leave blitz for now; I don't want it destroying my confidence since I already feel a lot worse about my chess from the blitz I played today. I can't see myself ever being good at blitz anyway; I'm simply not a fast thinker, I'm only productive at all when I have time to think.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
I know, I saw him beat Hikaru, it was awesome. That said I'm still gonna leave blitz for now; I don't want it destroying my confidence since I already feel a lot worse about my chess from the blitz I played today. I can't see myself ever being good at blitz anyway; I'm simply not a fast thinker, I'm only productive at all when I have time to think.


I guess the thing about blitz for masters is that to them, chess isn't so much an exercise in logical and abstract thought, but a very intuitive and natural process, sort of like speaking a language (that they know, that is..). Since they all started when they were two weeks old or whatever.. whereas people who start playing chess later have to actually reason through the positions more consciously. And reasoning takes some time. I guess, to go back to the language analogy, we need to "translate" what we see, rather than seeing everything as it is at once.
Original post by IamJacksContempt
How do I play?


i can teach you if you like, pm me...
Original post by IrrationalRoot
I know, I saw him beat Hikaru, it was awesome. That said I'm still gonna leave blitz for now; I don't want it destroying my confidence since I already feel a lot worse about my chess from the blitz I played today. I can't see myself ever being good at blitz anyway; I'm simply not a fast thinker, I'm only productive at all when I have time to think.


Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
I guess the thing about blitz for masters is that to them, chess isn't so much an exercise in logical and abstract thought, but a very intuitive and natural process, sort of like speaking a language (that they know, that is..). Since they all started when they were two weeks old or whatever.. whereas people who start playing chess later have to actually reason through the positions more consciously. And reasoning takes some time. I guess, to go back to the language analogy, we need to "translate" what we see, rather than seeing everything as it is at once.

I think this tournament has fizzled out. And I have beat both of you in one on ones in the past, but I am up for a rematch if either of you want to try again, or a friendly at least? Maybe later tonight??
https://www.chess.com/live/game/1719424808 Ridiculous Sicilian. I am quite sure he had multiple chances to refute the sac. Most glaringly I did the penultimate move without thinking, but he could have just taken my knight, and then when rook takes, the queen is there to recapture, and I am utterly lost. I need to slow down when calculating and really think about what's guarding what. Maybe just the double check initially was best, fancy rook sac wasn't working, as there is not usually a knight on e8 I forgot about its covering of the square. But at least I won lol.

Just looked at it with computer, and I was still winning after the rook sac, but far less apparently (Nxf6+ being far superior) I was losing literally for one move, the one I just mentioned. But most annoying is the fact I missed a rather simple mate: just do 23. Qxe5+ instead. Thinking too fast, getting too excited about complications. I thought it would be quite poetic if Rxf6 then Qg8#, with white delivering mate being down a rook pair and a bishop. Tunnel vision yet again.

Original post by john2054
I think this tournament has fizzled out. And I have beat both of you in one on ones in the past, but I am up for a rematch if either of you want to try again, or a friendly at least? Maybe later tonight??


I will have a friendly whenever if you want. If the tournament has fizzled out no need for a competitive game lol.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
https://www.chess.com/live/game/1719424808 Ridiculous Sicilian. I am quite sure he had multiple chances to refute the sac. Most glaringly I did the penultimate move without thinking, but he could have just taken my knight, and then when rook takes, the queen is there to recapture, and I am utterly lost. I need to slow down when calculating and really think about what's guarding what. Maybe just the double check initially was best, fancy rook sac wasn't working, as there is not usually a knight on e8 I forgot about its covering of the square. But at least I won lol.

Just looked at it with computer, and I was still winning after the rook sac, but far less apparently (Nxf6+ being far superior) I was losing literally for one move, the one I just mentioned. But most annoying is the fact I missed a rather simple mate: just do 23. Qxe5+ instead. Thinking too fast, getting too excited about complications. I thought it would be quite poetic if Rxf6 then Qg8#, with white delivering mate being down a rook pair and a bishop. Tunnel vision yet again.



I will have a friendly whenever if you want. If the tournament has fizzled out no need for a competitive game lol.


I wish my opponents played the dragon against me... or at least an open sicilian lol.
Yeah there were a few game-winning tactics in that game. Though the computer actually says that even after the double check line when White goes +4 up he has to very accurately defend his queenside for the next 10 moves lol. So not too easy to capitalise on such advantages if black can start attacking on the queenside.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
I wish my opponents played the dragon against me... or at least an open sicilian lol.
Yeah there were a few game-winning tactics in that game. Though the computer actually says that even after the double check line when White goes +4 up he has to very accurately defend his queenside for the next 10 moves lol. So not too easy to capitalise on such advantages if black can start attacking on the queenside.


That's the first time at least in a while, I can recall getting a standard dragon. Usually I seem to get people playing 2. ...Nc6. It seems as soon as I can get in Rxd6 black's kingside is ripped apart, but they had ways of preventing it (trying to take out the bishop was pretty silly - it and the knight converged on the same square, only the knight was really needed).

I finally converted an endgame later last night (with 6 inaccuracies lol, but my opponent didn't spot how to deal with them). I guess it's the rooks I hate rather than endgames as a rule. https://www.chess.com/live/game/1719460920 Nd1+ was a cool idea when available, seems to always scoop a pawn, but it's not the sort of move you look for. xD
https://www.chess.com/live/game/1720212749

I feel like I may have just been engined. Relatively new member, his blitz isn't particularly great after around 20 games, similar to mine, he had barely played rapid and went up 200 points after beating me. He moved quite fast, a lot quicker than me, but not super fast, enough time to input moves into an engine and get a decent output.Certainly didn't seem like he was spending a while thinking, and it was very regular.

Actually, I just ran his game through, and eventually an inaccuracy comes for him on 33. ...Rd8. Then again, the end position is pretty easy to win, so maybe he stopped bothering. I just don't see how someone worthy of 1350 blitz does this. (33 excellent moves, 4 good moves, 1 inaccuracy). Average centipawn loss of five overall. Might check out his other game. (it's in a 15|10 tournament).

I know I played like **** as usual, blundering a pawn, with not much in the way of compensation. But I mean, he took a while to jump the knight. Most humans, especially at this low level, can't wait for a discovered attack. Also h5 did not seem particularly in line with the rest of his play and seemed not very human. And I dare say a lot of players at this level would be tricked by the tactical traps I set.

edit: lol maybe not, he got mated in the next game. Missing a very simple tactic though, so the discrepancy is weird.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
https://www.chess.com/live/game/1720212749

I feel like I may have just been engined. Relatively new member, his blitz isn't particularly great after around 20 games, similar to mine, he had barely played rapid and went up 200 points after beating me. He moved quite fast, a lot quicker than me, but not super fast, enough time to input moves into an engine and get a decent output.Certainly didn't seem like he was spending a while thinking, and it was very regular.

Actually, I just ran his game through, and eventually an inaccuracy comes for him on 33. ...Rd8. Then again, the end position is pretty easy to win, so maybe he stopped bothering. I just don't see how someone worthy of 1350 blitz does this. (33 excellent moves, 4 good moves, 1 inaccuracy). Average centipawn loss of five overall. Might check out his other game. (it's in a 15|10 tournament).

I know I played like **** as usual, blundering a pawn, with not much in the way of compensation. But I mean, he took a while to jump the knight. Most humans, especially at this low level, can't wait for a discovered attack. Also h5 did not seem particularly in line with the rest of his play and seemed not very human. And I dare say a lot of players at this level would be tricked by the tactical traps I set.

edit: lol maybe not, he got mated in the next game. Missing a very simple tactic though, so the discrepancy is weird.


Upon analysis yeah he seems like a cheater. Very sly one though, occasionally throwing in some moves that were slightly worse than top engine moves.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Upon analysis yeah he seems like a cheater. Very sly one though, occasionally throwing in some moves that were slightly worse than top engine moves.


I guess he chose the wrong time to think for himself in the next game if so, blundering a simple mate in two xD. An advantage of playing bullet is it's a lot harder to do this..
I also suck at chees, but still I pefer playing them online
11 losses in a row, blitz rating down from 1482 a couple of days ago to 1264.
Finally broke 1900 on tactics trainer!
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Finally broke 1900 on tactics trainer!


I've hit 1970 and 1972, then I always slump back to like 1930 (I guess you could call it a depression...ha.) Meanwhile my blitz is still at like 1300.. :redface: I did beat an 1850 in rapid but he clearly was preoccupied as he took years on simple moves and lost on time
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
I've hit 1970 and 1972, then I always slump back to like 1930 (I guess you could call it a depression...ha.) Meanwhile my blitz is still at like 1300.. :redface: I did beat an 1850 in rapid but he clearly was preoccupied as he took years on simple moves and lost on time


Yeah you've gotta try to make your games as sharp as possible to take advantage of your tactical skills; if they're solid you'll find it hard to beat weak players since you'd need to play quite a strong strategic game because they'd be more or less forced to play reasonably accurate moves. Whereas in sharp positions your opponents would have lots of opportunities to make tactical mistakes.

Still looks good having beaten an 1850. I beat a 2100 on lichess in a simul not long ago (and it wasn't on time; he always had more time left than me). But then again lichess ratings are massively inflated so...
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Yeah you've gotta try to make your games as sharp as possible to take advantage of your tactical skills; if they're solid you'll find it hard to beat weak players since you'd need to play quite a strong strategic game because they'd be more or less forced to play reasonably accurate moves. Whereas in sharp positions your opponents would have lots of opportunities to make tactical mistakes.

Still looks good having beaten an 1850. I beat a 2100 on lichess in a simul not long ago (and it wasn't on time; he always had more time left than me). But then again lichess ratings are massively inflated so...


lol you'd think so but I just blunder tactics in actual games because it doesn't tell me when to look for them. Oh well..
Yeah I imagine real rating is somewhere in between chess.com and lichess. At least chess.com blitz seems too low and lichess blitz seems too high. Maybe chess.com rapid is pretty accurate (although CN is like 1950 despite being around 2200 or whatever in real life, but I guess that can be attributed to computer impossible).
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
lol you'd think so but I just blunder tactics in actual games because it doesn't tell me when to look for them. Oh well..
Yeah I imagine real rating is somewhere in between chess.com and lichess. At least chess.com blitz seems too low and lichess blitz seems too high. Maybe chess.com rapid is pretty accurate (although CN is like 1950 despite being around 2200 or whatever in real life, but I guess that can be attributed to computer impossible).


we play chess to have fun. stop worrying about the games/ratings/post game analysis thanks!
Original post by john2054
we play chess to have fun. stop worrying about the games/ratings/post game analysis thanks!


I do not find stagnation fun. I am not happy with my level and want to improve.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
I do not find stagnation fun. I am not happy with my level and want to improve.


yes but you can learn and improve in lots of ways. talking to people, enjoying life, enjoying chess, losing some times. teaching children. there is a lot more to the game than computer analysis.

It may help your opening memorizations, and tactics, but i really don't see how playing in this way can improve your strategy/long term vision or end game for that matter. Which is more about a soft touch, and compromise, than anything else!

Quick Reply