A game of chess doesn't test your intellect. Things pertaining to how good you are depend mostly on when you first played, how long you've played, and how many games. As long as you know the rules, we would have a fun game. I care about your favorite clock setting and wonder what your online rating is. People that started playing earlier in life have an advantage over others. I learned the rules when I was in school, but only ever played a dozen games until about 3 years ago. I watched a 30-60 minute video of Chess most days since then. I only played about once a week, some days 10 games, and other days 1 game. In total, I have played about 1000 games, all of them on fast time settings. I've never even played a classical game of Chess.
If you win or lose isn't the point, as that is mostly a matter of how good you are at Chess principles given your exposure to the game, and your familiarity + comfort with the time setting. Some people are a lot better at one time format than another. I'm not an expert myself, but I understand the concepts of good moves. Like any novice, I'm prone to making one mistake that costs the game. At my level, most people won't come back from a position where they cleanly lost a queen.
I don't want to play any cheaters, as those create sad stories. I played someone from the chat room here once. The first game seemed fair, and I won easily. In the 2nd game, I decided I'd let her win...within the first few moves I made a calculated mistake, one which I expected to be able to recover from somewhat easily (judging by her skill level displayed in our first game). I couldn't recover from the move though, it was as if she turned on a Chess engine and was evaluating my ability to play against the computer. which wasn't a 'simple' engine, it had more sophisticated programming, I presume, to calculate and estimate my ELO by just 1 or any number of my games.
I suspect she was doing this because she was looking for a 'smart' guy, someone with the ability to play at least at or above some level she predetermined (she was the one asking for a game of Chess, after all). I have a feeling that she believes anyone below some rating (maybe 7oo...[and while at least knowing the basic rules of Chess]) is too stupid for her. I fear the deliberate mistake I made early on in the game signaled to the Chess engine that I was much worse a player than I really am. Yes, just one mistake in the opening says a lot about a person's ability.
It was at the pace and accuracy she proceeded to confidently move to win after having the advantage of me blundering my bishop in the 2nd game. It was like playing 2 different people. The '2nd game' didn't play particularly well either. By my estimation, the gameplay for the 2nd game was that of a 1400. While the first game we played, left the impression she was below 1000. A 400 point difference in rating is huge; right after 400 points, the odds of the lower-rated player ever beating the higher-rated one is near 0.
That won't happen again. I will never 'let' anyone win at anything, even a game. I thought it would be fun to give her confidence, but turns out she was probably secretly judging me. She'll wonder why she can't ever find any nice guys...
If you win or lose isn't the point, as that is mostly a matter of how good you are at Chess principles given your exposure to the game, and your familiarity + comfort with the time setting. Some people are a lot better at one time format than another. I'm not an expert myself, but I understand the concepts of good moves. Like any novice, I'm prone to making one mistake that costs the game. At my level, most people won't come back from a position where they cleanly lost a queen.
I don't want to play any cheaters, as those create sad stories. I played someone from the chat room here once. The first game seemed fair, and I won easily. In the 2nd game, I decided I'd let her win...within the first few moves I made a calculated mistake, one which I expected to be able to recover from somewhat easily (judging by her skill level displayed in our first game). I couldn't recover from the move though, it was as if she turned on a Chess engine and was evaluating my ability to play against the computer. which wasn't a 'simple' engine, it had more sophisticated programming, I presume, to calculate and estimate my ELO by just 1 or any number of my games.
I suspect she was doing this because she was looking for a 'smart' guy, someone with the ability to play at least at or above some level she predetermined (she was the one asking for a game of Chess, after all). I have a feeling that she believes anyone below some rating (maybe 7oo...[and while at least knowing the basic rules of Chess]) is too stupid for her. I fear the deliberate mistake I made early on in the game signaled to the Chess engine that I was much worse a player than I really am. Yes, just one mistake in the opening says a lot about a person's ability.
It was at the pace and accuracy she proceeded to confidently move to win after having the advantage of me blundering my bishop in the 2nd game. It was like playing 2 different people. The '2nd game' didn't play particularly well either. By my estimation, the gameplay for the 2nd game was that of a 1400. While the first game we played, left the impression she was below 1000. A 400 point difference in rating is huge; right after 400 points, the odds of the lower-rated player ever beating the higher-rated one is near 0.
That won't happen again. I will never 'let' anyone win at anything, even a game. I thought it would be fun to give her confidence, but turns out she was probably secretly judging me. She'll wonder why she can't ever find any nice guys...
Last edited:
