WARNING: NON-POLITICAL POST!...Is there anyone here who's good at chess?
I rejoined the USCF after a long absence. Played two recent tournaments and my rating plunged from 1456 to 1386, getting beaten by players rated 300-400 points lower than me, something that never used to happen. Joined chess.com and my rating is in the low 800s, and it seems everyone plays well (I've ruled out cheating as they still make mistakes and inaccuracies). Has the game passed me by that badly with the advent of computer studying or did my skills erode that badly? Or maybe both.
Replies to: WARNING: NON-POLITICAL POST!...Is there anyone here who's good at chess?
ND521 and Basil are your guys.
(no message)
How's the market doing Dummy? Stick to Checkers.
(no message)
Of all the libs on the board, you seem the angriest.
(no message)
Nah, just out of tolerance for MAGA lies, diversions and distortion.
(no message)
I bought Ford for $2.15 in 2009 and sold it at $15 six months later.
(no message)
Nice trade
(no message)
Go back to eating your, Fudgie the Whale.
(no message)
Must be some potent shroom.
(no message)
Says the guy always posting on politics.
(no message)
I’m in a couple of groups and top % of all. Attack mode 24 7
(no message)
question or two:
how is your opening repertoire? there have been a lot of changes (as usual) over the past several decades.
were your tournaments online or over the board? i'm a former member of the uscf and a current subscriber to chess.com. i do not trust online.
it takes a while to get your rating moving in the right direction, but, imho, it's better to start lower and move up than start high and maintain/improve it. again, my opinion.
do you keep a record of your games so you can analyze them? very helpful.
I'm decent at the openings and actually fairly competent
And normally get an advantage going into the middle game.
The analyses on chess.com show I continually don't accurately spot opponent's attacks and often miss basic plays, such as failing to capture a hanging piece or executing a simple fork....mistakes I used to rarely make for a 1456 player.
So I guess I just answered my own question. I just suck.
two things to consider
exposure and patience.
i find the more i play, the less i miss when it comes to opponents' gambits. the more time i take, the more options i look at and (sic), the more hanging pieces and forks i see. i'm guessing you're still very good - just need to play more and look for some of the more complicated tactical maneuvers.
Based on what you said, the 10-minute format isn't my strong suit
I looked back at my history (have played a bunch of games since being laid up from a second ankle surgery) and I've lost on time a ton, even though I was ahead.
Having said that, I don't remember anyone under 1200 being much of a challenge, but on chess.com I'm losing a consistent 2 out of 3 at all rating levels, from the 1450 I started out at to the 800 level. You'd think I'd start winning more but I'm not ... but I'm not losing any more, either, which is the strange thing.
one more thing.
the older you get, the more chess-type thinking helps with mental acuity. great cognitive exercise regardless of ability. the exposure is what's important.
well, with chess.com, i played against exactly 2 opponents.
one was an eastern european who worked in my office and who i thought would kick my ass. turned out, he was hideous at it but kept telling me how bad he was going to take me down the next time. never came close. the other was a scandanavian who i played completely by accident. beat him but i think he was a teenager. after the company we were working for folded, i never played online again. chess.com has some really excellent puzzles that help a lot with spotting tactical moves and trying unusual moves to gain an advantage. i always do the "daily puzzle" and then the 5 free "puzzle" quizzes they give you each day. my current rating there is 2600+, so i'm reasonably satisfied with that. anyway, i don't trust online. when people paint themselves into a corner, they have difficulty accepting it. that's natural. some just use the computer against their opponents to boost their ego.
over the board is the only legit way to go, imho.
I think you're right about people using the computer to play
I think their M.O is to use it when they fall behind, because I would say about 80-90% of the time I have an advantage somewhat into the middle game that always seems to mysteriously disappear.
Online is awful, wayyy to easy to cheat
(no message)