|
Its funny that 1.e4, Na6 is so much better than 1.e4, Nh6, or at least according to stockfish.
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
Salt Fish posted:Its funny that 1.e4, Na6 is so much better than 1.e4, Nh6, or at least according to stockfish. Bad piece on kingside vs bad piece on queenside, and the fact that after e4 Nh6 the N can’t go to f5. Out of curiosity, what’s the eval on 1. e4 f5?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 22:08
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:Bad piece on kingside vs bad piece on queenside, and the fact that after e4 Nh6 the N can’t go to f5. +2.2 so it's pretty close
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 22:12
|
|
|
It's weird to me that my blitz rating is lower than my rapid. Like, obviously I'm worse with less time, but isn't everyone else? If rating isn't some true test of skill but just your average skill vs a particular pool, aren't I playing the same people at 800 blitz as I am 1000 rapid? Why aren't we all around 1k in every format?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 22:27
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Like, obviously I'm worse with less time, but isn't everyone else? I think: Not to the same extent, no.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
I think it's that the rapid pool is weaker overall, because most 2000+ players don't really play rapid online. But it's still anchored to the same midpoint (1200 on chess.com, 1500 on lichess.org). So you rank relatively higher, because Elo isn't an objective measure of strength, it's relative to the other people in the pool?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 22:32
|
|
|
CubicalSucrose posted:I think: Not to the same extent, no. It’s this. It’s very common for people to be relatively better at fast versus slow chess or vice versa.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
I believe there's also an effect that comes from people playing more blitz games than rapid games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
Huxley posted:It's weird to me that my blitz rating is lower than my rapid. Like, obviously I'm worse with less time, but isn't everyone else? If rating isn't some true test of skill but just your average skill vs a particular pool, aren't I playing the same people at 800 blitz as I am 1000 rapid? Why aren't we all around 1k in every format? I feel like around 800-900 blitz there are a lot of people that have studied one opening trap. They're 800 because they don't know anything else (and often end up punting the advantage anyway), but it's certainly hard to win with time pressure and being in a bad position early.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2023 03:10
|
|
|
yeah if you’re a high 3-digit d4 player and you spend like 1 hour learning Englund refutation, you will destroy a whole lot of people
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2023 08:42
|
|
|
This is from yesterday and stolen from the chess subreddit but I just can't stop laughing at this image: I'm kinda hoping Caruana does some commentary for the WC cause I thought he was really good last time. edit: Looks like he will. Sway Grunt fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Apr 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
Sway Grunt posted:This is from yesterday and stolen from the chess subreddit but I just can't stop laughing at this image: Why the gently caress did he move the bishop there? Doesn't that ensure mate in three?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2023 20:02
|
|
|
It’s mate in one 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
L.H.O.O.Q. posted:It’s mate in one Nah. He'll move the rook and bishop to prevent mate. EDIT: I'm dumb. It is mate in one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2023 20:30
|
|
|
I've been enjoying doing chess puzzles on Chess.com in my down time as someone still pretty new to chess, relatively speaking. But sometimes, I just don't understand the solutions, and the procedurally generated nature means there's no "here's the principle we were quizzing" aspect to it. For example, they claim the solution to this puzzle is ______ Ba5 with no further steps. Why? I also feel like sometimes the puzzle solutions are an even trade, which perhaps makes sense if you have the intuition or can run stockfish and see that one side has an advantage following a blunder. But without knowing why an even trade puts me ahead in terms of position combined with remaining pieces, it's hard to see HOW I arrive at a seemingly uneventful sequence of moves puts me ahead Playing out the rest of the match with the analysis tool after the conclusion of the puzzle is somewhat helpful, but I feel like I'm missing out on the fundamental idea when it just feeds me the following sequence of 8 steps to checkmate It also feels like maybe the procedurally generated puzzles on Chess.com just suck and I would enjoy more targeted/grounded puzzles on, say, lichess instead Its a Rolex fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Apr 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2023 21:56
|
|
|
Its a Rolex posted:______ Ba5 with no further steps. Why? skewering the queen and rook, and black can't push b6 because it opens a discovered check when white moves the rook regarding a puzzle solution being an even trade, are you sure? it should be clear why the solution is winning. maybe post an example of a puzzle like that next time you see one? Helianthus Annuus fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Apr 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
Today's CCT was amazing. After Hikaru got destroyed by Fabi two days ago, he had to beat Magnus yesterday and then Fabi twice today to win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:skewering the queen and rook, and black can't push b6 because it opens a discovered check when white moves the rook Thanks for the explanation. I meant to screenshot one in particular last night that seemed like a very bizarre trade, but I moved on by accident and the automatic puzzles don't let you see previous puzzles AFAIK. If I encounter any more that don't seem to make sense, I'll ask.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
Sometimes I have no idea why the puzzle solution is right, but I just assume it is because my level isn't high enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2023 22:26
|
|
|
Its a Rolex posted:Thanks for the explanation. I meant to screenshot one in particular last night that seemed like a very bizarre trade, but I moved on by accident and the automatic puzzles don't let you see previous puzzles AFAIK. If I encounter any more that don't seem to make sense, I'll ask. If you're on your phone, tap the puzzles tab on the bottom and then the icon in the upper right, it'll show your recent puzzle history.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
I prefer Lichess overall but I like the drills section on Chess dot com. Sometimes I want to grind specific pawn endgames or N+B or whatever until I can do them perfectly. Maybe even drill theory for specific openings. Not sure if Lichess had an alternative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 03:36
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:I believe there's also an effect that comes from people playing more blitz games than rapid games. can you please elaborate? -- and if it's a bad effect, is there any way to mitigate it while still focusing on blitz and bullet?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 03:58
|
|
|
Sataere posted:Sometimes I have no idea why the puzzle solution is right, but I just assume it is because my level isn't high enough. its a lot better use of your time if you know why its winning before you move on from the puzzle, even if you have to go to the analysis board and use the engine to help you figure it out
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 04:01
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:can you please elaborate? -- and if it's a bad effect, is there any way to mitigate it while still focusing on blitz and bullet? If there's a systematic pressure towards rating inflation and people play more blitz games then blitz ratings would tend on average to be higher. I think. I'm not a mathematologist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 04:07
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:If there's a systematic pressure towards rating inflation and people play more blitz games then blitz ratings would tend on average to be higher. oh i see what you mean, because more blitz games can happen in the same time interval. -- i thought you were going to say something like "habitual blitz players lose the ability to find non-obvious moves," which seems plausible to me as an incorrigible 5m blitz player, i have heard that the best way to get better at blitz is to play a slower time control. but i would rather continue to play 5m chess and pay the price of slower improvement even if thats true. do you think i get away with this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 04:17
|
|
|
I kind of have the same thing where, I want to get better obviously. And I know the best way to improve is playing like, 15+10s. But I find it really tough to hit that button. I want the bonus time, because I lose a ton of 10s getting flagged up 10 points (I need to start drilling endgames). But the longer I spend playing a single game, the worse it feels to lose it. So I keep playing 2+1s at a low level, because winning feels good and losing feels like nothing, where in rapid losing feels miserable. But on the other hand, ELO isn't a gauge of my worth or intelligence it's just a machine to give me fair matches. And I may not be improving as much playing 2+1 or 3+2, but it's better than spending all day finding reasons not to play 15+10. It's a game and I'm not obligated to get better at it. I am, however, obligated to make it a positive and fun part of my life.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 04:46
|
|
|
I tell myself I make up for it by also playing 1-day daily tournaments, which this thread suggested and has been fun. e, I guess also the real answer is finding my way to a place where losing a 10 feels as light on my ego as a blitz game. Just a game, nothing matters. Except we kind of get taught as new players that our rapid ELO is our "actual skill" so you want to protect it, not goof off with it. Huxley fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Apr 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 04:53
|
|
|
Here's one that looks like I trade equally but the analysis puts it at a pretty clear advantage towards black at the end.  Solution: Qxd6, xd6, Nxf3, which is where the puzzle "ends". The next move seems pretty to be xf3 as the analysis suggests, which leaves me roughly where I started: a knight up. but because we've both lost Q,N, my extra knight is relatively a larger advantage. Is there something *about* this position that's particularly good, or is it just that my relative advantage is much better because I traded equally and maintained an extra knight? White king position isn't great but it seems like there's still time to open up space so the king isn't easily checked/blocked by the rook E- it looks like the "tag" associated with this one is "Simplification" Its a Rolex fucked around with this message at 05:47 on Apr 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 05:44
|
|
|
Its a Rolex posted:
Stealing a naroditsky explanation; in a soccer match of 9 players vs 10 players the team with 10 has an advantage, but imagine a team of 2 against a team of 3. Simplifying by removing equal material is an amplification of your advantage. The end goal is to have 1 piece against 0. Salt Fish fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Apr 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 06:09
|
|
|
So I'm picking up playing chess again after a decade plus break and I've got on to Chess.com, but I'm getting frustrated at the number of players who simply resign when they lose their queen or the game doesn't go their way. I've had about 10 'wins' and only two of those were from legitimate checkmates. It kind of sucks the joy out of playing when my opponents do this so frequently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 06:46
|
|
|
Its a Rolex posted:Here's one that looks like I trade equally but the analysis puts it at a pretty clear advantage towards black at the end. In addition to simplifying and opening up the enemy king, you're also winning a pawn in the end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 07:07
|
|
|
Salt Fish posted:Stealing a naroditsky explanation; in a soccer match of 9 players vs 10 players the team with 10 has an advantage, but imagine a team of 2 against a team of 3. Simplifying by removing equal material is an amplification of your advantage. The end goal is to have 1 piece against 0. (The unspoken premise of Salt Fish’s explanation is that you’re already up a piece at the start, in case you hadn’t noticed)
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 08:34
|
|
|
Octy posted:So I'm picking up playing chess again after a decade plus break and I've got on to Chess.com, but I'm getting frustrated at the number of players who simply resign when they lose their queen or the game doesn't go their way. I've had about 10 'wins' and only two of those were from legitimate checkmates. It kind of sucks the joy out of playing when my opponents do this so frequently. Games played to completion (ie checkmate) are actually pretty rare for me. I don't know any player who would suffer to continue a game after they blunder their queen. Unless you mean they resign after you trade queens or something then lol. But players have no barrier to just getting a new game so lots of people will just bail if they smell the wind blowing the wrong way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 10:01
|
|
|
Octy posted:So I'm picking up playing chess again after a decade plus break and I've got on to Chess.com, but I'm getting frustrated at the number of players who simply resign when they lose their queen or the game doesn't go their way. I've had about 10 'wins' and only two of those were from legitimate checkmates. It kind of sucks the joy out of playing when my opponents do this so frequently. Not sure if this post is serious, but the huge majority of chess games are not played out to a checkmate. Most players do in fact resign if they are down a massive amount of material without some compensation like having a forced mate, and don't play out games that are hopelessly lost. It is true that it's possible for the winning player to blunder material back or win by an overlooked back rank mate, or blunder into a stalemate etc. so there's no harm done playing on but most players would just as soon move on to the next game. Not only that, if you DO have a forced mate sequence most players will resign when they recognize this. They are generally not doing this to deny you the satisfaction of checkmating them but acknowledging that you won! This is a good thing! Zwabu fucked around with this message at 12:07 on Apr 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 12:02
|
|
|
Huxley posted:It's weird to me that my blitz rating is lower than my rapid. Like, obviously I'm worse with less time, but isn't everyone else? If rating isn't some true test of skill but just your average skill vs a particular pool, aren't I playing the same people at 800 blitz as I am 1000 rapid? Why aren't we all around 1k in every format? To the first bit: Some people are just better at faster time controls. I’m ~1500 bullet but ~1100 rapid, much better at playing (and avoiding) traps as well as limited calculation really quickly (and compared to other players, my calc doesn’t improve as much when given more time) Also I mostly play alapin Sicilian and Halloween gambit and I have a bunch of practice endgame flagging, things that do not remotely resemble chess skill
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 13:28
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C9tL1XijM0 Rooting for Ding this week, but if I had to bet I think my prediction is (1) a bunch of safe draws, (2) Nepo ekes out one close win as white, then (3) a bunch more draws til Nepo wins overall.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 13:36
|
|
|
Helianthus Annuus posted:as an incorrigible 5m blitz player, i have heard that the best way to get better at blitz is to play a slower time control. but i would rather continue to play 5m chess and pay the price of slower improvement even if thats true. do you think i get away with this? I think what happens after the game matters at least as much. When playing blitz there's greater temptation to instantly queue up for a new game and erase the last one from your mind, which won't retain anything other than very basic pattern matching. But if you can avoid that and at least take a look at the moments you suspect you made the wrong move (if not a complete game analysis), then at least you've learned something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
Redmark posted:I think what happens after the game matters at least as much. When playing blitz there's greater temptation to instantly queue up for a new game and erase the last one from your mind, which won't retain anything other than very basic pattern matching. But if you can avoid that and at least take a look at the moments you suspect you made the wrong move (if not a complete game analysis), then at least you've learned something. i always go to the analysis board and try to learn at least one thing from a loss. here's a game i just played, where i had the black pieces, and i played badly and slowly and lost, which i think is pretty typical. i wasn't too upset with the result because i was eating a tasty breakfast at the time (maybe i lost because it was too tasty...) code:i considered b5, but it looked like it just loses a pawn, so i rejected it. but what i didn't see was that it gives me a good square for my queen on b6, which gives me an extra tempo because i threaten a discovered check after i move my c pawn, and this extra tempo lets me avoid losing the pawn. maybe i missed this because of detraining from playing too much blitz?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
I don't know that I would have even considered b5 either. My first instinct would be e5, and if they take dxe6, fxe6 frees the rook and if they take fxe5, then Nxe5 seems really good. But then just pushing f5 is probably annoying enough not to risk it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
Huxley posted:I don't know that I would have even considered b5 either. My first instinct would be e5, and if they take dxe6, fxe6 frees the rook and if they take fxe5, then Nxe5 seems really good. But then just pushing f5 is probably annoying enough not to risk it. thats right, the computer says white doesn't have to take e5 with the f pawn. white could push f5 or take en passant with the d pawn, and both moves are good for white. but if white plays fxe5, then Nxe5 is very good for black. i rejected e5 without thinking of any of this, my instinct (such as it is) told me that i haven't done enough to prepare e5, so i can't play it yet. i think i was right about e5 but for the wrong reasons. with e6 i figured if white takes, i activate my rook on the f file to put pressure on white's f pawn. or if he doesn't take, then i take and then i can activate my rook on the e file. taking the e file actually set me up in a winning position later in the game, but i blew it. after trading off the rooks on move 22, this position occurs -- black to move and win (2 possible continuations). computer says h5 or Nxg4 are crushing for black, but i didn't see it because i didn't notice how strong my bishop on d7 was. so i played the horrible move h6, because i wanted to stop g5 i think? except g5 isn't any good because it blunders checkmate in 1 Helianthus Annuus fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Apr 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2023 17:41
|
|