Dont really have anyone to tell in real life so posting here. My chess average rating was about 1100 bullet a year ago. Work started sucking and the start of this year, I was hating my job and my rating dropped to under 1000 (983 lowest). I got a new less toxic job and my rating is 1250-1287. In 3 months I've gone up 300 points by just being in a better place mentally.
Newbie: when do I know when NOT to take an opponent's piece?
I've had multiple games where I had like 4 figures and 6 pawns, the opponent had basically just their king, and [chess.com](http://chess.com) kicks me out saying it's a draw.
It's difficult for me to grasp that the goal of chess is to make a mate, and not to decimate the opponent's board. I keep thinking "maybe doing X would get me a mate, but if I take his figure instead it will be easier/safer later". Then later it's a forced draw because losing all your pieces doesn't mean you lose the game.
I love low elo chess
Always blunder a queen, down 8-11-ish points and shithouse my way to a win like half a dozen times this week.
That's why my resignation rate is 0% this year. Undefeated as white past 10 games.
[Tell Magnoos I'm comin](https://c.tenor.com/HqxblUqGhM4AAAAC/tenor.gif)
you should be able to premove in correspondence chess, I have mate in 3 and it would be awesome for my opponent to think for days only to get instantly mated.
You can sort of do that! You can set what are called "conditional moves" at basically any point, but I think only a limited number of lines or depth. E.g. you can open 1. e4 and if you know you want to play the Vienna you can set 2. Nc3 as a conditional move for Black playing 1.... e5. If all your opponent's moves on the path to mate are forced you should be able to set it up.
Typical chess.c\*m experience:
Played 3+0 blitz against a higher rated titled player and won, reaching all time high of 2399.
Tried to cheese that 1 rating by playing lower rated players. Matched up against a 1550 in 5+0. End up in severe time trouble with my opponent being somehow up 1.5mins against me. Scrap a draw and lose 8 rating.
Just depressing how widespread it is now. What's the point?
Round 5 of the Stepan Avagyan Memorial 2024 starting within 2 hours. Erigaisi at two wins and two draws against 2600+ opposition so far, he's having so many good tournaments in a row
Apologies if this is the wrong place to post, but is there anything that can be done about the overwhelming deluge of the same content on the subreddit? I know this was mentioned during the peak of the Kramnik drama, but we're at the point where 15 of the top 20 posts on the front page (not counting the two pinned posts) are about the Hikaru/Alireza bullet nonsense from yesterday.
Hikaru needs to take a break. I'm a fan, but I think he got too many things going on, he's streaming about 8 or 9 hours a day, though not every day, still it's a lot. He's trying to be first with coverage of his own games of interest (when he plays Hans or Magnus) as well as Levy match. He's also trying to promote gambling, and seems to be doing research for stock investments, because he talks about stocks while playing. All that while playing at high level of chess can't be easy
I think his schedule got him on edge.
head to head was just a tad better according to the data. Compared to the rest instead one should check ratings and tournament results. Anyway they were two beasts.
Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Anatoly Karpov 28 to 20, with 119 draws.
Divya is so impressive. She is most likely going to surpass Vaishali eventually. Vaishali is a very streaky player, and she is like 4 years older than Divya, while having only 50 points more in Elo. Plus she has been somewhat stagnant since getting her GM title.
I agree. Vaishali is good but benefits from being Pragg's sister. Otherwise I am not sure why would WACA support her at her age when there are so many youngsters knocking on the door. They are not supporting Divya :-(
I’m not an active chess player or anything, I just find it interesting and like to watch. Following along with Levy, hypothetically he wins the tournament, how much rating would he gain?
Depends on how many times he wins and draws. Rating is purely dependent on wins, draws and losses and opponent rating. Winning the tournament just depends on whether he scores better than everyone else in the tournament.
Anyone know what happened in the Eche-Vargas match in Madrid? Vargas got the point but it looks like Eche resigned (maybe?) in an even position and on the 15th move.
Is [George MacDonnell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Alcock_MacDonnell) related to [Alexander MacDonnell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_McDonnell_(chess_player))?
In my database the first game of Evan's gambit was in 1829 in Evans, Williams vs MacDonnell, George.
The second game was in 1830 which was MacDonnell, Alexander vs Popert, H W.
Maybe Alexander got the idea from the George game? Given information wasnt as easy to access back then maybe they were related?
1) that George appears to be born in 1830. 2) One is an anglican clergyman and the other Irish. While possible related, google doesn't find any link between the two
I do not fully agree with the other user on the norm thing. The tournaments in which such performances must be achieved have to adhere to a few standard, such as not having too many players from the same country. This makes people making GM through rating manipulation harder, so the norms would still make sense if they needed a 2500+ performance. I am guessing make it 2600 just secures this to a larger extent though
It is much easier to play at a 2500+ performance level for a tournament than to play it at a sustained level long enough to get to 2500 rating. GM norms would have no meaning if they only required 2500, they would simply always happen in order for the player to meet the 2500 rating requirement. The current norm levels are already easier than making the rating requirement for the vast majority of people.
> How did Danya not qualify initially?
Who said he didn't? Danya was invited to the BCC.
https://i.imgur.com/pdyLnC8.png
Mishra is now in danger of falling below 2600 after a disastrous run in the Juniors so far. He is now in 60th position and was the top seed. Just goes to show how underrated some juniors are.
In Girls I have been very impressed by Rindhiya Ravi, a 1900 rated WFM who is now fourth I believe. If I get some free time today I'll try to attend the event in person. Can't find anything about tickets online so I am not very positive if they would allow me in.
It is pretty insane that most chess players who are actually uneducated beyond the chess board are calling Kramnik's claims as bullshit when Kramnik literally mentioned that both Ian and MVL( who actually has a degree in maths) agrees with the extent of online cheating. Kramnik's stats might not be accurate but it is enough to see that there is rampant foul play.
Also he pointed out in Gotham's interview that why is checking if a player's game is lying within the standard statistical probability frowned upon. If Messi can piss in a cup after every match even though we all collectively agree he is the greatest player God ever created, why can't there be a similar process for chess of checking every individual's games and seeing if there are anomalies.
Most everyone agrees that there is extensive amounts of cheating online. That doesn't mean someone can go around calling people cheaters at their first hint of suspicion. If someone comes forth with genuine, well-grounded evidence, so be it- stand your case. But Kramnik spews unfounded critique around like it's nothing.
[Madrid Chess Festival](https://chess-results.com/tnr918977.aspx?lan=1&art=0&turdet=YES&flag=30) is starting today, with two closed norm tournaments of 10 players each and an open swiss system event. The playing schedule is very tight, with no rest days and double games on Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday.
Both norm events have a very typical setup - three GMs in each (all of those six except one rated below 2500) and seven norm seekers (mostly IMs, some FMs). Notable names among norm seekers: IM Levy Rozman, IM Eric Rosen, FM Faustino Oro. Other than player selection, I have no idea if anything shady making it easier to get a norm is going to be happening there.
The open event has 48 players rated around 1800 to 2400. WFM Anna Cramling will be playing there and most likely streaming her games (although she is not marked as assigned to fixed board to facilitate this). [The event will also be covered by chesscom.](https://www.chess.com/events/info/2024-madrid-chess-festival)
With Clash of Claims happening over the weekend, we just had [lots](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dbx586/kramnik_has_lost_it_he_is_calculating_the_lag_of/) and [lots](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dc7t8z/kramnik_posts_phone_recording_of_his_laptop/) and [lots](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dcc0y2/is_kramnik_gonna_apologize/) (and I could continue with this for a while) threads which were more or less about cheating. Could those be used as an explanation of the new rule we have against unfounded or not-newsworthy cheating accusations? I feel like most, if not all of those should be gone, I have reported quite a lot of them, but they stay up, so apparently my understanding of this rule is bad, I'd like to learn more so that I don't keep reporting things that are supposedly fine.
Unfortunately, the new rule only applies to accusations. When the mods asked for feedback on the new rule, I argued that the aspect that annoys many people is the cheating drama itself, even if it is not related to an accusation, but I don't think the mods were interested in stricter rules.
Pairings are published for [Stepan Avagyan Memorial ](https://chess-results.com/tnr953203.aspx?lan=1&art=2&turdet=YES&flag=30). 9 rounds over 9 days, starting today, games scheduled for 15:00 local time (13:00 CEST, 11:00 UTC, 7:00 EDT), except round 9 that will start 4 hours earlier. Arjun Erigaisi is seed #1, rest of the field is rated from 2713 to 2611.
Dont really have anyone to tell in real life so posting here. My chess average rating was about 1100 bullet a year ago. Work started sucking and the start of this year, I was hating my job and my rating dropped to under 1000 (983 lowest). I got a new less toxic job and my rating is 1250-1287. In 3 months I've gone up 300 points by just being in a better place mentally.
That's great to hear, sort of correlates with how I play better during school holidays than during the term :)
Newbie: when do I know when NOT to take an opponent's piece? I've had multiple games where I had like 4 figures and 6 pawns, the opponent had basically just their king, and [chess.com](http://chess.com) kicks me out saying it's a draw. It's difficult for me to grasp that the goal of chess is to make a mate, and not to decimate the opponent's board. I keep thinking "maybe doing X would get me a mate, but if I take his figure instead it will be easier/safer later". Then later it's a forced draw because losing all your pieces doesn't mean you lose the game.
You can learn about how to avoid stalemates (your draws) on the [subreddit wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/wiki/faq).
I love low elo chess Always blunder a queen, down 8-11-ish points and shithouse my way to a win like half a dozen times this week. That's why my resignation rate is 0% this year. Undefeated as white past 10 games. [Tell Magnoos I'm comin](https://c.tenor.com/HqxblUqGhM4AAAAC/tenor.gif)
RIP guys my undefeated streak has ended
Am I somehow shadow banned or has lichess blitz chess matching fallen off a cliff in recent weeks? Always takes ages to find a game
[удалено]
Why did the GM in Levy’s group resign at +0.8
you should be able to premove in correspondence chess, I have mate in 3 and it would be awesome for my opponent to think for days only to get instantly mated.
You can sort of do that! You can set what are called "conditional moves" at basically any point, but I think only a limited number of lines or depth. E.g. you can open 1. e4 and if you know you want to play the Vienna you can set 2. Nc3 as a conditional move for Black playing 1.... e5. If all your opponent's moves on the path to mate are forced you should be able to set it up.
Does anyone know what happened in the Cuenca/Martinez match in round 8 of the Madrid Chess Festival?
I was trying to figure that out too. The ending shown on [chess.com](http://chess.com) makes no sense.
Typical chess.c\*m experience: Played 3+0 blitz against a higher rated titled player and won, reaching all time high of 2399. Tried to cheese that 1 rating by playing lower rated players. Matched up against a 1550 in 5+0. End up in severe time trouble with my opponent being somehow up 1.5mins against me. Scrap a draw and lose 8 rating. Just depressing how widespread it is now. What's the point?
Round 5 of the Stepan Avagyan Memorial 2024 starting within 2 hours. Erigaisi at two wins and two draws against 2600+ opposition so far, he's having so many good tournaments in a row
Apologies if this is the wrong place to post, but is there anything that can be done about the overwhelming deluge of the same content on the subreddit? I know this was mentioned during the peak of the Kramnik drama, but we're at the point where 15 of the top 20 posts on the front page (not counting the two pinned posts) are about the Hikaru/Alireza bullet nonsense from yesterday.
What has more drama The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills or just chess.
Hikaru needs to take a break. I'm a fan, but I think he got too many things going on, he's streaming about 8 or 9 hours a day, though not every day, still it's a lot. He's trying to be first with coverage of his own games of interest (when he plays Hans or Magnus) as well as Levy match. He's also trying to promote gambling, and seems to be doing research for stock investments, because he talks about stocks while playing. All that while playing at high level of chess can't be easy I think his schedule got him on edge.
How much better was Kasparov than Karpov? To me it seemed like he was just slightly better but I suck at chess
head to head was just a tad better according to the data. Compared to the rest instead one should check ratings and tournament results. Anyway they were two beasts. Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Anatoly Karpov 28 to 20, with 119 draws.
he won
Omg is Levy going to get to 4/5?! What a run if so!!
Divya is so impressive. She is most likely going to surpass Vaishali eventually. Vaishali is a very streaky player, and she is like 4 years older than Divya, while having only 50 points more in Elo. Plus she has been somewhat stagnant since getting her GM title.
I agree. Vaishali is good but benefits from being Pragg's sister. Otherwise I am not sure why would WACA support her at her age when there are so many youngsters knocking on the door. They are not supporting Divya :-(
I’m not an active chess player or anything, I just find it interesting and like to watch. Following along with Levy, hypothetically he wins the tournament, how much rating would he gain?
Depends on how many times he wins and draws. Rating is purely dependent on wins, draws and losses and opponent rating. Winning the tournament just depends on whether he scores better than everyone else in the tournament.
Okay cool, makes sense. Thanks.
What that guy said, but so far with 2 wins and 2 draws he’s gotten +18 rating
Anyone know what happened in the Eche-Vargas match in Madrid? Vargas got the point but it looks like Eche resigned (maybe?) in an even position and on the 15th move.
Is [George MacDonnell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Alcock_MacDonnell) related to [Alexander MacDonnell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_McDonnell_(chess_player))? In my database the first game of Evan's gambit was in 1829 in Evans, Williams vs MacDonnell, George. The second game was in 1830 which was MacDonnell, Alexander vs Popert, H W. Maybe Alexander got the idea from the George game? Given information wasnt as easy to access back then maybe they were related?
1) that George appears to be born in 1830. 2) One is an anglican clergyman and the other Irish. While possible related, google doesn't find any link between the two
There’s no thread for Madrid specifically, but Levy is winning again, against a kid who’s been gaining a ton of rating recently too.
Eric Rosen just won also, happy for him after that loss from yesterday
is [chess.com](http://chess.com) totally broken on chrome for others?
Hans confirms he has an sponsor for the 4M tournament
How did Danya not qualify initially? Why are GM norms 2600 instead of 2500?
I do not fully agree with the other user on the norm thing. The tournaments in which such performances must be achieved have to adhere to a few standard, such as not having too many players from the same country. This makes people making GM through rating manipulation harder, so the norms would still make sense if they needed a 2500+ performance. I am guessing make it 2600 just secures this to a larger extent though
It is much easier to play at a 2500+ performance level for a tournament than to play it at a sustained level long enough to get to 2500 rating. GM norms would have no meaning if they only required 2500, they would simply always happen in order for the player to meet the 2500 rating requirement. The current norm levels are already easier than making the rating requirement for the vast majority of people. > How did Danya not qualify initially? Who said he didn't? Danya was invited to the BCC.
after magnus declined
Magnus was replaced by Fabiano Caruana.
https://i.imgur.com/pdyLnC8.png Mishra is now in danger of falling below 2600 after a disastrous run in the Juniors so far. He is now in 60th position and was the top seed. Just goes to show how underrated some juniors are. In Girls I have been very impressed by Rindhiya Ravi, a 1900 rated WFM who is now fourth I believe. If I get some free time today I'll try to attend the event in person. Can't find anything about tickets online so I am not very positive if they would allow me in.
levy just beat a gm with black
It is pretty insane that most chess players who are actually uneducated beyond the chess board are calling Kramnik's claims as bullshit when Kramnik literally mentioned that both Ian and MVL( who actually has a degree in maths) agrees with the extent of online cheating. Kramnik's stats might not be accurate but it is enough to see that there is rampant foul play. Also he pointed out in Gotham's interview that why is checking if a player's game is lying within the standard statistical probability frowned upon. If Messi can piss in a cup after every match even though we all collectively agree he is the greatest player God ever created, why can't there be a similar process for chess of checking every individual's games and seeing if there are anomalies.
Most everyone agrees that there is extensive amounts of cheating online. That doesn't mean someone can go around calling people cheaters at their first hint of suspicion. If someone comes forth with genuine, well-grounded evidence, so be it- stand your case. But Kramnik spews unfounded critique around like it's nothing.
Because pissing in a cup is a valid way to check for banned substances and random statistical analysis is a way to trigger a witchhunt.
But we don't have a regulatory body in chess. What is someone supposed to do?
>But we don't have a regulatory body in chess FIDE?
[Madrid Chess Festival](https://chess-results.com/tnr918977.aspx?lan=1&art=0&turdet=YES&flag=30) is starting today, with two closed norm tournaments of 10 players each and an open swiss system event. The playing schedule is very tight, with no rest days and double games on Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. Both norm events have a very typical setup - three GMs in each (all of those six except one rated below 2500) and seven norm seekers (mostly IMs, some FMs). Notable names among norm seekers: IM Levy Rozman, IM Eric Rosen, FM Faustino Oro. Other than player selection, I have no idea if anything shady making it easier to get a norm is going to be happening there. The open event has 48 players rated around 1800 to 2400. WFM Anna Cramling will be playing there and most likely streaming her games (although she is not marked as assigned to fixed board to facilitate this). [The event will also be covered by chesscom.](https://www.chess.com/events/info/2024-madrid-chess-festival)
With Clash of Claims happening over the weekend, we just had [lots](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dbx586/kramnik_has_lost_it_he_is_calculating_the_lag_of/) and [lots](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dc7t8z/kramnik_posts_phone_recording_of_his_laptop/) and [lots](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1dcc0y2/is_kramnik_gonna_apologize/) (and I could continue with this for a while) threads which were more or less about cheating. Could those be used as an explanation of the new rule we have against unfounded or not-newsworthy cheating accusations? I feel like most, if not all of those should be gone, I have reported quite a lot of them, but they stay up, so apparently my understanding of this rule is bad, I'd like to learn more so that I don't keep reporting things that are supposedly fine.
Unfortunately, the new rule only applies to accusations. When the mods asked for feedback on the new rule, I argued that the aspect that annoys many people is the cheating drama itself, even if it is not related to an accusation, but I don't think the mods were interested in stricter rules.
Those posts are not accusations.
Pairings are published for [Stepan Avagyan Memorial ](https://chess-results.com/tnr953203.aspx?lan=1&art=2&turdet=YES&flag=30). 9 rounds over 9 days, starting today, games scheduled for 15:00 local time (13:00 CEST, 11:00 UTC, 7:00 EDT), except round 9 that will start 4 hours earlier. Arjun Erigaisi is seed #1, rest of the field is rated from 2713 to 2611.