GameKnot Forum
[ mod this thread ] << - < - > - >>
| From | Message |
pgroenborg
2/08/2008
05:00:21
[ report abuse ] |
 Subject: One Hundred!
Message:
In relation to the 7000 thread there was an ongoing sub-discussion about playing lower rated people.
Upon reaching the Sky-High number of ONE HUNDRED WINS (LOL), I have some comments on that.
First I think the debate in the other thread has summed it all up: 7000 wins is a magnificent achievement, end of story!
Now, I am a player betwixt and between. I am neither very good nor very bad.
After hitting the roof of my highest rating here, 1858, I got stuck thereabouts for a while before I slowly squandered downhill below 1800. I was in a no development period, and slightly put off about not being able to reach my goal of 1900.
So I started playing lower rated people here, when before that, my average oppponent rating was actually higher than my own, because I was trying to make my way upwards.
One of the first things that happened was, of course, that I lost to toivokerstenbeck in a position where I was sure to win on my extra pawns, except he played a tactical finesse on me! Well done, I underestimated the opponent and got what I deserved. :-)
But what I've found out about playing lower rated people here, is something I've known on a different level beforehand, but haven't articulated: Lower rated people love to play higher rated people.
I found out that that is precisely how I feel myself in my regular Chess Club where we have some discussions about which form the autumn Club turnament should have, there I vote for one big group where low can meet high etc. But some of the higher rated players find it tedious to have to play an opponent about a thousand rating points lower than themselves, whereas I like to give my utmost to a game against a player rated 500 points above me - and still loose...
But playing better opponents makes your own games better, if you take heed of the lessons given in the games, that is. Here on gameknot I myself have enjoyed playing better players, particularly I remember a game against Heinzkat that we called "The Knight on f7 fork game" because both of us made such a fork on the opponents rooks in that very same square!
Also I have noticed how gratefull some of the lower rated people are when you accept their challenge, "Thank you for playing me" etc. I get that a lot recently!
Well, this is a social community! It is not just another room for boosting a self centered ego. Let us not quarrel about some minor thing or another, let us play chess. Let us grow on each others knowledge of this brilliant game, and let's share.
|
tim_b
2/08/2008
05:40:31
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
I like the sentiments, pgroenborg!
I challenge a 2000+ player every now and then and more often than not they are very sporting and will at least accept an unrated challenge. I even came across a 2,150 guy who insisted that the game be rated. :)
|
ionadowman
2/08/2008
11:51:48
[ report abuse ] | Good on him...
Message:
... I think it only reasonable for the stronger player to put his rating on the line - just to give the lower ranked player something to play for. The exception would be if difference was such that a win would give the stronger player a 0 increase in rating. That's 'hiding to nothing' country, and there's always the chance of an inadvertent timeout (I'm sure I've picked up the odd win through that cause..).
And if you happen to hit someone on the make still with a provisional rating: too bad!
;-)
|
pgroenborg
2/09/2008
06:59:33
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
He wasn't really lower rated when we started, but I think I have run up against "someone on the make", 63 wins, zero losses and no draws, he's currently playing 56 games, ouch.
Anyway I never played an unrated game here, so I have had quite a few games with the chance to win one rating point and loose 19. I never understood the point of unrated games...
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|
|  |
