From | Message | ||
---|---|---|---|
|
![]() Have a narrow rating variation, many times within a 50 point range. They also tend to not go above 100 point rating thresholds. Reason: they win faster when they can stay in lower ratings areas usually in the 1500s. Also, many have “unusual” patterns in their ratings history. Many cheaters are in the 1500s. This is the average rating at GK, more opponents and poorer machines (cheaper) have trouble winning quickly above 1900. Have a team rating close to or higher than their regular rating. Because they throw non-team/tournament games and use machines for team/tournament games. Does anyone have any others? |
||
|
![]() They tend to win (or place) in GK Tournaments. |
||
|
![]() Smear the opponent's chess piece with a poison with the intention to kill. |
||
|
![]() |
||
wasatch 20-Aug-24, 08:10 |
![]() |
||
|
![]() |
||
|
![]() Manipulating one's rating by intentionally losing "unimportant" games is a way to keep one's rating down in order to draw weaker opponents in team games or tournament games. It is not foolproof, but it is a way to gain a significant advantage in the games the rating manipulator cares about the most. Are there many players who combine these methods? A player can gain a significant advantage in team games or tournament games through rating manipulation alone, without ever using an engine. |
||
|
![]() |
||
|
![]() Yes, I treasure the experience of finding that elusive move hiding itself amidst pieces and squares, like a wild stallion in the hills camouflaging himself amidst brush and trees, just waiting to be coaxed out. Yet the struggle involves two of us, harnessing phantasies of our minds and hopes of our hearts. Ours is a game for two, not a puzzle for one. A game of counterplay, whose evolving position is to be imagined, played, and ridden to where it takes us -- like that camouflaged bronco. This harnessing of brains, and will, and desire can make our game a masterpiece that we as two fighting artists create together. For a game of chess can be a living work of art as well as a martial art. * I play to have fun; also, for understanding. I play chess to understand life. I play winning chess to understand the importance of taking the initiative, playing for the future of the position, of investing for the future (=sacrificing), actively defending the fortress, of taking action when having the advantage (you can only coast one way: downhill), always maintaining a credible threat, and knowing that the latent energy of a dynamic future will always trump a current, static structure. I play to understand this importance not only in chess, but in life. Otherwise chess is merely a game; for me as an adult, chess is a Rosetta Stone that often illuminates life, especially those aspects of life that involve Competition-- and they are everywhere around us, affecting all opportunities that call to us. So my moves are based on hopes, plans, judgment, and taking risks; in other words, not on tactics but on dreams. |
||
|
![]() I learned the game at 8 years old, and I’m old enough to witness the Bobby Fisher craziness. I’m a gamer at heart, but find I really need chess to keep my mind sharper at my tender age of 75. So, using a machine entirely runs counter to that. |
||
bluenoser 06-Oct-24, 08:16 |
![]() |