EPTGenerally felt like a weird test. A few basic endgame problems and lots of queen sac mates that are very easy to spot if you've ever done any tactics problems. Very few non-forced decisions in complex positions.
The Chess Thread - Page 91
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Orome
Switzerland11984 Posts
Generally felt like a weird test. A few basic endgame problems and lots of queen sac mates that are very easy to spot if you've ever done any tactics problems. Very few non-forced decisions in complex positions. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
| ||
|
Mafe
Germany5966 Posts
| ||
|
don_kyuhote
3006 Posts
My USCF rating right now is 1687 haha. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On July 12 2017 19:43 don_kyuhote wrote: I got exactly 2200. My USCF rating right now is 1687 haha. How do your chess.com/lichess ratings compare to your USCF rating? | ||
|
don_kyuhote
3006 Posts
On July 12 2017 20:09 bardtown wrote: How do your chess.com/lichess ratings compare to your USCF rating? I'd say my rapid rating on chess.com is 200 higher than my USCF and blitz is 300 higher. Haven't played on lichess in a really long time, but I remember lichess rating being more inflated than chess.com | ||
|
Orome
Switzerland11984 Posts
On July 12 2017 20:09 bardtown wrote: How do your chess.com/lichess ratings compare to your USCF rating? If you're interested in how online and otb ratings correspond, here's a reasonable breakdown of chess.com vs FIDE. It's from 2013 so things might have shifted slightly since, but it should still give you a good general idea. https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/fide-ratings-vs-chesscom-ratings-explored | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On July 12 2017 10:55 Orome wrote: I semi-blitzed through, misclicked two answers and got 2206. I don't have an Elo, but I'm sure I'm not 2.2k. Would take the whole thing with a heavy grain of salt. Generally felt like a weird test. A few basic endgame problems and lots of queen sac mates that are very easy to spot if you've ever done any tactics problems. Very few non-forced decisions in complex positions. Got almost the same result (2209) and my real rating is probably 300 points below that. Way too many problems though. If the calibration was done with that many as well, I doubt all players took it seriously to the end. | ||
|
calgar
United States1277 Posts
| ||
|
Koromon
United States304 Posts
On September 08 2017 00:25 calgar wrote: Karjakin and Anand upset round 2. Lots of other favorites go to tiebreaks tomorrow (Krammy, Caruana, Aronian, Nakamura, So) Is Krammy supposed to be Kramnik? Didn't he advance? My personal bias says that Svidler could also be listed in favourites going to tie-breaks. | ||
|
calgar
United States1277 Posts
On September 08 2017 02:11 Koromon wrote: Yeah you're right he won yesterday so he advanced.Is Krammy supposed to be Kramnik? Didn't he advance? My personal bias says that Svidler could also be listed in favourites going to tie-breaks. | ||
|
don_kyuhote
3006 Posts
Aronian -MVL So - Ding Liren Kinda sucks that only one of Aronian/MVL gets a sure ticket to the candidates, but excited to see one of So or Ding making it. | ||
|
fishjie
United States1519 Posts
On July 12 2017 06:49 bardtown wrote: Has anybody tried the Elometer test? http://www.elometer.net/ Are the results massively inflated? Because I got ~1800 and I am really a trash ~1000 blitz player. thanks for linking! that was a ton of fun! but badly inflated. I got 1897, but my blitz rating on chess.com is only 1180 ish. But I answered as accurately as I could - that is if I didn't know the right solution to the puzzle I just played how I would normally play. Some of them I stared at a long time and was unable to arrive at anything good. I haven't played in a tournament since high school but if I'd have to guess maaaaybe I could be 1300? I just started playing chess again on chess.com app and the chess by post app (massively inflated ratings there too - some guys have 6000 lol - mine is 1800 lol), so we will see. I don't think my blitz rating is going anywhere I am garbage at it, but will try to get some longer games going on chess.com and see where my rating winds up. Its an interesting test but most of the positions were midgame tactics and endgame calculation. There weren't as many positional tests (or maybe there were none and I didn't see the tactic in the questions i thought were positional), and most of the time I lose in opening because I haven't memorized all that crap. So its not a good test because you have to get to those kind of winning positions in the first place.... | ||
|
Jan1997
Norway671 Posts
| ||
|
imBLIND
United States2626 Posts
| ||
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
| ||
|
Twinkle Toes
United States3605 Posts
He's been showing me the basics and I find the game stimulating enough, but I think I need a really need a big push to completely embrace the game and dedicate to it. Why is chess a great game and why should I strive to know it better and be good/great at it? Thanks guys. | ||
|
fishjie
United States1519 Posts
I'm getting better at not losing to this crap, but its still frustrating. Is practicing the tactics on chess.com a good way to do this, or perhaps doing a checklist before making a move to not do stupid blunders? Or just a matter of grinding out a few hundred more games? Or worse, when people play weird crappy openings like h4, g4, or some other garbage that should never ever win, or e4 followed by queen h5. I have to stop and take precious seconds to think about what to do because they're not following a standard opening. Even if I get better position I lose in time pressure later. according to chess books a move like 1.h4 is awful, but I have no idea how to punish. Doing standard developing moves doesn't seem like it punishes enough, shouldn't 1.h4 be a free win for black? | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On October 05 2017 04:44 fishjie wrote: Question, I managed to finally break into 1200s on blitz. Want to get higher but I find I lose most of my games due to stupidity, oftentimes when I am ahead but under time pressure. Example, opponent pushes a pawn to do a discovered attack on my pieces and I blunder and lose the piece. Or if they have a knight outpost they ruin me and I get forked/mated under time pressure - so much so that now I often exchange bishop for knight even in endgames where the bishop is superior. I would never lose to this crap in a correspondence game but under blitz I do dumb stuff like this too frequently. I'm getting better at not losing to this crap, but its still frustrating. Is practicing the tactics on chess.com a good way to do this, or perhaps doing a checklist before making a move to not do stupid blunders? Or just a matter of grinding out a few hundred more games? Or worse, when people play weird crappy openings like h4, g4, or some other garbage that should never ever win, or e4 followed by queen h5. I have to stop and take precious seconds to think about what to do because they're not following a standard opening. Even if I get better position I lose in time pressure later. according to chess books a move like 1.h4 is awful, but I have no idea how to punish. Doing standard developing moves doesn't seem like it punishes enough, shouldn't 1.h4 be a free win for black? Bad openings are bad, but as long as they don't hand you material for free they won't be much worse and it's certainly not a free win especially in blitz. Even opening 1.f3 would only puts them at most a pawn down. It's not like Starcraft where a bad opening can lose you the game outright. Also remember that if you're getting matched up with them they should win about half the times regardless of how bad their openings are-maybe if they played good openings rather than bad ones they'd be rated higher that's all. Trying to exploit their lack of development or center control while unexciting is the correct way to play. | ||
|
fishjie
United States1519 Posts
https://www.chess.com/live/game/2352709496 On move 21 i played qf5, but the chess.com app analysis says i should instead do 21 ... Nf5, 22 Q x h7, Rg6 to Rg7 23 Q x g7 Ok how in the hell is Q x g7 forced? Why can't she retreat back to h5? What obvious combo am I missing here. The analysis shows that my attack was in a winning position, but I wasted too much time trying to find a combo, panicked, and analysis shows that white could've won a ton of material against me because I blundered a lot. But white missed the opportunities too. Still very frustrating loss | ||
| ||
