09 Sep 07
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexSometimes we just take our time against better opponents and think more.
It seems to be more 1400 players, it would be harder to know it if an 1800 player was using a computer as the quality of their play tends to be of a higher standard in the first place. But when a 1400 player plays a game completely free of mistake and wins fairly easily it seems pretty suspect.
Like this one time I played a guy called bishop of m ...[text shortened]... games against me but lost some other games in the same tournament with some horrendous mistakes
Othertimes we wonder about the true ability of the 1700+ players when we beat the easily 😉
I have beaten quite a a few 1700+ players and a couple of 1900+ but would consider myself an average joe 1350/1450 player.
We do occasionally get it right 🙂
09 Sep 07
Undefeated may be a sign, but as a newbie here, when your opponents are making 3-4 queen moves in the first 7 moves, it isn't a computer talking.
A very good indication is when someone consistently makes deep, correct tactical moves. This is more common naturally in correspondence chess where thinking time is longer, but as Kasparov put it, in some positions, computers play like God.
So, if Steinitz could give move and pawn to God, does that mean he would kick Fritz's butt?
09 Sep 07
Originally posted by buddy2Exactly!!
In order to get to 2000+ a cheater has to climb over lots of lower rated players so we all have to be on guard for the rats.
This is said over and over again in these forums - they only get NOTICED as cheaters when they get higher ratings. But I guarantee there are many lower rated cheaters here.ðŸ˜
09 Sep 07
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexBishop of Malburg played very well in 2 games against me doing well enough tp draw one of them but his draw was down more to me making a mistake rather than his brilliant play.
It seems to be more 1400 players, it would be harder to know it if an 1800 player was using a computer as the quality of their play tends to be of a higher standard in the first place. But when a 1400 player plays a game completely free of mistake and wins fairly easily it seems pretty suspect.
Like this one time I played a guy called bishop of m ...[text shortened]... games against me but lost some other games in the same tournament with some horrendous mistakes
When a 1500 plays a 2000 2 things often happen
(1) the 1500 player raises their game; and
(2) the 2000 player gets over confident and makes a mistake.
This is more common than you realise. I would find little point in a 1500 only using an engine against a 2000 as they would be caught quite easily when an analysis of their game shows totally different playing styles.
10 Sep 07
Originally posted by gambit05And did you notice this guy won 5 games in 25 minutes against jose345 the two-move man?
Some people are too stupid: User 203729