A lot of people say that I suck at chess due to lack of confidence, and that a lack of confidence causes one to play poorly. I think that is all crap. Why? Because caution, self-doubt, seems to be the only way to play well at chess and avoid blunders. For example, take two illustrative examples of games in another site I was playing. One game, I was down a whole exchange. Then I find a way to win the exchange back with a brilliant sacrefice! Suddenly, it's even material, but he has two groups of isolated doubled up pawns. Suddenly, I'm riding high, thinking all smug of myself, so I move in the next game.
Of course, in the game I tried to trade queens at all cost, and is so doing, it cost me the rook back and thus the game. Very frustrating feeling to be down, then up, then down again. To make matters worse, the move I made in the next game, my opponent was online and showed me that I blundered a bishop in the opening without even realizing! 🙄
So that's two botched up games, 50 ratings points in the drain, all because I got confident and excited about my play. I find this often happens to myself, I get confident/excited about the game, and in the moment of truth, I CHOKE.
Originally posted by Exiledwhat you mean is that you dont look at the whole board and all moves before moving. that's something different than confidence. If you are confident, you look at all moves and are able to decide what you think is the best move.
A lot of people say that I suck at chess due to lack of confidence, and that a lack of confidence causes one to play poorly. I think that is all crap. Why? Because caution, self-doubt, seems to be the only way to play well at chess and avoid blunders. For example, take two illustrative examples of games in another site I was playing. One game, I was down a wh ...[text shortened]... happens to myself, I get confident/excited about the game, and in the moment of truth, I CHOKE.
Originally posted by Exiledconfidence doesn't mean you'd be careless when playing..it's knowing that you can beat the other guy...it helps a lot...caution is always a good trait when playing, but then, some of the best/brilliant moves in chess are executed when one is not afraid to take risks...
A lot of people say that I suck at chess due to lack of confidence, and that a lack of confidence causes one to play poorly. I think that is all crap. Why? Because caution, self-doubt, seems to be the only way to play well at chess and avoid blunders. For example, take two illustrative examples of games in another site I was playing. One game, I was down a wh ...[text shortened]... happens to myself, I get confident/excited about the game, and in the moment of truth, I CHOKE.
Well, whenever I am not confident, I tend to be more careful, like, "Oh, I know I suck, so I better make sure 12 times this move I have in mind doesn't suck, and check over and over", it's effective to a degree, but when I am confident, I'm like, "wow, I'm improving, time to wallop him with a brilliant kingside attack!" and then I get walloped in turn. Maybe that's why I'm such a streaky player, often times I win like 15 games in a row against good players, and I know a storm is gonna come baring down, I'll lose maybe 3 games to 1300 rated players, and it's back to reality! LOL!
My play was so streaky up/down as mateulose, that a few people accused me of engine using.
well, i am always confident when i play...i like taking control of my games, so you'd see me giving up pieces just to get advantage of the board...at times it may look flawed, or blunders, but knowing that i am doing the right thing and believing i have the advantage even with a piece down, i still manage to win most games...confidence shows when your playing, and your opponent can sense it, that's when they become too careful and lose to you...
Originally posted by nightwing05Isn't that called overconfidence?
well, i am always confident when i play...i like taking control of my games, so you'd see me giving up pieces just to get advantage of the board...at times it may look flawed, or blunders, but knowing that i am doing the right thing and believing i have the advantage even with a piece down, i still manage to win most games...confidence shows when your playing, and your opponent can sense it, that's when they become too careful and lose to you...
Maybe not confidence is the most important thing, but optimism certainly helps. Nimzowitsch said that being able to be happy about the smallest advantages is one of the greatest assets. If you are tense and keyed-up to the limit unless you have a forced win in sight, then you will probably make mistakes. For example, it is very helpful to be confident that your solid center, or dark-square control, is giving you a comfortable game. If you know that your opponent is slightly worse, then chances are this will become increasingly evident as the game progresses, and they will crack under the pressure instead of you.
You're right, there is not always a difference; they may be synonymous in some contexts. But I am using optimism in the sense of hopefulness, which comes from an objective assessment of one's position, in contradistinction to confidence in the sense of certainty and especially self-certainty.
Originally posted by ExiledPoint to me where in the TOS it allows for creating a new account if your old one is banned.
The mateulose account is inactive and I cannot even access it you TROLL.
It says "do not create more than one account" in quite simple terms. Even someone with your supposed disability can read that.
Originally posted by XanthosNZWell, seeing that account can never be used and should simply be deleted due to inactivity, I don't see what's the point of this argument other then to troll. And you better watch what you wish for, a few of your "friends" at Forum Wars would technicly get AXED with your ruling and it's already well known, Mr. Court Jester.
Point to me where in the TOS it allows for creating a new account if your old one is banned.
It says "do not create more than one account" in quite simple terms. Even someone with your supposed disability can read that.