19 Oct 07
Originally posted by SquelchbelchIt would be nice if they had a 3d board available for play here. That would probably help those that have a problem with blunders after playing with 2d screen.
This is the way not to play an 1800 rated OTB if your own rating is around 1500:
[Event "Club Championship"]
[Site "Crawley Chess Club"]
[Date "18.10.2007"]
[White "S. Gutta"]
[Black "S. Collyer"]
[Time Control 42 in 90]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C44"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Nxe5 O-O 6.Nxc6 dxc6
7.d3 Bxf2+ 8.Kxf2 Ng4+ 9. ...[text shortened]... tions OTB similar to those in your CC games but alas, OTB is a different game!
19 Oct 07
This site has really helped me out, strength-wise. I had not played at all for several years, then played for one year here and finally entered an OTB tournament last week. Played credibly against two 2100s, beat a 1986 and a c-player in that tournament. My last USCF rating was 1699 and I scored an invite to the closed state championship, even though my rating is lower than normally allowed. I'm not bragging, but giving the credit to this site, and my esteemed opponents here. CC is so much more useful for improvement, and blitz seems to be wasted time, at least for me.
19 Oct 07
Originally posted by wargamer66Agreed.
...CC is so much more useful for improvement, and blitz seems to be wasted time, at least for me.
For intermediates who want to improve their OTB play I think playing a lot of blitz is a big mistake.
Blitz is really about superficial analysis, gut instinct & who makes the least (or second from last!) mistakes.
Much better is spending that valuable time tactics training.
19 Oct 07
Originally posted by SquelchbelchSee the statment below about blitzing on ICC and the following comment froma GM:
Agreed.
For intermediates who want to improve their OTB play I think playing a lot of blitz is a big mistake.
Blitz is really about superficial analysis, gut instinct & who makes the least (or second from last!) mistakes.
Much better is spending that valuable time tactics training.
- Too much speed chess on ICC really hurt my long game.
- Yes, it is well known that too much speed chess makes for superficial judgements and sloppy analysing!
20 Oct 07
Originally posted by Dragon FireThanks everyone... I don't wish to overstate the issue here. I don't think that RHP is ruining me for OTB chess or anything like that. (My openings seem to be improving, for one thing.) For me, I think the problem is all in the eye. It's a bit like what happened a few years back when someone thought it would be a larf to get me a Simpsons-themed set... I played one game with it (out of a sense of obligation, really), and it was a gong-show... "Ohh right... That's a Bishop.. My bad.," etc. 🙂
My sole purpose in being here is to improve my OTB play so I hope you are wrong...
I'm feeling good about the set-er-up-on-a-real-board solution for now. I'll try that other RHP set as well, although I'm a big fan of 'Alpha'... 🙂
20 Oct 07
Originally posted by ExumaI believe that this, more than the time controls, is what makes CC and OTB the most different.
I find that using the analyze board function really decreases my over the board calculation ability, I start wanting a little side board to try out variations...
OTB players have to calculate in their heads in a shorter amount of time, while CC players get to play around with different lines, refer to books/databases, and take their sweet time doing it...
surely this is evidence that OTB players are superior to their CC counterparts?
20 Oct 07
Originally posted by rubberjaw30objection, your honor.
I believe that this, more than the time controls, is what makes CC and OTB the most different.
OTB players have to calculate in their heads in a shorter amount of time, while CC players get to play around with different lines, refer to books/databases, and take their sweet time doing it...
surely this is evidence that OTB players are superior to their CC counterparts?
1. OTB players don't play games at the same level as CC players (corresponding to the time diff.)
2. CC players, contrary to popular opinion, are often better than their OTB counterparts in the opening. Part of this is due to spending more time in databases and therefore having longer to learn it.
3. CC players often have a better understanding of positional play. They need to in order to play at such a high level.
4. CC players are sometimes better tactically... many having studied lines such as the Traxler and KG (like me 🙂) extensively.
My personal conclusion is that a CC player would make a better OTB player than an OTB player would make CC.
20 Oct 07
Originally posted by ih8sensoverruled council:
objection, your honor.
1. OTB players don't play games at the same level as CC players (corresponding to the time diff.)
2. CC players, contrary to popular opinion, are often better than their OTB counterparts in the opening. Part of this is due to spending more time in databases and therefore having longer to learn it.
3. CC players often have a bett ...[text shortened]... conclusion is that a CC player would make a better OTB player than an OTB player would make CC.
OTB players are more used to thinking on their feet than CC players are,,, who are surrounded by luxuries: multiple boards set up for analysis, databases, time, optional trips to the restroom and opportunity to sleep on a position, where OTB players must react to an opponent's complications immediately, CC players can think them out... "solve" them if you will, at their own leisure. And CC players wouldn't be more familiar with openings, since they don't HAVE to commit them to memory, as OTB players do.
20 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by rubberjaw30Objection again, your not so honorable chessness.
overruled council:
OTB players are more used to thinking on their feet than CC players are,,, who are surrounded by luxuries: multiple boards set up for analysis, databases, time, optional trips to the restroom and opportunity to sleep on a position, where OTB players must react to an opponent's complications immediately, CC players can think them out familiar with openings, since they don't HAVE to commit them to memory, as OTB players do.
1. The bathroom thing is totally unaplicable.. if you get distracted by your bowels you got issues...
2. Players do not need to react to complications perfectly, only quickly. CC players must play at a much higher level just to maintain the same rating an OTB player has. The quality of my OTB games vs. CC proves this.
This proves one thing in itself... CC players are the stronger ones. Does this neccesarily mean they are 'better' however?
The short answer is no... both types of play have their advantages and disadvantages.. I play both at about the same level and I can say for a certainty if I played CC like I do OTB I'd be rated about 1400 on here.
Both CC and OTB are very legitimate ways to play. Many prefer CC due to it's high quality results. On the other hand, OTB is often more respected due to its more competitive nature. Pick your poison if you like.
edit - oh and the opening thing.. I knew nothing about openings until I took up CC. That, and chat with others, leads me to believe that CC players are far more adept in the opening.
20 Oct 07
Originally posted by ih8sensok, council...
CC players must play at a much higher level just to maintain the same rating an OTB player has. The quality of my OTB games vs. CC proves this.
overruled, and may I remind you that you are in MY courtroom, and you will mind your manners or I'll hold you in contempt!
let's play a game, it's called: count the number of games Tal played in coorespondence chess. at zero, I believe I win! yay!
how many other "superior" CC games have you personally studied by the greats lately?
answer: none. The greats dedicate their time to OTB, where their minds can function at the necessary faster level. Where as a CC player has three days to stumble across a move 26 brilliancy, an OTB player has 30 minutes to find the same brilliancy. that means that CC players get 144 times as much time to find a move, sounds a little lopsided on the fairness of who's better, don't you say?
now, council, take your seat, and If I have to overrule one more of your objections, I'm going to hold you in contempt! is that CLEAR?!?!
😉 🙂 😉
20 Oct 07
1 edit
mhmm... contempt eh... you've been watching WAY too much TV.
... oh ... I almost forgot...
Your Honour.
or is it Honor... which one is the Canadian spelling.. i'm sick of these crazy Americans trying to take over the world.
edit- way to use the Tal card by the way... that's just cheap. Use my own hero against me.
20 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by ih8senswell, the Tal card was low, but effective...
mhmm... contempt eh... you've been watching WAY too much TV.
... oh ... I almost forgot...
Your Honour.
or is it Honor... which one is the Canadian spelling.. i'm sick of these crazy Americans trying to take over the world.
edit- way to use the Tal card by the way... that's just cheap. Use my own hero against me.
just like the tal-ster's playing style...
😀
and yes, we are trying to take over the world...
or at least...
take over all of your OIL!!!
mmmmm!!!
oil for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and supper!
love that oil!
recently, we've had to do some cover up operations to get some oil...
i.e. charity and giving food out...
in reality, we care not whether or not these people live...
just as long as their diplomats are happy and we get our OIL!!!
mmmm, love it!!
😉
yes, I was just now possessed by George W.'s inner soul, but I'm back to normal now, all is good 😉
and I AM honor, the MERRCUN way, that is...
and as a side note, we (americans) were here first...
Canada is basically a huge nation of Loyalist posterity...
traitors! yank sympathizers! etc.!
Edit: and this from the kid whose hero is an alcoholic/smoker/womanizer
I admire thee for admiring such a man!
20 Oct 07
Originally posted by ih8sensGotham City's in Canada for serious?!?!
.. we also play hockey. Meaning each and every 'true' Canadian has a head injury... you want our oil it's yours, just get Bettman the hell out of there.
and my hat's off to hockey...
here, there is an occassion discussion about whose sport is the toughest.
of course there's the moronic football (american football, that is) player who is entirely convinced that there is nothing tougher than "laying it all out on the gridiron"
Then some other kid will speak up and say that I'm the toughest in the group, because I play rugby.
Then I, without fail, make it known that I believe that hockey is by a long shot the toughest sport on earth...
Even if I could skate, I probably wouldn't have the balls to go out on some ice and skate around with a piece of solid hard-as-brick rubber flying towards my mouth at 100+ miles per hour.
20 Oct 07
Originally posted by rubberjaw30Consider yourself Recc'd
Gotham City's in Canada for serious?!?!
and my hat's off to hockey...
here, there is an occassion discussion about whose sport is the toughest.
of course there's the moronic football (american football, that is) player who is entirely convinced that there is nothing tougher than "laying it all out on the gridiron"
Then some other kid will speak up an ...[text shortened]... ith a piece of solid hard-as-brick rubber flying towards my mouth at 100+ miles per hour.
I totally agree... the game is fast, rough, dangerous, and yet beautifully finesse in a way no other sport can match. Reflexes must be sharp, fitness must be extreme, experience is key, finnese must be trained, accuracy must be instinctive, power must be unlimited.
Quite the game. Go Leafs Go.