A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Playing higher rated opponents



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 14th 16, 03:09 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Eliyahu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default Playing higher rated opponents

Bs"d

I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.

That is something for masochists, who enjoy losing. I'm not a masochist.

So I avoid higher rated opponents like the plague.

  #2  
Old September 17th 16, 05:08 PM
zarkoth zarkoth is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2016
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliyahu View Post
Bs"d

I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.

That is something for masochists, who enjoy losing. I'm not a masochist.

So I avoid higher rated opponents like the plague.

You have a point in being concerned playing better players than yourself.

But, on the other hand, if you only play lower rated players, how will you ever improve?

You need to strike some balance:

If you have a choice, try playing against players SLIGHTLY better than yourself - like 100 points better.

You have to challenge yourself a bit in order to bring out the best in you.

It's like going to the gym: in order to lift more weight, you have to slowly but surely accustom yourself to lift more and more.

You have to sweat to grow your (real) muscle or your chess muscle :-)
  #3  
Old September 19th 16, 08:13 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default Playing higher rated opponents

On Saturday, September 17, 2016 at 2:19:05 PM UTC-4, zarkoth wrote:
Eliyahu;376897 Wrote:
Bs"d

I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.

That is something for masochists, who enjoy losing. I'm not a
masochist.

So I avoid higher rated opponents like the plague.



You have a point in being concerned playing better players than
yourself.

But, on the other hand, if you only play lower rated players, how will
you ever improve?

You need to strike some balance:

If you have a choice, try playing against players SLIGHTLY better than
yourself - like 100 points better.

You have to challenge yourself a bit in order to bring out the best in
you.

It's like going to the gym: in order to lift more weight, you have to
slowly but surely accustom yourself to lift more and more.

You have to sweat to grow your (real) muscle or your chess muscle :-)




--
zarkoth


zarcoth, imo, offers good advice, but try 200 or 300 better. once you scalp one of them, you will be encouraged by your own attention to the game. phil
  #4  
Old September 23rd 16, 11:24 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Eliyahu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default Playing higher rated opponents

On Saturday, September 17, 2016 at 9:19:05 PM UTC+3, zarkoth wrote:
Eliyahu;376897 Wrote:
Bs"d

I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.

That is something for masochists, who enjoy losing. I'm not a
masochist.

So I avoid higher rated opponents like the plague.



You have a point in being concerned playing better players than
yourself.

But, on the other hand, if you only play lower rated players, how will
you ever improve?


Bs"d

But why would you want to improve? In order to get better, and beat the opponents.

But the problem is, unless you are the world champion, which is a kind of unlikely for me, there will always be people better then you.

And you want to improve, so you can beat your opponents. And because you want to improve you play better players, and lose most of the time.
And if you would actually improve, then what? Then you start playing even better players, so you keep on losing.
So because you want to win, you cause yourself to be the eternal loser.

I take a short cut, I only play lower rated players, and win most of the time.

So you are the eternal loser, and I'm the eternal winner.

So tell me, who is the smart one here?

  #5  
Old September 23rd 16, 07:18 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Chris F.A. Johnson[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Playing higher rated opponents

On 2016-09-23, Eliyahu wrote:
....
And you want to improve, so you can beat your opponents. And because you want to improve you play better players, and lose most of the time.
And if you would actually improve, then what? Then you start playing even better players, so you keep on losing.
So because you want to win, you cause yourself to be the eternal loser.

I take a short cut, I only play lower rated players, and win most of the time.

So you are the eternal loser, and I'm the eternal winner.

So tell me, who is the smart one here?


The smart one is the one whose game improves, rather than the one who
treads water, watching those who were formerly lower rated pass him
by.


--
Chris F.A. Johnson
  #6  
Old September 29th 16, 08:38 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default Playing higher rated opponents



So you are the eternal loser, and I'm the eternal winner.

So tell me, who is the smart one here?


Smarter?

The 1600 tyro or the 1900 improver who necessarily has found something beyond books, tricks and traps to enjoy?

Obviously if you think you are smart at 1600, then you will like to kick children of the game. If you are dissatisfied with being 1900 you will be a true student, and understand the game as an art and science.

Phil Innes
  #7  
Old October 7th 16, 02:52 AM
Radrook Radrook is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliyahu View Post
Bs"d

I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.

That is something for masochists, who enjoy losing. I'm not a masochist.

So I avoid higher rated opponents like the plague.
I tend to agree.
Slightly stronger players will allow you to win once in a while. But playing far stronger ones is an exercise in frustration.

My experience at The Internet Chess club is a case in point.
Having reached 1997 standard rating approx. 20 years ago I expected to move higher not lower.
However, suddenly and inexplicable the all the opponents I encountered began playing like experts and masters regardless of rating.
This dropped me t the 1700range for many years.

Then again suddenly and inexplicably all opponents, regardless of rating, began playing like masters.
This dropped me to the 1500 area.

I tested the chess computers there seeking affair level of competition and all played like grandmasters regardless of how low I went.
One recently permitted me to win two miserable points after a savage struggle in which it seemed to anticipate every plan I made.
It was rated only 1100. So my efforts to find a proper level of competition on ICC was systematically frustrated in that manner.

Why? Well, I guess one might suspect that one isn't wanted to go beyond a certain level.
Sometimes I was permitted to get enticingly close to the 1700 once more, but then the players again suddenly began playing like grandmasters regardless of rating. The only improvement I saw was when I mentioned this garbage here yesterday. Then suddenly the computers began playing at their rated levels and I easily beat them four times. Guess that the publicity caused something to happen.

However, if indeed I notice that the same garbage it starts again I will no longer play on ICC.

Last edited by Radrook : October 7th 16 at 05:17 PM.
  #8  
Old October 7th 16, 06:34 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
azigni
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Playing higher rated opponents

On Fri, 07 Oct 2016 03:52:05 +0200, Radrook wrote:

Eliyahu;376897 Wrote:
Bs"d

I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.


I would like to add...it all depends on ones reasons for playing chess.
Not every chess player aspires to be be a world class player. Not every
chess player wishes to play someone who could beat them.
  #9  
Old November 20th 16, 01:36 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Eliyahu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default Playing higher rated opponents

On Friday, October 7, 2016 at 8:34:23 PM UTC+3, azigni wrote:
On Fri, 07 Oct 2016 03:52:05 +0200, Radrook wrote:

Eliyahu;376897 Wrote:
Bs"d

I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.


I would like to add...it all depends on ones reasons for playing chess.
Not every chess player aspires to be be a world class player. Not every
chess player wishes to play someone who could beat them.


Bs"d

What I want, what every normal chess player wants, is WINNING!!

In order to achieve that goal, you can start learning very hard, read a lot of books, play higher rated players, and get your a.. kicked.

I prefer the shortcut, playing weaker players, and winning without effort.

But to each his own. Those who like to lose because they wanna get better in order to win, also have their place. If everybody did like me, I wouldn't have opponents anymore.


  #10  
Old November 26th 16, 12:40 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
The Horny Goat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 41
Default Playing higher rated opponents

On Sun, 20 Nov 2016 05:36:54 -0800 (PST), Eliyahu
wrote:

On Friday, October 7, 2016 at 8:34:23 PM UTC+3, azigni wrote:
On Fri, 07 Oct 2016 03:52:05 +0200, Radrook wrote:
I think it is very unwise to play higher rated opponents.

I would like to add...it all depends on ones reasons for playing chess.
Not every chess player aspires to be be a world class player. Not every
chess player wishes to play someone who could beat them.


Bs"d

What I want, what every normal chess player wants, is WINNING!!

In order to achieve that goal, you can start learning very hard, read a lot of books, play higher rated players, and get your a.. kicked.

I prefer the shortcut, playing weaker players, and winning without effort.

But to each his own. Those who like to lose because they wanna get better in order to win, also have their place. If everybody did like me, I wouldn't have opponents anymore.

My daughter played for awhile but gave it up as I let her win
occasionally to keep up her spirit but she was good enough to know
when the punches were being pulled. This would have been roughly 1750
vs 1100. I tried to get into the rudiments of analysis but she figured
it was going to take far too long to get the broad points down.

Which given the size of my library (which I haven't put nearly enough
time to master so it's at least as much a collection as a compilation
of assimilated chess knowledge) that's a real shame since it's big
enough and of high enough quality that a properrly motivated junior
could easily make master strength with enough time.

Moral: mastery at chess is one heckuva lot more than an ability to
appreciate quality in chess books and buy them!
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My highest Elo scalp on Playchess for far: beat a player rated 516points higher than me. raylopez99 rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 8 August 18th 10 10:17 PM
First Draft: Blue Book Encyclopedia of Chess samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 9 February 29th 08 03:55 PM
Should the USCF rate the Olympiads? Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 9 March 29th 06 11:52 PM
Should the USCF rate the Olympiads? Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 9 March 29th 06 11:52 PM
Why is a woman rated 1663 playing for the US title? Ray Gordon rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 1 March 10th 06 02:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.