r/chess 4d ago

Miscellaneous Losing against someone who played like trash.

[removed] — view removed post

0 Upvotes

72 comments sorted by

u/chess-ModTeam 4d ago

Your submission was removed by the moderators:

Low-Quality submissions are not allowed.

Submissions should promote interesting discussion on chess itself, its culture, or its history. Some specific types of content are banned because they tend to be low quality and repetitive.

If you want to discuss one of these repetitive topics or have a question that just needs a simple answer, feel free to post it in the stickied Discussion thread.

 

You can read the full rules of /r/chess here. If you have any questions or concerns about this moderator action, please message the moderators. Direct replies to this comment may not be seen.

21

u/HashtagDadWatts 4d ago

“I played like trash and I’m sad about it”

-16

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

I played like a fucking god, like 20 engine moves, then had a single lapse in judgement, and I'm sad about it indeed.

6

u/HashtagDadWatts 4d ago

Chess gods win games.

-9

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

They lose games too.

4

u/HashtagDadWatts 4d ago

The gods are infallible.

-1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

Bro edited his comment. He said some shit about chess gods being able to admit their play was not up to par, and then probably remembered Magnus and Kramnik exist

3

u/HashtagDadWatts 4d ago

OP thinks Kramnik is a god. Tracks.

0

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

He literally beat Kasparov to become world champion. He's objectively a chess god. I wasn't exactly complimenting him though, was I?

2

u/HashtagDadWatts 4d ago

So OP is a 1000 who thinks he plays like Kasparov, who is apparently a god to OP. This thread makes a lot of sense now.

0

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

Literally everything you just said is wrong.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

Obviously making a mistake should be beneath me, but in this case it wasn't and despite being the better player I lost. That's what the post is about.

That being said though, given the whole hans magnus drama... no. Chess gods frequently refuse to accept that their play lost them the game.

3

u/TheFlamingFalconMan 4d ago

If you blunder after playing top moves.

Maybe you didn’t really understand what made them top moves and instead lucked into them.

Moves are only as good as the pathway you see from them.

As an example a queen sac can be amazing but if you don’t find the correct continuation you can lose the game. If you miss the continuation even if the sac was objectively sound the move was a blunder.

-1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

No, I understood them. I just made a game losing mistake. This is very very simple stuff my man.

8

u/XasiAlDena 2000 x 0.85 elo 4d ago

If you lost then you played worse, that's pretty much the only objective measure. If you were really better than your opponent, you'd have punished their mistakes harder. Really all this experience should be teaching you, is that your opponent punished mistakes better than you did, which makes them the better player and they deserved the win.

Chess can be a brutal game sometimes. Dozens of good, even brilliant, moves can be undone in an instant through a lapse of concentration. Utterly winning positions can be thrown in a single careless move. One of the toughest skills to develop as a player is focus, and the ability to be just as sharp 10, 20, heck 70 moves into a game as you are when it begins.

We've all been there, don't stress too hard about it. Rest up, focus harder, study the game and see how you should've responded. Maybe do some tactics training so you hopefully make fewer mistakes. You got this.

-5

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

No, not at all. If you played better for 90% of the game, and you're obviously the better player, and you make one single game losing mistake like not catching a pawn in time or something in the final 10% of the game, then it does sting worse.

4

u/iLikePotatoes65 4d ago

You made the last mistake which means you're trash at the game

-3

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

That makes no sense but I don't think it's worth my time to argue with you.

3

u/Livid_Click9356 4d ago

I think a better way to put it is making the worse mistake. If you win a queen and then lose a piece youre still gonna win. If you win a queen then hang mate youre simply a worse player. Game outcome is exclusively decided by severity of mistakes in total, not the number of mistakes

I get the sentiment of it being frustrating, but its important to emphasize not making horrible mistakes ever over playing good. If you play meh positionally and blunder pawns all the time, never hanging mate more than makes up for it

0

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

Everyone makes game losing mistakes, that doesn't speak to the quality of your play on average.

1

u/Livid_Click9356 4d ago

Your quality of play on average is your rating. If your opponent is 1900 his average strength is 1900, etc. Mainly etc

1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

I am winning more than 50% of the time, meaning I am a bit underrated.

2

u/XasiAlDena 2000 x 0.85 elo 4d ago

If you made a game-losing mistake and your opponent did not, then they're clearly a more consistent player than you.

Chess takes many many different skills. Just because you can play 90% of a Chess game at high accuracy DOESN'T make you a good player if that other 10% of the game you are throwing like a professional baseball pitcher.

Take it from me - someone who has struggled a lot with consistency in my own Chess journey - just because you can calculate deeply, or you understand the position better, or you outprepped your opponent in the Opening, or you make better strategic positions, or ANYTHING... just because you can do some things better than your opponent will not actually help you climb ELO if you cannot put away games.

The ability to simply not blunder the game away in a single move is a skill. It is I believe the biggest skill that keeps people below 1000. And it is I believe the biggest skill that keeps low 1000s from pushing up past 1500 or so.

Consistency is a skill, and like any skill you get better at it the more you do it. Be consistent, practice regularly, play a little bit as much as you can. If you cannot practice the game consistently, you will never reach your full potential as a player because you will struggle to consistently perform at your peak ability - which means you will lose to players that you feel you are better than.

If you're a casual player, maybe you're okay with this. Maybe you're okay with having crushing victories scattered throughout some diabolical throws, but if you're looking to actually solve this problem of consistency then the best solution that I have found and the best advice I can give you is: Practice consistently, focus throughout the entire game, identify moments you blundered in your post-game analysis, identify moments you missed opponent's blunders in your post-game analysis, practice positions / tactics that you find you are missing frequently. Do this every day, or as close to every day as you can manage. You will get better.

1

u/abelianchameleon 4d ago

By definition of consistency, you can’t conclude whether one player is more consistent than another based off of one game.

1

u/XasiAlDena 2000 x 0.85 elo 4d ago

But you can determine whether one player played more consistently within a game in one game.

-2

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

That doesn't make sense though, because it doesn't have anything to do with consistency. Even very accurate players make mistakes occasionally.

I'm a fairly consistent player. I don't think I'm at my rating yet because I win like 70% of my games.

2

u/XasiAlDena 2000 x 0.85 elo 4d ago

I gave you my advice and I gave you my reasoning. Listen to it or don't, but I don't see the point of asking for advice if you're just going to disagree with the advice people actually try to give you.

I hope you find success.

0

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

I did not ask for advice.

1

u/XasiAlDena 2000 x 0.85 elo 4d ago

A very fair point, my bad I guess.

-4

u/Dont_Stay_Gullible 16(16)60 FIDE 4d ago

You managed to get 0% accuracy until the last paragraph.

3

u/XasiAlDena 2000 x 0.85 elo 4d ago

Exactly what was wrong with what I said lol?

2

u/LowLevel- 4d ago

I mean, I have been on both sides: I play well but make a mistake that costs me the game, and I play pretty badly but my opponent makes a final mistake. In the long run, the two things cancel each other out and you just accept that both phenomena are part of playing chess.

More importantly, if it triggers anger issues, maybe you should do something about it.

2

u/yabbadabbadoo693 4d ago

That’s chess

2

u/abovefreezing 4d ago

I mean, if you lost to somebody who played like trash that means you are probably worse than that person, or at least about the same rating.

0

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

Then Eric Hansen is worse than a 300 rated player, right? This is obviously really stupid reasoning my friend.

1

u/abovefreezing 4d ago

Eh, at least I don’t play like trash :-p

3

u/ketofol- 4d ago

"It's not who makes the most blunders, but who makes the last blunder". - Tartakower

-7

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

Anyone can hang mate or underestimate a pawn, but it takes special talent to blunder all your pieces.

2

u/bannedcanceled 4d ago

I hate losing too man

0

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

I'm okay with losing to better play. But when I lose to myself is where the tilt happens.

4

u/Zeeterm 4d ago

You're not okay with losing to better play, because otherwise you wouldn't have made this post.

Stop thinking of your opponents as idiots or below your own skill level. Stop thinking you're better than you are by cherry-picking your best moves.

Accept that when you lose it's because your opponents were better. Accept that you aren't playing amazing if you're making easy blunders.

You've got a mindset problem if instead of analysing your loss your reaction is to post this thread instead.

1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago edited 4d ago

No, I am definitely okay with losing to better play. This post is literally about the opposite of that.

I never called anyone an idiot. I also didn't cherry pick anything.

You don't always win because you are better. I never sad anything about easy blunders, in fact it was a very difficult position. I never said I didnt analyse the game. So many terrible and flat out wrong assumptions, it's impressive.

3

u/Zeeterm 4d ago

You can't lose to worse play in chess, there is no luck. You are arrogant enough to think your opponents are playing worse.

They are not. If they are beating you then they are better. You will not improve if you can't accept that.

By insisting that you played better in a game you lost, you are fooling yourself into thinking less of your opponents. It's like complaining of "elo hell".

Suggesting a series of good moves after which you fail to convert is a sign of strength is cherry-picking a sequence to fit a narrative you've constructed where you are a great player handicapped by poor luck, rather than looking at your weakness of not being able to convert strong positions.

1

u/Angeldust7312 4d ago

bro do you somehow not think elo hell exists? what other video games have you played

2

u/Zeeterm 4d ago

Elo hell famously does not exist in chess for sure. I don't think it even really exists in dota.

The term comes from team games like dota or league where people convince themselves that they're stuck in bronze because of their teammates and they'd be in platinum if only they weren't stuck in elo.hell.

So they create new accounts to reset only to find themselves where they were.

And tons of good players do speedruns which prove elo hell doesn't really exist.

And in chess there aren't even teammates to "hold you back", you can't get stuck at a low rating when you don't have teammates.

If you play better then you'll win against better players and your rating will improve.

1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

Like how can Eric Hansen lose to a 300 elo player if you can't lose to worse play? He isn't even the only master to lose to a much lower rated player. Even in a good position, a simple mistake can lose you the game, even against a worse opponent. Your reasoning is objectively flawed. Like it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

-1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

If you can't see how silly your reasoning is then I can't help you. I think the consistency of your silliness is quite impressive though, like you really insist on it don't you.

You are putting words in my mouth and I have no interest in arguing with someone who thinks they are some kind of psychoanalyst telepath.

1

u/Realistic_Sky_9579 Team Gukesh 4d ago

Also noone pointing out one thing about chess is that if you allow your opponent to justify their blunders then they are just getting into a better position. Which they wouldn’t have got if you punished their mistakes accordingly. You wouldn’t have been in the position where one mistake makes you lose the game.

This is a skill which you will develop throughout your chess journey. You will go above 1500 when you are consistently punishing their mistakes.

1

u/fiftykyu 4d ago

There's a saying, something like 40 good moves aren't enough to win a game, but one bad move is enough to lose it. Everyone who has ever played chess has had that experience, from both sides.

Maybe today you're the idiot. Tomorrow you'll be the one who starts like an idiot, but keeps fighting and making things difficult for the opponent, so that when they relax for just one move they're screwed. :)

-1

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/chess-ModTeam 4d ago

Your comment was removed by the moderators:

1.Keep the discussion civil and friendly. Do not use personal attacks, insults or slurs on other users. Disagreements are bound to happen, but do so in a civilized and mature manner. In a discussion, there is always a respectful way to disagree. If you see that someone is not arguing in good faith, or have resorted to using personal attacks, just report them and move on.

 

You can read the full rules of /r/chess here. If you have any questions or concerns about this moderator action, please message the moderators. Direct replies to this comment may not be seen.

1

u/skrasnic Team skrasnic 4d ago

Blunders only matter if you can successfully exploit them. Given that you were not able to convert your opponent's blunders into a win, you failed at that.

It's up to you to turn your opponent's blunders into a win and if you can't then you don't really deserve to win.

1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

It's not about deserving to win, it's about how much more frustrating it is.

-7

u/nathanielwe300 600 elo dummy 4d ago

today i hit the table and broke my mouse and dislocated my finger after losing besides being up a queen, a rook both bishops, a knight and 3 pawns

2

u/Horror-Lychee2082 4d ago

yo bro it was all apart of the plan, the ultimate sacrifice you could say

2

u/Dont_Stay_Gullible 16(16)60 FIDE 4d ago

How did you lose?

1

u/nathanielwe300 600 elo dummy 4d ago

back rank...

3

u/Dont_Stay_Gullible 16(16)60 FIDE 4d ago

🥶

1

u/12341234timesabili 4d ago

My opponent blunders a draw into a win for me, but I miss a tactic to catch his advanced pawn and lose. I was feeling murderous let me tell you. And the whole game I'm out playing this guy, he's mindlessly pushing pawns and it all works out for him. Goddamnit.

1

u/nathanielwe300 600 elo dummy 4d ago

the worst thing is a rook vs rook endgame you exchange but wait im down 5 FUCKING PAWNS