hi everyone ive been playing chess for over 30 years and im looking for people to play with :)
Uh-huh, so you need strong players to see that your engine is really strong?
engine? if u are trying to imply that im using a software thats quite rude of you making random assumptions. this is why i dislike playing chess on the computer, there are always people making snide comments
well, my best compliments. I browsed a fistful of your 10+0 games and I saw super performances (0 errors, 0 mistakes and 0 points lost). Really impressive!
Hope you'll find someone at your level here.
Did you try 1/2 + 0 super bullet?
Are u a GM?
Hope you'll find someone at your level here.
Did you try 1/2 + 0 super bullet?
Are u a GM?
This is hilarious. He's played 19 games, and has a grand total of four inaccuracies (no mistakes or blunders) to his name, and has a 25-move game where his average centipawn loss is 1. Get the hell out of here with your defensive act.
Honestly, I don't care that much about cheating (though obviously it should be stopped immediately when it's noticed), just because I don't care that much about my rating on this Web site. When people like this come along and are so obviously oblivious to how easy it is to identify them, it is just absolutely hilarious.
If my real identity and a real-life title I had earned were attached to my profile at this site though, I'd probably feel differently.
Honestly, I don't care that much about cheating (though obviously it should be stopped immediately when it's noticed), just because I don't care that much about my rating on this Web site. When people like this come along and are so obviously oblivious to how easy it is to identify them, it is just absolutely hilarious.
If my real identity and a real-life title I had earned were attached to my profile at this site though, I'd probably feel differently.
Comments #4 and #5 <3
I was thinking of using irony, and I was thinking of using reason, but you've covered them both between you. Top marks.
I was thinking of using irony, and I was thinking of using reason, but you've covered them both between you. Top marks.
I just loved yanez's last post. There is indeed hope for the human race. Computers might be good at chess, but they'll never be able to come up with such delicious irony!
Actually, my two cents: imagine you're a dirty cheating 12 year old. What's the first thing you do? NOT draw attention to it with a forum post basically inviting people to look at your games. MORON.
Ok, let's check whether you are a cheater.
2 inaccuracies over 18 games (397 moves in total; leaving out the bullet game since his time ran out in the opening). First indication. And probably even those are no inaccuracies, since we all know that this online engine is a bit weak.
Second indicator: constant move times.
Have a look at these games:
http://en.lichess.org/knMsHbi4#0
http://en.lichess.org/knMsHbi4
http://en.lichess.org/bAVwgazM#43
Now let's look at one interesting position, consider which moves a human would make, which move opsecgod made and how long it took him.
Game http://en.lichess.org/knMsHbi4#20, move 10.
opsecgod played dxe6, after 10 seconds of thinking.
Clear idea, logical. Black plays fxe6. What you can expect. Opsecgod plays Nd4, again after 10 seconds of thought. He must have calculated what happens when black captures his knight. Yes, he plays Bc6!! Brilliant!! After 10 seconds of thought. In my view, you have to see seven moves ahead to justify this decision: Nd4 Bxe4 Bc6!! Bxc6 (also Bc5 has to be calculated) Qh5+ Kh8 Nxe6+ Kg8 Qg4+ Kf7 Nxd8+ Rxd8 Qc4+ Kg7 Qxc6. Without the last move, Qc4+, picking up the bishop, this line would not work. Try to find someone who can see all this in 10 seconds. Try to find him. Ha.
Then Bxc6 from black, what you can expect. Qh5+ from opsecgod, 15 seconds this time. For a completely obvious move, the followup, he had planned to Bxc6. Lol.
Should I go on?
Rather not.
Do you think you're smart, opsecgod?
I don't think so.
2 inaccuracies over 18 games (397 moves in total; leaving out the bullet game since his time ran out in the opening). First indication. And probably even those are no inaccuracies, since we all know that this online engine is a bit weak.
Second indicator: constant move times.
Have a look at these games:
http://en.lichess.org/knMsHbi4#0
http://en.lichess.org/knMsHbi4
http://en.lichess.org/bAVwgazM#43
Now let's look at one interesting position, consider which moves a human would make, which move opsecgod made and how long it took him.
Game http://en.lichess.org/knMsHbi4#20, move 10.
opsecgod played dxe6, after 10 seconds of thinking.
Clear idea, logical. Black plays fxe6. What you can expect. Opsecgod plays Nd4, again after 10 seconds of thought. He must have calculated what happens when black captures his knight. Yes, he plays Bc6!! Brilliant!! After 10 seconds of thought. In my view, you have to see seven moves ahead to justify this decision: Nd4 Bxe4 Bc6!! Bxc6 (also Bc5 has to be calculated) Qh5+ Kh8 Nxe6+ Kg8 Qg4+ Kf7 Nxd8+ Rxd8 Qc4+ Kg7 Qxc6. Without the last move, Qc4+, picking up the bishop, this line would not work. Try to find someone who can see all this in 10 seconds. Try to find him. Ha.
Then Bxc6 from black, what you can expect. Qh5+ from opsecgod, 15 seconds this time. For a completely obvious move, the followup, he had planned to Bxc6. Lol.
Should I go on?
Rather not.
Do you think you're smart, opsecgod?
I don't think so.
#9, hatchet, amazing find! :D I almost choked with laughter when I saw Bc6.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.