(Calling you down with K-high.)
07/14/07 10:41 AM
Re: Durrr in process of losing 60k+ in a chess bet.. good month for ra


I really do think it's fair actually.

Your rating IS your rating.

I'll use another analogy though:

"I have tilted in chess the way I have tilted in poker, and have gotten so frustrated at my play that I'd go off on an idiot-bender and knock my rating down two or three hundred points."

This sounds to me much more like:

"My win-rate in pokertracker is 0.2BB/100, but when I'm actually taking the game seriously and not tilting I'm probably about 3BB/100."

I mean, if you're so bored with chess while you're playing that you are REALLY screwing around and practically trying to do damage to your rating then I guess your statement can make sense.

But it really sounds like you perhaps justify some of your losses by saying, "Well, I was kind of screwing around on that one. I totally would beat that guy if I actually felt like concentrating."

Well, I guess we can just agree to disagree. Because I haven't played chess at all, semi-seriously or not, for years, I really don't have much of a dog in this fight . I kinda agree with what you're getting at re tilt, but there's still a non-trivial distinction between a chess-for-fun mindset vs chess-for-blood, between sitting down to play casually and actually bringing out the books and reviewing openings, etc.

I don't think it's a cop-out to say that when I was actively studying my game, I was ~1800 (on ICC), but when I wasn't, I was rated lower. I mean, we're talking stretches of weeks or maybe a couple months at a time where by actual rating, across all games, was bouncing around 1800, because I was in donk-free mode -- it wasn't a stream of days of "well, of the seven games I played today, except for that last game and that game an hour ago, I played 1800 chess".

On your last note, in general I have no problem with a statement like "I'm a better poker player than it looks" if it's actually true. Practically speaking it's kinda useless to be a good player who just plays bad most of the time, but there's a qualitative difference between a pro sitting down at a low-limit table and donking money away and a novice who couldn't step up his game if he tried.

Their money, of course, spends the same, which I think is your point .

contact us 2+2 Publishing

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5

Message Boards and Forums Directory

Pages provided by ConJelCo