Durrr in process of losing 60k+ in a chess bet.. good month for raptor

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

having him down a rook is much more valuable than a knight. you would have to be a very very strong player to beat a GM down only a knight.

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

you guys are under estimating the different ways a GM could play to prevent you from simply trading pieces, specifically not using an opening you are familiar with like


e4 e5
nf3 nc6
bc4 nf6

[Cresspahl]

Just for the records: Did curtains/Shahade and Durr play their match on a chess server or real-life over the board?

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
Just for the records: Did curtains/Shahade and Durr play their match on a chess server or real-life over the board?

[/ QUOTE ]
Real life

[jalexand42]

Nice job raptor, sick prop.

I'm curious tho, why didn't you get Samo to play for you?

[Arnfinn Madsen]

Out of 100 random club players, I would probably beat only around 20, but I still quite sure I would beat Curtains if he would play without a rook (my brother is about that level and I would beat him), but I think that I would be a favourite against Durrrr with a rook less, with a knight less I would crush him. The big difference is really between club players and sunday players, the best sunday players that beat all their friends and relatives etc. usually get crushed when they join a club, you don't remove all your easily exploitable mistakes until you regularily play people that know how to exploit them.

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
you guys are under estimating the different ways a GM could play to prevent you from simply trading pieces, specifically not using an opening you are familiar with like


e4 e5
nf3 nc6
bc4 nf6

[/ QUOTE ]

Anybody that doesn't know that opening can't call themselves a competent player. Which side does the GM have in that sequence?


You do make a good point though KKF, one I alluded to earlier, in that the GM would have a harder time compromising the weaker player without a knight as oppopsed to without a rook.

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you guys are under estimating the different ways a GM could play to prevent you from simply trading pieces, specifically not using an opening you are familiar with like


e4 e5
nf3 nc6
bc4 nf6

[/ QUOTE ]

Anybody that doesn't know that opening can't call themselves a competent player. Which side does the GM have in that sequence?


You do make a good point though KKF, one I alluded to earlier, in that the GM would have a harder time compromising the weaker player without a knight as oppopsed to without a rook.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, i meant the GM wouldnt be playing a simple opening like that which would allow him to just trade pieces. d4 d5 is much harder to play than e5 e4 imho.

i think a rook is more valuable than a knight, not that it matters much because durrr had zero chance.

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you guys are under estimating the different ways a GM could play to prevent you from simply trading pieces, specifically not using an opening you are familiar with like


e4 e5
nf3 nc6
bc4 nf6

[/ QUOTE ]

Anybody that doesn't know that opening can't call themselves a competent player. Which side does the GM have in that sequence?


You do make a good point though KKF, one I alluded to earlier, in that the GM would have a harder time compromising the weaker player without a knight as oppopsed to without a rook.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, i meant the GM wouldnt be playing a simple opening like that which would allow him to just trade pieces. d4 d5 is much harder to play than e5 e4 imho.

i think a rook is more valuable than a knight, not that it matters much because durrr had zero chance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah I see, misread your post. Yeah, you're absolutely right.