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

[quirkasaurus]

From Chump Change:

Aye, but the discussion isn't about a weekend player. It seems that everybody, save for durrr, knew and knows the weekend player had no chance. The comment I quoted stemmed from the talk about seriously competitive players beating top players in certain conditions.

Plus, I still gotta say comparing not having a rook to spotting somebody points in 1 on 1 shows such a fundamental misunderstanding of chess and probably basketball as well.

From Curtains:

I don't think its a bad analogy at all. If a friend of Kobe Bryant offers me some prop bet in basketball for like 100k, I probably won't take it, regardless of how great it sounds for me.

Well, at least Curtains agrees with me.

My point is simply that non-professionals and layman alike tend to
seriously underestimate the skills of professionals and experts.

Does an analogy of a top billiards player work better for you ?

Doesn't losing a $50,000 prop bet seem to support my premise ?
How seriously did durr underestimate curtains ?

[Madd]

[ QUOTE ]
No [censored] way in hell Im an underdog against the top GM's with pawn odds

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd pick Morozevich without c2-pawn against you.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No [censored] way in hell Im an underdog against the top GM's with pawn odds

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd pick Morozevich without c2-pawn against you.

[/ QUOTE ]


Ok I assumed that without a pawn meant the standard f-pawn handicap. Also realize that if you aren't talking about literally the top 10-20 players in the world, I would easily be a favorite IMO. I only have trouble discussing them because I never actually played someone who was currently ranked 1-10 in the world. I have played plenty from 50-100, and there is no way in hell they will back themselves in a match against me starting without a pawn. If they want to they know where to find me.

Let's put it this way. I wouldn't back myself in a match against someone 300 points lower rated than me, if I started without a pawn, although it might be close. That means it should be even less likely that someone 300 points higher rated than me, should feel confident playing me down a pawn. The reason for this is that small advantages have more value when the ratings of the players involved are higher. Note that no one in the world is ranked more than 350 points higher than me.

So logically I either underestimate my abilities to beat a 2150 FIDE player without a pawn (and I really think I'm an underdog), or there is something seriously wrong with these arguments.

[Madd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No [censored] way in hell Im an underdog against the top GM's with pawn odds

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd pick Morozevich without c2-pawn against you.

[/ QUOTE ]


Let's put it this way. I wouldn't back myself in a match against someone 300 points lower rated than me, if I started without a pawn, although it might be close. That means it should be even less likely that someone 300 points higher rated than me, should feel confident playing me down a pawn. The reason for this is that small advantages have more value when the ratings of the players involved are higher. Note that no one in the world is ranked more than 350 points higher than me.

So logically I either underestimate my abilities to beat a 2150 FIDE player without a pawn (and I really think I'm an underdog), or there is something seriously wrong with these arguments.

[/ QUOTE ]


I completely agree with the part that small advantages have more value when the ratings of the players involved are higher. But, I would pick you in a match (8 games, 30 min each, pawn odds, a-pawn in game 1, b-pawn in game 2 etc.) against somebody with 2150. Anyway, here we are on to something because the outcome of a match like this (or a match of you vs a 2700+) wouldn't be determined beforehand. Somewhere along these lines there should be a fair prop bet.

ps:
[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] raptor,
[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] curtains

[etizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No [censored] way in hell Im an underdog against the top GM's with pawn odds

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd pick Morozevich without c2-pawn against you.

[/ QUOTE ]


Ok I assumed that without a pawn meant the standard f-pawn handicap. Also realize that if you aren't talking about literally the top 10-20 players in the world, I would easily be a favorite IMO. I only have trouble discussing them because I never actually played someone who was currently ranked 1-10 in the world. I have played plenty from 50-100, and there is no way in hell they will back themselves in a match against me starting without a pawn. If they want to they know where to find me.

Let's put it this way. I wouldn't back myself in a match against someone 300 points lower rated than me, if I started without a pawn, although it might be close. That means it should be even less likely that someone 300 points higher rated than me, should feel confident playing me down a pawn. The reason for this is that small advantages have more value when the ratings of the players involved are higher. Note that no one in the world is ranked more than 350 points higher than me.

So logically I either underestimate my abilities to beat a 2150 FIDE player without a pawn (and I really think I'm an underdog), or there is something seriously wrong with these arguments.

[/ QUOTE ]

curtains after this thread you are now on the very very short list of people from 2p2 i think i would actually enjoy meeting. congrats.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason for this is that small advantages have more value when the ratings of the players involved are higher.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a sound point, but I’m not sure that the 300 points gaps are actually linear steps. I believe the k-factor for FIDE ratings is different for players below 2400. I don’t recall exactly but let’s agree for this example that below 2400 the k-factor is 24 and above it is drops to 18. The impact on rating gains would results in a player below 2400 who defeats someone of the same rating would gain 12 points, a player above 2400 who defeats a player of same rating would only gain 9. The outcome is that it is more difficult to go from 2400 to 2500, than it is to go from 2300 to 2400. However even with this being the case I believe your point of smaller advantages having more value as the ratings increase would offset some of the k-factor issues but I’m not sure entirely.
“….So logically I either underestimate my abilities to beat..” I think you are just using solid judgment, it’s not a bet that I’d want a piece of from either side.
I am (was) 2275 FIDE like two thousand year ago, anyone want to create a prop bet with Curtains and someone over the hill?

[Punker]

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously with such a rating, you are a big favorite. Such a match would be the equivalent of rope-a-dope. But Curtains won't take you up on it, and you know it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No - I mean I as the 2150 player will offer the same rook odds to durrr and play him for the same $50K. Not that I would play curtains.

[chesterboy]

I don't have the money to be prop betting, but if i did I would bet on Durr if I coached him 2hrs a day for 30 days in the same match.

[KingDan]

All,

I'm out in Vegas now and willing to try the following props against novice players

1)I play blindfolded
2)I'll play at an extreme time disadvantage (as low as 30 seconds for the game)
3)Play a series of games, getting progressively drunker.
4) combination of 2 and 3

I'm a mid 2100 player (about 300 points less than curtains) but am kind of rusty since I stopped taking chess seriously when I found poker (about 2 years ago).

[TomCowley]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have the money to be prop betting, but if i did I would bet on Durr if I coached him 2hrs a day for 30 days in the same match.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd take curtains for 50k again without hesitation. You grossly underestimate the time it takes to improve.

[ QUOTE ]
Let's put it this way. I wouldn't back myself in a match against someone 300 points lower rated than me, if I started without a pawn, although it might be close. That means it should be even less likely that someone 300 points higher rated than me, should feel confident playing me down a pawn. The reason for this is that small advantages have more value when the ratings of the players involved are higher. Note that no one in the world is ranked more than 350 points higher than me.

So logically I either underestimate my abilities to beat a 2150 FIDE player without a pawn (and I really think I'm an underdog), or there is something seriously wrong with these arguments.

[/ QUOTE ]

You might be underestimating yourself. I don't have any competitive experience with f-pawn odds, so it's a bit of a guess, but I wouldn't back myself against the best local player (FM, USCF ranging from 2275-2410) and I'm USCF ~2050. I'd play at 2:1 (after some time to work off ring rust).