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

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Reading through these posts, it's amazing to me how people
can be so unappreciative of experts who have worked for
years to develop their skills. ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry breaux but this is the worst analogy ever. It's not the NBA player playing with a point handicap, it's him playing without an arm.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point isn't the mechanics of the analogy, it's the contention that average people underestimate the ability of experts, which I agree with.

Most weekend players (in any sport/competition) simply don't realize how much they don't know and see professionals as better versions of themselves, e.g. weekend basketball player sees NBA pros as stronger/faster/more accurate versions of themselves when in reality, there's probably another complete level the pros are operating on that the amateur doesn't even see.

[/ QUOTE ]

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.

[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, people are really drawing the wrong conclusions from Durr's loss.

If you follow the games, then it is obvious that Durr has no idea how to play chess. A competent player should be able to at least draw an IM if they start up a rook.

Again, look at the first five moves of game 1:

1.d4 d5
2.c4 Bf5
3.Nc3 c6
4.Bf4 e6
5.c5 Qa5!!!

Qa5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The people who think this match shows that an IM can beat a lesser player if he is "only" spotting a rook clearly don't understand how badly Durr played.

He doesn't know how to play chess. When you realize this, his loss is not at all surprising.

Here's a better analogy. Let's say you set up a handicapped boxing match. One participant is a professional featherweight (126 lbs at weigh in) prizefighter, who has to wear 10 oz gloves. His opponent is a relatively untrained 210 pound man who can wear 3 oz. MMA gloves.

Well if the 210 pound man is short, obese, and old, then the lightweight will definitely win within one round. If the 210 pound man is an NFL wide receiver (to take a previous example), then the outcome will be very different.

Giving up a rook is a very big handicap, and it was only a good bet on Raptor's part because Durr is so awful at chess.

[rory]

this is only true if you are allowed to trade down. obviously curtains is going to play in such a way that you do not get into trade-everything-off-positions very easily

[rory]

i do not think you are a favorite over gary kasparov down a rook unless you are really strong.

[justaPlayer]

This thread has been very instrucive in itself, and I can see quite a few of you are very accomplished players.

Can someone recommend to me some good software that will not only help me learn but allow me to rate myself with accuracy and to play against a strong engine in a variety of formats (like setting it up to be down a rook, for example)?

What about the best place to play online (name of site) with other players?

Sorry everybody, I am just getting into chess and don't know where to turn to get better, as there are no instructors in my rural area. I will be moving to Las Vegas in a few months and will there join a club, but why wait to pursue an activity I enjoy? Thanks everybody for suggestions...

Btw I've been playing semi-seriously for 2 mo. and can beat "Chess Titans" (sometimes) on level 7 on Vista. When I started I couldn't beat it on 2. I really want to get better.

[rory]

as an example of an amateur getting gang raped by a GM down a rook:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1242893

[Voltaire]

Pretty.

Thanks guys. I just "wasted" an hour with this thread. I only wish I could get an IM to play me a rook down for some serious cash. Durr is, as Curtain says, about a 950 USCF player. Only he didn't know that!

My estimate of how good a player has to be to have a +EV against an IM a rook up is around 1300. Against a GM maybe 1500.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Pretty.

Thanks guys. I just "wasted" an hour with this thread. I only wish I could get an IM to play me a rook down for some serious cash. Durr is, as Curtain says, about a 950 USCF player. Only he didn't know that!

My estimate of how good a player has to be to have a +EV against an IM a rook up is around 1300. Against a GM maybe 1500.

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference between a normal IM and a GM in this bet is almost zero when facing low rated players. This should be extremely obvious and if you don't realize this you shouldn't be so cocky about how easily you'd win.

[Your Mom]

www.chessmail.com is ok.

[curtains]

btw just a note, I am positive that a decent % of the people that say that they would win the bet easily and then mock durrr for losing, would not actually be a favorite in the bet. Some of you are, but I'd be almost certain that most of you aren't. Almost every chessplayer whom has never played in a tournament drastically overrates their ability. If you have never played in a tournament and think that you are about 1600, you are probably about 1200-1300. Basically just subtract 300-400 points from how good you are, and that's how good you actually are.

I know this through tremendous exposure to players who have never played rated games, yet seem to think they know how good they are.

Sorry to be mean, I just find it silly how so many people are talking about how easily they would win the bet, without once giving their actual rating or any credentials of any sort. I'm mainly saying this to defend durrrr.