@Chan_Fry said in #40:
> Does the profile "win streak" number include games against Stockfish? Does the number include unrated games? If yes to either of these, then it's easy to see how someone could easily build long winning streaks.
Well, yes to all. I had my 35 game in beaten streak across time controls and variants with those parameters.
@Akbar2thegreat said in #39:
> We are talking about streak not necessarily win streak.
I think the title of the thread is clear.
@Akbar2thegreat said in #37:
> @pointlesswindows
> You are wrong about latter point of yours.
> I had 35 game unbeaten streak at Lichess across all time controls and variants (I hardly played any variants).
Nonsense.
> In OTB chess, Ding had unbeaten streak of 100 games and Tal had 96 games (best win ratio by anyone in longest streaks
You don't grow up to Tal's heels.
@RickRenegade said in #36:
> Complete and utter nonsense.
>
> 2000 vs 1000 30 - 0 is standard.
I am surprised that a player of 2000 rating can be so silly. Shared account with an older brother?
@ChessMVPmaster said in #33:
> According to your logic anyone having a win streak above 20 is cheating. Then why do people like Lance5500 have a win streak of 380 in rapid. Don’t just say stuff without justification. It depends on the skill of people. If they aren’t skilled, they won’t have a good win streak, and if they are skilled and have a high rating they will have a better win streak.
Mumbling and nothing more.
@pointlesswindows said in #43:
> Nonsense.
So you are!
I was saying that your 'cheating' remark is purely baseless and you can't prove it.
> You don't grow up to Tal's heels.
And you can't deny history.
Apart from Tal and Ding: Capablanca, Lasker, Carlsen too have unbeaten streaks.
You can't deny historical facts.
Well, assuming that players use pool to pair themselves (and opponent is similar rated) and also assuming that players are playing with their main account, higher the rating more difficult it would be and much lower the rating more difficult it would be.
So, a quite stable middle rating around 1800 would have more chances of longer streaks than players rated on either sides.
@Akbar2thegreat said in #46:
> So you are!
> I was saying that your 'cheating' remark is purely baseless and you can't prove it.
What I say is very logical, and I don't know what your problem is.
> And you can't deny history.
> Apart from Tal and Ding: Capablanca, Lasker, Carlsen too have unbeaten streaks.
> You can't deny historical facts.
I am not denying. I said that if majority of players are matched randomly on lichess it's impossible to get more than a few win streak. Who cares how many wins a world champion had? Do you think you are a world champion or what??
that seems surprising to me. They probably played 30-50 games with some people around 300-400 points lower than them.
@pointlesswindows said in #48:
> What I say is very logical, and I don't know what your problem is.
You had said that if player wins games more than 20 then it is pure cheating which is not logical as one may be cheating but not necessarily. You don't understand logical things.
> I am not denying. I said that if majority of players are matched randomly on lichess it's impossible to get more than a few win streak.
But there are significant streaks exception to way of your thinking. Even I had 35 games streak (across time controls and variants) which I didn't lose and I still don't believe it.
> Who cares how many wins a world champion had? Do you think you are a world champion or what??
Lol! Everyone cares after all its fact and some keep making headlines with streaks latest being Carlsen who has longest unbeaten streak (but less win ratio).
I am not a world champion but everyone remembers special things.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.