I think you're probably using 'you' each time in the generic sense when responding to me, but just in case I'll note that I'm not MeWantCookie.
Always the same problem : what to learn, how to learn, and how to memorize lines and ideas, and how to apply during games.
I think that a very beginner only needs opening principles. Younger you are, more you will learn during your life !
Then, the two or three first moves of the most often played openings and reinforcement of knowledge. By experience, tournaments after tournaments, we will be able to play the first moves of the italian, the scandinavian, the bird, and so on.
After that, (may be approximately 1500 elo FIDE ?), we need to learn seriously one open game, one semi open, one closed and one semi-closed game, and alway play them. Stronger you are, more moves you need to practice.
I saw some young and good players (teenagers), using the right square with the right piece, without any knowledge of the current opening.
With computer, it is easy now to detect good variations, why we tactically lose a game, what is the ratio of good games with a particular opening.
Do not spend time to memorize heavy variations.
Last year i wanted to use Benoni opening. After 12 official games (tournaments OTB), i never encountered the possibility to use it.
You want the sicilian ? Be ready to fight against alapîn, closed variations, opened variations
Some good coaches say it is better to begin with gambit and open games, and later, as you improve, to use closed games
Learning seriously an opening is a hard work, because, as Celestial_object wrote, you have to learn pawn structures, early variations, endings, master games, key positions, usual combinations, traps.
It is only my opinion.
I think that a very beginner only needs opening principles. Younger you are, more you will learn during your life !
Then, the two or three first moves of the most often played openings and reinforcement of knowledge. By experience, tournaments after tournaments, we will be able to play the first moves of the italian, the scandinavian, the bird, and so on.
After that, (may be approximately 1500 elo FIDE ?), we need to learn seriously one open game, one semi open, one closed and one semi-closed game, and alway play them. Stronger you are, more moves you need to practice.
I saw some young and good players (teenagers), using the right square with the right piece, without any knowledge of the current opening.
With computer, it is easy now to detect good variations, why we tactically lose a game, what is the ratio of good games with a particular opening.
Do not spend time to memorize heavy variations.
Last year i wanted to use Benoni opening. After 12 official games (tournaments OTB), i never encountered the possibility to use it.
You want the sicilian ? Be ready to fight against alapîn, closed variations, opened variations
Some good coaches say it is better to begin with gambit and open games, and later, as you improve, to use closed games
Learning seriously an opening is a hard work, because, as Celestial_object wrote, you have to learn pawn structures, early variations, endings, master games, key positions, usual combinations, traps.
It is only my opinion.
@Rapid167 you're @MeWantCookie 's friend? Because there's no need to see a lot of his games to see that his didn't cheat only on that one, like here :
Kalfch, no I'm not, we live in different countries. I agree he probably did cheat in that one too, you're right.
Oh wow.. Okay. I was wondering how that subject creeped up so fast.
Yes.. I am both this mewantcookie, and that mewantcookie.
If you guys will permit me to rebuttal all of this please.. And I will tag possible interested parties. @Rapid167 @Kalfch @turtlenecks @Sneakmasterflex
I didn't mean to post on that account. I have been trying to keep a low profile until the subject popped up in less fast circumstances. I hope you guys have an open mind because I am going to attempt to gain support.
Here are the facts:
Yes.. I played in that tournament. I did win against Astaneh. I was on lichess tv, I was also nervous. But that is all that is true in the story that people believe.
Here is what actually happened:
I was playing and had a good tournament. I was actually heavily studying four books:
1. Wojo's weapons 1-3
2. The Benko Gambit move by move
I am not sure how you guys can figure that the Benko Gambit game has any kind of proof of cheating because the game was won fresh out of the opening and it's a common tactic in the system.. I was relatively decent in the opening back then.
Anyway, the Astaneh game. I had a friend who told me I was on lichess TV. And that was incredible. So I started watching. (This explains why the administrators told me they detected me switching tasks. Because when I tried to rebuttal at the time they told me that my explanations were okay, except for switching tasks. Which in reality if I wanted to cheat I could just use my cellphone. It's strong enough to beat my desktop.) I took the opportunity to watch his explanations because I feel IM and GM analysis would help me in the long run. Win lose or draw. When he resigned I was so excited I was bouncing up and down for like 20 minutes because that was the first time I actually beat an IM. Literally.. I have beaten and drawn NM's over the board and I have had pretty good games against IM's over the board where the games were "Equal" till I made a blunder in the endgame. And I have beaten IM's and GM's in simuls, but I never actually beat an IM before one on one.
My friend who was watching at the time and explained to me I was on Tv finally got my attention and blew my mind by telling me I had been blocked for rated play due to computer abuse. I didn't actually see it till I noticed my rating wasn't moving, and I logged out to see that I could see it when not signed into the account.
Why do I feel I can Rebuttal the claims:
Well here is the thing. I was SO pissed about the accusation that I went on a rampage for two days. Because I had been training really hard to compete for a Reno or Las Vegas tournament that was in the end of that year. And I felt cheated of my account. I had A LOT OF ANALYSIS. I thought I lost it all. And I had my pay pal account ready to donate literally $1000 to lichess because I felt Studies were so cool and that they were helping me improve at a rate faster than I could have imagined.
Well that weekend.. I went to a tournament in San Francisco. And I did pretty good. I placed a tie for 5th I think because of my performance pitted me against the top three boards almost one after another.
Here is the game list:
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblPlr.php?201610301712-001-20052503
In the second round I played against a 2450 player and won. It was not only a good game, but I have submitted it for analysis in several forums. The game was better than the Astaneh game, and I held lichess in contempt for a long time. I found out about a month after the game that the guy I played was actually an IM. I couldn't believe it!! I was so happy to hear that, I went into a conniption fit and held lichess in contempt even harder. Thinking to myself, "HOW'S THAT FOR A SLAP IN THE FACE TO LICHESS!!!!" My confidence was back and I even had some good performances after that too.
Porter Ranch is an example:
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?201802173722.1-20052503
I played two NM's and a fresh new female youth CM who is up and coming. I beat both of the NM's and lost to the CM. (I have a good win against her in one of the tournaments before that, and I beat her again in this last tournament. One of the NM's I have a +4.5 score against.)
I placed most of the games into one of my studies entited, "Games on submission regain innocence." You can look at it all you like.
I did not cheat. I don't even like engines. I don't like looking at analysis from them and I am prejudice of the feel of their moves and I hate that people keep telling me my play is sub par because I can't play as well as the top engines. I also literally hate it when it's obvious that players kibitz engine analysis as if it's their own, or degrade titled players because their engine told them the titled player blundered and they pass it off as their own analysis.
I use to take it as a joke because one of the players in the 16th st mall back in 2004 in Denver use to tell me I play like an engine. And I told him, "Yeah that's hilarious because you're sitting in front of me, and I get told that a lot online." Well now this happened I don't take this as a joke anymore.
I do hope that some of you start trusting me again, because one thing I love to do is offer advice on chess forums. And I don't need a bad reputation just because a site made one mistake and won't admit the error. I would love to have that account back, even now, because I loved that account and I loved the name and the work I did on it. I believe Lichess is a good site, and I believe they have pretty decent techniques in computer abuse. But to have a perfect system is impossible, and I hope people decide they can believe that it's possible someone was innocent.
Yes.. I am both this mewantcookie, and that mewantcookie.
If you guys will permit me to rebuttal all of this please.. And I will tag possible interested parties. @Rapid167 @Kalfch @turtlenecks @Sneakmasterflex
I didn't mean to post on that account. I have been trying to keep a low profile until the subject popped up in less fast circumstances. I hope you guys have an open mind because I am going to attempt to gain support.
Here are the facts:
Yes.. I played in that tournament. I did win against Astaneh. I was on lichess tv, I was also nervous. But that is all that is true in the story that people believe.
Here is what actually happened:
I was playing and had a good tournament. I was actually heavily studying four books:
1. Wojo's weapons 1-3
2. The Benko Gambit move by move
I am not sure how you guys can figure that the Benko Gambit game has any kind of proof of cheating because the game was won fresh out of the opening and it's a common tactic in the system.. I was relatively decent in the opening back then.
Anyway, the Astaneh game. I had a friend who told me I was on lichess TV. And that was incredible. So I started watching. (This explains why the administrators told me they detected me switching tasks. Because when I tried to rebuttal at the time they told me that my explanations were okay, except for switching tasks. Which in reality if I wanted to cheat I could just use my cellphone. It's strong enough to beat my desktop.) I took the opportunity to watch his explanations because I feel IM and GM analysis would help me in the long run. Win lose or draw. When he resigned I was so excited I was bouncing up and down for like 20 minutes because that was the first time I actually beat an IM. Literally.. I have beaten and drawn NM's over the board and I have had pretty good games against IM's over the board where the games were "Equal" till I made a blunder in the endgame. And I have beaten IM's and GM's in simuls, but I never actually beat an IM before one on one.
My friend who was watching at the time and explained to me I was on Tv finally got my attention and blew my mind by telling me I had been blocked for rated play due to computer abuse. I didn't actually see it till I noticed my rating wasn't moving, and I logged out to see that I could see it when not signed into the account.
Why do I feel I can Rebuttal the claims:
Well here is the thing. I was SO pissed about the accusation that I went on a rampage for two days. Because I had been training really hard to compete for a Reno or Las Vegas tournament that was in the end of that year. And I felt cheated of my account. I had A LOT OF ANALYSIS. I thought I lost it all. And I had my pay pal account ready to donate literally $1000 to lichess because I felt Studies were so cool and that they were helping me improve at a rate faster than I could have imagined.
Well that weekend.. I went to a tournament in San Francisco. And I did pretty good. I placed a tie for 5th I think because of my performance pitted me against the top three boards almost one after another.
Here is the game list:
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblPlr.php?201610301712-001-20052503
In the second round I played against a 2450 player and won. It was not only a good game, but I have submitted it for analysis in several forums. The game was better than the Astaneh game, and I held lichess in contempt for a long time. I found out about a month after the game that the guy I played was actually an IM. I couldn't believe it!! I was so happy to hear that, I went into a conniption fit and held lichess in contempt even harder. Thinking to myself, "HOW'S THAT FOR A SLAP IN THE FACE TO LICHESS!!!!" My confidence was back and I even had some good performances after that too.
Porter Ranch is an example:
http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?201802173722.1-20052503
I played two NM's and a fresh new female youth CM who is up and coming. I beat both of the NM's and lost to the CM. (I have a good win against her in one of the tournaments before that, and I beat her again in this last tournament. One of the NM's I have a +4.5 score against.)
I placed most of the games into one of my studies entited, "Games on submission regain innocence." You can look at it all you like.
I did not cheat. I don't even like engines. I don't like looking at analysis from them and I am prejudice of the feel of their moves and I hate that people keep telling me my play is sub par because I can't play as well as the top engines. I also literally hate it when it's obvious that players kibitz engine analysis as if it's their own, or degrade titled players because their engine told them the titled player blundered and they pass it off as their own analysis.
I use to take it as a joke because one of the players in the 16th st mall back in 2004 in Denver use to tell me I play like an engine. And I told him, "Yeah that's hilarious because you're sitting in front of me, and I get told that a lot online." Well now this happened I don't take this as a joke anymore.
I do hope that some of you start trusting me again, because one thing I love to do is offer advice on chess forums. And I don't need a bad reputation just because a site made one mistake and won't admit the error. I would love to have that account back, even now, because I loved that account and I loved the name and the work I did on it. I believe Lichess is a good site, and I believe they have pretty decent techniques in computer abuse. But to have a perfect system is impossible, and I hope people decide they can believe that it's possible someone was innocent.
Yeah I trust you, you seem honest. (: good day!
@MeWantCookieMobile yeah. That day even Carlsen couldn't beat you if I look the other games, just incredible, you've never played so well. And it stopped. But you didn't cheat…
Well @Kalfch For one thing, I bet you didn't even look at the games I submitted.. For another thing, I lost the very next game.
I am pretty sure I am completely prepared to know that there are people out there that no matter what the evidence they will simply convince themselves that the server is always right. So I laid out my self, even gave my personal USCF and FIDE. It's not like I am hiding anything. As it stands I am focusing on my own chess.. If you want to convince yourself I am guilty without even consideration I won't do anymore to try to convince. But I thought it was worth a shot for other people. I played in a tournament just now where I beat an FM then lost to two 1800 players. The last one I lost my brain and slipped a rook.
I am pretty sure I am completely prepared to know that there are people out there that no matter what the evidence they will simply convince themselves that the server is always right. So I laid out my self, even gave my personal USCF and FIDE. It's not like I am hiding anything. As it stands I am focusing on my own chess.. If you want to convince yourself I am guilty without even consideration I won't do anymore to try to convince. But I thought it was worth a shot for other people. I played in a tournament just now where I beat an FM then lost to two 1800 players. The last one I lost my brain and slipped a rook.
@MeWantCookie You sound legit to me, but I'm curious about one thing. Why did Lichess call you a cheater? What's confusing me about it is that you said it was because you switched tasks. Well I do that literally all the time when I'm playing, 5 5 games and sometimes I have clean games but I've never been accused of cheating.
@President_DonaldDuck
I'll give you the facts and then I'll give you my opinion.
Fact:
Yes that is a question I asked them when they gave me audience. They basically told me that the task switching was "Evidence enough and no further discussion was going to happen." They wouldn't entertain me anymore discussion on the matter after that and they considered the issue closed. I don't know why the task switching was evidence enough.
My opinion which is the opinion of several people I have brought this to including my trainers: The fact that it was a low centipawn loss in combination that it was on lichess tv with a popular IM. Also every chess site is a "Guilty with no chance for innocence" policy. I once saw a player who got banned from ICC for cheating and he had a good portion of a larger tournament watching him live, like 20 people. No matter how much they protested saying they witnessed it live, ICC still never retracted the ban.
Anyway Thanks @turtlenecks and @President_DonaldDuck. It means a lot that people are at least listening.
I'll give you the facts and then I'll give you my opinion.
Fact:
Yes that is a question I asked them when they gave me audience. They basically told me that the task switching was "Evidence enough and no further discussion was going to happen." They wouldn't entertain me anymore discussion on the matter after that and they considered the issue closed. I don't know why the task switching was evidence enough.
My opinion which is the opinion of several people I have brought this to including my trainers: The fact that it was a low centipawn loss in combination that it was on lichess tv with a popular IM. Also every chess site is a "Guilty with no chance for innocence" policy. I once saw a player who got banned from ICC for cheating and he had a good portion of a larger tournament watching him live, like 20 people. No matter how much they protested saying they witnessed it live, ICC still never retracted the ban.
Anyway Thanks @turtlenecks and @President_DonaldDuck. It means a lot that people are at least listening.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.