| General Chess Discussion - Loses again comes in waves. Is it me or something else?#1 Again loses comes in waves. After many days of stable play and some improvement today 12 lost games against 2 wins. Rating drop 55 points. I know people lose more sometimes, like 100 and even more. Bu… | Motroskin |
| Game analysis - What the strategy should be to win or at least draw this game?#3 @OctoPinky said in #2: > By move 30, you can defend your two pawn chains, White has to defend two pawn chains and an isolated pawn, so you basically can wait forever until they find a way to attack yo… | Motroskin |
| General Chess Discussion - Why is that games with more rated people is both more interesting and simpler?#5 Just to the thrift-box. Why again this game https://lichess.org/SgJvuY9Q/ Was so much easier and funnier than many games with 1700-1800 rated players I played recent days? | Motroskin |
| Game analysis - What the strategy should be to win or at least draw this game?#1 What should I have done to win or at least draw this game? Especially in blitz? https://lichess.org/0ozFcx3O Well, computer analysis shows that I should have stuck to line 7 with two rooks, defending … | Motroskin |
| General Chess Discussion - Why is that games with more rated people is both more interesting and simpler?#4 Another game with more rated player. https://lichess.org/9oR6261T Why it was so much easier than tons of games with 1700 rated players? | Motroskin |
| General Chess Discussion - Why is that games with more rated people is both more interesting and simpler?#3 @Willem-II said in #2: > Almost by definition, games by stronger players follow a more or less logical course from one phase of the game to the next, and games of weaker players follow more or less il… | Motroskin |
| General Chess Discussion - Why is that games with more rated people is both more interesting and simpler?#1 Just curious, why almost every game with more rated people (like 1900+ for me) is both more interesting and simpler? Just had a nice game: https://lichess.org/zD7z20j1/ Not perfect, but good enough fo… | Motroskin |
| Lichess Feedback - What is the real value of accuracy metrics?#12 @Toadofsky said in #6: > ... because your moves were 62% accurate. 0% would represent "every move is a blunder" and you're nowhere near that. You lost me. I am totally fine with this 62%. My question … | Motroskin |
| Lichess Feedback - What is the real value of accuracy metrics?#3 @Toadofsky said in #2: > Accuracy% = 103.1668 * exp(-0.04354 * (winPercentBefore - winPercentAfter)) - 3.1669 Yes, I read the https://lichess.org/page/accuracy. My question, is if it makes real sense?… | Motroskin |
| Lichess Feedback - What is the real value of accuracy metrics?#1 Reading the https://lichess.org/page/accuracy and curious, what is the real value of accuracy metrics if for blunderfest: https://lichess.org/jeYXGtAY/black#38 with 5 blunders I still have 89% accurac… | Motroskin |
| Next |
|---|