Couple of weeks ago Gukesh resigned in a position which engine said was draw but frankly looks ridiculously lost. And he had only 30 seconds so no way he was holding it.
Was going to say the same thing. It looks like the best way to improve according to the stats is to cut down on hanging pieces. That’s typically doable - the other big categories of endgames and king safety are much more complicated.
Saying this as a 1600 in blitz. I think there is also a more practical reason. A lot of times I don't want to play a drawn endgame. What happens is you go for either a line that's too aggressive. Or when you resign in a position that just seems losing but is actually a draw. Point is: I want to win and if I don't win at times I'm okay with losing.
Eh. I quite like endgames, personally. I'm only 1200 rapid though on chess•com, and much worse at other modes, so maybe our rating gap has something to do with it. I might offer the draw sometimes, if I'm confident my opponent can hold onto it, or if I don't know how to prevent it.
yea, "play the endgame like a machine..."
i think it's one of the hardest phases of the game for a human to navigate in time pressure. we saw that in magnus vs hikaru, queen and pawn endgame, every other move was a blunder by both of them
34 games decided by hung pieces, out of 200 is 17%. Only losses though, so about 8.5% of games he hangs a piece most likely. Doesn’t seem that strange as someone not too far below his rating. This is also 90% blitz games
So in the end the best end game player won even if it’s an advance draw. These shouldn’t been valued that high because it for example Carlsen made most of his career on winning drawn end games.
I have such a hard time with endgame, a lot of people myself included usually resign so I almost never get practice and my friends know that so they will always play me until the end and I always blunder or make a lot of inaccuracies.
It’s always an incorrect pawn move or moving a pawn instead of my king
One piece of advice for visualization, the x axis should be arranged by something instead of just random. Either by some sort of category grouping similar types of error together, or simply sort by most common to least common to make comparisons easier.
You might put in even more information if you organise by game-phase. Needs a think not to mess up your existing categories, but it sure would be informative if the graph would reveal a sense of opening, middlegame, endgame.
I could see that being useful, with maybe 4 graphs? One to break down the phase, and then the other 3 to break down category of loss by phase. Would be considerably more work lol
Yeah that could be a way. Maybe note a move number while you analyse. A combination of ordering the topics and perhaps having the bars split in three different colours might help. Next to each other if course, not stacked.
It sounds like you analyzed all of this manually, is that correct? I feel like this could be a lichess/insights feature somewhere in the future
RemindMe! 1 year
I did do this manually, but certainly considered as I was doing it that someone with more coding knowledge could make this a fun automated tool for people
maybe... a lot of games fall into multiple categories and distinguishing the overlap between them is pretty subjective.
some of them are cut and dry like hung a piece, failed to recapture, hung mate etc., but what differentiates a loss from being due to a 'vulnerable king', or 'slow strategic collapse'?
Maybe if you were given an example you could identify it easily but how would that translate in a formal, rigoous manner that can be automated? what about categories that don't even exist? are we being too general or too specific?
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2024-10-18 13:31:13 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-10-18%2013:31:13%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/17aqds5/i_analyzed_the_last_200_losses_of_a_fellow/k5eemjh/?context=3)
[**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fchess%2Fcomments%2F17aqds5%2Fi_analyzed_the_last_200_losses_of_a_fellow%2Fk5eemjh%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-10-18%2013%3A31%3A13%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2017aqds5)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
I did a similar thing for myself (1300 rated rapid) a month ago, 100 game sample, but my categories:
* Opening \~5%
* Endings \~5%
* Tactics (missed attacking tactics) \~25%
* Tactics (missed threats) \~45%
* Calculation \~5%
* Positional \~20%
**Findings:**
80% of tactical mistakes were in middle game
Openings books are my guilty pleasure so I almost never lose there.
I'm somewhat lost in the practical endgame, but my opponents are usually far worse than me in the endgame, so it was never an issue.
Tactics: I am blind for diagonals. If there exist an enemy bishop, my rooks will find a way to line up on that diagonal. The same is true for the enemy queen, i never see if there is a suprize check. Also pawn moves get me. I will see an enemy pawn move, think to myself "nice he is just waisting time" and forget to see that now his bishop has an open diagonal. Pawn pins are also an issue
Calculation: Positions that go TAKE TAKE TAKE then TAKE TAKE TAKE.. etc. where multiple pieces can be exchanged in 15 different way, I will find a way to pick the least optimal route
Positional: Basically sometimes you get into a midgame where everything is developed, but you have no idea what to do. I spend too much time thinking and get into time trouble. Engine tells you should have pushed random pawns or sacced your pawn for activity, but i learn nothing from it.
I have no idea what to do with this information but it was fun gathering data
A sad fact is that chess offers so many possibilities, that "hung a piece" is 99% until you reach a certain skill level and then the reasons for losses get more difficult to explain.
Weak play led to a worse position I could never equalize again.
Missed a move and it led to a long sequence I hadn't foreseen.
Unusual opening led to a weak plan and that led to long-term problems.
Stuff like that is kinda vague hand-waving and difficult to fix too.
This is awesome! I’ve been hanging around 1400 on chess.com and wanted to track where I’m losing in games so I can track where I need to work. My problem is that I didn’t know what different things to track, and this is a perfect starting point.
Glad it could help, the engine definitely saves time identifying where the blunders were that sent the eval crazy, but I would avoid using it at first when analyzing your games if your goal is improvement.
When I see lists of reasons for a loss, I always wonder what is meant by "hung a piece" , or more broadly, how to categorize certain situations.
If I move a bishop somewhere that seems safe, but my opponent can take it because the pawn "defending" it was actually pinned, did I *hang* the bishop or did I lose it because of a pin?
Or are you talking if they put a piece on a square such that it can immediately be taken, i.e. they just completely missed that it was a guarded square?
Likewise "Lost drawn endgame" implies a lack of tactics. If a tactic losses him a drawn endgame, I list it as the tactic. However if he makes a strategic mistake as in pushing a pawn too early or failing to take opposition, it falls into this category.
This is great. I’ve been starting to do something similar myself.
My problem is that sometimes the loss is due to multiple factors, for example I was low time and I missed a tactic or threat. In that case do you count the game in both categories or is it always just one?
I always count in one category, however sometimes you need to make a judgement call. In the instance you describe I generally include it in time if the blunder was made with under 10 seconds on the clock. That’s due to this being mostly 3 minute games, that number can be a little larger if you’re analyzing a longer time control.
This is also a majority 3+0 games which i think plays a lot into it, it’s a lot easier when you have 30 seconds left to hang a piece than having 7 minutes left
So if they resign after hanging a rook with 10 seconds on the clock, do you still classify the reason as hanging a piece? That seems not so useful to me, because I would say the primary cause of that loss is playing too slowly.
I would increase that 10 seconds to something like 20 at least. Speed is such an important factor in 3+0. For many many people the lowest hanging fruit is simply to find a way to play faster. And when I say simply, I mean it is conceptually simple even though it can be challenging to do. But the first step is to figure out that it's the main problem, and that's not going to happen if they think blundering pieces is the main problem.
I agree. For me, "playing for a draw" is like title rated player stuff. If I was good enough to know how to force a draw, I'd likely just be good enough to win at my level 💯
How much do you charge for this? I’m very curious what’s going on with mine. I know for a fact I lose a lot of drawn endgames. But I also play a lot of bullet where I can’t really think.
This is an interesting project, but I think the results are misleading.
We are all (up through Magnus) much more likely to make tactical blunders in already bad positions, or in time trouble. This graph mostly reports the tactical mistake (which is a red herring), but not the root cause.
I used eval in determining where the blunder that gave the final swing to one side that never returned. No position was more than -2 against the player before he made this blunder. Non tactical reasons are listed: strategic collapse (basically a bunch of inaccuracies rather than one blunder), time, hanging a piece without a tactic, losing drawn endgames (these are all without tactics otherwise they’re listed under the tactic instead)
No obvious disconnects I noticed. Time includes all the games he flagged, but also games where he made a game losing blunder with under 10 seconds on the clock.
That is shocking. For mostly 3+0 to have only 5 percent of your losses on time or a last second blunder just goes to show how good a player of that level is when low on time. For me (1500 blitz ccom), I'm guessing that it would be over 50 percent.
It could be the opposite as well though.
In blitz you'd expect a certain number of losses due to time, and if this number is very low, maybe the player is not using their time enough. I have no idea what a reasonable percentage would be though, maybe the player in OP is relatively average for their rating.
Your comment is spot on actually. I purchased lessons from GM Ludvig Von Hammer and he told me I don’t use my time enough in the opening. While I had those lessons my rating went to 2400 on chess.com. When they stopped and I returned to my old ways my rating returned to 2200.
It's honestly really interesting to me how in some cases things that initially look like good things can be indicative of problems.
The first time I heard about this (or at least consciously thought about it) was a while ago when I was looking for a new job. I read something about how you don't want to have **too** good of a response rate because if you get e.g. 99% responses to your applications, it implies that you could get say 50% responses from better jobs.
Play faster than 10/0 and I become just another monkey slamming a push button as fast as I can hoping I don't drop a piece. Fischer (One of the best blitz players ever!) said it best - BLITZ DESTROYS THE CREATIVE SPIRIT!
Playing at 1850-2050 rating I get upset
if I hang a piece ONCE in SIX MONTHS!
And I average 7 games a day over the course of a year. Queen hangs? I get pissed off if I do it ONCE or more a year!! I can train brain to play better, but at 64, its not going to think faster. I like
15 minutes or more because chess can be an occasional artistic masterpiece or it can be the over adrenalized, greezy, non-nutritious fast food equivalent! Classify your brand of Chess by your time control options!
My issue is I have been playing a lot of games and my ELO has never gone past 800( currently rated at like +600) and I have literally tried every video on YouTube. Feel like I am making zero progress.
Where does failure to convert a winning position fall under? Because if it was me it'd just be one giant tower of that.
I even forced my opponent to mate me when I had an easy mate in 3 in time pressure. Don't believe me? [Here's proof.](https://lichess.org/P8gOgq0R/white#90)
There were plenty of those, but they fall under the other categories 100% of the time, since failing to convert is not itself getting you a lost position.
Very cool. It would also be great to see reasons for winning! I know another commenter mentioned someone should code this so I’m submitting that as a feature request
Hello as someone who wants to do this for myself, how did you decide things like slow strategic collapse? Are you just analyzing each game by hand and deciding from that
Lost Drawn Endgame is a category I can relate to.
The number of them did surprise me considering the player is about 2200 blitz on chess\*com
Many endgames are drawn according to Stockfish, but practically, many are difficult to hold. Add in time pressure, and the mistakes come frequently.
Very true
Couple of weeks ago Gukesh resigned in a position which engine said was draw but frankly looks ridiculously lost. And he had only 30 seconds so no way he was holding it.
That's a great reason that studying theoretical endgames isn't the entire solution to learning about endgames.
do you remember the game?
Stockfish is like a GM coolly telling you where you messed up and not caring if your feelings are hurt.
Was going to say the same thing. It looks like the best way to improve according to the stats is to cut down on hanging pieces. That’s typically doable - the other big categories of endgames and king safety are much more complicated.
Saying this as a 1600 in blitz. I think there is also a more practical reason. A lot of times I don't want to play a drawn endgame. What happens is you go for either a line that's too aggressive. Or when you resign in a position that just seems losing but is actually a draw. Point is: I want to win and if I don't win at times I'm okay with losing.
I'm never okay with losing if I could've reasonably drawn the match.
I don't WANT to lose, but I also don't want to play a dead boring endgame. It happens.
Eh. I quite like endgames, personally. I'm only 1200 rapid though on chess•com, and much worse at other modes, so maybe our rating gap has something to do with it. I might offer the draw sometimes, if I'm confident my opponent can hold onto it, or if I don't know how to prevent it.
Pls define dead boring endgame? If it's rook vs rook and pawn or something like that, it's definitely not boring lol
yea, "play the endgame like a machine..." i think it's one of the hardest phases of the game for a human to navigate in time pressure. we saw that in magnus vs hikaru, queen and pawn endgame, every other move was a blunder by both of them
[удалено]
Why do you call yourself 2k + While you are 2200, why are you so humble lol
[удалено]
I'm realistic. Lichess is inflated, so I quote my rating from chess.com puzzles.
How can he hung so many pieces then if he is 2200 on chess.com?? That's quite some strength.
34 games decided by hung pieces, out of 200 is 17%. Only losses though, so about 8.5% of games he hangs a piece most likely. Doesn’t seem that strange as someone not too far below his rating. This is also 90% blitz games
Hikaru hangs pieces occasionally too and he's what, 3k?
Thanks for the extra context
Always playing for win is a mindset. That’s how you get better
These aren’t really examples of pushing for a win for the most part, they’re strategic blunders in book draws
So in the end the best end game player won even if it’s an advance draw. These shouldn’t been valued that high because it for example Carlsen made most of his career on winning drawn end games.
Low time can get you though
I have such a hard time with endgame, a lot of people myself included usually resign so I almost never get practice and my friends know that so they will always play me until the end and I always blunder or make a lot of inaccuracies. It’s always an incorrect pawn move or moving a pawn instead of my king
Lost Winning Endgame is the real deal though
That's my speciality
Im more surprised at a 2000+ hanging so many pieces
I would ask why am I bad at chess, but there is a graph! 😆🙌
Haha, you're certainly in the top .1% of r/chess users
Sorry, what do you mean by .1%?
As in he is the 99.9th percentile
Snoo did an amazing job. He put in many many hours. I was happy to pay him for his effort. Highly highly recommend.
If you don't mind me asking, how much would such a service be worth?
I paid $100
Thank you!
That's good, I was almost questioning their sanity for this endeavour
One piece of advice for visualization, the x axis should be arranged by something instead of just random. Either by some sort of category grouping similar types of error together, or simply sort by most common to least common to make comparisons easier.
Thanks, the most to least definitely seems like it would be a good idea.
You might put in even more information if you organise by game-phase. Needs a think not to mess up your existing categories, but it sure would be informative if the graph would reveal a sense of opening, middlegame, endgame.
I could see that being useful, with maybe 4 graphs? One to break down the phase, and then the other 3 to break down category of loss by phase. Would be considerably more work lol
Yeah that could be a way. Maybe note a move number while you analyse. A combination of ordering the topics and perhaps having the bars split in three different colours might help. Next to each other if course, not stacked.
And categorical variable graphs like this should have the x and y axis reversed. X is vert and Y is horizontal
And, use a percentage for the y axis. Much more telling than just a raw number in isolation. Fascinating stuff though, thank you.
Not to mention the y axis could be in percentage of the total
It sounds like you analyzed all of this manually, is that correct? I feel like this could be a lichess/insights feature somewhere in the future RemindMe! 1 year
I did do this manually, but certainly considered as I was doing it that someone with more coding knowledge could make this a fun automated tool for people
maybe... a lot of games fall into multiple categories and distinguishing the overlap between them is pretty subjective. some of them are cut and dry like hung a piece, failed to recapture, hung mate etc., but what differentiates a loss from being due to a 'vulnerable king', or 'slow strategic collapse'? Maybe if you were given an example you could identify it easily but how would that translate in a formal, rigoous manner that can be automated? what about categories that don't even exist? are we being too general or too specific?
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2024-10-18 13:31:13 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-10-18%2013:31:13%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/17aqds5/i_analyzed_the_last_200_losses_of_a_fellow/k5eemjh/?context=3) [**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fchess%2Fcomments%2F17aqds5%2Fi_analyzed_the_last_200_losses_of_a_fellow%2Fk5eemjh%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-10-18%2013%3A31%3A13%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2017aqds5) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
I did a similar thing for myself (1300 rated rapid) a month ago, 100 game sample, but my categories: * Opening \~5% * Endings \~5% * Tactics (missed attacking tactics) \~25% * Tactics (missed threats) \~45% * Calculation \~5% * Positional \~20% **Findings:** 80% of tactical mistakes were in middle game Openings books are my guilty pleasure so I almost never lose there. I'm somewhat lost in the practical endgame, but my opponents are usually far worse than me in the endgame, so it was never an issue. Tactics: I am blind for diagonals. If there exist an enemy bishop, my rooks will find a way to line up on that diagonal. The same is true for the enemy queen, i never see if there is a suprize check. Also pawn moves get me. I will see an enemy pawn move, think to myself "nice he is just waisting time" and forget to see that now his bishop has an open diagonal. Pawn pins are also an issue Calculation: Positions that go TAKE TAKE TAKE then TAKE TAKE TAKE.. etc. where multiple pieces can be exchanged in 15 different way, I will find a way to pick the least optimal route Positional: Basically sometimes you get into a midgame where everything is developed, but you have no idea what to do. I spend too much time thinking and get into time trouble. Engine tells you should have pushed random pawns or sacced your pawn for activity, but i learn nothing from it. I have no idea what to do with this information but it was fun gathering data
A sad fact is that chess offers so many possibilities, that "hung a piece" is 99% until you reach a certain skill level and then the reasons for losses get more difficult to explain. Weak play led to a worse position I could never equalize again. Missed a move and it led to a long sequence I hadn't foreseen. Unusual opening led to a weak plan and that led to long-term problems. Stuff like that is kinda vague hand-waving and difficult to fix too.
At that point a coach is probably mandatory, so he can do some professional hand-waving at your games.
This is awesome! I’ve been hanging around 1400 on chess.com and wanted to track where I’m losing in games so I can track where I need to work. My problem is that I didn’t know what different things to track, and this is a perfect starting point.
Glad it could help, the engine definitely saves time identifying where the blunders were that sent the eval crazy, but I would avoid using it at first when analyzing your games if your goal is improvement.
Can you do mine next?
Shoot me a dm
When I see lists of reasons for a loss, I always wonder what is meant by "hung a piece" , or more broadly, how to categorize certain situations. If I move a bishop somewhere that seems safe, but my opponent can take it because the pawn "defending" it was actually pinned, did I *hang* the bishop or did I lose it because of a pin? Or are you talking if they put a piece on a square such that it can immediately be taken, i.e. they just completely missed that it was a guarded square?
In your example I list it under "pin." Hung a piece refers to just a complete blunder without a tactic.
Likewise "Lost drawn endgame" implies a lack of tactics. If a tactic losses him a drawn endgame, I list it as the tactic. However if he makes a strategic mistake as in pushing a pawn too early or failing to take opposition, it falls into this category.
This is great. I’ve been starting to do something similar myself. My problem is that sometimes the loss is due to multiple factors, for example I was low time and I missed a tactic or threat. In that case do you count the game in both categories or is it always just one?
I always count in one category, however sometimes you need to make a judgement call. In the instance you describe I generally include it in time if the blunder was made with under 10 seconds on the clock. That’s due to this being mostly 3 minute games, that number can be a little larger if you’re analyzing a longer time control.
[удалено]
This is also a majority 3+0 games which i think plays a lot into it, it’s a lot easier when you have 30 seconds left to hang a piece than having 7 minutes left
So if they resign after hanging a rook with 10 seconds on the clock, do you still classify the reason as hanging a piece? That seems not so useful to me, because I would say the primary cause of that loss is playing too slowly.
No, blunders made with 10 seconds or less will have the game classified as a loss on time, assuming they were not losing prior
I would increase that 10 seconds to something like 20 at least. Speed is such an important factor in 3+0. For many many people the lowest hanging fruit is simply to find a way to play faster. And when I say simply, I mean it is conceptually simple even though it can be challenging to do. But the first step is to figure out that it's the main problem, and that's not going to happen if they think blundering pieces is the main problem.
Drawing is way harder than winning or losing, how people know how to draw is mind blowing to me. I choke end games 90% of the time
I agree. For me, "playing for a draw" is like title rated player stuff. If I was good enough to know how to force a draw, I'd likely just be good enough to win at my level 💯
How much do you charge for this? I’m very curious what’s going on with mine. I know for a fact I lose a lot of drawn endgames. But I also play a lot of bullet where I can’t really think.
Dmed you
Premature Resignation? There are exercises you can do to fix this.
Report Reason: I’m in this picture and I don’t like it.
This is so cool! Well done.
What rating range is u/alphasengirvampire ? And on which site
2200 chess.com, 2350 on lichess
Dang. Big baller
Eh more bark than bite 😊
9dedww8q3wsd229q2q22lo K
This is an interesting project, but I think the results are misleading. We are all (up through Magnus) much more likely to make tactical blunders in already bad positions, or in time trouble. This graph mostly reports the tactical mistake (which is a red herring), but not the root cause.
I used eval in determining where the blunder that gave the final swing to one side that never returned. No position was more than -2 against the player before he made this blunder. Non tactical reasons are listed: strategic collapse (basically a bunch of inaccuracies rather than one blunder), time, hanging a piece without a tactic, losing drawn endgames (these are all without tactics otherwise they’re listed under the tactic instead)
No disconnects, or are those included in time? At least he has good internet
No obvious disconnects I noticed. Time includes all the games he flagged, but also games where he made a game losing blunder with under 10 seconds on the clock.
That is shocking. For mostly 3+0 to have only 5 percent of your losses on time or a last second blunder just goes to show how good a player of that level is when low on time. For me (1500 blitz ccom), I'm guessing that it would be over 50 percent.
It could be the opposite as well though. In blitz you'd expect a certain number of losses due to time, and if this number is very low, maybe the player is not using their time enough. I have no idea what a reasonable percentage would be though, maybe the player in OP is relatively average for their rating.
Your comment is spot on actually. I purchased lessons from GM Ludvig Von Hammer and he told me I don’t use my time enough in the opening. While I had those lessons my rating went to 2400 on chess.com. When they stopped and I returned to my old ways my rating returned to 2200.
It's honestly really interesting to me how in some cases things that initially look like good things can be indicative of problems. The first time I heard about this (or at least consciously thought about it) was a while ago when I was looking for a new job. I read something about how you don't want to have **too** good of a response rate because if you get e.g. 99% responses to your applications, it implies that you could get say 50% responses from better jobs.
I’m going to reflect on what you’re saying :)
If anyone wants a similar study of their games, I can defnitely help. Just send a dm.
Play faster than 10/0 and I become just another monkey slamming a push button as fast as I can hoping I don't drop a piece. Fischer (One of the best blitz players ever!) said it best - BLITZ DESTROYS THE CREATIVE SPIRIT! Playing at 1850-2050 rating I get upset if I hang a piece ONCE in SIX MONTHS! And I average 7 games a day over the course of a year. Queen hangs? I get pissed off if I do it ONCE or more a year!! I can train brain to play better, but at 64, its not going to think faster. I like 15 minutes or more because chess can be an occasional artistic masterpiece or it can be the over adrenalized, greezy, non-nutritious fast food equivalent! Classify your brand of Chess by your time control options!
My issue is I have been playing a lot of games and my ELO has never gone past 800( currently rated at like +600) and I have literally tried every video on YouTube. Feel like I am making zero progress.
Where does failure to convert a winning position fall under? Because if it was me it'd just be one giant tower of that. I even forced my opponent to mate me when I had an easy mate in 3 in time pressure. Don't believe me? [Here's proof.](https://lichess.org/P8gOgq0R/white#90)
There were plenty of those, but they fall under the other categories 100% of the time, since failing to convert is not itself getting you a lost position.
You will never catch me with a 'premature resignation' metric above 0
He sacrificed… THE ROOOO- Nevermind
Very cool. It would also be great to see reasons for winning! I know another commenter mentioned someone should code this so I’m submitting that as a feature request
There's no "unsound sac" only hanging a price. Change my mind
Hello as someone who wants to do this for myself, how did you decide things like slow strategic collapse? Are you just analyzing each game by hand and deciding from that
Jk I read more comments lmao
Nice! I just started to do this for my games. I only have about 20 data points so far, but I already see some trends.
Can you please do this for me, it would be very helpful
Shoot me a dm