wait, they are actually gms?

@@JL-hq4sg yeah you can see the title next to their names

exactly, the games that decide the whole battle are the 600 guys

Yeah i like them too, of course good chess is good chess but yeah low rated games give best laugh and i feel its all about when im looking sub battles.

I like the mid-level kinda games like the 1900-2100 range. Its exciting chess and still there's opportunity to blunder if not careful

Agreed; the low-rated games are the most tense because anything can happen. One player is up a queen and a rook? Still everything to play for :)

Agreed. And I like seeing the top players up their game if the win is in doubt

The players are payed subscribers on twitch, and they know what their signing up for.

Everyone who signs up for these sub battle knows they're signing away their dignity.

Slimeagedon As a 900 in one of the previous battles, I can confirm that roasting did occur. But it really isn’t as bad as you’re making it out to be

Twitch chat is always harsh.

Stfu u plastic hearted bitch

@Filip Gasic no need to be nasty

Racist

Physical Ruler Racist? How is that aimed at race in any way?

Physical Ruler that’s the way you took it buddy

Physical Ruler and if you have been following the twitch, they did an Australia vs the world which a person from Australia rated 900 beat a 1200 it was in no way targeted at race

@@lachy6448 Oh ok my bad then bro I thought otherwise

Thanks

Hope to see u get speedy recovery mate

Good luck bro

I’m going to keep playing guys even if I can’t see the whole board

No clue

It would just be an awkward conversation, she is not at fault here... I'm with Aman at just letting go, the guy will probably get banned so, whatever

Probably because a bunch of idiots screeching "CHEATER" in chat doesn't mean there was any cheating. It's entirely possible for 1000 rated players to get games with 99 pc accuracy. They're not low rated because they can't play excellent or best moves. They're low rated because they can't manage to do it consistently, and in more games they make terrible mistakes.

@@danusiaspock9253 True, it's very possible to have 99% accuracy if it's a short game with a lot of obvious moves, such as checkmate, hanging pieces, etc. All of the moves that were played seem obvious and natural. I've had games with 99.7% accuracy just because my opponent blundered pretty much every single move. I'm not saying there wasn't cheating, but it's irresponsible to throw those accusations around.

Obviously Ndb5 cb Nb5 Re3 Nc7 Re1 Kh2 Nc7 should objectively be lost but the other line seems promising, Ndb5 cb Nb5 Re3 Re3 Qe7 Nd6 Rd8 Nc8 Rc8 and c5 or something, black of course has b6 but the potential to create a passer and having a rook and two pawns is more than enough justification for this

@Joe Dorben The second line is dead drawn, with easy play for black because of active pieces and a bishop pair. Your 4. Nxd6 is actually a blunder because it allows ... Nd4! Then either something like (5. Qd1 Qxd6 6. e5 Qxb4 7. Rxd4 Ng5 8. h4 Ne6), or (5. Nxc8 Rxc8 6. Qd3 Rd8), leaving black's monster knight. Checked both lines with stockfish and it's already -2 for black. Also, even in your line there's ... Bh6 skewering white's rooks, which is losing as well.

Fuck off. This is a GM safespace. Everyone here is a GM.

@@iamwill737 I'm not.

She so hot, she makes me do ungodly things to myself.