DeeDubb is the korean roux guy in a chess video? havent seen your stuff in years man

DeeDubb he really did :D

Chess is actually a trigger for a multitude of Epilepsy diagnoses. The guy in the story potentially has JME ; everytime i play a game higher rated than normal I myself have muscle jerks before a tonic clonic occurs. It's not funny at all.

Josh hi Josh. I also occasionally suffer grand mal but luckily never occurred during chess - i just played bullet for 3 hours so i think i'm fine with chess. Everyone has different triggers, unfortunately i still don't know what mine are!

I did too

Tim Priest Ben looked happy about it too!

If you know what duel meaningin talking is then u will know that these jokes are not jokes as they seem its clear that ben is talking to the subconsious mind of the audience

If you know what duel meaningin talking is then u will know that these jokes are not jokes as they seem its clear that ben is talking to the subconsious mind of the audience

He didn't read Ben Finegold's book 'Meme Like a Grandmaster'.

Truth hurts

Holden and Karen on vacation. :)

:(

I almost died at that one KEKW

I said to my doctor, "Everytime I play chess, I have a seizure. What should I do, Doc?" "Stop playing chess."

I don’t get the d5 time

@@EdwardTrain Defy, I guess, as in - it's time to defy, meaning openly resist or refuse to obey.

He wouldn't agree.

Humor very suspicious

how much does Ben pay you for that comment?

Nothing he's a natural asskisser. Would probably blow a fat piece of shit, if he had a chance

Even your face is brown noser prototype.

Gold

?

Lmaooo

Found it: Chessbase.

He uses Stockfish 9 a lot.

Your first solution doesn't work, after 3. Qa3+ black can move back, Kb6.

Jk forgot about a5,a6

Never mind, a5, a6, Ka7 and white has NOTHING

Nope, after Bc6 --> Kc8

after Nxc3 white plays Qxd7. with more advantage

I know one year passed and you probably figured it out yourself. I just read the comment and wanted to tell you that after Qe4+ and Kc7 Qc6+ doesn’t force Kb8 because Kd8 is legal. The king escaped and you didn’t mate in 3. Cheers.

Nevermind, I see it now.....he would just move both his pawns up.

. My city m

You mean 1.Qxe5 a5 2. Bc6 Ka6 3. Qe2#? Probably not good for Ben. No Bh3.

Oops! ...2. Kc8 avoids that mate in three. And 1. Qxe5 a5 2. Qd6 a6 avoids mate in 3 also. So maybe 1. Qxe5 gives Black too many options.

I was thinking that too, but it doesn't work! Black can play a5, followed by a6+. So a mate in 4.

@@zabeehullahbabar9108 thank you! I missed a6+!

@@KR-ef8qe That's what I missed, too! And i was screaming e5 the whole time so i had to check the engine

I see it, 1. Qh5 a5 2. Qe8 a6 3. Qc8 Ka7

Wow you're so smart. That dumb grandmaster missed that you can play Qe6, jumping over the pawn! Brilliant!!

Balinoob Нет.

Magnus carlsen?

perkalov blunders usually are because you didn't "see" something. However, what Ben is trying to demonstrate is that it's far easier to go "blind" in a losing position than in a winning one. In the kind of positions in this game where black "blunders" there's only one move that isn't a blunder, and it's often still losing. No human can reasonably expect to find that move every time, not even the best in the world. The real key to limiting blunders is to avoid positions where they become more likely. That is why eliminating those earlier poor choices is more relevant. Ben doesn't care if his opponent blunders or not in a worse position; he can always blunder the next move, or the next, all he has to do is keep the pressure on. What matters to him is that his opponent's position is worse in the first place. It's blunders in better or winning positions that suck. Blundering in a losing position is practically inevitable.

No, he isn't trying to demonstrate that, if he did he would be wrong. Its easier to make blunders in complicated positions, not in lost positions. Some lost positions are dead easy to play and some won positions are insanely complicated and sharp. What I think you are mixing it up with, is the lessons where Ben tries to show that what a computer define as an "equal" game often isnt equal in practical chess, since one side might have a plethora of ways forward, that all decent while the other player has to follow an sharp line or lose the game. But that has nothing to do with this rant about blunders. What I think Ben is trying to convey is that its not that easy to evaluate the position, particularly when you are playing it. And its something that needs to be learned and is important. If you "avoid positions where they become more likely" you also help your opponent avoid those situations. Now, if you are a strong tactical player, you want complicated sharp lines. You want to give your opponent the opportunity to blunder. If you're not an strong tactiacal player, then yeah, avoid those complicated lines. That said... The key to avoid blundering shit is to learn to recognize patterns and positions. It will as a bonus give you the ability to spot when your opponent blundered

perkalov well it appears we agree? I don't get what you meant by the rant then. I took "blunders are far worse" than poor choices as meaning they were independent events; I wanted to say that blunders are more likely after poor choices that result in bad positions and therefore avoiding poor choices is a good way to avoid blunders. It's certainly true that complexity and evaluation are different, but when you're worse, your options become more and more limited regardless of complexity. It may or may not be obvious. When you're better, often many moves preserve some advantage and you can recover from a move that an engine ranks 10th or whatever. It's harder to even find a decent looking move that gives it all away or loses.

We actually do not agree :P I do not agree with the notion that you make more blunders in bad positions then in good. The quality of your position has nothing to do with how likely it is that you make blunders. That an blunder in a winning position might still have you as winning, doesn't change it from being a blunder. Blundering your pawn while being a rook up, doesn't make less of a blunder. Its just that it doesn't end with you losing. Blundering is when you fail to notice something important that would have given you an edge or is giving your opponent an edge. Its an move that would constitute an ? or ?? in notations (deliberate sacrifices and moves might also constitute an ? or ??, but still not actually be an blunder).

"The quality of your position has nothing to do with how likely it is that you make blunders." That doesn't seem to be how it works in praxis at any level. The poor quality of a position is definitely correlated to the likelihood of a poor move in that position. I never said bad positions CAUSE blunders; there's nothing intrinsic to a chess position that would promote poor play. I said they were PRACTICALLY inevitable. It's often just a mere matter of morale and mental toughness. Only the very best players can successfully defend an obviously inferior position to a draw, or last long enough to swindle a win. "Blundering is when you fail to notice something important that would have given you an edge or is giving your opponent an edge." No one I know uses that definition. No one cares much about hanging a pawn a rook up; no one trains to avoid those sort of moves. A win is a win. An engine may complain, but no strong player would even look that far without a contrary result. The word "blunder" is reserved for GAME-CHANGING bad moves. If you told me, "I blundered but I won," I would automatically think that the blunder was some epic disaster that you miraculously recovered from and would want to hear that story, not that you were stomping your opponent and hung a pawn up a rook.

A.C. Clemons U dont play Qd2 instead play Qg4

Still 2...a5. What's the follow up?

Qc8 from Qg2... illegal

A.C. Clemons I made a mistake. I mean instead of Qd2 u should play Qg4 not Qg2. Hope this clears things up

Thanks...I knew I was missing something!

Nightmare at these ratings it hardly matters. He probably means USCF, but in either case it's just a guideline; ymmv.

kmarasin Thank you for your answer, it was out of curiosity.

USCF. We will clarify that in future video descriptions!

Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Atlanta Thank you!

You mean Nxc4 (knight takes pawn on c4)? Then after the Zwischenzug Rxd1+ white loses the knight with Qxd1 Nxc4

mainly stockfish + chessbase

Average Joe Qxe5 a5 Bc6+ Kc8 and theres no checkmates

Qxe5 , a5 , bc6 , ka6, then qe2 . You got the last one wrong

evgiz0r Thanks! I was searching in the comments for Qh5!

Qh5 a5 Qc6 a6 then white can't mate on the next move.

Me too, he has a really contagious laugh. Never laughed that much in a chess lesson until now

Under USCF Rating of 1700; suggested level for the class

And I know her. She is Vermona. She is just ............... .

Black moves a5, a6, Ka7.