Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
My hobby is Chess, and to me it would be to beat a Grandmaster(impossible under normal context). I have beaten only once a National Master in a simul, to put things in perspective.
So historically speaking, when people have managed to beat a Grandmaster in chess, how often was it because they discovered such a novel new chess technique that even the Grandmaster wasn't familiar and thus pushed the boundary of the "martial" arts of chess, and how often was it because the Grandmaster made a mistake that gave their opponent a sufficient advantage to beat the Grandmaster?
Getting a novel technique is impossible, there is less and less new theory, and they know all the tricks, but the only way one can possible gain an advantage on a Grandmaster is baiting them into an opening line they they do not know well and you know very well, which again is very unlikely considering they study the game for life and even then, converting said advantage would be very difficult.
The difference between International Masters and Grandmasters is big enough, but the difference between Grandmasters and amateurs is abysmal. You can see this with the Elo System (rating system), players under 200 Elo points their rival are expected to win almost never.
They can even beat amateurs with their eyes blinded, and this is not a joke, one can just see the many videos of Grandmasters giving opponents odds like this.
How tf does blindfolded playing work?
They can hear the moves in algebraic notation, and then they play their move(either someone plays them physically for them or they have invisible pieces in the computer interface).
They have to remember the whole board position though, which is what makes it harder.