Adrian Waldock

Adrian Waldock

Only Chess

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

B

Joined
29 Nov 08
Moves
9272
16 Nov 10

Originally posted by robhamer
...and if by some luck I win my next 30 matches are they going to ban me

No. I don't think RHP will ban you just because you win 30 straight games.

B

Joined
29 Nov 08
Moves
9272
16 Nov 10
1 edit

Originally posted by queenabber
To be fair the "GM" played very poorly in both games and if he played like that against me, I too would beat him and I'm certainly no GM either. I seriously doubt that actually was a GM playing, rather someone using his name!
Yes. I do agree with you to certain extent. Obviously the second game. That doesn't mean that his opponent did not use engine. Maybe that GM looked weak because of he was against an engine. I don't rule out this possibility.

D
Up a

gumtree

Joined
13 Jan 10
Moves
5151
16 Nov 10

Originally posted by Zygalski
It's GM Julio Becerra. chess.com verifies titled players details & I think they'd check a GM.
Also, that player has been a member since Feb 2009 so I think the real Becerra would have got wind of it by now.
That site has hundreds of titled players from GM's down to Candidate Masters.
and some of those "titled" players end up banned just like ordinary mortals.

S

Joined
14 Jul 06
Moves
20541
16 Nov 10

That's true. Titled players get free premium lifetime membership there, but they do have to provide checkable proof.

Rob Hamer

England

Joined
24 Feb 09
Moves
124421
16 Nov 10

Originally posted by Bahari
no worry of that made a bad start to my winning run ,i like that quote at the time .but i need to become a better chess player .

Z

Joined
24 May 08
Moves
717
16 Nov 10
1 edit

Originally posted by queenabber
To be fair the "GM" played very poorly in both games and if he played like that against me, I too would beat him and I'm certainly no GM either. I seriously doubt that actually was a GM playing, rather someone using his name!
I just checked & the first game, the 28 move one left book on 17.Bxe4.
The second game with 33 moves went out of book on 22...Nf6.

So out of interest, which of the GM Becerra moves do you think were weak in these 2 games & how would you have played differently?

q

Joined
22 Oct 10
Moves
1975
16 Nov 10

Originally posted by Zygalski
I just checked & the first game, the 28 move one left book on 17.Bxe4.
The second game with 33 moves went out of book on 22...Nf6.

So out of interest, which of the GM Becerra moves do you think were weak in these 2 games & how would you have played differently?
Just quickly playing through the 1st game again. Black's e6-e5, is ugly, allows Nf5 with tempo on the bishop even and I am not convinced a GM would consider it for long. Has all the halmarks of a much weaker player or possibly of a GM not really taking the game seriously. This can happen I guess, as I for example beat an OTB IM in 18 moves as black whereas nobody, regardless of strength should lose a corres game in 18 moves as white!
Will look at the 2nd game again when I have a chance

Z

Joined
24 May 08
Moves
717
16 Nov 10

I can't analyse these 2 games vs GM Becerra, simply because they have too few non-theory moves to have any relevance.