> including my dad who was much better than me at chess.

My experience as well unfortunately. No matter how many books on chess I read, no matter how many games I played against Battle Chess to try to get better, he always won.

▲

SubiculumCode a day ago | parent | next [-]

Chess...I'm in the top 1 percent among regular players on chess.com/lichess, yet impossibly far away from Master/GrandMaster level as to be impossible; their minds are completely alien to me.

▲

OroPla 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I lost most of the interest I had in chess as a child when I found out that the way to get better at chess boils down to rote memorization of positions. That's not fun.

▲

karim79 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Impressive. Keep at it. I hope you'll find a Eureka moment. I also hope they're not just cheating using AI.

▲

SubiculumCode a day ago | parent | next [-]

Becoming such is not my goal; I have too many other interests. It was more commentary about how one might be good, but no where even near competitive, and the journey, even if mentally capable, of improving further would take years and year of full time dedication...because chess is that deep, and because "good" is always context dependent.

▲

jodrellblank 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

See https://danluu.com/p95-skill/

▲

karim79 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I can relate. I'm in the top percentile on stack overflow (now killed by AI). My only goal was to be "good" in the way you described.

▲

jodrellblank 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I was in the tens of thousands of points on Stack Overflow, over a hundred badges, into the millions of “people reached”, learning things just to be able to answer, things I have found now in search results and been surprised that it was my answer, and yet so far from being a top contributor it may as well be the Moon.

And haven’t been back there for years. Reinstate Monica. And shame on the licensing grab.

	▲	eks391 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thank you so much. Whatever the motivation, contributions like yours are what helped hobbyists like me decide that whatever ambition I had was in fact a possible outcome, when I otherwise was hitting infinite walls of my own. And I'm sure for those who turned that hobby into their career, you've helped advance countless improvements to everyone's standard of living. Sure some advancements suck, but that's not on you. Answering the questions publicly for all to see enables everyone, and it's up to them to use it for better or worse.

▲

jayGlow 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I believe there is a type of anticheat to help detect ai usage, there are probably ways to circumvent it but id imagine most of the top players are legit.

https://www.chess.com/cheating

▲

matwood 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I remember the day I beat my dad the first time at chess and also my grandfather. Those were big days for me after losing so many times.

▲

wafflemaker a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Makes me wanna play against Swell Joe's Dad \s

But about having nobody to play because you crush everyone - as long as you want to play to enjoy and not just always go full-on try-hard mode - just stop crushing everyone and you'll have people to play with.

Let people win every third game. If you're good enough (at it), they won't notice. They'll have a good time and you will. In Tekken it works to have them win some rounds (extra points if you let them have two out of three), but still win the match, tho maybe only if you're not just 2 ppl playing.

That's a rule established from rat behavior observation study, you can hear about it in every third jbp lecture.

Ever since implementing it, I never end up with nobody to play with. Just curb your wanting to always win and focus on maximizing the amount everyone enjoys playing in the long run.

Even a game where there's always a winner and a loser doesn't have to be a zero sum game.

▲

SwellJoe a day ago | parent | next [-]

"But about having nobody to play because you crush everyone - as long as you want to play to enjoy and not just always go full-on try-hard mode - just stop crushing everyone and you'll have people to play with."

Sure, I'll go back and tell my 12 year old self to do that.

But, actually, I did do that, to some degree. As I mentioned, I would drop hints and talk about my strategies in games, usually after the game, so he could be more competitive and understand how I was thinking about things. That also has a cost on the fun for both parties, though. Smart people can recognize when you're going easy on them. Nobody normal likes being pandered to.

▲

matwood 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I don’t know stratego, but could you play to put yourself in a tough position and then dig yourself out?

This is what I do when training jiujitsu with less experienced people.

	▲	SwellJoe 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You could give yourself a terrible setup. A significant portion of the game is how you place the pieces and there are definitely challenging/risky options. Flag in front with no bombs protecting it is bound to lose, but the game won't last very long either. And, I did that kind of thing sometimes, though I was a kid and still liked to win, I doubt I used any truly suicidal setups.

▲

opan 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'd also heard about that rat experiment (probably on HN) and also tried applying it to fighting games since my friend I usually played with seemed to get really mad most of the times we played. I think it worked somewhat, but then I told him what I did and he didn't take it well. I kinda get why he'd be mad about losing, but then he never plays without me, doesn't spend time in training mode, doesn't watch videos on the games, etc. Not sure what he expects then, I don't think he's gonna improve much jumping right into a real match while rusty and possibly not even understanding all the fundamentals. Not sure there's a solution here since you can't really force people to care about or like things. Ideally we'd both keep striving to improve and competing with each other, but instead I hear "I'll never be better than you anyway". I'm not even god-tier at FGs, I'll lose 90% of the time if I do online matchmaking. I'm just good enough to have trouble getting new people to play with me.

The rat strat may be worth revisiting but it's not very fun letting people win, and it feels dishonest and disrespectful as well. The closest thing I've found is to play super defensive. If I try to take as few hits as possible and drag out the battle it still serves as practice, and I kinda let them set the pace.

	▲	fn-mote 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I can’t believe I’m giving social advice on HN, but maybe it will help. > I told him what I did and he didn't take it well This was a mistake. Ask yourself why you did it. If you don’t have a good answer, one possibility is that it was your ego. Another is your very strong adherence to a certain code of behavior that others do not relate to. > we'd both keep striving to improve and competing with each other I’m not sure competing with someone who is not on your level is a normal approach. I also doubt your friend sees the situation the same way as you. They are more of a recreational player. It’s a level below where you are, but for some reason you want them to care more. > I'll lose 90% of the time if I do online matchmaking And yet playing in person is important to you. It’s fun? > it's not very fun letting people win, and it feels dishonest and disrespectful as well At work, you want people on your team to pull their weight even though you could do the job better. How do you keep them from being discouraged? A strategy like this works.