As part of my ongoing series of playing chess at the 1000 Elo level, I present my masterpiece of a smothered mate, defined by Wikipedia as a “checkmate delivered by a knight in which the mated king is unable to move because it is completely surrounded (or smothered) by its own pieces.” This usually occurs at the edge or corner of the board, so this one was especially pretty.

How does 1000 level compare to say 100 level?
LikeLiked by 1 person
100 level would be someone who probably doesn’t know how all the pieces move. 1000 level is still considered pretty bad. 3000 is basically as high as it goes.
LikeLiked by 2 people
So, it doesn’t go up to 9000 then? That’s too bad, because I could make some good Hal9000 jokes if it did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Elo calculation is actually kind of complicated. At least it seems that way to me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yeah, a comparative rating system. That seems weird to me to not have an objective standard to measure against.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nice one!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was proud of it. As proud as you can get winning at that level of play . . .
LikeLiked by 2 people
A win is a win! Any level. Is the next level 2000 or 1001?
LikeLiked by 1 person
On the chess.com site the opponents go up by increments of 100. So the next would be 1100. Though I think this game was maybe against a 1100 avatar. Anyone with a rating of 2000 would wipe the board with me.
LikeLiked by 2 people
But you need to play the level above you to get better at it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
True. But I realize I’m not getting better. It would be too much work to actually improve.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Haha know when to fold’em.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How do the pieces taste in a computerised version?
LikeLike
Bland. Digital.
LikeLike
Will you be posting the final positions from your tiddlywinks competition? I’m keen to absorb the nuances.
LikeLike
I can’t remember, but isn’t the board cleared at the end of a game of tiddlywinks? Not much to post.
LikeLike