XD
This topic has absolutely nothing to do with queenside castling and belongs in the game analysis forum. I am saying this because it is unclear what you want to do with this game besides gloat about it, which is pointless. The only other purpose is analyzing.
Maybe its his vital stats of his physique....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
stick figure
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
stick figure
0-0-0 is the normal notation of long castles (so the King and the Queenside Rook are involved in the castling process, the King will be castled on to the c-file while the Rook is transported to the d-file).
But this Forum post isn't about 0-0-0, the castling move - it rather is about the 0 Inaccuracies, 0 Mistakes and 0 Blunders of the OP in the shown game. So, the engine didn't see any "major" flaws with whites play (but it also gives an Average centipawn loss of 15).
Most of the "0-0-0" games happen, because one player blunder severely early on and then loses fairly quickly. It also is based on the strength of the analyzing engine - a lower depth may give you a 0-0-0 game more often than a higher depth.
Anyways, it's a nice 0-0-0, although I really hoped to see Queenside castling. Oh, and I also think, that this belongs into the Game Analysis sub-forum, but it is probably alright in this one too (the general chess discussion sub-forum).
I hope, that this post was insightful.
But this Forum post isn't about 0-0-0, the castling move - it rather is about the 0 Inaccuracies, 0 Mistakes and 0 Blunders of the OP in the shown game. So, the engine didn't see any "major" flaws with whites play (but it also gives an Average centipawn loss of 15).
Most of the "0-0-0" games happen, because one player blunder severely early on and then loses fairly quickly. It also is based on the strength of the analyzing engine - a lower depth may give you a 0-0-0 game more often than a higher depth.
Anyways, it's a nice 0-0-0, although I really hoped to see Queenside castling. Oh, and I also think, that this belongs into the Game Analysis sub-forum, but it is probably alright in this one too (the general chess discussion sub-forum).
I hope, that this post was insightful.
@george_mcgeorge said in #4:
> 0-0-0 is the normal notation of long castles (so the King and the Queenside Rook are involved in the castling process, the King will be castled on to the c-file while the Rook is transported to the d-file).
>
> But this Forum post isn't about 0-0-0, the castling move - it rather is about the 0 Inaccuracies, 0 Mistakes and 0 Blunders of the OP in the shown game. So, the engine didn't see any "major" flaws with whites play (but it also gives an Average centipawn loss of 15).
>
> Most of the "0-0-0" games happen, because one player blunder severely early on and then loses fairly quickly. It also is based on the strength of the analyzing engine - a lower depth may give you a 0-0-0 game more often than a higher depth.
>
> Anyways, it's a nice 0-0-0, although I really hoped to see Queenside castling. Oh, and I also think, that this belongs into the Game Analysis sub-forum, but it is probably alright in this one too (the general chess discussion sub-forum).
>
> I hope, that this post was insightful.
Thanks for the clarification. If it wasn't for Christmas with IHOP being closed, poster #2 and I would have got together to purchase a humble pie.
> 0-0-0 is the normal notation of long castles (so the King and the Queenside Rook are involved in the castling process, the King will be castled on to the c-file while the Rook is transported to the d-file).
>
> But this Forum post isn't about 0-0-0, the castling move - it rather is about the 0 Inaccuracies, 0 Mistakes and 0 Blunders of the OP in the shown game. So, the engine didn't see any "major" flaws with whites play (but it also gives an Average centipawn loss of 15).
>
> Most of the "0-0-0" games happen, because one player blunder severely early on and then loses fairly quickly. It also is based on the strength of the analyzing engine - a lower depth may give you a 0-0-0 game more often than a higher depth.
>
> Anyways, it's a nice 0-0-0, although I really hoped to see Queenside castling. Oh, and I also think, that this belongs into the Game Analysis sub-forum, but it is probably alright in this one too (the general chess discussion sub-forum).
>
> I hope, that this post was insightful.
Thanks for the clarification. If it wasn't for Christmas with IHOP being closed, poster #2 and I would have got together to purchase a humble pie.
@Babbeo said in #6:
> ooooh come on jerks, just a joke
Oh, so now you're insulting us just for misunderstanding your post?
> ooooh come on jerks, just a joke
Oh, so now you're insulting us just for misunderstanding your post?
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.