Conquer Club

loutil
rmillet
ThePrince2011
reich1

I was just wondering how this guy could have 80% win rate, and found my answer seeing very redundant "opponents". there are probably more accounts but I didn't bother.

just look at the games played by some of his multi accounts, pretty obvious.

Think he was cleared sometime ago

viewtopic.php?f=239&t=154043&start=15

oh sorry, I missed this very points profitable one too: rettan

betiko wrote:oh sorry, I missed this very points profitable one too: rettan

just remembered the name from a while back

hmsps wrote:Think he was cleared sometime ago

viewtopic.php?f=239&t=154043&start=15

sorry read this after posting my second post.

ok, fair enough then, all "very bad" coworkers. how can you play 100 1vs1 with all the luck involved in a non freestyle game and win almost all of them? is it possible to suck that much? and not to get tired of losing?

anyway, that's a good excuse. naa same IP cause we are coworkers and he sucks. i could play him a thousand times and he still wouldn't learn! don't believe someone can reach this level of stupidness and be in the same office.

Also, why would all these "coworkers" (there are probably even more) never play each other? let's face it; if you are like 6 or 7 coworkers playing CC while at work and 1 guy is way above the other guys, would you play the tough guy 150 times to just win 5 times? or would you play 15 games and lose them all? why wouldn't you play vs the other "bad" coworkers?

Don't you need to win once in a while to find a little incentive to play? if you always play a better player it might help you to get better. but if you never learn anything, why not trying to play vs someone of your level?

If I ask my grandmother to register to CC; can I play endlessly 1minute speed games? with her parkinson and alzheimer i would soooo whoop her ass i tell you!

personally, if I wanted to improve i would play those much better than me. I think I spent 3 years playing my dad at chess before I beat him - it was worth the wait.

nebsmith wrote:personally, if I wanted to improve i would play those much better than me. I think I spent 3 years playing my dad at chess before I beat him - it was worth the wait.

chess is not a game of luck as risk is. you know how dice can be! playing freestyle on complicated maps is the way GLG did his "risk management" vs unexperienced players.

So you want me to believe that you played chess during a consequent amount of years losing every single time vs your dad and you never tried to play vs kids your age to use what you learned?

It's just about logic and human nature. why would all these people in his office play only him and not play each other if his story is true?

I think comparing risk to poker is more relevant than comparing it to chess. Do you think it's possible that a pro wins every single time when he plays amateurs heads up (1vs1)? it's a mix of skills and luck. your oponent can just decide to attack you 3vs5 and win the rolls! no matter how bad you play, you have to win sometimes in a sequential game.

this is so obvious come on...

and you didn't answer about my grandma. is it ok if I help her to create a CC account and play 100 games vs her?

I just think they should create non competitive games for training with no points involved. it would cut loose the excuses of some people, that sometimes could be justified.

Cleared of being multis.

eye84free wrote:Cleared of being multis.

so asking friends to open accounts to give you points is allowed?