Somebody, as is usual on this forum, attacked me, twisted my words (mentioned my FIDE rating, which is irrelevant when talking about a goal for an online rating) and labelled me a liar, saying that I was exaggerating my chess ability.
Instead of saying "hmm that seems a bit high - good luck!", as a normal person would - he called me a liar, twisted my words (changing topic of discussion from online rating to FIDE rating) and mocked me. Standard TalkChess practice.
Nevertheless, and regardless of what cynics say, within a few more games, I hit my target.
How does this relate to computer chess?
I have improved my chess by a few hundred points in the last few years, despite not playing a tournament since 2010, all as a direct result of only training with engines.
This is all as a result of three things.
- Playing against them (this results in a strong law of contrast coming into effect when you return to playing humans - in effect, the human "feels" weaker.)
- Analyzing their games played in my openings (from deliberately created theme tournaments)
- Creating personalities of all playing styles (mostly with Rodent) and seeing how strong a given personality can become, no matter how extreme the settings are.
A direct result of all of this has been a wide broadening of my knowledge of the many varied ways of handling positions, that previously, I'd thought could only be played in a specific way.
Especially ways that a position, even a quiet one, can quickly be turned dynamic in a way that human players quickly drown in.
Of course, the next step is to learn some reliable openings, and enter some LTC tournaments again.
When I have the time.
P.S Here is a game from this morning, where, I blundered my queen in the opening by playing quickly "without looking" - and when the splash of cold water that was the queen loss took effect, I focussed.
The tactical onslaught that came from my opponent's only real blunder, could well have been played by one of my engine "personalities".
[pgn][Event "chess24 online game | blitz"]
[Site "chess24.com"]
[Date "2018.02.24"]
[Round "?"]
[White "ChessnCognac"]
[Black "ArturoMarnCorresa"]
[Result "1-0"]
[BlackCountry "es"]
[BlackElo "2308"]
[ECO "A80"]
[Time "01:03:35"]
[TimeControl "300"]
[WhiteCountry "au"]
[WhiteElo "2486"]
1.d4 f5 2.g4 { [%clk 0:04:57] } 2...fxg4 { [%clk 0:04:56] } 3.h3 { [%clk 0:04:55] } 3...d6 { [%clk 0:04:54] } 4.e4 { [%clk 0:04:50] } 4...c6 { [%clk 0:04:51] } 5.hxg4 { [%clk 0:04:47] } 5...Nf6 { [%clk 0:04:47] } 6.f3 { [%clk 0:04:43] } 6...e5 { [%clk 0:04:43] } 7.g5 { [%clk 0:04:38] } 7...Nfd7 { [%clk 0:04:29] } 8.f4 { [%clk 0:04:09] } 8...exd4 { [%clk 0:04:08] } 9.Qxd4 { [%clk 0:04:01] } 9...Qb6 { [%clk 0:04:06] } 10.Qc3 { [%clk 0:03:50] } 10...d5 { [%clk 0:04:01] } 11.Be2 { [%clk 0:03:40] } 11...Bb4 { [%clk 0:03:58] } 12.Nd2 { [%clk 0:03:24] } 12...Bxc3 { [%clk 0:03:57] } 13.bxc3 { [%clk 0:03:22] } 13...Nc5 { [%clk 0:03:52] } 14.Ngf3 { [%clk 0:02:57] } 14...dxe4 { [%clk 0:03:47] } 15.Ne5 { [%clk 0:02:54] } 15...Bf5 { [%clk 0:03:45] } 16.Ndc4 { [%clk 0:02:49] } 16...Qd8 { [%clk 0:03:36] } 17.Ba3 { [%clk 0:02:42] } 17...Nbd7 { [%clk 0:03:33] } 18.Nd6+ { [%clk 0:02:39] } 18...Kf8 { [%clk 0:03:17] } 19.Nxf5 { [%clk 0:02:35] } 19...b6 { [%clk 0:03:12] } 20.Ng6+ { [%clk 0:02:28] } 20...Kf7 { [%clk 0:02:56] } 21.Bc4+ { [%clk 0:01:55] } 21...Kxg6 { [%clk 0:02:52] } 22.Nh4+ { [%clk 0:01:52] } 22...Kh5 { [%clk 0:02:51] } 23.Be2# { [%clk 0:01:49] } 1-0[/pgn]
The opponent is over 2300 by the way.
I've only recently found out about how well Schooner plays here: 
