Fun fact: Andrew Tate's Dad was a International Master and even Hikaru called him a "Legendary Tactician" sadly he passed away in 2015 in a Chess Tournament
@@Sanamxnmthe fact that Andrew tate is a 1800 ELO chess player, and he can barely even win against a 600 ELO chess player (3 times less) is just depressing
@@TherabbitthemyththelegendELO rating is just a rough measure. Just because someone has a lower rating doesn’t necessarily mean they are bad at chess, it just means they haven’t climed up the ELO ladder, if you only play casually irl chess your ELO can’t increase.
For those wondering why the eval bar went up to the middle again after Nf3, Andrew should’ve played Be6+ resulting in a free queen if Kxe6 or any other move except for Kd8, or a free bishop if after Kd8 he played Qxe8+.
No it’s not. Be6+ is a loss for white. King just takes it and queen isn’t hanging. The move the computer was looking for is ng6. Black can’t capture the knight because it loses the rook.
@@sauce5218 If you do Ng6, they respond with Qe8, pinning the Queen to the Knight, and if you check the king on e6, discovered attack with the bishop, and if you don't move the Queen you lose the knight. Perhaps another check does the trick? Tricky position.
@@BasicGambler clearly the game shows how much knowledge he had. Just because he lost his queen in a 5 minute match doesn't mean that your better than him, "gotham-chess" an international master who is way better than you blundered his queen to an 800. And tate still won the game quickly anyway
Engine says Tate played at 58.1% accuracy. 1 Great Move 5 Best Moves 2 Excellent Moves 3 Good Moves 3 Book Moves 2 ?! Inaccuracies 1 ? Mistake 1 ?? Blunder 4 X Misses
Yeah bad game but chess nuke did find his account he is 1600 rated wasn’t lying but very poor game but it happens I average 70%+ I’m 1100 rated but I still have terrible games aswell espicsllt irl I play worse than online
@@notnoahqlapped9575this guy is lying all the time. Just bc there is a Tate account doesn't mean that he personally plays on it. He also lied about being a chess champion as a kid or that his father was the first black GM while he wasn't a GM at all
@@mitternachtsplausch9559 where did he say that? I am not tate fan but I do like chess and iv'e heard him say stuff like "my father was the highest rated black player" never that he was a GM. Do you have a link?
Im 1155 and so far loosing a queen means resignation in my elo level so either he is good or extreamly bad that he doesnt know you can resign in chess 😅
@@LOLzum101 open and closed positions is something anyone who plays chess at all knows about. They might not know the tactics, but know what it means and can recognize an open or closed position.
@@LOLzum101 ah ok, i guess since you said so 😅 Do you not know what open and closed position means? Its very simple, i dont know why you think just knowing what it means is something higher rated players would know. Its not complicated at all to recognize if a position is open or closed. Not saying this in condescending way, its just very easy to understand concept. Like i said though most low rated players just recognize the positions, but don’t really have tactics or understanding of why it matters.
@@fintan9218 it's not something the average person knows about I can only assume you're autistic or you havnt played chess with many people in real life. Open or closed positions are not what the average person thinks about when playing chess especially not a 600 rated casual
@@dracibojovnik420not true. If they’re actually that smart, they don’t start that low in elo, their skill gets “appraised” in their first game or two. You will never see someone rated 300 in elo who’s on the level of a 2000. Because to get a rating you have to atleast have a few games played. They’d never get rated that low initially if their skill is actually in the 2000s
Agreed, I'm 500 ELO and dude in the video is only moving pawns and not developing pieces, or trying to control center. Most people play against me do this 400-550 ELO. Also he has not strategy.
@@coldclearkt well, even on lowest levels people play openings, maybe not so complicated but still. You can't just play anything. If you paly f3 g4 you are not getting away with this even at 500 elo
This was both painful to watch and highly amusing. Andrew is a similar level to me and although I can constantly spot errors he makes I find it somewhat painful to know that I must make similar constant errors.
What is your rating? Tate is a well above average player and must be at least a 1800+ Elo based on a few games I’ve seen videos of although he made a few mistakes here and blundered his Queen 🤔
@@Charles_KTN He only made one big mistake which was the queen blunder. Youre 1100 and have the audacity to estimate someones skill as if youre an expert lmao
Both played pretty bad to be honest. They didn’t follow opening principles, which is expected from someone 600 ELO, but I thought Tate was supposed to be good. He played a lot of dubious moves.
he is good at making people believing in what he says. Its the same with his business, he makes people think he is way more rich and successfull than he really is. He is bragging about being a good chess players. He brags about 1800 rating, which is not even good, but most people thinks tate is a great chess player when he is not much better than a beginner.
@@Madara_Uchiha69420 even a 1200 will beat a 600 easily, tate is clearly lying he doesn't even know basic opening theories for example you are never supposed to bring out queen that early in the game before castling , he also didn't developed his every piece his knight and bishop were under developed, he didnt take control of centre and these are theories that a 500 player knows
@@zytaxrr4192he knows how the pieces move but that's it. He's like a 400 ELO tops. A 600 would know to develop pieces in the opening, this guy just pushed pawns 😂
@@myhatmygandhi6217600 elo is an absolutely dogshit rating, players from 400 to 800 are all equally shit at chess. This guy could very well be 800. There's no such thing as "piece development" at those levels, keep coping.
At 2:23 Tate should have taken the pawn with the bishop which would have saved his queen. Him coming back and winning still was impressive from gate and bad from his opponent
The top G is most likely 800 or 900 which is not so good tbh and nothing compared to his father, but we should be glad that he will boost Chess’s popularity and he’s not bad either, just mid.
The dude he's playing is not 600 ELO, he played more like a beginner. Andrew Tate pulled out Queen early risking losing on development, I would've mated him easy. He won cuz the other guy (black) was playing really bad..
@@evanhager4266 no hes just not as good as yall think he is, the people whove never played chess in their lives just overhype him when in reality hes just an early intermediete
Bro this game doesn't mean anything, I usually don't think at all when playing against low rated opponents and mistakes happen but I eventually win, I'm 1700 and I think tate is around this level based of his other games.
@@Spamacjxjc you can win a game of chess without any checks and just get checkmate. It’s not like the count up the points at the end “now you got 9 checks so that’s 9 points I got checkmate so that’s 5 you win!”
What do you mean he wanted queens on the board?If he played that he would win a queen for a bishop! What is there to think about? He just didn't see it and a few moves later he trapped his own queen
@@light-water What do you mean just a bishop?If you play it like that and you trade queens and you win a bishop its a HUGE lead! It's not about keeping queens on the board it's about getting closer to an endgame where you are a bishop up and a fcked up king...no one would ever be like oh i dont want a free bishop because i dont wanna trade queens there! He just didn't see it.
At 1:12 Tate missed that he could’ve played Bb6 with check, if the other guy took the bishop with his king, Tate could’ve won the queen for free, if he retreated to a dark square Tate could’ve added pressure to taking his queen creating a battery with the bishop and creating a mating net. Honestly this entire game made them both look like 500 elo, just lots of missed tactics, overextended pawns on both sides etc
I'm currently at 600 ELO and you see huge blunders from time to time. I'm also _SO_ tired of everyone trying to go for Scholar's mate. Hopefully will be out of this rathole in a few weeks.
@@j00flmao im like 200 elo and because normally i get paired with people who are as bad as me I always go for a variation of scholars mate and it works 30% of the time
0:57 why wouldn't you play Ng6 there?!?! That traps the opponents rook. Instead retreats the knight back to f3?!?! 😂 😂 Yah Andrew tate is not much stronger than his opponent anyway.
There are basic 'rules' (always exceptions, of course) but one of them is; your queen should not be your furthest forward piece - you are asking for trouble. You are inviting your opponent to attack it, whilst developing their own pieces, and all you're doing is moving your queen around... You're welcome :)
Love the 800s in the chat saying “he is no where near 1700 he blundered a lot” when they would get their queen forked 4 turns in against a decent player
Andrew got his Queen trapped 4 moves ago when he didn't move it to h3, (white square, baiting his opponent to brake dark square pawn position allowing him options to clean house). How someone who's stayed at a consistent ~1800 elo doesn't see that I don't get, considering I just started learning chess seriously and I saw that immediately.
Naw I won’t judge Andrew here. I’ve blundered like crazy against lower-rated players too (due to me not being as careful, as I’m sure was the case with him as well). Happens to the best of us
@@gameothers2022 I'm a 1400-rated player. I've noticed that I play my worst games against 800s-1000s, because they're at the level where they can capitalize when you make a huge blunder, but you don't take them seriously enough to concentrate on the game. Andrew likely thought he had the game in the bank, and since lower-rated players play very unorthodoxly, and you can't be bothered to really think against them, you play stupid moves. I'm pretty sure that's what happened to Andrew here, because there's no way an 1800 rated player regularly plays like that
@@noahbrandt2959 In a normal chess game when you are down with a pawn the best you can fight for is a draw. When you are -6 points the chances to make a victory versus normal chess player are negative.
I'm sorry, but there is no way black is even 600 Elo. He made nothing but pawn moves for so long. Looks more like 200 Elo tbh. As someone who is around 600 Elo, I've never had an opponent that didn't understand to focus on developing their pieces in the opening. This is more like someone who just learned how the pieces move.
I advise everyone to try learn the game of chess, its a game of complete accountability. If you lose its because at some point you made a mistake there is no luck in chess at all its the purest form of competition.
600 guy is playing exactly how I would doing some goofy sh-t moving my king around like he's discovering new foreign (albeit dangerous) lands. Respect. One should evoke the spirit of Alexander The Great when he plays and not give a single F about where he goes.
I don't like the guy but we all blunder sometimes. You can usually get away with a lot when the opposing player is lower rated. So, no, I don't think he was losing just because his position was much worse after he blundered with the queen.
@@pushupkid4203 The position may be objectively losing but that doesn't mean you are going to lose the game. Top-rated players often play objectively bad openings on streams or make funky moves or even give up some of their pieces just to have some fun. Their position would be losing against other top-rated players but that does not mean mediocre or even very good players are actually good enough to capitalize on these mistakes, which is why they're doing it. If Usain Bolt gave me a lead start in a race, that does not mean I'll win the race even he's objectively losing at the beginning.
It baffles me at 1:20 why he didn't play Be6+ 😢. If Ke8 you take the Queen, he takes your queen, and then you win his bishop for free. I mean when you go for this sort of attack (starting with Nh4) this is the kind of stuff you look for... why be so passive after that??
I think he went for the victory, not just for the queen. But nothing was there so he passed that opportunity. But I don't know that's just a guess, I had to google who Andrew Tate is anyway.
@@Giofear These situations are victorious anyway, you can't always expect it to be to the level of a direct checkmate. In order to avoid the checkmate they sacrifice material like this, and that's what one should expect.
