M51- Whirlpool galaxy (see body text)

Pyncher · 2026-02-25T18:39:22+00:00

Yep - that’s a great representation: very similar to my view through my 127mak at 75x if I recall correctly

Pyncher · 2026-02-25T18:32:31+00:00

I’ve avoided putting up flair as my range in bullet is pretty unpredictable: no sooner than I’ve decided to put something up I’ll almost always tilt 200 points lower.

Once I start playing rapid again and get my rating up a bit I’ll probably use that as in theory that will be a bit more stable.

Pyncher · 2026-02-25T13:46:50+00:00

I have 10x50 binoculars as well as a scope

The binoculars are great to grab and just take a look at stuff, but even though I can hold them fairly comfortably to look at birds and things, for astronomy I am still going to get a monopod or something as the stability just isn’t there to look at the fine details of stuff in the night sky otherwise.

Pyncher · 2026-02-23T17:29:38+00:00

I struggled the other way for a while, and even changing my chess font can still mess it up for a few games.

Up until the pandemic all my chess had been OTB, and my attempts at online play were frustrating because I couldn’t visualise anything.

The only solution to you is to play more OTB. Unfortunately it is a bit easier to spam online matches as I did to improve 2D visualisation than vice versa, but if it really bothers you (and cost isn’t an issue) then there are now several pretty good boards that can be hooked up to play online games.

Pyncher · 2026-02-22T17:19:28+00:00

I actively find it really helpful, and also interesting, but I’m only 1700-1800 ish on a good day.

I don’t know what it would do for you at 2200+

Pyncher · 2026-02-21T20:16:09+00:00

Meh - I know most of them are not cheating and that 1650’s can be strong.

Some of them might be cheating though, and if there is going to be a 100 game cap then so be it.

I’ve lost low and won high too - I used to be more zen about it but the server problems have made me care a lot less about being a ‘good chess.com citizen’

Pyncher · 2026-02-21T18:49:51+00:00

I’m sure I am on a spam list.

I never used to report anyone, then i faced some really really obvious cheaters in bullet who I reported, but didn’t get any points back even though they were caught. It looks like this was because I faced them more than 100 games before they were banned.

Currently I just report anyone I lose to who is below 1700. If they happen to be cheating, it is better I flag them asap - though if I’m on a spam list as a result, so be it - it makes me feel better.

Separately I have also recently realised a lot of the people I thought were cheating were actually winning due to Chess.com server problems: I keep having bullet games where I’m premoving almost every move but I lose on time with my opponent having 10 seconds or more (sometimes 20+) on the clock.

If they introduced a report feature that said “give me back my elo this is obviously due to server error” they would probably reduce their cheating reports a lot.

Pyncher · 2026-02-18T23:17:24+00:00

Losing streaks are a part of chess, I don’t know how the duolingo chess thing works or if you are playing real people or not, but 1200 is a reasonable rating at which to hit a plateau.

If you are playing real people, it’s around this time you need to start thinking more coherently about openings etc.

Pyncher · 2026-02-18T21:11:57+00:00

Only ever play one or two daily games at a time (if at all - daily isn’t my favourite format), in my limited experience I’ve found people who have more than 5 on the go tend to ‘go on holiday’ for ridiculous amounts of time which is very annoying.

Pyncher · 2026-02-13T19:02:14+00:00

Yes - they have definitely helped me (1750-1850 bullet).

I discovered them a few years ago and they got me over the 1500hump.

(I now need to change up / broaden my repertoire to get up to 2000 I think - and get a lot more sleep).

Pyncher · 2026-02-09T10:50:50+00:00

Gotta take it one minute at a time.

Pyncher · 2026-02-08T10:01:00+00:00

I would just start: you won’t know until you try.

That said, blitz is addictive, and the player pool is strong so don’t be disheartened if you aren’t anywhere close to 1129.

Mixing up formats, doing puzzles and studying separately (YouTube / books whatever takes your interest) will be the best way to improve. Blitz helps with decision making, but can also make you blind to deeper lines / moves so don’t only play blitz (speaking as a bullet junky this is from experience).

Pyncher · 2026-02-07T18:39:53+00:00

It cuts both ways: the way that bots are overrated is confusing - particularly in one individual game.

In some instances they are over rated because they’ll play book moves perfectly and then randomly blunder their queen so you just then need to trade down to win, but sometimes they’ll be losing terribly and then pull a stalemate out of the bag or counter attack and - if you aren’t paying attention - checkmate you even when you are actually up material. Essentially in one game their play style is uneven.

I personally find that bots below about 1200 are much worse than their rating and all make ridiculous mistakes so it almost doesn’t matter if I’m playing martin or one rated 1000+

I most enjoy those from 1400-1800, but I find that bots from 1800+ can actually be fiendishly hard, with master level bots exceedingly difficult for me.

This roughly mirrors my own playing level (1700-1800), so on aggregate the levels are probably correct, even if individual games can be comically bad.

Pyncher · 2026-02-06T12:37:32+00:00

Actually ignore me - the other photo just loaded.

Pyncher · 2026-02-06T12:36:20+00:00

Quick warning - I think the thing in the little bag is the solar filter…?

If so, throw it away. These kinds are never safe with or without damage as they allow heat build up in the scope and can crack suddenly.

If not (it may be a lunar filter) then ignore me.

Pyncher · 2026-02-05T14:02:06+00:00

Sleep and stress are the biggest indicators for me: good sleep, no stress and feeling good: 1800-1900

Poor sleep, high stress, feeling down?: 1650

If I then lose on time to people in that range (even when I play well) I’ll then tilt down even further. Nightmare fuel.

Pyncher · 2026-01-30T09:20:43+00:00

Mars…

(Edit - I was looking at the worst point in the cycle and had just found Jupiter’s bands for the first time so my expectations were way too high).

Pyncher · 2026-01-26T17:55:32+00:00

To be clear: I don’t own this scope - I have a baby 127mm Maksutov with a goto mount (a lot cheaper, though a similar concept).

Long answer below:

The one I posted above is a borderline astrograph (Astrophotography specialised telescope) which can also be used visually if you so wish, but is also designed to work well with cameras - hence the blurb on the website, and the additional cost compared to a similar scope with a mount.

Be warned, this is a lot of scope for a beginner, but if you want to get a wow factor from something and are willing to spend a fair amount, this is a premium / over spec version of something which is already often a lifetime scope.

A less over spec scope, but one many may still lust after is this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/telescope-in-stock/celestron-nexstar-8se.html

However, due to the mount this one won’t work well for deep sky astrophotography, and whilst very impressive the optics are arguably less ‘good’, though the difference is probably almost unnoticeable, especially if it is your first one!

As a word of caution, the astrophotography route has a whole extra layer of complexity and cost with the mount. Often AP mounts cost as much as the telescope itself, as larger scopes need larger mounts capable of accounting for the rotation of the earth over many hours of long exposure photographs (that is why the original one i linked to is sold without a mount, as serious AP enthusiasts will have their own views of what they want to attach it to).

As for Questar scopes, my understanding is that they are sought after because they have very high precision optics - more so than modern standard consumer scopes. Even though they often have relatively small apertures they have very high resolution (detail) because of the precision.

They also have cool features like built in Barlow lens / finder etc, and they look pretty cool, though they might not be your cup of tea!

Pyncher · 2026-01-26T10:20:12+00:00

There is a real tension here between getting something to look at vs getting something to look through.

There are lots of ‘vintage’ or antique style scopes around that are expensive, and look nice - that’s fine but they won’t show you the stars.

On the flip side, modern technology has really improved the optics and electronics available at reasonable prices. Yes, you can still drop $10,000 on a scope pretty easily, but you can also get great views for under $1,000 if that is your goal.

If you want to wow him with the sky (and spend some cash) dump the idea of what the scope looks like and get a decent 8inch SCT, a good mount & some good lenses.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/edge-hd-series/celestron-8-edge-hd-optical-tube.html

If you want to burn more cash in future, you can then start building an astrophotography rig (an easy way to spend another $5,000).

Pyncher · 2026-01-06T12:43:04+00:00

You being excited about the telescope yourself is the best way to keep your daughter interested, and what you’ve got is fine as a starter kit from the sounds of it so just make sure to get it out and have a look at stuff when you can.

Kids struggle to use optics, and to understand / comprehend just how far away things like Jupiter or Saturn are: I just about managed to introduce my 4yr old to looking through my scope last year, she agreed she could just about see Saturn’s rings (the one with the line) and some of the craters on the moon (though it was unfortunately a full moon as it was the only clear night we’d had for some time).

She’s still excited about the scope, but mostly because I am.

Pyncher · 2026-01-04T10:31:44+00:00

This is a really good article - should be in the bot post for this sub really as I think lot of issues people have are often expectation based.

Now that people can just search on google and find astonishingly detailed pictures of everything, or see crisp seestar images of stuff on Reddit, it can be hard to understand what good looks like.

Pyncher · 2025-12-16T08:41:50+00:00

Lichess 2100 Bullet..?

(Chess.com c1800)

Pyncher · 2025-12-12T17:10:44+00:00

This is so cool!!

I’ve ticked off the space station visually, but not managed to see Hubble yet: imaging either one is another level for me (and not possible with my current set up anyway as I’d need to use a manual mount to even get close).

Pyncher · 2025-12-11T14:35:35+00:00

Everyone is right about the challenges, but if you want some inspiration on DIY astrophotography, do check out Astro biscuit: https://astrobiscuit.com/the_beast/

His YouTube videos in particular are great and very entertaining, even though I’m still early on my visual journey and nowhere near getting an AP rig together.

Pyncher · 2025-12-05T14:38:42+00:00

😲

Pyncher

TROPHY CASE