do you ever play like a grandmaster for a few games and then play like 100 elo for a few

it happens with me a lot. I play 3-4 games and get 20-40 centipawn loss, and then play a few and get 150+. do any of you have this issue, and if so, is there a way to play more consistantly

You should play rapid ;)

The variability in my game is due to my level of concentration. Sometimes I feel like I'm half asleep and miss everything, other times I feel really sharp and awake. I have no idea whether this is something that can be tackled, but in another discussion thread about preparation for tournaments, someone emphasised the need to work on physical fitness.

That's the definition of a noob, sometimes you get lucky and play well but then you revert to type.

@imanoob424 said ^

it happens with me a lot. I play 3-4 games and get 20-40 centipawn loss, and then play a few and get 150+. do any of you have this issue, and if so, is there a way to play more consistantly

No. Playing several games in a row “like a grandmaster” is possible (probably; by my evaluation criteria, yes) sometimes, but playing several games in a row “like with a rating of 100” – no, I never play that way. And losing 20-40 centipawns per move on average is not “like a grandmaster,” but, for example, like my average (that’s my average, according to statistics; the vast majority of my games are bullet; I mostly play bullet with a time control of 0+1) (but I have sometimes beaten grandmasters, and I have beaten various masters many, many, many times; my match score against many masters is in my favor). In my best games, I have lost on average 2 centipawns per move. As far as I remember, I have never lost less (1 or 0).

@lizani said ^

That's the definition of a noob, sometimes you get lucky and play well but then you revert to type.

I am a noob who hasn't been playing long but you don't always play like 2000 elo either https://lichess.org/aae2Jxao@lizani said ^

@Inventor_1 said ^

it happens with me a lot. I play 3-4 games and get 20-40 centipawn loss, and then play a few and get 150+. do any of you have this issue, and if so, is there a way to play more consistantly

No. Playing several games in a row “like a grandmaster” is possible (probably; by my evaluation criteria, yes) sometimes, but playing several games in a ro...

not 20-40 per move, but for the whole game. granted, most those games were over in under 10 moves

@imanoob424 said ^

it happens with me a lot. I play 3-4 games and get 20-40 centipawn loss, and then play a few and get 150+. do any of you have this issue, and if so, is there a way to play more consistantly

No. Playing several games in a row “like a grandmaster” is possible (probably; by my evaluation criteria, yes) sometimes, but playing several games i...

No. It's not written like that. You write the same about 20-40 and 150+. If you meant 20-40 for the entire game, then your topic is absolutely meaningless and contradicts itself. Do you write about 150+ centipawns for the entire game or per move? If for the entire game, then more than 99% (more likely that more than 99.9%) of your games are actually like this. To lose 150 centipawns in the entire game - you managed to lose so little in a small, small number of games. This is better than the average of the best grandmasters. Therefore no. Your topic only makes sense if you mean the average loss of centipawns per move is this. And about 20-40 and about 150+. About which you have written the same.

@imanoob424

For example. I have now opened your latest game at the moment. In it you have 26 moves. In it, your losses per move are in centipawns: 71. That is, during the game you lost 71*26=1846 centipawns! Not 150+, which you named as an example of a bad game! And you lost 1846 centipawns in this short game (only 26 moves)! Therefore, no. I answered you correctly initially. Your topic only makes sense when your phrase is interpreted the way I interpreted it! Otherwise it is meaningless, otherwise it contradicts itself!

I suspect that a lot of "I play like a GM" games is actually the opponent not providing enough challenge, they might even be high rated, just not having a good game.