Hallvard Haug Flatebø (hallvardhf)
Meet Hallvard Haug Flatebø, a streamer who’s been on a crusade through the wild lands of chess ratings since 2014. Beginning his journey as an eager blitz player with a modest 813 rating low, he’s climbed the ranks to a buffed 2300+ in blitz by 2025. Talk about leveling up faster than your morning coffee can kick in!
A Dynamite Streamer and Casual Chess Enthusiast
Whether it’s bullet, blitz, rapid, or daily games, Hallvard racked up thousands of games, totaling over tens of thousands of wins and near-titanic losses—because every epic tale needs a few enemies, right? His blitz stats show a fierce battler who’s not afraid to dance with defeat yet often rallies back with a comeback rate of 83.34% and an impressive 97.49% win rate after losing a piece. Basically, if he loses a pawn, expect a sneaky knight or queen move in response.
Playing Style
- Early Resignation Rate: 4.25% — Hallvard never gives up easily.
- Endgame Frequency: 64.98% — Loves those nail-biting final moments.
- Average Moves per Win: About 74 moves — marathon games, anyone?
- Average Moves per Loss: Roughly 59 moves — still battling till the end.
Opening Repertoire Highlights
True to his creative and versatile nature, Hallvard’s preferred openings feature solid classics peppered with aggressive flares:
- Sicilian Defense Mengarini Variation — holding his own with a 48.5% win rate over 2000+ blitz games.
- Caro-Kann Defense Advance Tal Variation — his most successful, boasting a commendable 56.5% win rate.
- In bullet games, Hallvard is no stranger to the Owens Defense and King’s Fianchetto Opening, maintaining a near 45–47% win rate.
Peak Performance (and Twitch Likes)
Hallvard’s blitz peak quickly rose from 1362 in 2014 to a belting 2513 in 2025 — impressive gains for a player balancing the world of streaming and bullet points. His bullet and rapid ratings similarly peaked over 2400 and 1900+ respectively — proving he’s got the speed and endurance.
Quirks & Fun Facts
- He hits his highest win rates during late-night hours, especially around 4–5 AM. Night owls, unite!
- His tilt factor is a moderate 29, meaning he’s human — but not easily rattled.
- Hallvard’s current longest winning streak is a hearty 22 games, so don’t be surprised if you catch him on a hot streak during a stream.
With endless hours played, a resilient mindset, and an opening repertoire deeper than a fantasy novel, Hallvard Haug Flatebø is a streamer who proves that chess is not just a game — it’s a way of life (and a great show for his audience!). Whether he’s streaming or blundering, you’ll find plenty of laughs, passionate tactics, and an inspiring journey to follow.
Overview and momentum
Hallvard, thanks for sharing your recent blitz activity. You’ve shown willingness to enter sharp positions and weaponize tactical chances, which is a strong asset in blitz. Your strength-adjusted win rate sits around 50%, suggesting you’re competitive in mixed, dynamic games but there’s room to tighten decision making and time management to tilt more games in your favor. The rating trend data indicates a mixed short‑term picture: recent month and quarter changes have been modestly downward, while longer-term trends show some fluctuations. A focused plan can help convert that tactical sparkle into more consistent results.
What you’re doing well
- You actively seek tactical opportunities and sharp lines, which keeps blitz games exciting and creates chances to seize initiative early in the middlegame.
- Your win against a Sicilian-leaning opponent shows you can capitalize on dynamic play and convert pressure into material gains when your pieces coordinate well.
- Against flexible defenses, you’re comfortable choosing aggressive routes (for example, aiming for active piece play and king-side pressure) that put your opponent under decision pressure.
- You demonstrate willingness to trade into favorable positions where your pieces coordinate, which is valuable in blitz where long, technical sequences are costly.
Areas to strengthen
- Several moves show you entering middlegame calculations with limited clock, which increases the chance of inaccuracies. Build a quick, repeatable check routine per move (threats, captures, king safety) and set a mental threshold to stop and reassess when you’re close to time pressure.
- In some games you pursued aggressive plans that left you vulnerable to counterplay or forced concessions. Practice identifying a safe, solid plan first, then integrating tactical ideas as a secondary objective rather than the primary agenda.
- The openings data shows strong activity in sharp lines. For blitz, having a compact, consistent repertoire can reduce overthinking. Consider consolidating 2–3 main setups with clear middlegame plans to reduce early mistakes in unfamiliar lines.
- When the position simplifies, ensure you’re always clear on the best plan (pawn structure, актив king safety, activity for rooks and minor pieces). Small endgame advantages can slip away quickly in blitz unless you’re precise about conversions.
- Maintain focus between rounds, especially after a tough loss. A short, routine post‑game review helps you keep momentum and prevents small errors from compounding across games.
Insights from the most recent games
- Win example: In the win against basem2001, you demonstrated effective initiative and tactical follow‑through. The key came from keeping pieces active and probing weaknesses, culminating in a decisive sequence that leveraged your attacking potential. Post‑mortem tip: after hitting a tactical sequence, quickly confirm whether you’ve left your king safe and that you’re not overextending beyond your compensation if material balance shifts.
- Loss example: In the loss to Planet_Megino, Black’s counterplay along the central files and on the queenside proved difficult to neutralize. A constructive takeaway is to seek simpler, more solid middle-game plans when your opponent activates pressure—prioritize keeping your king safe and reducing tactical clutter when you’re under attack, and consider broader space control rather than chasing material at the expense of king safety.
- Draw/unclear line example: In the longer, multi‑phase games, tensions remained in the center for longer periods. The lesson is to maintain a clear plan: select a straightforward plan (control of the center, a specific pawn break, or a rook activity move) and push that plan rather than oscillating between aggressive improvisations that invite simplifications by your opponent.
Opening and repertoire suggestions
Your openings show engagement with a range of popular blitz choices. Here are practical steps to optimize for blitz results:
- Identify 2–3 openings you enjoy most with clear, repeatable middlegame plans. Keep your set-ups simple so you can play quickly and accurately even when you’re down on the clock.
- Favor lines with a solid structural basis and a straightforward plan for the middlegame, reducing the chance of getting tangled in sharp, highly tactical lines where a single mistake costs a lot of time and points.
- Use the data you provided to lean toward openings with historically better performance in your sample (for example, some lines in the “Unknown” category show higher win rates; however, balance with your own comfort and understanding). The goal is consistency and confidence, not just win rate.
Practice plan and next steps
- Do a focused post‑game 5–10 minute review after each blitz game. Identify the first critical decision point and ask: Was there a simpler plan available? Could I have avoided a risky tactical chase?
- Improve time management with a 15–20 minute daily blitz workout: alternate quick tactical puzzles with 2–3 longer calculation problems. This builds speed without sacrificing accuracy.
- Strengthen endgames by solving 5 endgame puzzles per week and playing 2 short (5–10 minute) endgame drills against a slow, deliberate pace to internalize conversion patterns.
- Streamline your opening repertoire and write down a one‑page plan for each line you commit to. Review the plan before each game to reduce on‑the‑board indecision.
Quick tips you can apply now
- Start every move with a 5-second scan: what is my opponent threatening, what are my best captures, and is my king safe?
- Before committing to a tactical fight, check if there is a safer, simpler plan that keeps tension without creating clear counterplay for your opponent.
- Track time after each critical moment; aim to have at least 30–60 seconds on the clock for the final phase of a blitz game.
Notes on the data you shared
Recent openings performance shows a mix of results across several lines, with some lines showing solid results and others more volatile. Your strength-adjusted win rate is around 50%, which aligns with the need to convert more of your sharp moments into wins through tighter calculation and efficient time use. The rating change figures indicate some short-term pressure, but with a targeted practice plan you can stabilize and push the score upward again.
If you’d like, I can tailor a printable one‑page opening plan and a 2‑week blitz training schedule based on your preferred lines. Here are placeholders you can use to reference your profile and openings in your notes: hallvard haug flatebø and Sicilian-Defense for quick notes.
🆚 Opponent Insights
| Recent Opponents | ||
|---|---|---|
| Fatih | 3W / 1L / 0D | |
| asztrik | 3W / 7L / 2D | |
| Luqueta Grota | 2W / 0L / 0D | |
| anig6 | 2W / 0L / 0D | |
| oldmilwaukee414 | 4W / 3L / 0D | |
| stasdetroit | 0W / 1L / 0D | |
| harpiaj | 0W / 2L / 0D | |
| shakerd4a6 | 1W / 0L / 0D | |
| booot76 | 2W / 1L / 1D | |
| coachzorez | 0W / 1L / 0D | |
| Most Played Opponents | ||
|---|---|---|
| manmoth | 454W / 894L / 133D | |
| Elias Sidali | 162W / 148L / 41D | |
| icecube91 | 135W / 121L / 7D | |
| nymfyr | 142W / 79L / 4D | |
| sor1s1 | 61W / 118L / 14D | |
Rating
| Year | Bullet | Blitz | Rapid | Daily |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 2422 | 2280 | ||
| 2024 | 2307 | 2320 | ||
| 2023 | 2316 | 2246 | 1991 | |
| 2022 | 2242 | 2254 | 1851 | |
| 2021 | 2327 | 2169 | 1741 | 813 |
| 2020 | 2183 | 2258 | 1722 | |
| 2019 | 2166 | 2089 | 1730 | |
| 2018 | 1982 | 1959 | 1430 | |
| 2017 | 1487 | 1942 | 1371 | 1244 |
| 2016 | 1654 | 1705 | 1331 | 1238 |
| 2015 | 1336 | 1289 | 1337 | 1111 |
| 2014 | 1012 | 1111 | 1122 | 1186 |
Stats by Year
| Year | White | Black | Moves |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 1002W / 825L / 115D | 896W / 920L / 134D | 79.9 |
| 2024 | 1027W / 898L / 138D | 901W / 1033L / 121D | 76.9 |
| 2023 | 834W / 794L / 115D | 711W / 895L / 117D | 76.3 |
| 2022 | 1347W / 1068L / 169D | 1288W / 1131L / 158D | 62.9 |
| 2021 | 1414W / 1422L / 207D | 1317W / 1511L / 196D | 75.6 |
| 2020 | 1426W / 1329L / 196D | 1276W / 1473L / 171D | 74.5 |
| 2019 | 1957W / 2000L / 243D | 1782W / 2104L / 199D | 70.0 |
| 2018 | 2590W / 2463L / 266D | 2291W / 2703L / 226D | 66.6 |
| 2017 | 1903W / 2155L / 216D | 1652W / 2212L / 193D | 65.3 |
| 2016 | 2550W / 2882L / 258D | 2195W / 3205L / 256D | 66.0 |
| 2015 | 935W / 1045L / 91D | 850W / 1155L / 76D | 61.6 |
| 2014 | 508W / 478L / 44D | 447W / 546L / 29D | 61.1 |
Openings: Most Played
| Blitz Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sicilian Defense | 2663 | 1247 | 1278 | 138 | 46.8% |
| Amazon Attack | 2438 | 1216 | 1084 | 138 | 49.9% |
| Caro-Kann Defense | 2024 | 1023 | 895 | 106 | 50.5% |
| French Defense | 1931 | 889 | 951 | 91 | 46.0% |
| Unknown | 1664 | 937 | 717 | 10 | 56.3% |
| French Defense: Burn Variation | 1335 | 563 | 694 | 78 | 42.2% |
| French Defense: Exchange Variation | 1253 | 584 | 585 | 84 | 46.6% |
| Dutch Defense | 1182 | 489 | 625 | 68 | 41.4% |
| Colle System: Rhamphorhynchus Variation | 1098 | 470 | 541 | 87 | 42.8% |
| Barnes Defense | 1026 | 526 | 455 | 45 | 51.3% |
| Bullet Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barnes Defense | 2287 | 1045 | 1127 | 115 | 45.7% |
| Amar Gambit | 2068 | 964 | 1003 | 101 | 46.6% |
| Colle System: Rhamphorhynchus Variation | 1185 | 531 | 589 | 65 | 44.8% |
| Australian Defense | 1115 | 491 | 577 | 47 | 44.0% |
| French Defense | 729 | 342 | 355 | 32 | 46.9% |
| Döry Defense | 596 | 260 | 314 | 22 | 43.6% |
| Nimzo-Larsen Attack | 554 | 248 | 284 | 22 | 44.8% |
| Hungarian Opening: Wiedenhagen-Beta Gambit | 531 | 252 | 233 | 46 | 47.5% |
| London System: Poisoned Pawn Variation | 445 | 194 | 223 | 28 | 43.6% |
| Catalan Opening | 341 | 151 | 178 | 12 | 44.3% |
| Daily Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sicilian Defense | 35 | 18 | 17 | 0 | 51.4% |
| QGD: 3.Nc3 Bb4 | 21 | 10 | 10 | 1 | 47.6% |
| QGA: 3.e3 c5 | 17 | 3 | 13 | 1 | 17.6% |
| Amazon Attack | 16 | 0 | 15 | 1 | 0.0% |
| Unknown | 14 | 3 | 10 | 1 | 21.4% |
| Australian Defense | 12 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 25.0% |
| Barnes Defense | 12 | 4 | 8 | 0 | 33.3% |
| Slav Defense | 10 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0.0% |
| Sicilian Defense: Closed | 10 | 1 | 8 | 1 | 10.0% |
| Sicilian Defense: Closed, Anti-Sveshnikov Variation, Kharlov-Kramnik Line | 10 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 60.0% |
| Rapid Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sicilian Defense | 36 | 25 | 9 | 2 | 69.4% |
| Amazon Attack | 26 | 16 | 9 | 1 | 61.5% |
| Dutch Defense | 20 | 11 | 7 | 2 | 55.0% |
| Bishop's Opening: Vienna Hybrid, Hromádka Variation | 14 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 71.4% |
| Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation, Knight Variation | 14 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 57.1% |
| French Defense | 13 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 46.1% |
| Sicilian Defense: Alapin Variation | 12 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 66.7% |
| French Defense: Burn Variation | 11 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 45.5% |
| Amar Gambit | 11 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 81.8% |
| Sicilian Defense: Closed | 11 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 45.5% |
🔥 Streaks
| Streak | Longest | Current |
|---|---|---|
| Winning | 21 | 0 |
| Losing | 29 | 1 |