Supercheese: A Chess Prodigy in Motion
Supercheese’s journey in chess began over a decade ago and has evolved into a tapestry of impressive achievements across all formats—from lightning‐fast bullet games to steady, calculated daily battles. Emerging on the scene in 2010 with promising ratings in rapid, blitz, bullet, and daily formats, Supercheese quickly established a reputation for versatility and tenacity.
Over the years, this dynamic player has refined a playing style that combines daring tactical flair with an exceptional endgame sense. Known for pushing opponents when the odds seem against him, Supercheese boasts a remarkable comeback rate and an uncanny ability to convert even a slight edge into victory. Whether navigating the complexities of a sudden bullet blitz or the strategic depth of a daily game, his average moves per win and loss reflect a consistently adaptable mindset.
Integral to his chess persona is not just the raw numbers behind his ratings—which have steadily improved over time—but also his nuanced psychological approach. With a tilt factor keeping him mostly composed and a win rate that withstands material deficits, Supercheese thrives on pressure and displays superb tactical awareness. His performance shows a balance between aggressive play as white and resilient tenacity when fighting as black.
Beyond ratings and statistics, what truly defines Supercheese is a creative repertoire and a willingness to explore different opening systems. His expansive portfolio in openings—from the intricacies of the Kings Indian Attack to complex lines in the Ruy Lopez and Nimzo Indian Defense—demonstrates a thirst for innovation and a deep understanding of chess theory.
Today, Supercheese continues to challenge both peers and rising stars on the international scene. His journey, marked by a long winning streak and consistent performance across various time controls, is a testament to his dedication, strategic depth, and undying passion for the royal game.
Hi Zuhao (Luke) Li, here’s a personalised post-match review
1. What you already do very well
- Opening variety – You comfortably switch between 1.e4 and 1.d4 / 1.Nf3 systems. This flexibility is rare at your level and keeps opponents guessing.
• Your Giuoco Piano win versus Julia Alboredo shows model development and an early ...Nxe4 d5 central break.
• The Catalan structures you choose as White demonstrate a good grasp of long-term space advantages. - Tactical alertness – You convert middlegame advantages quickly when pieces are flying (e.g. 18…Nxe5! in the French Win).
- Psychology – When facing higher-rated players you still choose principled, ambitious moves (16.Nd5! against Eric Lobron).
2. Repeated issues to address
- Time management
Two recent defeats came from the clock rather than the board. You often enter critical positions with <20 seconds, which hurts calculation quality. - Converting initiative into a safe king
Loss PGN shows the pattern attack – over-press – exposed king. Example (Kan Sicilian):
After 19…Kh8 the attack fizzles and your king is suddenly the target. - Piece coordination vs pawn storms
Several losses feature pawn pushes (…h5/…g5 or …b5/…c4) that drove your pieces backward. Aim to keep major pieces connected before launching pawn breaks.
3. Action plan for the next 30 games
- Adopt a “2-minute rule” – never let your clock drop below 2:00 before move 20 in 3-minute games. Blunt but effective.
- End every calculation with a king-safety checklist (checks, captures, threats, loose pieces). This habit would have avoided 21.Nf5?? in the Kan.
- Deep-dive one critical endgame weekly – Your wins often end before endgames; make sure you can convert slightly better rook endings if the attack stalls.
- Create a “no-pawn-moves” practice game – Play training games where you restrict yourself from pushing flank pawns until move 15; this forces you to improve piece coordination first.
- Add tactics on piece sacrifice into discovered attacks. Your attacking style will benefit from recognising the zwischenzug possibilities that often appear one ply deeper.
4. Micro targets to measure
- Average remaining time on move 25 > 25 seconds.
- Clock-losses ≤ 1 in the next 30 blitz games.
- Conversion rate with > +3.0 engine eval after move 20 to reach 90 % (currently ≈ 78 %).
5. Useful dashboards
Your best performance cluster currently appears late evenings; consider scheduling serious sessions then.
6. Motivation boost
Your current peak 2806 (2019-10-09) is already top-1 % on the platform. Cleaning up the two recurring issues above is realistically worth another 75-100 ELO in three months.Keep the curiosity burning and good luck with your next games, Luke!
🆚 Opponent Insights
| Recent Opponents | ||
|---|---|---|
| Sam Copeland | 1W / 0L / 0D | |
| azchessgurus | 0W / 1L / 0D | |
| Bryan Weisz | 0W / 2L / 0D | |
| tulipnoir | 0W / 1L / 0D | |
| Warrick Rolfe | 4W / 0L / 1D | |
| nikolai008 | 1W / 0L / 0D | |
| levonathan | 1W / 0L / 0D | |
| eddienketiahfan22 | 0W / 1L / 0D | |
| 1869ukd | 0W / 1L / 0D | |
| nepitibiribas | 1W / 0L / 0D | |
| Most Played Opponents | ||
|---|---|---|
| lack_of_creativity | 80W / 5L / 0D | |
| Sergey Agapov | 28W / 29L / 1D | |
| Jack Rodgers | 25W / 26L / 6D | |
| Mark Kotliar | 33W / 18L / 5D | |
| Safal Bora | 23W / 23L / 8D | |
Rating
| Year | Bullet | Blitz | Rapid | Daily |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 2454 | 2537 | ||
| 2024 | 2605 | 2237 | ||
| 2023 | 2472 | |||
| 2022 | 2487 | 2430 | 2237 | |
| 2021 | 2543 | 2232 | ||
| 2020 | 2431 | 2530 | 2303 | |
| 2019 | 2455 | 2705 | 2405 | |
| 2018 | 2364 | 2543 | 1897 | |
| 2017 | 2317 | 2328 | ||
| 2016 | 2348 | 2416 | ||
| 2015 | 2335 | 2259 | 1598 | |
| 2014 | 2004 | |||
| 2013 | 1882 | 1989 | 1598 | |
| 2012 | 1716 | 2112 | 1739 | |
| 2011 | 1784 | 1914 | 1641 | 1617 |
| 2010 | 1631 | 1854 | 1565 | 1886 |
Stats by Year
| Year | White | Black | Moves |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 296W / 198L / 36D | 224W / 251L / 49D | 74.0 |
| 2024 | 18W / 6L / 2D | 18W / 7L / 1D | 78.4 |
| 2023 | 4W / 1L / 2D | 2W / 4L / 0D | 92.5 |
| 2022 | 7W / 9L / 0D | 8W / 6L / 1D | 73.5 |
| 2021 | 11W / 10L / 0D | 12W / 2L / 7D | 80.8 |
| 2020 | 250W / 176L / 39D | 234W / 203L / 50D | 75.2 |
| 2019 | 1204W / 760L / 193D | 1010W / 865L / 264D | 84.0 |
| 2018 | 1180W / 758L / 193D | 1051W / 848L / 236D | 83.4 |
| 2017 | 1260W / 873L / 197D | 1168W / 913L / 258D | 81.0 |
| 2016 | 604W / 441L / 62D | 586W / 452L / 69D | 79.0 |
| 2015 | 179W / 112L / 28D | 193W / 116L / 14D | 80.3 |
| 2014 | 1W / 0L / 0D | 0W / 0L / 0D | 115.0 |
| 2013 | 7W / 10L / 1D | 6W / 12L / 0D | 57.9 |
| 2012 | 275W / 242L / 36D | 273W / 270L / 18D | 71.2 |
| 2011 | 265W / 269L / 22D | 280W / 262L / 18D | 66.9 |
| 2010 | 378W / 261L / 25D | 359W / 280L / 31D | 68.5 |
Openings: Most Played
| Blitz Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nimzo-Indian Defense: Classical Variation | 666 | 375 | 223 | 68 | 56.3% |
| QGD: Ragozin | 587 | 271 | 245 | 71 | 46.2% |
| Amazon Attack: Siberian Attack | 485 | 231 | 194 | 60 | 47.6% |
| Diemer-Duhm Gambit (DDG): 4...f5 | 376 | 190 | 140 | 46 | 50.5% |
| English Opening: Agincourt Defense | 355 | 174 | 136 | 45 | 49.0% |
| Blackburne Shilling Gambit | 340 | 183 | 133 | 24 | 53.8% |
| Slav Defense: Alekhine Variation | 316 | 188 | 103 | 25 | 59.5% |
| French Defense | 296 | 160 | 118 | 18 | 54.0% |
| Nimzo-Indian Defense | 293 | 145 | 118 | 30 | 49.5% |
| Australian Defense | 276 | 157 | 105 | 14 | 56.9% |
| Bullet Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| French Defense | 158 | 93 | 56 | 9 | 58.9% |
| Australian Defense | 148 | 82 | 55 | 11 | 55.4% |
| Döry Defense | 146 | 72 | 67 | 7 | 49.3% |
| Nimzo-Larsen Attack | 144 | 79 | 58 | 7 | 54.9% |
| Amar Gambit | 142 | 69 | 64 | 9 | 48.6% |
| Benoni Defense: Benoni Gambit Accepted | 127 | 66 | 55 | 6 | 52.0% |
| Colle System: Rhamphorhynchus Variation | 122 | 62 | 51 | 9 | 50.8% |
| Modern | 116 | 58 | 49 | 9 | 50.0% |
| Amazon Attack: Siberian Attack | 107 | 52 | 44 | 11 | 48.6% |
| London System: Poisoned Pawn Variation | 92 | 49 | 39 | 4 | 53.3% |
| Daily Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| French Defense: Advance Variation | 53 | 34 | 16 | 3 | 64.2% |
| QGD: 2...Bf5 3.cxd5 | 30 | 23 | 5 | 2 | 76.7% |
| Nimzo-Indian Defense | 28 | 11 | 15 | 2 | 39.3% |
| French Defense | 25 | 18 | 7 | 0 | 72.0% |
| French Defense: Exchange Variation | 24 | 14 | 8 | 2 | 58.3% |
| Australian Defense | 23 | 12 | 11 | 0 | 52.2% |
| Unknown | 19 | 9 | 10 | 0 | 47.4% |
| Amar Gambit | 18 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 83.3% |
| QGA: 3.e3 c5 | 17 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 88.2% |
| Old Indian Defense: Normal Variation | 16 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 75.0% |
| Rapid Opening | Games | Wins | Losses | Draws | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| French Defense | 9 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 44.4% |
| French Defense: Advance Variation | 8 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 50.0% |
| French Defense: Exchange Variation | 7 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 71.4% |
| King's Indian Defense: Four Pawns Attack | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Budapest: 3...Ng4 4.e3 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 25.0% |
| QGA: 3.e3 c5 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 75.0% |
| Blackburne Shilling Gambit | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
| QGD: Albin, 3.dxe5 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 66.7% |
| Australian Defense | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0.0% |
| Nimzo-Indian Defense | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0.0% |
🔥 Streaks
| Streak | Longest | Current |
|---|---|---|
| Winning | 20 | 1 |
| Losing | 24 | 0 |