You have always come off to me as incredibly stubborn. Once your opinion is stated, it seems that it will take nothing less than an active volcano of logical evidence to change it.
Hordes of unbelievers believe lies about reality. Agreement is not truth.
I am responsible for my own emotions, however, in this case. If someone were to assume something about me and my winning capabilities, I would find that dehumanizing, because a chess opponent is an unknown and a game an unknown outcome. What are you going to do if I lose? Am I not allowed to be human? Knowing that the relationship is conditional on my chess wins actually makes me want to lose so I can get rid of you. You don't really care about me at all.
But perhaps Hans views your statements quite differently. I most certainly will not be making any assumptions. Ironically, he is off playing an IRL chess tournament right now.
More accurately, a bunch of folks IRL have made it their business to assume that I'm going to fail at everything. Those people are dehumanizing too, because what are you going to do if I win? Oh right, punish and abuse and abandon me back to failure. Thanks for nothing. Now I'd hardly assume that you would be similarly interested in said punishing/abuse/abandonment, but you assuming that I am going to lose reminds me of that. That's probably the real reason I am irked.
Now, if you'll pardon my emotional oversensitivity and my desire to be viewed as a human being rather than an unstoppable chess-playing machine, a target to hit, or a certain chess failure, I also have no particular investment in proving myself better than another human being. I prefer my chess opponents to be human beings and to view them as human beings along with myself because it makes the game easier to play. But that's all on me.