Yes indeed. But also -- and maybe this is only a Popperian thing you guys think is wrong? -- I find that correcting statements, instead of just saying them wrong and leaving it at that, often leads to better understanding. Sometimes you find it's not as easy to correct as you assumed, and maybe change your conclusion a bit.

No. You are missing the point. The easy correction would be for you to say "Well, the chess claim might not be true. But your point still goes through if I used Go and one of the world's best Go players or some chess variant like Andernach chess or cylindrical chess or Capablanca chess." And then respond to the argument in that form.

It isn't helpful to pick out a small problem with an argument someone makes and then ignore the rest of the argument until they've responded to doing so. It might feel fun, and it might be rhetorically impressive in some circumstances, but it doesn't really help resolving disagreement or improving understanding of what people are trying to communicate.