10930 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
ratings are kinda like the collage football rating system for example if some small collage like apilichian state beats va tech there ranking would drastically increase but techs would drastically decrease. learn the value of the pieces and as you play you will learn the better the position of the peices the more they are valued at that pituclar time. like if you had a infantry solder high on a hill and some navy seal at the foot of the clif trying to attack him the battle would kind of even out , whereas if they were on leval ground the seal would have a far better advantage of skill and power.
Your account may be restricted if you do not follow our Fair Play Policy. If restricted, you will only be able to play with friends. Please do not intentionally abort/disconnect from games or make your opponents wait unnecessarily. Thank you for keeping Chess.com a fun place to enjoy chess!
Please tell me why? i'd never lie every one in the fight
Tour Mui Ne
I haven't got a rating but i have played one or two online/live chess games, do i have to win them in order to get a rating or do i have to play more?
You do have a rating. Scroll down your live and on line page and look at "current". If you run your cursor over your name above it will show your live rating.
I honestly have never cared for a rating and never will. The strength of a player is all in their head. One who plays well plays well, and one who does not, will lose. That's my philosophy, and I have never deterred from it. Now ratings can give you a general idea of the strength of a player, but they can never be the thing that dictates our strength. Just look at GM Walter Brown losing to a 1500 player on the Ruy Lopez Berlin Wall Fishing Pole trap. It's inituition, quickness, tactics, and strategy that win games.
its all the good u said!!
@BLS, what you say is correct with the underlying phrase being 'that ratings do not dictate ones strengh'. They are an indicator and help greatly in tourneys when players are matched up. Having said that, there are always the mis-matches and these are the ones that have the potential to create upsets and so often do.
I did say that were indicators.
As did I in statement # 1170!
Damn, this is a long thread. ;P
In playing my first game on Chess.com, I received a rating of 1200, before I played. Why, and how was that arrived at?
dont play WET GLOVES>he is very unprofessional
hey u got the right criteria of a good chess fighter as u will never tell a lie!! hats off !!!
Indeed a chess rating does not really measure "Chess Strength" because such a thing does not even exist. All it does is measure past performance. End of story.
The only thing that matters in Chess is the moves on the board. Never let a number or a title defeat you or let it intimidate you in anyway. Again, all that matters is the moves on the board.
Best moves is key to win.
I was going to mention the difference in the ratings you can get on different chess sites, but there are so many variables, including how much time you devote to the games, that comparisons are meaningless.
variables may be sort of recipe but devotion and correct move remains there as pivotal!!
Try to avoid wet gloves!! appriciate. Rating 1200 was a standard starting point!! U need to accept a certain point to be ur stand to start.Pl go thru CHESS .COM'S introductory discussion by Erik on the top of this forum page to make ur understanding certain.
Computer analysis most often gives my games 30+% of inaccuracies, mistakes and blunders, and yet I am rated in the top 2% (turn-based). Players rated 2200+ still make their share of mistakes. When I am stuck for a good move, I try to avoid making a really bad move. Making the "best moves" constantly is a pipe dream.
My humble goal within 3 years is to reach 1500 Elo. I don't think I will beat many players. Is it still possible to get a reasonably accurate rating?
I assume you mean over the board chess. You'd need to play a large number of games (maybe 50) against a variety of opponents to achieve a reasonably accurate rating, IMHO. According to my turn-based Glicko RD = 61, meaning there is a good degree of confidence that my playing strength is + or - 122 points, (between 1892 and 2136) and I've played about 300 games.
Correlation between chess and atheism.
by ChastityMoon 12 minutes ago
5/22/2015 - Surya Ganguly - Emanuel Berg , Gibraltar, 2009
by mri10 18 minutes ago
Who Ever Invented Chess Made A Mistake
by RedDawn430 21 minutes ago
Does ...Na5 refute the Yugoslav Attack?
by hayabusahayate16 31 minutes ago
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by Irinasdaddy 39 minutes ago
Bobby Fischer Lacked Creativity ?....How Dare Me !
by Synaphai 45 minutes ago
A pretty finish to a bullet game
by kevinkt 45 minutes ago
by kco 46 minutes ago
If you could change one rule of chess,what would it be?
by owltuna 47 minutes ago
Scandinavian Defense 1. e4 d5 2. Qxd5 Nc3 Qd8!!
by Conzipe 55 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!