KNOW YOUR APPROX RATING

http://www.elometer.net

Interesting. Got this:

Hmm, it doens't progress me past the first 'puzzle'.

I used Chrome. Could be a browser issue.

Nonsensical. You can't accurately measure a player's strength by giving only 30 seconds to tactical puzzles.
When I took it seriously, it gave an estimate of 1580 points, when I deliberately made nonsense moves in one second on each puzzles, it gave an estimate of 1300.

I got 2000. Works for me.

Baaah, don't be silly. Of course you can measure a chess players skill with accuracy, you just don't understand what a bell curve or confidence interval is ;)

I do undestand what a bell curve and confidence intervals are, since they taught in at least high school everywhere.
What I don't understand that if I deliberately make nonsensical moves in one second how's that result in a 1300 rating, which is well within the average.

Another thing.
This test allows you to make illegal moves.
You can click on your pawn and click 5 squares ahead, and it jumps to the next puzzle like nothing happened.
It also lets you move your own pawn in squares occupied by your own pieces.
I did just that wherever I could, which is almost all of them.
For the remaining few, I moved my queen or rook to squares where they could be captured for completely free without any recapture.
The result I got was 1156 with a confidence interval of 920 - 1391.
Now tell me this is an accurate measurement when it's broken as all hell.
Do the same, if you don't believe it.

Based on your move choices, our estimate of your Elo rating is 1156, with a 95% confidence interval of[920...1391].

Seriously you don't get statistics. It isn't accurate. It isn't not accurate. It is 95% confident you are in the range stated. Moreover you are giving anomolous data to a statistical model. It assumes you are demonstrating skill and not fooling it. All your 1 second guesses are outliers and should not be used for predictions. 

The whole system is almost certainly using machine learning algorithms which do not respond well to bad input. If you give it nonsese data instead of showing it your skill of course it will not do a good job. However your nonsense data is likely being added to a databse and used for other predictions. So infact you are probably making it less accurate with every dumb move you put it. Now get back to school hyyyahhh 

What I simply say is that it's completely pointless to take on a broken test.
How can it measure anything even remotely properly if no care was taken even to make it realise illegal moves?

It's like taking a grammar test where not even the questions are checked for errors.
Get me, big boy?

It gives an estimate of 1300 when deliberately putting pieces en prise, and gives an estimate of 1156 when making illegal moves.
If anything, it should at least make you redo a puzzle in case of an illegal move, as those moves in statistic terms, would be invalid data, wouldn't they? 

1949

If someone has a 13xx rating here maybe their 1-second responses really do accurately reflect how they think and what their rating range is. I know that most GMs' first guess would still put them at GM levels.

I have a rating of 13xx here, and I don't put my queen en prise for free, though.
And I don't think that 11xx players play illegal moves, either. 

Its an approximation i wouldnt get to caught up in the results.  

Apparently it estimates me at 1712.  Kind of matches up to my chess.com ratings or at least in the right ballpark of where they have been within the last 6-12 months.  Not convinced by it though.  When I am in a game I have the 'feel' for the game through having played all the moves to get to whatever position I am in.  I'm certainly not a deep calculator of variations, but just dropping into a position with 30s to size it up and play a move doesn't feel to me like it matches up to the situation I am in when I play a serious game (which I've only done in one tournament in the last 15 years!).

My approx elo is 1933. Sure. I lose to 1700's all the time. You can't estimate my elo from only 30 tactics. You need a lot more data, like actual gameplay. Just because you can solve a mate in one doesn't mean your positional play is good. I read positional chess books all the time, and yet I still have a hard time grasping some positions that look equal from the Silman Thinking Technique, but in just 20 moves somehow white/black gets an advatange (with best play!) and wins...

I took the test it said i was a 1604 player but really i am around 1400.

I know my rating. If I stop losing to underrated youth players, my rating will match my skill level.

OTB gives you a real rating. These estimates, on the other hand, http://chessskill.blogspot.com/2009/05/rating-estimation.html 

I think the idea of this test is not to measure your ability to solve puzzles, but to compare your answers with what players with known rating answered and based on that it is guessing your rating.