Is there anybody that can help me how to calculate rating grade ? Although some members might play the game for fun  but I believe  alot of them play for better improvement the their game. My experience is :

up to 1200 - I usually feel comfortable w/ my game

1200-1400 -  I can win more than I lose.

1400-1600 -  Sometimes I win  sometimes I lose

1600-1800- It drains my brain away to win or even to get a draw ?

 1800 and up - I tried once and got easily beaten

Btw I'm currently at 1583 and feel that It may drop again close to 1500.

Damn toharno,you declined my challenge and my schore is 1600 now.I Have not been doing anything but not sleeping and playing chess and its really comming to me.Im on a winning streak.

ha...ha,,,ha... how about now ? I was having too many games at the time, cann't focus.

This is how i look at it...

 1 - 999  beginners.

 1000-1299 - Novice players.

 1200-1399 - Weak club players.

 1400-1599 - Average club players.

 1600-1799 - Strong club players.

 1800- 1999 - Very strong club players.

 2000-2199 - Junor master's.

 2200-2499 - Master's.

 2500+ GrandMaster's (GM's)  (Some IM's are also at 2500.)

2800+ WORLD CHAMPIONS.

Others might have a different view but this is roughly how i see it anyway....

yeah 1-999 are really weak players who are usually just learning "HOW THE HORSE MOVES"

mercytononeZ wrote: yeah 1-999 are really weak players who are usually just learning "HOW THE HORSE MOVES"

---

At that rating level they either havnt learned all the moves or only know basicaly how to move them and have no understanding of the fundementals of chess... the novice players can at least have a plan even if its a weak one can think more then 1 move head on good days and have a very basic concept of fundementals like controling the center and so on.

Wanna see how rating below 999 does the playing. here is one example I get from this site. A bit ackward but really entertaining.

I can't stop laughing.  Please tell me that was a joke.  I am saddened to think that someone can honestly be that stupid as to attack a position with their king in the first 5 moves.

It did happen. I just don't want to offense other member in this site. In fact He/she repeated this kind of action several times- attacking the opponent w/ king's move. Maybe he thinks that his king is a great hero who needs to lead his packs in the battle-thus the king should in front of the soldiers.

I recognise that - it's Lenny Bongcloud. I think he's deliberately trying to be the lowest ranked member on the site to tell you the truth.

lol, i as well couldnt stop laughing at the posted game.  i dont think they were trying to win, i think it was vice-versa.

camdawg7 :

either I lost my queen or let him do the cehck mate.

If xc5 then black wl response w/ Qxh2# - checkmate. If Qxf3 then black wl response w/ Qxf3, I wl lose my queen. What's the point of continuing the game w/ rating 1900 over while you lose your queen? Do you have better solution ?

Unbeliever wrote: I can't stop laughing.  Please tell me that was a joke.  I am saddened to think that someone can honestly be that stupid as to attack a position with their king in the first 5 moves.

---

Dont laugh at beginners mate its not nice! Remember we were all there once.And compared to me you cant play either! No offence but its relative to your playing skills so try and be kind even when u see they are not as u good ok.....

little-man :

Like it  or not you must not be able to hold your laugh seeing how the game was played, but I agree w/ one point of yours- it's relatively a matter of playing skill. Frankly I really don't want to offense anybody in site (that's why I cover the player's name), just to mention that there are always different ways of enjoying the chess game. 

Peter Paul on rec.games.chess post this ratings guide in 1999:

 

How about this for a "qualitative" ratings guide. It comes
from observations of scholastic chess as well as USCF chess
tournaments. One of the first questions I get when I play
one of my unrated friends is "what do you think my rating
is?" This guide might help if you get similar questions.
Don't flame me for it not being accurate, but I'd welcome
suggestions...

 

Qualitative Ratings Guide
-------------------------

 

USCF
500      Knows how the pieces move, doesn't have a firm grasp of
         the rules of castling (especially q-side) and doesn't
         know about en passant. Will leave any piece en prise
         including the king. Often games result in illegal
         positions. Endgame is seldom reached.
800      Average "layperson" chess player i.e. never heard of USCF
         (or CCA or FIDE or whatever),
         chess notations, chess books. Knows castling, but
         may not know of en passant. Doesn't leave king en prise,
         but will leave any other piece en prise. Loves the queens.
         Games are often decided by which player hangs queen first.
         Difficulty in figuring how to
         mate with K+Q+R vs. k. Difficulty in avoiding
         stalemate in K+Q vs. k.
1000     Starting to realize that there is a body of chess "theory"
         including tactics and strategy, opening, middle and
         endgames. Loves forks. Generally does not leave pieces
         en prise. Easily figures out how to mate with K+Q vs. k.
1200     Knows an opening for white, usually the Italian or the
         Four Knights. Strives for development in opening, but
         doesn't know what to do with it afterwards. Can see 1 ply
         ahead regularly, 2 if trying hard. Can see a mate in 1.
         Knows forks, pins, skewers. Stalemates often in won
         K+P vs. k endgames (oposition). Easily figures out how to
         mate with K+R vs. k.
         Difficulty in figuring out how to mate with K+B+B vs. k.
1500     Average rating for USCF members (or there abouts).
         Has an opening for W and B vs. KP and QP.
         If KP player then knows the fried liver attack cold. If QP
         player then knows the Cambridge Springs cold.
         Usually takes a
         2 or more move combination to hang a piece. Can solve
         many mate-in-n problems if given enough time. "Visualizes"
         the chess board. Almost always defeats those rated below 1000.
         Attempts to play some lay people blind folded, but
         finds it more difficult than it looks. Easily figures
         out how to mate
         with K+B+B vs. K. Knows how to mate with K+B+N vs. k.
         Although very conversant in tactics, strategy seems a
         bit of a mystery.
1700     About the average rating of tournament players.
         Has a definite feel for which positions are
         comfortable and which are potentially dangerous.
         Easily crushes laypeople when giving multiboard
         simuls.
         Rarely hangs pieces, but for multimove combinations.
         Understands methods of attacking the castled king position.
         Has trouble sacrificing material for positional
         compensation. Believes that to get better, they must
         study the endgame.
1900     Has reached the top %15 or so of all rated players. Can
         actually understands some of the GM games published,
         espcially in openings that s/he plays. Understands
         many positional weaknesses and how to exploit them,
         i.e. minority attack, backward pawn, isolated pawn,
         bad bishop. Looks for good squares for knights. Can
         sacrifice the exchange with success. Easily
         gets positional advantages against computers, though
         doesn't always win. Knows some basic K+R+P vs. k+r
         endgames. Believes that s/he could easily become
         a master, but for the time needed.
2000     (I'm only mid 1900's so how woiuld I know :-) )
2200     ??
2400     ??

Ok fair enough it was silly chess i agree. But laughing at them is a bit harsh dont u think? i mean it would be like me laughing at your games and asking what kind of play is that?  i just dont want to put them down to much thats all. there are lots of ways to enjoy the game thats true for sure...

wow that must be good for me... on this im rated 2175 and im only 12... IM A JUNIOR MASTER!

To some extend I think correspondent chess may tend to inflate compares to OTB chess, maybe by 200-300 points, I'm not really sure, perhaps there is  anyone can point it out the difference ?

I think you are right about inflated ratings for correspondent chess, because you have more time to evaluate your moves along with possible moves of your opponents.  Live chess is faster and probably contains more errors by both players.  That's why I don't care for blitz chess.  The 5 minute games.  I remember the movie "Searching for Bobby Fischer"  Josh's coach warned Josh not to play blitz because it ruins your game.