Thats a very difficult question to answer. There are a lot of factors that come into play. How long have they been playing, how frequently do they play in rated tournaments, playing ability etc... I cant even take a guess. I know some kids ages 9-12 that are rated way higher then people 30-40. Chess is a game where age doesnt really matter too much.
Average chess rating
Sort:
i think the longer you've been playing the higher your rating will go. I find tht higher rated people are usually a little older...
There's no such thing as an "average" chess rating, but a solid club-level chess player might be rate somewhere around 1500-1700.
In general, a person's rating will increase as that person becomes more experienced. Most people can continue improving well into middle age. At some point, though, age-related decline kicks in.
I saw a list several years ago of the average USCF rating for different age groups. The peak, as I recall, was 1720 or so at age 40.
what is more important is your own skill. ratings are such trivial numbers. there is bound to always be someone who is much better and much worse. i found much more enjoyment in chess when i stopped worrying so much about my rating and that of others and just worried about making good art.
Live ratings are practice to me. According to the live statistical rating, it shows that the average long player is 1180 or so. I played live chess for a month straight and I always hovered around 1220-1260. My ratings went up and down slowly after a hundred games, but when i took time off for a month and came back, my games were changing 20-30 pts at a time instead of the usual 7-12 points.
Does that mean you are being re-assessed?
If your looking for the best rating for your ability, dont do what i did and drink while you play.
Ratings don't mean much. Some 1200 player could be a master just starting his account. I don't think that artificially doing things to maintain a certain level does anything at all. I fluctuate between 1600 and 1750 in a down cycle like now it gets close to 1600 mostly because I am doing stupid things. My approach is to play whoever sits down regardless of rating. Sometimes I lose to lower rated players who actually played well or who are actually much better than their rating. I have also met some sandbaggers who are people who play unbelievaby strong games despite having a triple digit rating and who offer derogatory remarks during and after games. I think they get some perverse pleasure out of winning against higher rated players when they themselves are far, far better than their apparent rating.
rich wrote:
The Average chess rating is always around 1314.
Rich, where did you come up with 1314 as the average chess rating? Do you mean on this site or in general?
goldendog wrote: I saw a list several years ago of the average USCF rating for different age groups. The peak, as I recall, was 1720 or so at age 40.
The USCF estimated initial rating is:
50 x age (between 3 and 26 inclusive); 1300 otherwise
http://math.bu.edu/people/mg/ratings/rating.system.pdf
rich wrote: The Average chess rating is always around 1314.
lawyer08 wrote: Rich, where did you come up with 1314 as the average chess rating? Do you mean on this site or in general?
Currently 1353 (MY HOME, Online Chess, View Players).
It's massively skewed by the initial rating of 1200, and it has been rising (due to rating inflation?).
rich wrote: Wow, last time I checked about 1 month ago it said 1314.
40 points a month, 500 points a year; we'll all have GrandMaster rating in a few years.
Mine was 1120 until my computer broke and It dropped to 1049. Now I have to get it high again. Hopefully I'll get it before I'm 13
Chessroshi wrote:
what is more important is your own skill. ratings are such trivial numbers. there is bound to always be someone who is much better and much worse. i found much more enjoyment in chess when i stopped worrying so much about my rating and that of others and just worried about making good art.
I agree, anyway I find myself in the last category. Now, how do I stop worrying about my age? Thae author of the post clearly does'nt believe ther's another age category after 55
Chessroshi wrote:
what is more important is your own skill. ratings are such trivial numbers. there is bound to always be someone who is much better and much worse. i found much more enjoyment in chess when i stopped worrying so much about my rating and that of others and just worried about making good art.
rooperi wrote: I agree, anyway I find myself in the last category. Now, how do I stop worrying about my age? The author of the post clearly doesn't believe there's another age category after 55
1. Many people take up painting or flower-arranging when they get too old to play chess. It's nothing to be ashamed about.
2. Or that it's not worth differentiating between 'old fogies' once they have reached 'retirement age' from chess. Should there be a mandatory retirement age? An easier set of data to track down: what was the average age of the last 20 chess world champions at the point they lost the title?
artfizz wrote:
Chessroshi wrote:
what is more important is your own skill. ratings are such trivial numbers. there is bound to always be someone who is much better and much worse. i found much more enjoyment in chess when i stopped worrying so much about my rating and that of others and just worried about making good art.
rooperi wrote: I agree, anyway I find myself in the last category. Now, how do I stop worrying about my age? The author of the post clearly doesn't believe there's another age category after 55
1. Many people take up painting or flower-arranging when they get too old to play chess. It's nothing to be ashamed about.
2. Or that it's not worth differentiating between 'old fogies' once they have reached 'retirement age' from chess. Should there be a mandatory retirement age? An easier set of data to track down: what was the average age of the last 20 chess world champions at the point they lost the title?
Korchnoi will live forever. That's my point and I'm sticking to it.
Gotta go, time for mt Lucozade.
it cant be said. 1200 could be GM and I have 1800 quick and 1300 long because I dont play long games. So how can you explain that?
who cares
I am 15 and I have 1750-1800 :)
So what will be the average chess rating for a person who is >15 , 15-20 , 20-30 , 30 - 40 , 40 - 55 , 55<