Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Which do you believe is the hardest rating improvement to achieve?

Which do you believe is the hardest rating improvement to achieve?

  • 1200 to 1400
  • 1400 to 1600
  • 1600 to 1800
  • 1800 to 2000
  • 2000 to 2200
  • 2200 to 2400
  • A 2400 achieving the GM title

Created on June 8, 2010 | 6568 Votes | 43 Comments

Comments


  • 18 months ago

    Qt3--rObO

    1200 to 1400 for sure

  • 22 months ago

    Ineedphenylalanine

    A lot of people, including myself, put the last one.

  • 2 years ago

    MonkeyPawn

    Why is it harder to get 1800-2000 than 2000-2200???

  • 2 years ago

    konttaruan

    At first it seems that it gets harder to improve when ratings are higher. However most of the times a player rated 1200-1400 does not have too much idea what he is lacking and what to improve first. In terms of motivation to keep trying to improve,1200-1400 is very hard i can say. And I can give myself as an example =)

  • 3 years ago

    Stephenson2

    Going one step up

  • 3 years ago

    chessbeginner77

    1200-1400 for me. Still not quite there yet

  • 3 years ago

    michaello0001

    I think it depends on a player's rating

  • 3 years ago

    Starman_Skullz

    Not wrong

  • 3 years ago

    Karavardanyan

    Let me tell you why its hard to achieve from 1600 to 1800. You are skillful player but not as skillful as 1800 player, and since you don't know as many ideas (tactics, middlegames etc) as a 1800 player. So if you achieve 1800 by learning deep chess, you will have the skills of learning more, and the more you learn the better rating you will get.


    Am I wrong?

  • 3 years ago

    Garvanko

    Getting to 1400. I think I can only do it playing player who at my level or less.

  • 3 years ago

    mobidi

    If you want to reach very big rating -most important factor is personality (very big - from 2650).I think it is very hard to create such personality (like Alekhine,Fischer, Karpov,Kasparov,etc.).What about chess technique-at this level it must be unique(from opening to endgame)- not only variants,but philosophy,and psychology too.

  • 3 years ago

    Starman_Skullz

    2200-2400.

  • 3 years ago

    little15

    i think the hardest is not the obvious ( which would be from 2400 to GM)

    firstly i will explain my reasons for it and after i will tell MY CHOICE.

    i think that once you sustain for a long time a rating of around 2400 you are already know wht you are doing and you play frequently in biggest tourneys there are in the world, with GM's ( top tier tourneys do comprise 2400 ELO players who are not GM)

    eventually you will get your norms if you try to get better and in the meantime you play at that level  against GM's

    one more thing to notice is that there are a reasonable number of GM's who obtained the title before and now are hovering around ... your level ...2400 elo

    My choice is to get from 2200-2400... yeah , the 7% choice hahhahahah

    reasoning, that is the level where IM fighting. And there is a lot of competition there as obviously the number of International Masters is far greater than of GM's

    peace and chess :)

  • 3 years ago

    KHOSROV

    higher harder

  • 3 years ago

    restinpeace

    2000-2200, because you will must be we polished player before you reach that mark. You will take a little bit of time to accomplish that, and it is hard to maintain once you're up there.

  • 4 years ago

    Frankdawg

    2200-2400 seems like a bigger jump than 2400-2500, but really it all matters on what coarse you take to get that rating.

    If you grinded out going from 2400-2500 vs players rated say 1800-2000 I would say that is less difficult than going from 2200-2400 vs players rated around 2300-2400

    Your opposing players is the main factor, I think a solid 2400 player who played people around 2000 would have an easier time going to 2500 than a solid 2200 player going to 2400 vs players rated around 2300

    Also if you find a player who has a good rating, but plays weaker in a certain opening you can exploit that if you are adept in that opening. For example a 2000 player who has played 800 kings gambit games I would favor in a match over a 2200 player who has played 30 kings gambit games if the opening becomes kings gambit.

  • 4 years ago

    WilsonYiuWahWong

    Difficulty is relative. A strong player has an easier time improving as they are already strong and just need to tighten the gap of mistakes whereas the amateur player has to redo their game plan and take into account all the mistakes they make and play with plans so I vote 1600-1800, an area I believe where many club players are around and short of becoming a master.

  • 4 years ago

    Rogalentis

    1200 to 1400, of course

  • 4 years ago

    slvnfernando

    Well I jumped from 1200 to 1400 at no time and even without noticing it but, now , I am stuck and struggling to pass 1500!!!Wink

  • 4 years ago

    -BEES-

    I'm going to disagree with the prevailing opinion here. I think the lowest one is the hardest. Going from 1200-1400. I say that as someone who was in that range back when I was a kid, because I remember how tough it was.

    Once you hit 1400, you're good enough at chess to sort of enjoy the rush of getting better. Even though the amount of learning you have to do to improve is greater, it's easier to find the motivation and the interest to go from 1400-1600, then 1600-1800, and even 1800-2000. It gets even easier as you get better. Your rating is a positive reinforcement. If you feel like a better chess player, you will play like a better chess player.

Back to Top

Post your reply: