13910 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!
Created on June 8, 2010 |
6587 Votes | 43 Comments
1200 to 1400 for sure
A lot of people, including myself, put the last one.
Why is it harder to get 1800-2000 than 2000-2200???
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 =)
Going one step up
1200-1400 for me. Still not quite there yet
I think it depends on a player's rating
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?
Getting to 1400. I think I can only do it playing player who at my level or less.
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.
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 :)
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.
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.
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.
1200 to 1400, of course
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!!!
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.
4 days ago
11 days ago
13 days ago
3 weeks ago
4 weeks ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 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!