The difference between 50 ELO is remarkable

Sort:
Viznik

Maybe I’m wrong on this, but it seems the rating in just 50 ELO is extremely noticeable. For example, I just played someone rated 911, about 50 ELO below me in blitz. It’s not that they were a bad player, but their ability was substantial less than the game of played before of a blitz player rated 970 the game before.

I’ve noticed this as a recurring thing, too. Anybody else?

DasBurner

low 1500s blunder queens before move 10 and 1625+ never blunder anything for some reason

AunTheKnight

Same. Below 1450 1400s play like 500s, and above that play like... well... 1400s.

sndeww

Yes

MegaPro-123
Viznik wrote:

Maybe I’m wrong on this, but it seems the rating in just 50 ELO is extremely noticeable. For example, I just played someone rated 911, about 50 ELO below me in blitz. It’s not that they were a bad player, but their ability was substantial less than the game of played before of a blitz player rated 970 the game before.

I’ve noticed this as a recurring thing, too. Anybody else?

Nope. Haven't noticed anything like this. 50 ELO higher or lower doesn't matter to me. I win either way.