How many points should a chess tutor ideally have?

The_economist9
drmrboss wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:

I would argue that a tutor should be a solid player (rarely lose).

Rarely lose to who?

2000+ rarely lose to 1000 but Hikaru rarely lose to 2000+.

Just rarely lose in general. 

The_economist9
Vibhansh_Alok wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:
Vibhansh_Alok wrote:

Any 2200+ is an excellent choice for students under 2000.

I noticed that a lot of high rated players charge a lot.

I agree, high rated players who doesn't have any title, charges high amount for coaching maybe because they're not called for international tournaments, they don't have sponsors. Their income mainly adds up from there job earnings, prize money from local or national tournaments and from the chess coaching.....

But what's up with the titled player charging higher cost? They don really need it, they do have a valid reason for high pricing i.e. they are much better than untitled player. But believe me its mostly price for fame....

Yeah I noticed that too, but normally tutors who charge too much don't get as much costumers. 

The_economist9
imivangalic wrote:

In chess taking coach for begginers doesnt mean that higher coach has elo that he will be better teacher, that is like someone can be great profesor at college and bad techer for kids.

But definitly for taking someone to coach you should go over 2000 elo becouse if you take 1500 player to coach you, you can learn lot of things wrong.

Best regards

+1

The_economist9
JackRoach wrote:

I'd say you should be titled if you want to make money.

This brings up a question I have, why do some non-titled players play so well? I thought titled players were the best, but I have seen many accounts on chess.com without a title and a very high rating. 

B1ZMARK

It’s possible they’re either alts or just really good at speed chess.

Steven-ODonoghue
The_economist9 wrote:

Just rarely lose in general. 

All players should win and lose 50% of the time regardless of whether they are 100 rated or a grandmaster. If your tutor loses less often than that it means they are playing opponents weaker than themselves.

drmrboss
The_economist9 wrote:
drmrboss wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:

I would argue that a tutor should be a solid player (rarely lose).

Rarely lose to who?

2000+ rarely lose to 1000 but Hikaru rarely lose to 2000+.

Just rarely lose in general. 

Impossible for any human. 

Just Stockfish rarely lose. 

laurengoodkindchess

Hi! My name is Lauren Goodkind and I'm a chess coach based in California.  

 Here's my opinion:

   If you are just starting out in chess and know nothing about the game, I feel that a 1000-1200 rated player would be good to coach.  I'm rated 1850 USCF and most of my students are rated above 1000.  If I am looking for a coach myself, then I'll look for somebody who's rated above 2400 or above.

I hope that this helps. 

ZhuangziCM
drmrboss wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:
drmrboss wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:

I would argue that a tutor should be a solid player (rarely lose).

Rarely lose to who?

2000+ rarely lose to 1000 but Hikaru rarely lose to 2000+.

Just rarely lose in general. 

Impossible for any human. 

Just Stockfish rarely lose. 

Leela Chess Zero has entered the chat.

thilinaanjana

sounds good