What should a 10-11 year old's rating be?

hailducky

I'm part of a youth chess club. I'm fairly good for the average chess player at my age, but nothing special. 

In the youth chess club, none of the ten year olds can hold a candle to me. And where I live, the top player in the region for u18 is 1995.

So yeah, you're pretty good. Play rapid, not blitz. More cheaters, but more accurate for actual rating.

DaMaGor
AlphaZeroDark30 wrote:
AndBell wrote:
AlphaZeroDark30 wrote:

Nakamura hit 2750 at age fourteen.  How much has he gained in the last twenty years?  Kamsky hit 2700 at fourteen.  What's he now?  There's a lot of known theory that one can emulate to get to 2600-2800, but after that they stop dead in their tracks.  At some point a dominant player is just going to blast everyone like Fischer did and cross 3000.

The reason people peak at 2700 is there is no one left to get any significant elo points from.  When you are 2700 and you beat a 2400 or 2500 what do you get?  1 or 2 points?  For Carlsen, Nakamura, Aronian, Vishy, etc... they don't have anyone left to play except each other.  ELO is a relative scale, not absolute, so it starts to lose accuracy as you get to the extremes of the spectrum. 

In other words, no humans who can score 90+ percent against the top GMs, the way Stockfish can.  Fischer and Kasparov were self-taught more or less so they kept improving.  Carlsen is not a brilliant innovator, just slightly better than a large group of equals.  

So soon we forget that Carlsen was 70 points clear of #2 for much of 2014; only Fischer and Kasparov have had similar or larger margins.

See for instance https://ratings.fide.com/toparc.phtml?cod=313

It is true that in recent years Carlsen has stagnated, though keeping his hold on the title, while others have caught up.

Kawawawa
FrostedBoy wrote:

I'm 10 and my rating is 1900 here my real life rating is 1826 I think that's good enough.....

 

ghost_of_pushwood

Only if you're willing to settle!