people below 300 elo should quit chess.prove me wrong

Sort:
badger_song

OP has it backwards, nobody has to prove anything; OP made the statement, it's up to him to prove he's right. The rest of us will judge his effort.

Bun

i love chess.prove

humzini1

CHICKEN JOCKEY

Anonymousplayer_796

No one should quit at any rating I started chess at a rating of 151 and was at the level for almost a year look at me now

PlayerIDC
badger_song wrote:

OP has it backwards, nobody has to prove anything; OP made the statement, it's up to him to prove he's right. The rest of us will judge his effort.

But he wants us to prove him wrong. He wants us to do the work, while we either responds with something pointless or jist doesn't respond at all.

ClickandMove

If you make 300 as the lower limit, it will serve as a culling... As players continue to lose until they reach the minimum, they will be culled and removed... You also need a clear space where the rating fluctuations would not reach the culling line. This region must have an average of 300 elo... Therefore, based on the graph of players elo density, approximately half of players would be culled...

badger_song

Troll-posts aside, it's silly to tie whether or not someone should play a game based upon some artificial rating system. The only factor determining whether someone should be playing is whether they enjoy doing so. If all the 100-300 elo players enjoy chess they should all play. Furthermore, they should recruit as many other potential sub-300 players they can find.

Nahiplaychess3
I know everyone can play chess at any level and they can enjoy playing chess at any level i respect the 300 elo or below that elo i am not serious about the post and didnt think that it would get this attencion
Zitr0n3

In Germany we say "zuerst denken, dann reden" which basically means, "first think, then open your mouth" since thoughtless words can bring trouble. (c)

EfeAkyuz3

they cant even understand bro

at1kshs1ngh

About 68% of chess.com users are below 300 not because they are bad or anything but because they can't deticate their lives to chess, many people (including me) play chess as a hobby, I play to take a break from my school studies (I'm 13), I don't think we should judge by rating, even magnus must be below 300 at a point, say he should've quit chess too

at1kshs1ngh
Nahiplaychess3 wrote:

i wrote this artical to get an achievment i was not serious about it

The prove me wrong part sounds pretty serious

SacrifycedStoat
They should not because if there they’re 300, they probably haven’t tried to improve.

If they try to improve and are U200, chess is not for them.

Not making one-move blunders and punishing opponent’s one-move blunders will get you to 500. You wouldn’t even need opening principles.

CussyPock

good thing there is not system in play that matches you based on your elo

VivPlayzX777

BRUV let them improve

EfeAkyuz3

dude he littelary said that he isnt serious with this forum and you guys still say its serious. Why bro??

Emperor-Bluto

unfortunately, beginners start at zero.

sorry for proving you wrong bro.

Jontavious772

Not if they like chess, if they enjoy playing chess (like i do), or play for fun, they should stay. i also believe they have their own say in a topic like this.

TheSnipeKing

People below 300 Elo are either completely new or don't dedicate enough to the game, meaning they shouldn't quit the game. Few people stay at 300 Elo when they genuinely try.

ChessMasteryOfficial

If chess brings joy or growth, that’s a win. And if that joy exists, there's no reason to gatekeep it behind numbers.