FavelaSwag wrote:
200s are quite cunning
You can have "400"s who are true beginners and "200"s who have a few games and quite a few puzzles under their belt.
ELO 200-ish at Chess.com is a strange place
Sort:
Oct 26, 2025
0
#43
ChessIlford wrote:
I'm just a casual chessplayer, no ambitions which makes sense cause I never got beyond ELO 400 here at Chess.com. But I find it a weird place. 50% I win because the opponents are so obvious beginners: hanging pieces, weird moves which make no sense, early Queen attacks which they eventually keep hanging, they miss my hanging pieces i sometimes do on purpose just to test the opponents abilities, so in short; easy wins.
Then however those other 50% of the games....it's like I'm all the time moving 3 paces behind my opponents. They are agressive and/or very cunning in their tactics, and even if I'm trying to stay cool, think, aplly all those prinicples I picked up in all those youtube tutorials...in the end i loose hopeless. It is really either easy win or complete helpless games. Hardly any games "in between", makes sense? can anyone relate?
Personally, as a 177, I can relate a lot. Half the people either need lower rating, or the other half needs a higher rating or smth.
Oct 26, 2025
0
#44
BirbTheGreatBirb hat geschrieben:
ChessIlford wrote:
I'm just a casual chessplayer, no ambitions which makes sense cause I never got beyond ELO 400 here at Chess.com. But I find it a weird place. 50% I win because the opponents are so obvious beginners: hanging pieces, weird moves which make no sense, early Queen attacks which they eventually keep hanging, they miss my hanging pieces i sometimes do on purpose just to test the opponents abilities, so in short; easy wins.
Then however those other 50% of the games....it's like I'm all the time moving 3 paces behind my opponents. They are agressive and/or very cunning in their tactics, and even if I'm trying to stay cool, think, aplly all those prinicples I picked up in all those youtube tutorials...in the end i loose hopeless. It is really either easy win or complete helpless games. Hardly any games "in between", makes sense? can anyone relate?
Personally, as a 177, I can relate a lot. Half the people either need lower rating, or the other half needs a higher rating or smth.
same here at 1700
I apologize for this off topic statement, but I find this important. Recently, a bright, wholesome member of our chess community, Daniel Naroditsky, has tragically passed away. When Daniel was going through this tragic difficult time, he was being harassed online by a former world champion Vladimir Kramnik. The chess community fully condemns Kramnik of his actions, and wishes for change regarding his tragic passing. To take action, please sign this petition:
https://c.org/vVBtWzX75r