And like everyone can see i'm definetly not 'overrated' at 2200(sadly). Doesnt change the fact that fun-factor is 0, i always lose/win in the same boring way against annoying 2300s...
I hate being on 2200!
Sort:
Aug 18, 2021
0
#43
Every level has its own difficulties, otherwise you would have passed to the next level already.
But i don't think this is an honest claim, this sounds like simple flex.
Aug 18, 2021
0
#44
Its obvious that every level has difficulties. Doesn't change the fact that chess was way more fun for me when i was at for instance 1400 or 1800. I already explained why.
Aug 18, 2021
0
#45
NewestCM wrote:
Its obvious that every level has difficulties. Doesn't change the fact that chess was way more fun for me when i was at for instance 1400 or 1800. I already explained why.
I disagree with that statement, regardless you explained why.
Everystage has its own good sides, one can enjoy on being 600 or being 1200 or 1600 in different ways.
And i'm still not convinced that this is a legit claim. It still looks like you are trying to tell "look people! i'm 2200.."
Aug 18, 2021
0
#46
Yeah im 2200! Wow! Great! I keep losing against 2300s, isnt this nice! Never had so much fun! Men... i dont see 2200 as an 'achievement'. We have lots of guys at this level.
Stil1 wrote:
NewestCM wrote:
2200s are just so annoying and maje it sooo unnecessary hard to win
If playing against other 2200s feels hard, then you might be overrated.
Playing against those in your actual rating range should feel comfortable, and evenly matched.
Very wise remark.
Aug 18, 2021
0
#48
No chance. Many 2300s i play against play like 2500, when i like at their history i see that their peak was aboth 2500, and many of then managed to beat guys over 2500. Just for instance. If you play an 1200, he usually will play like an 1200. Above 2200 its not that clear from my experience. There is often no feeling of 'evenky matched'.
Aug 18, 2021
0
#49
But doesnt matter, cant change it. I got that most guys are not frustrated about it, which is quite interesting and what i wanted to know.
NewestCM wrote:
No chance. Many 2300s i play against play like 2500, when i like at their history i see that their peak was aboth 2500, and many of then managed to beat guys over 2500. Just for instance. If you play an 1200, he usually will play like an 1200. Above 2200 its not that clear from my experience. There is often no feeling of 'evenky matched'.
It's very interesting... what you wrote.
I suspect that also.
The range of players whom you can beat... increases as your chess.com rating grows... )Â Ain't? )
Aug 19, 2021
0
#51
A 2300 player beating  a 2500 player is not unusual it would seem that person is rated less than 10% higher. That same player will lose to a 2100. 1200 players are probably somewhat less stable. I am not 1200 but even 1000-1100 I do throw away matches vs 900 but best 1300.Â
Aug 19, 2021
0
#52
I'm not sure what all the whining here is about.
Wins and losses come with the territory, especially once you reach players that play at your level. It's part of chess.
The troll that opened this thread has left the scene, in case you've not noticed.
And of course i'm whining. Why should i not be tilted and let my frustration out? I'm not the only relativly high rated players who loses games and gets tilted, but normally they simply dont talk about it. Thats you will normally only see 800s 'whining' here.