is it normal to have no mistakes in 1300-1400?

haha poor guy...

Would you be a chess player, I would say you're a mentally disabled person.

What is cruel and deceitfull, is to flatter and let believe someone stuck at such sub level, they're anything or anyone worth mentioning or counting, within the said sport.

Even low IQ and uneducated persons get easily to 1000 and above after a year, at most two, club/competition practice and study.

As you can see, nobody, beside nervously or mentally disabled persons, stays long under 1300, under which you're the complete beginner. Even blind players get rated higher than 1300 rather quickly.

So, if you want to know, if it means something to play at such sub level a thing that is not only a game but also a sport and somehow a martial art, my answer, based on good old common sense, is: no. Go play golf, or dominos, chess doesn't suit your temper, your personality, something such.

If you insist on playing chess anyway, well, sure, be free. But don't bother then "levels", "ratings" and the such, for there is no such thing for Monopoly or Cluedo players. For you're then playing some sort of chess with dices, instead of playing the actual art of chess.

Most people wont make it to 1300...1300s are in the 92nd percentile or something 

Some people arent skilled enough to get to 1200

This is extremely rare. Most people on chess.com are stuck mostly because they do nothing to get better. All they do is play speed chess for fun, making the same blunders every game.

That said, MelvinGarvey is talking a lot of nonsense. A player rated 1300 is very far away from a complete beginner.  They difference is roughly as great as between MarvinGarvey and Magnus Carlsen.

i could beat a beginner blindfolded i believe even with my relatively low rating like a 700 or 800 im talking

I'm not going to engage in the chess gatekeeping, i don't think anyone can benefit from that, hopefully we can all move on.

Going back to my question, i understanding now that accuracy is calculated differently in chess (or at least on this site) and i should expect high values in general, even tho it still feels crazy to me, for instance in the last game i played against a person at the same level (both around 1350) he played every move in 1-2s and finished the game with more than 9 minutes left and 85.5 accuracy, i spent like 7 min had 3 minutes left and around 74 accuracy... Playing so fast with such accuracy for 40 moves sounds insane to me, but i understand what you are all saying and i guess I'm just not gonna look at that anymore, thank you for clearing my mind

What about the 0-1 inaccuracies and 0 mistakes/blunders? Are those normal as well?

Also since someone was asking, i consider myself a beginner because I'm literally just playing 10 minutes games and just analyzing them after,  never watched a video or read about any openings or anything, i just wanna see at what level i plateau before i need to study at least a few openings, but i  guess playing Go at a more advanced level it helps?

False. That is only so in the flawed, flattered and merchandized game online.

Join an actual chess club, forget what you see online, compete and all, and you'll see what every chess player has seen since "ever" before the Internet chess BS happened.

Nope, see the FIDE's rating distribution I posted. People who don't make it to 1300 quickly, have got various problems, a few keep it up in spite of all, most will give up on chess, out of laziness, lack of concern, lack of time to study, such things.

I taught chess to every member of my enlarged family, and most of them made it easily to 1300-1500 before giving up out of lack of interrest for more.

My mom would have been competent, but has a problem of pride, and doesn't take it well when she loses, which results into denying the existence of the game for the next 6 months or so.

My ex wife scored 1500 performance in a 9 rounds swiss 6 months after she learned how to move a pawn. Then she gave up out of lack of interrest.

My younger brother and sister both made it to about 1400, then gave up, and since then beat every coworker and friend in friendly, casual games. They don't even play online.

My oldest son went stubborn, wanting to calculate everything, and rejecting the concept of judgement. That's a personality flaw, which had him stagnate at about 1100 then give up.

My youngest son made it to 1800 rapid and 1400 classical, won a few youth trophies, then moved on toward teenagers concerns (girls, etc).

I taught chess to over 100 people in my life. When they don't make it to 1300 (about), it's rarely because they can't. It's because they reject the sports endeavour, or have got a problem of pride (or other personality flaws), or have got more pressing matters.

That is what happens with chess in real life, letting the bloody Internet aside, as stated over decades.

Then you list a lot of anecdotal evidence that people can get to 1300 (and beyond) with a year (or more) of hard work. Unless they can't or won't.

I completely agree with that. However, it all supports what I wrote: "a player rated 1300 is very far away from a complete beginner."

On the side note: as for my own case, after years of casual chess games and very rare moment of chess studies in some books, I finally, around age 25, decided to take the big leap, and enlisted in a chess club.

I first played only Rapid, because I did not want to waste my time in classical, then lose for a blunder.

My first Rapid Rating was 1500.

Two years later, I engaged classical, as I felt ready, and my first rating was 1700.

No one ever looked at me like I would be some sort of genius.

If in clubs or tournaments, you're at all times, surrounded by people who are not scared of working and studying, and can get over a bad loss.

Chess is for the brave. No one is born brave.

Go to an open tournament, see the list of players, removing the under aged. You'll see that players U1300 are a blattant minority.

Here the 100 first ratings of a big Parisian club, after that, all are unrated.

F stands for FIDE, N for National, E for Estimate (aka unrated).

You can check on the complete list here:

http://www.echecs.asso.fr/ListeJoueurs.aspx?Action=JOUEURCLUBREF&JrTri=Elo&ClubRef=836

2453 F
2321 F
2292 F
2290 F
2286 F
2254 F
2232 F
2229 F
2156 F
2140 F
2139 F
2124 F
2098 F
2093 F
2090 F
2087 F
2086 F
2080 N
2058 F
2049 F
2040 F
2035 F
2005 F
2002 F
1971 F
1970 F
1963 F
1942 F
1933 F
1930 F
1917 F
1915 F
1898 F
1886 F
1879 F
1872 F
1872 F
1809 F
1808 F
1803 F
1775 F
1774 F
1772 F
1757 F
1753 F
1747 F
1740 F
1732 F
1708 F
1703 F
1690 N
1669 F
1662 F
1658 F
1625 F
1620 F
1610 F
1598 F
1576 F
1544 F
1504 F
1503 F
1501 F
1481 F
1430 F
1427 F
1399 E
1385 F
1376 F
1365 F
1362 F
1361 F
1348 F
1327 F
1322 F
1271 F
1254 F
1224 F
1223 F
1199 E

As you can see for yourself, 4-5% of the rated players in that club (I picked at random) are rated below 1300.
 

It's quite out of the ordinary for a human player to make no mistakes, a mistake according to the computer analysis that is.

Internet is keeping you faaaaaar away from reality.

Anyhow, it's not the first time I do publish official listings and numbers, proving what I'm saying.

But many don't take it well, the schock to discover they've been believing in the fairy tales the Internet merchants are brainwashing people with. And so, many go into denial, because it hurts, at first. Your pony's rainbow world is gone. Only is left the pain and sweat of sports training, vs "playing house with chess".

But believe me: or you really want to be a chess player and do the chess competitor's training and competitions, or, if you chose to keep it up with the Internet chess alone, that's fine, but don't bother their BS ratings, levels and awards. It's stuff for the dummies.

One thing is true tho: a few can make it to rather high levels by just playing chess. But that's a very small percentage. The rest of us must work in order to achieve anything worth mentioning.

The puzzles, the video lessons, the sub ratings, the BS awards, only gives one the illusion they worked.

Take a chess board and a chess book, and begin the real work, like two hours a day, every day. Study endgames and Strategy, Play classical games in competition, where it's a normal thing to stare at a position for 10-30 minutes in a row and play a game for 4 hours or more through. You'll see the difference after a few months.

In order to finish with the subject, and for those who care, there is a reason why the BS training Internet offers doesn't work for most players, when the normal training does the job for most players in real life: it doesn't "print" the same way in your memory.

Your brain needs some "signals" something is worth remembering. Puzzles, videos and all, lack these signals. The illusion it should work, is maintained by the fact that "gifted" players who have got a rare ability to memorize things without the help of these otherwise needed signals, are constantly showed and seen by other more normal Internet users.

It's like movies, when you come to believe that a car that crashes explodes every times, when it's actually rare enough. Or that the legal doctors do autopsies all the time, when actually 80% of their work is to check on victims injuries for court lawsuit purposes.

The good old, painfull and tedious way to get things to stay in your brain, is the efficient one. Without it, you come to believe tales and lies, like "only a few are meant to reach 1300", which is a pure joke in real life. If that was true, you would not even be able to learn English nor any language.

For more, I do invite your to read a bit of chess champions history, and compare the trainings and achievements of two chess geniuses: Bobby Fischer, the worker, and Samuel Reshevsky, the lazy prodigy child.

MelvinGarvey I'm going to be that guy and say that no one asked you to go off this tangent, for being a strong player that likes the art of chess so much you seem to lack the basic understanding of keeping the focus on the topic at hand and how to help in a beginner forum where people would love to get answers around what they are asking in order to understand the game better without having the discussion be derailed for pages.

if you could please open your own thread to preach the art of real chess on a real board i would appreciate it, i am sure you'll find like minded people that would love to discuss the topic with you.

I hope I'm not sounding arrogant by saying this because that's not my intention, no one owes anyone any answers, i just hope this is all about the community wanting to help each other and especially beginners in a forum like this

What I posted is directly linked to the topic, and to what others posted about it.

You don't like what I posted? Fine, that's your right

Sure I will now stop posting in this thread after that one reply. I said all there was to say about it, and it's the oddest moment to ask me to stop, 7 hours after my last post that brought a clean and final closure to the topic.. But it's not answers you're looking for.