Truth about elo

All the time people post about how  hard low elo is and then higher elo players say no you just gotta blunder check heres the truth i started playing chess  on chess.com in 2019  and at first i was a terrible player i would  blunder constantly but after getting into the 400s and 500s and watching gotham chess  i learned all the tactics i could easily spot them i thought that this would mean  my elo would start to climb like how all those tutorial vidoes do how to cross soemthign somethign ladder. 400s and low elo in general are good  and way better the most people think we know tactics and can play good games   my advice if you truly think that your trapped in low elo hell then  delete your account and create a new one and go to  intermediate elo or beginner or even advanced you will find your true elo. Thanks for reading

The lowest elo I ever hit I believe was 592. I was there for a reason. I hadn't studied much and I played way too quickly. I wasn't there by accident. If you are 500 elo and you can't escape there is definitely a major reason as to why that is.

You could make a new account, But after you lose a few games to people much better than you (because you never learned what they know) you will be back to where you 'belong' but it doesn't have to be that way. With an analytical approach, checking your games to see the mistakes you make will do you a greater service to your ability to play chess than creating a new account for a rating to give you self validation. The rating means nothing if you can't play at that level.

I lived and breathed every chess youtube video I could lay eyes upon and i shot up from that 600 ish elo all the way to 900 in less than 3 months. Its not impossible you just need to put your mind to it and put in effort and you can get there. The solution is in identifying why you're losing games. Elo hell is the barrier to better than average. If you want to be better than average you must prove it. I proved it after learning things such as; Pawn structure, Opening principles, learning a solid opening for white and black, learning to calculate effectively, learning to slow down and take my time with my moves.

Anyone reading this, ask yourself, Do I know these concepts? Is my calculation good? Could it be better? Do I play too quick? This is how you improve. Find what's wrong and you will find the solution.

well i think i generally was stuck as on this account im 1000 elo and i can beat 1000 l elo oppoments so i think fr people like me its a good idea to just reset

also i will say when i had my old account in the 8 00s that is not inactive and i closed it 800s in my eyes were way worse then 400s making even worse mistakes

You refer to me as being "lucky" which is quite amusing. It looks like luck because the work is not obvious. My game history is there though. I went from about 1000 (I was an inactive account with 1-5 games played) to 592 at lowest. I then climbed my way back up proving I deserve the rating by getting there. That's not luck, It is proof. If you want something enough and you put the work in. Not immediately but eventually something comes of it.

People who play rapid like it is blitz or bullet will not improve either. These people can accumulate thousands of games and "not improve." Improvement is an ACTIVE thing. Thousands of games doesn't magically make someone better. It might create experience but it can also create bad habits.

Those people who played like 1000s. Are they 1000s now? If not then why not? Maybe you felt outclassed but in actuality you were both of similar skill the whole time. I did this myself I looked back at some of the people I have lost to when i was 500-700 who seemed so good at the time and destroyed me. Those people are still around the level I met them at, yet I am 1300 as of writing this. This is no accident.

The whole point I'm trying to make is that. Making a new account is a quick fix to a symptom of a problem, it doesn't fix the cause. The cause of being stuck in an elo hell is ultimately up to the person there. If you are truly destined to be a higher rating (900, 1000, 1100) You will get there by playing. The difference between a 500 and a 1000 is a night and day difference. the win rate for the 1000 playing against a 500 is approximately 95% according to elo win probability calculations. If you make that new account and play your 25 calibration matches and you're 600 again, now you have 2 accounts that are 600. The cause wasn't fixed.

You currently have 14 matches played out of the 25 calibration matches and have already dropped from your highest of 1400 to 1100 at the time of writing. By definition chess.com is not yet certain of your ranking. Will you retain your rating? or will you go up or down? It will stabilise at whatever rating you deserve. Maybe you were always this rating but didn't play enough? Perhaps what you lacked was confidence? however that won't be the average person's experience. From a mathematical standpoint not everyone can be above average, it merely shifts where the average is. Those of us who work hard to become better than average, will.

im not discounting your work but after playing 100 matche sin low elo i only gained 6 elo at a time making it very hard to win like 12 13 matches in a row

also i selected advanced AND LOST MATCHES NOW IM AT 1100 I WILL GET BACK TO YOU WHEN I FIDN MY ELO AND HOPE TO CONTINUE TO CLIMB SORRY FOR CAPS

mabey someday i will reach a high enough elo to play you

nah you right i suck

It seem you lack confidence. This can also impact your chess ability even if you have knowledge of someone who is higher rated. Play an unrated game with me and try your best. we can then analyse it together.

The truth about elo is chess.com doesn't even use elo, it uses something called glicko

I went from 1000 to 2000 in a year

As I understood the truth about Elo by the OP is just to open a new account with higher initial rating if you feel your current account does not match your expectations

According to your own stats the average rating of your opponents in bullet is 1905

Ok, still 1878 and not 1200

Thats because he was 145 two years ago

And dont forget the even more poor 400s

What