I feel like im pretty good at chess, but my rating is 400

Funniest joke I have heard.

@MyGuyEatinHam oops i do that a lot

BoredErica replied to JamesColeman saying he agrees with what he said. Then you replied and said "I do not agree with this at all". That is you disagreeing with a titled player. You're 600 be humble and listen to players better than you.

Accuracy depends on what moves you're doing based on the position on the board. When you play a 500 their moves suck. Responding accurately to them is easy because they don't complicate a position the same way a 2400 does. That is why it is easy to get 70% accuracy against a 600. If you played a 2400 your accuracy would drop to 30

So what if he's a titled player? Saying you are doing everything wrong does not constitute a very good analysis. He's been very silent ever since I showed him some examples of games with really low average centipawn loss, which clearly contradicts his arguments.

Btw, centipawn loss is accrued by comparing your move to the engine's best move. Not by comparing it to your opponent's move. You could argue some positions are more positional and others are more tactical, therefore, it will be easier to match the best engine move more often, but that will not happen for every single move in a match since engines go on tangents and lines even SuperGMs can't find.

When a player in 3 digits or even in the lower 1000 elo ladder plays 25, 30 move matches with 30, 20 average centipawn loss, regardless of whether the match is highly positional or highly tactical, is a clear sign they are not "doing everything wrong".

That's also a sign the elo ladder on this site is completely broken.

In my experience I have only played against people who are that accurate at Daily chess and they are players close to 1900-2000 elo. In a time control where they can even go consult databases, etc. So it's incredibly upsetting to see players at 900 elo on this site playing with such accuracy.

And engines don't analyse a position differently based on the rating of the players. Mate in 1 is mate 1 for Carlsen and for a chess.com 400 elo player. Losing 100 centipawns in 1 move is evaluated exactly the same, whether you do it or Nakamura does it.

And please note Im using "centipawns", not the chess.com "CAPS SCORE" or accuracy, or whatever they call it. In chess the accuracy of a move against an engine is measured in centipawns.

Good is relative

Honestly when JamesColeman went on his rant about 400's blundering everything he was completely wrong. These days most four hundreds aren't half bad players.

There it is, a sub 1000 thinking he knows more about chess than a master. Dunning-Kruger in full effect

Dont get me wrong us 400's suck but were not so bad that we blunder everything.

You just can't counter my arguments because you know they are true. Prove me wrong. Tell me centipawns to measure accuracy is a myth and that everyone uses chess.com CAPS. Prove the engine analysis a position differently based on elo of the players. Prove accuracy is not measured against the engine's best move rather than the other player's move.

You can't. So you immediately try to disregard it via elo. Hilarious. You also keep referring to that titled player when Im addressing YOU. Are you calling for help? Do you think "the master" is going to come back to the thread to defend you? "Help me, Master, I can't counter this 900 elo's arguments, help pls".

Embarrassing.

Also im 900 in 10+0 Rapid chess and faster time controls because I can't think beyond 2 moves in such a quick time control and i blunder like a moron. Im much much much better in slower time controls. You, on the other hand, are only 2000 when playing fast. When you have to slow down and think about your play, your brain just can't go very deep and gets stuck, so that's why you are 1300 in Daily.

I'm with xor just because you have low elo doesn't me you are just absolutely terrible.

Same situation here lol

this crazy

The problem is titled players are so good they never mingle with lower ratings, so they lose sense of how people play at the scrub level.

I remember when Hikaru still collaborated with Levy, and they were doing this guess the elo thing. Levy, who used to teach chess apparently, could guess the strength of the low rated players quite accurately. Because he had experience teaching to very lower players, he could spot all the tactics players used to play at different levels.

Hikaru? He was way off every time. Yet Hikaru is miles away from Levy in terms of chess skill.

I don't have the time nor the inclination to waste my time with you. I will tell you one thing your excuses as to why you suck at chess are pretty pathetic. You can't accept the fact that you suck so you're trying to bring up stupid excuses to justify how bad you are at this game. The fact that you claim 15|10 is not enough time to think beyond 2 moves says everything about your skill

You have no arguments again so "i dont have time to waste on answering you". I mentioned 10+0. The fact you are 1300 elo in slow time controls says everything about your skill. You are only 2000 at bullet and blitz, lol. When you have to think a bit deeper you fail so much you are 1300 elo. Embarrassing. Rather than getting better with more time to think, you lose 700 elo points.

Rapid includes 15|10 no one is forcing you to play with no increment. And I am 2000 at rapid not just blitz and bullet. I don't play daily and could care less about it. Hikaru is a super GM and his daily is 900pts lower than his blitz by your stupid logic he "fails when he has time to think". And you're laughing at the fact that my rating is 2k at blitz when you're is less than 1000? lmao literally delusional

Hikaru timeouted a lot in Daily shortly after he lost to a 1400, lol. Has not played Daily ever since, hahahah.

But at least Nakamura is 2800 FIDE GM, in classical (AKA LONG) time controls. You drop 700 points when you play long time controls.

Why? Because no matter if I give 30 seconds or 10 minutes to think about a position, you can't think beyond basic stuff you already come up in your quick games. When your adversary has time to think for longer, your quick chess tactics and strategies no longer work and you lose 700 elo.

I've already played people like you here. Boasting 2k elo in speed chess, but this is how they play when put to play longer Daily time controls:

(The other game was a draw). Hilarious.

I've played 50 daily games because I don't care about daily it's not real chess when you can use opening books and databases which is what you rely on since you can't think more than 2 moves. You've played 5000 rapid games and still below 1000. You're terrible and I would trash you in classical. I don't usually talk like this since I know how much I suck at chess but to have someone who is even worse talk the way you do just makes me want to give you a reality check. You fkn suck man

Lol relax, I too lose a lot of elo when playing a time control that does not suit me. For example I've played Daily chess all my life and my strength is around 1700-1800. Sometimes a bit less when Im not having good days. But In rapid I blunder in almost every game in one move.

So yeah I too lose around 700-800 points, only the other way around. But at least it's in quick time controls that no one cares about except the Naka's Twitch acolytes.

I heard somewhere that the CAPS score is different based on your rating, for example a move might be "good" for someone rated 500 but it might be labeled "mistake" for a 2500 rated player. 

Also, computers do not really care if you make blunders in a losing position. For example there might be a mildly complex position where one side is losing by a piece. He might randomly sacrifice a piece and the engine might say it is a pretty good move because, to the engine, it postpones losing more material, when the player in fact simply hung a piece, which can contribute to the "high" centipawn losses that xor keeps talking about.