IM BAD AT CHESS

i am very bad at chess and decided to test my 300 ELO brain against the Magnus Carlson bot. i am surprised at how good i did ngl(still awful, just surprising) chess.com thinks i'm 1250. down 15 points of material and even if not in checkmate, a very much losing endgame.

Is 297 ur actual Elo??? No 297 gets that kind of accuracy. They would never stay at 297.

😳

yeah, most of the time the reason i lose is just because i don't realize the opponent has checkmate, then when i do realize it i just kinda... stop working. likely why my ELO is so low

Just keep trying, you’ll get better eventually!

I really wish chess.com would get rid of the "game rating". It's completely irrelevant and made to falsely boost ego. If a 1000 elo player had chosen the same moves with the same accuracy percentage, it would say they played like a 1700 and Magnus bot a 2100.

As far as accuracy goes. You had a very rough opening where the Magnus bot got a huge advantage. Your accuracy percentage in the middle game is so high because you are getting kicked around the board and making the only logical (often forced) reactions to a bad situation.

yeah i agree, 1200 on a 300 is redicuous, the point of the comment was to show how much farther this the "game rating" needs to go.

thank you!

Thought I'd give it a go. It says I played well above my level, but those who say a lot of these moves are forced are probably right.

Although, I actually thought I didn't play that badly. It's just that everything he does is a freaking trap.

Title says: "International Master bad at chess".

Bad at spelling aswell, lol.

yeah i'm bad at spelling

You're never bad when you're working on improving.

You are still bad. Relax.

whew

Practice tactics and you will get better

WHAT

Maybe, maybe not.

If chess.com tells me on one game that I played 400 rating and on another I played 1200 rating, that does tell me that I really blundered on that first game. I should find out what went wrong.

GAME RATING IS WHAT KEEPS US GOING AND IMPROVING. If they removed it then we wouldnt know how good we are or how much we've improved

If they made game rating give you an accurate elo, that would be meaningful. But that's not the way it works right now. Take OP's game against the magnus bot. They did not play like a 1250, I'm just going to say that right now. When you look at the opening and how badly they played it, and their accuracy in the middle game only coming from the fact that they are so losing that every move is good because they literally have no chances.

They did not play like a 1250, and being told that is not honest or helpful to their growth in the game and improving. You don't need a dishonest, flattering review to help motivate you to improve. I'd say a more honest representation is that they played like a 600-800 elo, which is still fantastic given their actual rapid rating.

Tldr; if OP is being told they play like a 1250, they might think all they need to do is play more games to get to that elo and it's in the bag. No extra work required. Which isn't helpful.

But you can't spell 'as well' correct;y.