A 3000 could easily beat a 2000, but could a 4000 easily beat a 3000?

As I said, it's relative. There's no way of accurately judging something using language like that. You could look at rating percentiles to judge which rating is average.

You have to get nasty? Why the hell are u posting then?

Really, then why do they label 700s "BEGINNERS" and 2500s "GRANDMASTERS" ?

They do it relative to others.

That makes sense, was this soo much work lol?

I said the same thing on the previous page.

Ok. Sorry if I was rude.

No, you said that ratings were relative to EACH OTHER, not that they just pick the lowest rating and call that beginner and pick the higher one a master. I understand now.

Einstein, Mozart and Fischer might be exceptions.

You play against komodo 12 to see how good he is!

Just Kidding

Good point. But then we have to remember that people in the 1800’s did not have ratings. It was just established to make it easier to tell skill.

Me saying a rating by itself means nothing made the question moot anyway.

1. A 4000 or even 4 00000000000 rated engine can not beat a 3000 315 out of 316 times.  I think the 3000 is strong enough to save more than 100 draws out of 316 against unlimited power. Anish Giri can save 100 draws against whatever you put him up against in a 316 game match.

I dont think they ever will make 4000. In daily chess I have beaten a ca 900 friend 76 times out of 76 (beeing between 1600 and 1800 myself, and I do  not think I have gained a single ratingpoint against him. Another 1200 friend I usually have picked one point from , so I believe the opponent must be inside a number not to far away (maybe 600?) to gain any points at all.

If that how it works, the 4000 needs a lot of opponents to rise above 3400 to gain any ratingpoints at all, and maybe  he will lose 3 points for every draw, which makes 4000 impossible because the 3400 will draw more than he will lose against unlimited strenght.

its really hard to tell, who would have thought players 500 points stronger than a prime kasparov or carlsen where even possible?

perhaps you need a much bigger sample of games say (10000 games) to determine the differences between a 3700 engine and a 4000 engine.

That answers my question the best. So they set 1500, and then compared the other rating from that. That's what I was wondering, what ratings were considered beginner, average, and master without respect to other ratings.

That's the point I was trying to make. There's a certain level, where the players are so good, that the game will be equal, regardless of the "difference". There's a finite number of moves in chess, but an infinite number of possible ratings. If one player can see a billion moves ahead, and the other can see a trillion moves ahead, the game will still probably be only 200 ish move anyway, so it doesn't really matter.