Are you good for your age?

I learned when I joined this site, and haven't improved at all.

You're a GM of mopiness.

I think so

Hmmmmmmmm.

hmmmmmmmm hmmmmmmm

I always beat everyone in my Family. I made one of the best in my school forfit. I beat my English, Social studies, and Special Ed teacher. I beat a well experienced 19 yeare old. I beat a 48 year old. I beat an experienced 21 year old.

I would say that "good" is relative. I'm 16 and at school there are only like 6 people who can really play and I can usually beat or stalemate them, and whoop anybody else in the school because they don't know how to really play. But when I play here I get slaughtered (my rating is like 500). And there are also GMa younger than I, so they are obviously much better than me. So good is relative to who you play. This summer I'm dedicating my self to get better. I have ADHD and I'm extremely impulsive, which is (was) my biggest downfall. I made moves without thinking them through and that has cost me big time. I am now learning more strategy and beginning to see how everything fits together, which has helped me start raising my rating.

Yes. I'm very good for my age.  Before I came along, everyone that was my age was just doing so so.  But now, since I became my age, everyone at my age is really doing well.  I'm told I'm also very good for the Age of Aquarius in general.

What I think is the question should regard the time one has been studying chess. I'm 16 and I haven't yet been part of a tournament. I'm in the 1600 range here on chess.com ... well the rating doesn't tell much. I can play way worse or way better than my rating shows. The thing is I started to play last August so I think I improved a lot in 10 months but I think I'm not that good for my age. A lot of guys reached GM at my age. Of course they started way earlier. Still, I think I can get a title such as NM or FM in some years if I put enough work in it.

paulgottlieb wrote:

I would think chess is very good exercise for somebody with ADHD. In fact, in the terrific film "Brooklyn Castle," about the amazingly successful chess program at IS 813 in Brooklyn, one of the story lines they follow is the progress of a young man with ADHD who goes from being someone who loses every game to a pretty darn good chess player. It's quite an inspiring story. I would think chess is a great venue to work on impulse control and on learning to consider your alternatives before you act.

I have noticed that playing chess, especially since I started to take it really seriously has mad my focus better, but I'm still in the losing almost every game catagory (though I'm getting better, my endgame sucks)

i really don't think age matters much. i've beaten adults and lost to kids way younger than me. my ratings like almost 1000 (USCF) and my teacher likes to say I'm better than me rating says. Honestly, we all have good games and bad games... I'm still learning not to define by rating because sometimes it takes more than four games (depends how many rounds a tournament is- mine are usually 4) to really figure out where you stand. 

I'm 18, and there's this guy in my grade with 2150 FIDE (and a 2400 on the SAT). So no, I don't consider myself good for my age.

There's a 17 year old on here, who made IM at 16.

I have won 8 chess medals and have a decent ratign for A player that has joined 4 days ago.

I'm mature for my age ^_^

I got one medal that took months to win.

I guess being 2000 USCF after just turning age 13 is good for my age. :P

With little blues That divide my age by 3.

Better than who?  At 51, I'm better than the median, and average, rated USCF player, and in my opinion I'm a weak player with much room to improve.

I am in the 95th percentile for US juniors, which means for every 19 USCF juniors, I am rated better then 18 of them.

I still aim to improve, my goal being a NM.