At what elo are you no longer a bad player?

I was at 1870, then life got busy and I lost a bunch of games on time and my elo slipped by about 200.  Now I've started again, and while I stayed in the mid=1600s for a while, I've sIipped under 1500. Have I become worse, or has the opposition gotten better? Awfully high accuracy scores for people in that range. Actually, I think I've just become more adventurous; e.g. I traded a knight for opponent's g and h pawns, getting a passed h pawn, then I focused on grabbing the f pawn, figuring that two connected outside passed pawns backed by rooks would be a winning end-game. It worked, but I forgot to watch my back, and switched from offence to defence too late. It's the Queen's Gambit effect: always looking for slick combinations that aren't quite there. 

My rating has been dropping. I’ve become a bad player if I was not always already one.

I’m 1500 but I think many people can improve many hundreds of points a year for example in one year I went from 1000 to 1500 rapid which was this year so if you say someone is bad at chess you never know what they can be in a year or even several years.

Somewhere around the 1400-1500 blitz range is where you start to become noticeably decent at chess in my opinion. This is the area where you’re getting good enough to beat most casual players - ie. those who don’t play regularly, almost consistently. 

But as others say, it’s subjective.

I recently hit 2000 blitz and still think I’m not very good. Partly because 3 years ago, I didn’t even know how to play. So still think of myself as an improver/intermediate. 

When you can play games without making any blunders or mistakes, and the winner is determined by the player that played best as in strategy and planned ahead the best. As opposed to a "bad player" game where the winner is the one who made the least blunders and mistakes.

IMO

In other words, somewhere north of 2800.

i think 1200

Don't know about the topic's question, but you are no longer a dumb person when you are able to separate objectivity from the small world of personal experience.. which is more important than being a 'not bad chess player'.

This move in your most recent game drops at least a piece.

I’m over 1800 in rapid and I drop pieces. 

I'm basically new but also anyone bothering to try and get better is comparatively better than those not trying so i guess no one is bad?

Here is my opinion in how well you perform in different elo ratings.

0-100: You are a very bad player and is still learning the basics of the game

100-250: You are definitely a bit better than what skills you had before. But you are still learning the basics

250-400: You can outplay people that have a lower elo than you and you're almost done learning just the basics. But you can still get destroyed by many people

400-600: I mean, you're still trash but you're a lot better than before and you might know a few tactics and key opening moves.
600-800: now we're talking about advanced beginner level. You are getting a lot closer to intermediate and you know even more key opening moves, tactics, and even some traps.

800-1000: When people reach 1000 elo, they mistake that they are an intermediate but that's not how FIDE calculates that so no. You are not.
1000-1100: At this point you are a pre-intermediate. A person who is between beginner level and intermediate level. Though don't think you can beat an advanced 1800 elo player because you are still gonna look like Martin (250 elo) to them.
1200-1400: You have just reached the intermediate level. Bravo. But since players who reach this level very recently became intermediate, they still have the chance to lose their mind and downgrade back to beginner. Of course many players can beat you and you're still not very good.
1500-1700: By this point you are now considered as "the average chess player". You have a moderate grasp at the game and you don't realize this but this is a big milestone. You can beat a lot of chess players and lose to a lot of chess players. So you're average

1800-2000: Welcome to the advanced players section! At this level you will be playing against slightly better players than an intermediate. You are a decent chess player and you should be proud for how long you've come.

2000-2100: You have now reached the EXPERT players! When reaching this level most people are either not or are prepared because at this stage a lot of people are very competitive players and won't just sit and accept a draw at the middle game, nor opening. Even if you or the opposing player fails to do something properly.

2200 (CM)/(NM): You have passed the competitive cat/dog killers of the expert level and you have now become better than them + you get your first FIDE title which is "Candidate Master" (CM). If you are connected to a national chess federation example "USCF", then you get the National Master title (NM) until you reach Grandmaster (GM). But if your'e not connected to any chess federation then you can't get a title unless you do connect to a chess federation. Overall you have an amazing level in chess and at this level you start to get recognized more. Not as much as the International Masters (IM) nor the Grandmasters (GM).

2300 (FM)/(NM): You are a very good player in chess and if you are connected to FIDE then you get a new title called the "FIDE Master" (FM). You are recognized a lot more and this is where you have access to most things other players wouldn't have example entering tournaments and getting a classical rating for the first time. You can also now be applicable for the pro chess league program and be placed in a team and attempt to win.
2400 (IM)/(NM): At this stage you have 2 options. 1: settle for a bit or for an eternity and stay where you are in chess rankings. 2: Keep going. And why can't you choose the third option which you probably could've guessed what it would be if there even was a third option (3: give up and go to beginner). Well then the answer is pretty simple; you've gone too far to give up. So if you JUST right now figured out chess is not actually your thing well... Too late. I guess it's time to go on a suicide mission for all your mistakes. But overall, at this stage you can get very famous very quick, like Levy Rozman did. You also gain an International Master title (IM).

2500 (GM): I don't have much to say about this but................... YOU'RE AN OUTSTANDING AND BRILLIANT PLAYER O_O. How do you even reach that high?

And I guess if FIDE makes for titles I would probably have to make a new version of this comment that took me an unnecessary 30 minutes amount of time to write.

Old post, but I generally agree.

I view 2200 as the point when one has officially "mastered" the fundamentals, at each phase of the game.

(Clarification: 2200 OTB, not 2200 online ...)

me with 188 elo

.........

How do I find out my elo

I can teach you EXACTLY how to think during the game (opening, middlegame and endgame). Your chess understanding will never be the same and you will improve a lot. I charge €35/h (€22/h if you pay for two lessons in advance), but if you can’t afford too many lessons, don’t worry. I can teach you a lot in an hour. Here to help if you are interested.

If you want to study by yourself, read ‘Logical Chess’. It is really instructive book. You have it on youtube as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eTB7oHeRgM&list=PLUrgfsyInqNa1S4i8DsGJwzx1Uhn2AqlT

i'm literally only 250

fat

For example if you are able to stay on the circus line 1800 elo of chess.com for a year you are a strong player!!

I think this is a good answer.

My rating fluctuates between 1200 and 1450, it often depends on how much anxiety I’m feeling, how I’ve eaten etc. I don’t know if rating is the best indicator but n blitz it seems like a lot of obvious blunders drop off sharply against opponents in the 1200s range. When I’m playin in the 1300s or 1400s I’m usually winning not because my opponent made a critical obvious blunder but because I’m actually, somehow, playing decently well. Can’t seem to concretely stay above 1400 for some reason.