Ira, Igor Khmelnitsky's "Chess exam and training guide" gives you exactly what you're asking for. It pointed out that my positional understanding was at expert level but my tactics were class D. After a focused training in that area of weakness my rating went up some 300 points.
Full disclosure: I won't receive a dime should you buy the book, nor will any of my friends or family.
And this is why you have a rating under 1000. Some people play this game to get to a certain rating, my personal goal is to become an FM.
So, what you're saying is that he has a low rating because it's directly linked to his level of desire for a higher rating? Well, I really, really wanna be a Super-GM. I desire it greatly. Now let me do my "I Dream of Jeannie" nod 'n' blink, and pow(!), I'm a Super-GM. I just can't figure why you only shot for FM....?
Maybe you'll forgive my tone if you take into consideration the *myriad* of reasons why a player might currently have a low rating and not try to shame them.
why the **** is this website so ******* **** every single game is buggy and ******* laggy cant even finish game coz peices get stuck to my cursor *** is that
why the **** is this website so ******* **** every single game is buggy and ******* laggy cant even finish game coz peices get stuck to my cursor *** is that
I was once in a tournament that had my incorrect rating(191) when it was actually 426 or something. I got to play a 998, the highest rated in the tournament. He underestimated me because he thought I was bad, but I whooped him.
once played a 1850 rated player,i was 1650. reached an end game of oppossing bishops and a/b/ f pawn vs. my b/f pawn. controlling a1-b2(black squares)w/ my king and protecting my 2 pawns(f4/b2)w/ a bishop, this was a draw-HE CARRIED ON FOR 10 MOVES claiming his rating meant he was not only a better chess but also he was supposed to win! Of course "FISHER" w/ draw this game---talk about mis-placed entitlement! What counts is what u feel about playing this game.
i think the nice thing with ratings is you can play people rated closer to yourself. It gets frustrating to always lose to better people, even though thats how improvement is made
Maybe from apractical point of view that would not work but would be helpfil for the individual.
Ira, Igor Khmelnitsky's "Chess exam and training guide" gives you exactly what you're asking for. It pointed out that my positional understanding was at expert level but my tactics were class D. After a focused training in that area of weakness my rating went up some 300 points.
Full disclosure: I won't receive a dime should you buy the book, nor will any of my friends or family.
wow ppl
just play
ratings dont even matter
And this is why you have a rating under 1000. Some people play this game to get to a certain rating, my personal goal is to become an FM.
wow ppl
just play
ratings dont even matter
And this is why you have a rating under 1000. Some people play this game to get to a certain rating, my personal goal is to become an FM.
So, what you're saying is that he has a low rating because it's directly linked to his level of desire for a higher rating? Well, I really, really wanna be a Super-GM. I desire it greatly. Now let me do my "I Dream of Jeannie" nod 'n' blink, and pow(!), I'm a Super-GM. I just can't figure why you only shot for FM....?
Maybe you'll forgive my tone if you take into consideration the *myriad* of reasons why a player might currently have a low rating and not try to shame them.
why the **** is this website so ******* **** every single game is buggy and ******* laggy cant even finish game coz peices get stuck to my cursor *** is that
Some of us find that charming.
why the **** is this website so ******* **** every single game is buggy and ******* laggy cant even finish game coz peices get stuck to my cursor *** is that
Don't use netscape grandpa.
Oh, was netscape a self-censoring browser?
I was once in a tournament that had my incorrect rating(191) when it was actually 426 or something. I got to play a 998, the highest rated in the tournament. He underestimated me because he thought I was bad, but I whooped him.
once played a 1850 rated player,i was 1650. reached an end game of oppossing bishops and a/b/ f pawn vs. my b/f pawn. controlling a1-b2(black squares)w/ my king and protecting my 2 pawns(f4/b2)w/ a bishop, this was a draw-HE CARRIED ON FOR 10 MOVES claiming his rating meant he was not only a better chess but also he was supposed to win! Of course "FISHER" w/ draw this game---talk about mis-placed entitlement! What counts is what u feel about playing this game.
Oh, was netscape a self-censoring browser?
Oh hell no, Netscape was not self-censoring. When I was growing up in the 90's Netscape Navigator was porn central for me!
All I could ever find in the 90's was pr0n on BBSs.
Yeah it was like grainy 35k size .jpg photos but pr0n nonetheless to me at that age haha.
i think the nice thing with ratings is you can play people rated closer to yourself. It gets frustrating to always lose to better people, even though thats how improvement is made
Oh, was netscape a self-censoring browser?
Oh hell no, Netscape was not self-censoring. When I was growing up in the 90's Netscape Navigator was porn central for me!
Then what the hell was wafflle's joke?
Muppets shouldn't be allowed to participate in jokes![Laughing]( "Laughing")
Oh, was netscape a self-censoring browser?
Oh hell no, Netscape was not self-censoring. When I was growing up in the 90's Netscape Navigator was porn central for me!
Then what the hell was wafflle's joke?
Presumably implying that the problems with the website were due to him using an outdated browser.
everyone starts at 1200. then as you play you get a new rating. it is all based on the Glicko ratings system :) check it out - it's a fun read!
http://math.bu.edu/people/mg/glicko/glicko.doc/glicko.html
Presumably implying that the problems with the website were due to him using an outdated browser.
Yeah, he already told me.
I dont know about how to calculate actual rating yet! any program available?
No.