Cutoff Rating When No Longer Patzer ?

chess.com online i have 60% overall timeouts.and it is USCF 30 min games,and when i started on this site i was only 1041 uscf.

Oh ok.  You gotta stop timing out!

LOL.yeah.

Maybe there should be a patzer world champ match.

LOL!

....or die trying. And RE: Ken Colby strongly urges all to invest substantial study time to your opponents "Mysterious Pawn-Rook Move."

In his wonderfully resourceful book "Secrets of a Grandpatzer" (Malibu Chess Press 1979) he devotes pages about when your opponent pushes an a or h pawn - beware. Most attacks begin RIGHT HERE. You must defend accurately and with equal and opposite counterplay.

btw, why 2050 ? why not just, say, 2000. That's a nice round #. anyway, good luck and keep on. the only person that can make you quit is you. They can throw you out but that shouldn't stop you. there's games going in there around the clock.

If you can't spot the patzer at the table, you're it.

Could we use a more objective idea to seperate them ?

a GM isn't a patzer to me, but as one person alluded to, the weakest GM's are patzers to the elite...so for them, if the spot you a pawn, can you win ?

 or if you are a CM, what if the Elite GM spotted you a knight or bishop, could you still win ? While I don't know how the parameters of such a metric would have to be established, it is just a thought...

perhaps this should determine patzer, instead of just a number, so the idea can be used more cross contextually... ?

This is all bull. A patzer is somebody that blunders games. Verpatzen means to waste your game. I would say this is until 1200 elo.

According to 2500 elo analysis, players over 2200 still blunder here...

Somebody that has 2200 elo is no patzer. These forums really make the world stand on its head.

I think you stop being a patzer when you start playing decent positional moves, when you understand all the basic concepts and stop losing pieces to 2-3 moves tactics. And that might be somewhere around 1700-1800. After that, you're an amateur, but not patzer. At least you have some sort of idea of what you're doing on the board.

Yeah, so do 2800's. Just not that frequently. Look at Aronian's game against Nakamura at the Sinquefield cup where he blundered the exchange in one move. He just went blind. That doesn't mean he's a patzer. He's a chess genius, actually.

How about:

Definition: A patzer is a chess player who has an average inaccuracy of over 0.33 per move, as determined by a strong chess engine.

well even plus 2000 player often blunder strategically , i really would think 2400 is the mark when someone isnt a patzer anymore.

i know even IMs probably consider everything above 2000 probably strong, but when i look at the ease  a plus 2400 player has in finding mistakes in a -2400 game. I really think 2400 should be the mark.

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/patzer2

Exactly, that is why I think trying to use blunders strictly isn't good enough for a measuring strength. How about average t score per move ? That is really a better indicator of one's over playing strength and apptitude, even if there are a few holes in one's game ?

I think Chess.com's system should disply this along side of everyone's rating. It would have other useful benefits besides telling you if someone is likely a patzer, regardless of their rating.

I was thinking average t-score per move also would suffice. It is basically the same thing, just written differently...

im pretty sure that was a bit more complicated than you make it out to be. nakamura can probably play better in bullet than 95 percent of posters in long games.