ELO Gatekeepers

I really don't do much, I play more positionally nowadays (positional = higher accuracy) and a lot of my times my opponents sell the game (I have some very short games with 90-100 accuracy in lines like damiano, fried liver, traxler, or just early game blunder and that bumps up the accuracy)

Thanks, i know it's a kinda solution but I'm not a fast thinker - my potential opens up in longer games. Daily games, on the other hand, makes difficult to fully immerse in the game when every move is in different day. So that's why I prefer 30min/1h Rapid. About mistakes you mentioned... it is a common misconception that elo gatekeepers in a 1000 elo environment are inaccuracy or mistake free. If they have regular 90+ accuracy, they will be caught quickly.

Don't you think if they were all cheaters they wouldn't be rated 1000, or they are not doing it very well?

The "gatekeepers" are those who don't let you chomp?

The 1000 elo level is full of elo gatekeepers and sandbeggers. Whether they are there in transit to a bigger elo or want to please their ego by playing with weaker ones, I don't know. Even if it's a transit, the masses are so big that some go above, new ones come from below and you meet them all the time. If you had studied their accounts (but you don't because you are 2000 elo), you would have realized that many of them after the first 7-10 moves see in the analytics that they play against another elo gatekeeper, so they deliberately resign. To then torture an honest player. Logically, in this style, their elo may not always rise. Mental deviations can be different - there are also victory junkies at any cost or people with sadistic and narcissistic tendencies - they enjoy not rising in ranking, where they are easier to catch, but instead torment weaker players in a 1000 elo environment.

The ones that don't "smart cheat " they still lose tho there are still a higher percentage of bans in the 2000+ range even if most get caught People just suck at cheating and when they don't it's kinda embarrassing

Most of you gathered here are with 2000+ elo as if what is happening in a 1000 elo environment could be your problem 😁

Better be glad that by 2000 rating those elo gatekeepers mostly are banned (I hope)! That's one of the reasons why almost no GM or famous chess youtubers fights against this nightmare, because it doesn't affect none of you personally. But it affects millions of chess amateurs who want a fair environment but who have no platform to speak out and no power to be heard. If a multiple world champion is being mocked for fighting against elo gatekeepers, what's an ordinary 1000 elo person to do?

But you saw in the screenshots that my 1000 elo inaccuracy is only 0.2% more than a 2000 elo guy. I have 0.6% more mistakes and 1.9% more blunders. It's not that much overall, considering that I don't aim to match Stockfish's accuracy at all costs, but play creatively and aggressively with a lot of sacrifices. If those are my stats then think what they are for the elo gatekeepers at ~1000 rating, 30min/1h Rapid (!!?)

So yesterday, me and a friend of mine, who also has a 1000 rating here, registered on the second largest chess site - today he has a 1768 rating there, and I have a 2123. Coincidence? Maybe 😂

None of this means what you think it means.

As it was said before, it's much easier to play well against an 100 rated opponent as against a 2000 rated. The lower rated player makes more frequent and more obvious mistakes and puts less pressure on the opponent.

Also, chess.com calculates accuracy based on rating. The same game would show higher accuracy for an 1000 rated player than for a 2000 rated one. The criteria for "mistakes" and "inaccuracies" also depends on rating. Which sounds crazy. And it is.

Also, there are no "Elo gatekeepers". The whole notion is a completely unhinged conspiracy theory with no basis in reality.

Another smarty-pants with 2000 elo who knows better what's going on in a 1000 elo landscape. Without even ever playing Rapid games 😁😂

Really, what are you doing here? This is not your problem at all.

Just because elo gatekeepers are mostly banned in a 2000+ pool and they are much less on any level of blitz and bullet, doesn't mean the same is happening in a 1000 elo Rapid environment. Also, you've only played against the computer for the last couple of years... And such a person will tell us what is reality and what is a conspiracy 🤭

Also note that since you have the ability to abort game on the first move without losing rating, before you make your first move make a quick scout of your opponent's account. When was the account created? Do they have a profile picture? What are their recent accuracies? If they haven't reviewed their games, did they win a lot of them? Are one of their ratings (in your case, their rapid rating) much higher than all their others? Did they gain a ton of elo over a short period of time? (Ex: 200 Elo to 1000 Elo spike in a month) Are they on their trial gold membership/No membership? The last couple are just some extra checks if you are sure of the first couple. If your opponent checks at least 5 of these questions, abort the game. This will help avoid some of the less discrete "Elo gatekeepers". As for smurfs and sandbaggers, there's nothing we can do to detect them sadly . Hope you can save some Elo with this!

The image is really interesting, I didn't realize that Bourdonnais was 1800 strength
Btw, are you really a WFM? If so you should apply to get your title on here

Months is wild. An NM at the chess club I go to got his title a few months ago and got the title on lichess in a week or so

I have read the whole thread and I have still no clue.

I think he means a cheater

Yes, from the nature of the replies to some comments made here (such as mine) these "gatekeepers" being referred to are cheaters and smurfs/sandbaggers

Thanks, but most of your suggestions don't work, because elo gatekeepers aren't that primitive these days. They are not just new accounts and a missing profile picture. At Rapid level 1000 rating, 80-85 accuracy for elo gatekeepers is enough to defeat most opponents. Sometimes even 75 is enough.

So, I have noticed several factors that define that a elo gatekeeper is playing against me - but only afterwards the game:

1. Poor positional awareness early in the game followed by a rapid jump in quality. At first, the pieces are not developed, the opponent locks them himself or even loses them. But then, all these disadvantages suddenly disappear, the opponent's game improves tremendously, and you have the feeling that you are playing against an "invincible idiot".

2. Playing at level 1000, most players do simple attack concepts that a good chess player would counter. People are emotional. They want to attack quickly and easily. The engine, on the other hand, sees ahead that these ideas are wrong, so it does not recommend such attacks. Since elo gatekeepers listen to the computer, they don't have the typical adventurous attacks that are so common at level 1000. Instead, they get the position of pieces amazingly correct so that you can't make any creative move. And by "you" I mean people with 1000 level, not 2000 level.

3. When playing against a elo gatekeeper, you lose significantly more time than usual, because you have to think about each move much longer. You immediately feel a huge difference from other games where honest people with THE SAME elo plays. If elo gatekeepers can't win quickly due to their opponent's mistakes, they win by taking advantage of their opponent's timeout. Against a stronger opponent, they cannot afford a higher volume of Stockfish moves, but still at level 1000 it is enough to cut off all attack ideas through help of their tools and simply wait for the opponent to run out of time.

4. Many elo gatekeepers does not understand the moves suggested by the computer. For example, if you sacrifice a piece, they usually choose not to listen to the computer and take the bait, because it seems obvious to them. They believe that there is no need for engine help here. A similar way is to create a situation where most of the intuitive options in the opponent's move are mistakes. These are usually the only mistakes elo gatekeepers make aside of intentional. Therefore, sacrifice is almost the only way to somewhat resist them.

5. Their rating fluctuates tremendously like 900-1400-900 but always stands still in long run. I think this is due to the fact that at 1400+ they have to do more Stockfish moves to defeat stronger opponents and they are afraid of getting caught. To gatekeeping above level 1400 and not get caught, you need to know how to play chess good. 
But these are only the most extreme cases. Many of them have learned to maintain natural rating fluctuations. 
And yes, between them, there are also many sandbeggers too, who operates different, but in fact, are just another kind of elo gatekeepers.

The biggest misconception is that people think that elo gatekeepers are stupid and act obviously. They can easily mix best moves with good moves or inaccuracies or even mistakes at 1000 level to win and not get caught.

Apparently there is a big conspiracy theory of cheaters whose job is to beat lower Elo players in order for keeping people like the OP (who is actually a 2000 level player in his accuracy level he says) at a low Elo level. So this secret society of cheaters agrees to play against lower players and beat them, so that the lower players never realise they are as good as the higher level players...

That's how I understand this thread's theory anyway - I could be wrong

is this like lizard people theory but for chess? but I mean I don't think OP is 2000