LoekBergman wrote:
A me surprising 2035. Expected 200 rating points lower.
Yes, as has been said many times in this thread, it is inaccurate and overrates people.
Find your REAL ELO rating: ELOMETER.NET then post here the results
Sort:
The only thing that site is good for is to demonstrate something about human psychology: We don't give a damn if something is true or not as long as it tells us something we want to hear.
Jul 4, 2017
0
#204
Based on your move choices, our estimate of your Elo rating is 1750, with a 95% confidence interval of [1617...1883].
My score was way too high. I am who I am at this point. My blitz rating here is who I am. A pathetic chess player
Mine was 1917.
1869. I started a year ago.
2249 for me. I am not sure which puzzles I did wrong!. I thought I answered most of them correctly.
Jul 4, 2017
0
#210
The last 2 pages of this thread are filled with posts saying the system is flawed and rates people too high. Since it doesn't rely on openings as heavily as real games, I think the ELO is fairly accurate, in depicting the overall level of play. Openings are the bane of chess. Learning most of them is something one needs to do at an early age to expect to ever reach over 2000 FIDE.
Excalibr4 wrote:
I think the ELO is fairly accurate
What was your score?
Jul 4, 2017
0
#213
Harmbtn wrote:
Excalibr4 wrote:
I think the ELO is fairly accurate
What was your score?
1600 something, I posted it back a few pages
my real elo is 3000!
Jul 4, 2017
0
#216
I think it was 1776 I took more time and found more mating nets.
ok I started taking the test for real, but are these problems timed? I'm a classical or correspondence guy, I take minutes on each one. someone was saying something about timing out? does that mean I'm wasting my time? Plus I find this tedious and too many problems, I would only want to do a few at a time not all at once, screw that.
Excalibr4 wrote:
The last 2 pages of this thread are filled with posts saying the system is flawed and rates people too high. Since it doesn't rely on openings as heavily as real games, I think the ELO is fairly accurate, in depicting the overall level of play. Openings are the bane of chess. Learning most of them is something one needs to do at an early age to expect to ever reach over 2000 FIDE.
I couldn't disagree more. A good player can play good, instinctual moves in the opening and win with it, since he will have advanced positional play and tactics. Memorizing book openings helps, but is not "the bane of chess". I'd say that the middle game is more important than the opening. I have often misplayed an opening and made a comeback in the middle game and won.
fewlio wrote:
ok I started taking the test for real, but are these problems timed? I'm a classical or correspondence guy, I take minutes on each one. someone was saying something about timing out? does that mean I'm wasting my time? Plus I find this tedious and too many problems, I would only want to do a few at a time not all at once, screw that.
It used to be timed, but it no longer is. Also, you can do a few problems, save the link to your favorites/bookmarks and it allows you to pick up where you left off. I'm a classical/daily player myself. I took my time on it, finished it in two sessions and scored an 1820 on it. That's pretty close to my daily rating, so I think it's pretty accurate.
A me surprising 2035. Expected 200 rating points lower.