How impressive is a 600 rating in rapid on chess.com?

Finally reached 600! (lowest was 100, had many bad losing streaks getting me down to 400 but i did not give up).

How impressive is it?

What level would you consider them at?

How rare are they?

You can see the rating distribution here: https://www.chess.com/leaderboard/live/rapid.

I'll leave the subjective interpretation of how good 600 is, to yourself.

How honest an answer do you want?

Everyone starts somewhere and it's great that you're improving. Try not to worry about your rating (I know, easier said than done). The important thing is that you're getting better.

If you look up the "detailed stats" on your profile under each game type, you can see a "percentile" rating. This shows you where on a percentage basis you are relative to the total ranking (since the published ranking list only shows the top half-million players). According to your profile, you are at 37%, meaning that 73% of rapid players on the site have a rating equal to or higher than yours.

With that said, I should note that some years ago the default "starting rating" was much higher than it is now (I think it was 1200?) so there may be players on there who have only played a couple of games, are worse players than you, but have a higher rating for legacy reasons.

Thanks for the answer guys

I want to play more chess but i dont want to lose my 600 rating. Even though its still a pretty low rating it was pretty tough for me to achieve.

In unrated games i always play against people over twice my rating, over 1000. 

And how do you do against them? If you are maintaining a decent record, then there's no real reason to fear for your rating if you continue to play (sensibly-rated opponents) in rated games.

Ratings do go down as well as up, and getting on a tilt happens. It sucks when you achieve a milestone and then fall below it again. But the only way to improve it is to put yourself out there and play games.

For opponents who are over 1000, I always lose to them

For opponents in my rating range, I have 387 wins and 357 losses.

Yeah I know I will eventually gain back all the points I lose, but when you hit a milestone and fall back that sucks.

I will keep playing and trying to get better

@1

600 is not impressive at all.
Always check your intended move is no blunder before you play it.
Hang no pieces, hang no pawns. That little mental discipline is enough to reach 1500.

Wow, you have a rating over 2000!??! how

@davidkimchi congratulations on your 600 rating. Your rating is honestly at the level of an early beginner, but definitely don't give up. A lot of players here will tell you how small the rating is, but if you play rapid and think about the games you will definitely improve! I personally have a rating of 1300 and three quarters of a year ago I had 800. Set realistic goals and watch YT, that might help you in the beginning :D

Thanks, 1300 is great!

What level rating for rapid would i need to no longer be considered a beginner?

@8
I am old, I used to be much stronger.

Anyone know what this champion trophy is from?

I never even entered any tournaments or competitions but it says i am the champion with 485 trophies

@davidkimchi Honestly, to not be considered a chess beginner, you should have a rating of around 1500, that's a classic chess player. As for the champion, it's actually an activity-based league. You get points for every game won or drawn. The leagues are basically useless, so supposedly you can win something in the highest one, but I'm not there yet.

Congrats to reaching 600.

If you want to progress and to become a GM you literally HAVE to lose your 600 rating. :-) So don't be afraid of playing. Eventually your rating will go up.

Others will disagree, but I find that forgetting about the rating is a much better experience.   If you can do that.   Ratings, ratings, ratings... chess.com gives me the impression of being at least 98% full of ratings.   Too much, everywhere you look.

Ratings are useful, granted, for matching against similar ability.   I try to like playing, (that does occasionally happen), and yes to improve a bit sometimes if I can, and not even bother to ignore the rating.   What is chess about, after all?

You may have a different view.   I'm probably in a small minority.

The good thing about rating is that it is humbling and doesn't leave much room for deceiption. In many professions there are untalented people who talk their way up, merely because they act confident. And I know musicians, artists and writers who are convinced they are the real deal. In chess, if someone tells you that they are good, you just ask for their rating and know...

Well, from your account, it seems you've been playing chess for 2 months.

So it's about 2 month's worth of impressive... so that's good. Keep playing and improving if you're still enjoying it.

The answer to how impressive might be based on one’s perspective. To some, 600 pales in comparison to those at 800 and higher. To others, at 2-400, you look like an experienced player and they wonder how long it will take to reach 600. Here’s the secret; it doesn’t matter what our ratings are. If you’re enjoying the game, you’re already a “winner.” If you’re enjoying the game and improving, you’re on a wonderful journey of experiencing chess. Ignore those that may scoff at your 600, and don’t be too enamored with those higher than you, especially the “know-it-alls.” 

You might be right that 600 is not impressive (I am currently in the 700-800 range, and am aware I am not very impressive either). Your "advice", however,  is overly simplistic and unrealistic.