2000 expert
1200 beginner
How is a 2000 different from a 1200?
Sort:
go n watch youtube videos climbing the ladder rating 1200 to 2000
ROUNAK-SARKAR wrote:
2000 expert
1200 beginner
1200 is an intermediate. It's the chess.com average.
Jan 30, 2016
0
#25
Pearls of wisdom 0110001101101000 :) My sincere compliments for such an eloquent contribution.
The difference is that the 2000 player will ironically give more thoughts to his opponent's moves than the 1200 player does.
Not hanging piece is just the start. There's so much more.
I win against lower rated players without them hanging anything all the time. Positional understanding is vital.
ThirdCultureKid wrote:
lol, I kinda think you all misunderstood me....What I meant was HOW is a player better than another? Does the 2000 have more foresight? Does he think in more 'advanced' terms?
I already know a 2000 is a GM and a 1200 in a novice guys
Better memory, better pattern recognition, more mental control, less beer.
The difference between a 1200 and a 2000 is the same (numerically) than the difference between a 2000 and a world class player. In term of playing skill what does that mean?
Jan 30, 2016
0
#31
Colin20G wrote:
The difference between a 1200 and a 2000 is the same (numerically) than the difference between a 2000 and a world class player. In term of playing skill what does that mean?
By itself it doesn't mean anything.
The main difference as I see it though, is that 1200 vs 2000 is a matter of literacy.
2000 vs 2800, they're both literate, but the 2000 is writing average columns at a newspaper, and the 2800 is celebrated genius of an author.
The 2000 rated player has learned how to use nen.
2000 is not a GM. 700 off
Jan 30, 2016
0
#34
0110001101101000 wrote:
ThirdCultureKid wrote:
lol, I kinda think you all misunderstood me....What I meant was HOW is a player better than another? Does the 2000 have more foresight? Does he think in more 'advanced' terms?
I already know a 2000 is a GM and a 1200 in a novice guys
Absolutely everything. You want a list of everything in chess? Ok, off the top of my head:
Tactics, strategy, opening theory, endgame theory, practical decisions, sense of danger, fantasy/imagination, evaluation, calculation, visualization, time management, general rules, and when general rules don't apply.
---
In the opening, if the 1200 doesn't blunder into a trap, they will play a few passive moves. This will give the 2000 some targets or at least positional ideas to start to go to work on. The 1200 is oblivious to any of this of course. This is how it usually starts.
Remember being a pawn up for no compensation is easily enough for the 2000 to force a winning endgame. But even so, if the 1200 miraculously doesn't lose any material through the first 10 or 20 moves out of the opening the 2000 will continue to play towards the strengths of their position and the weaknesses of the 1200's position. It's not about what they want, it's about how well they can meet the needs of the position.
The positional pressure will continue to build. The 2000 will tend to have more active pieces and more space (better minor pieces is often a quick and easy way to tell who is better, and to some degree space too). This is leveraged to generate weaknesses like a doubled pawn or weak king or even more passive pieces for the opponent. It builds to the point that winning tactics are unavoidable and the 1200 loses material. Then (if that's not mate already) it's a simple trade down into a won endgame... the 2000 will queen a pawn and give checkmate.
However this long-ish process is more like 1800 vs 2000... 1200 vs 2000 is more usually "oops, I didn't notice the 2000 could capture that" and then with a few extra pieces there's a relatively easy and fast mating attack.
Great answer! Thanks so much, really was spot on ;)
Jan 30, 2016
0
#35
FChopin99 wrote:
Drew, the difference between a 1200 and a 2000 is that the 2000 is a better chess player
Crikey, how many times do I have to say this isn't what I meant
0110001101101000 wrote:
Colin20G wrote:
The difference between a 1200 and a 2000 is the same (numerically) than the difference between a 2000 and a world class player. In term of playing skill what does that mean?
By itself it doesn't mean anything.
The main difference as I see it though, is that 1200 vs 2000 is a matter of literacy.
2000 vs 2800, they're both literate, but the 2000 is writing average columns at a newspaper, and the 2800 is celebrated genius of an author.
That's a really good description. I think I thought something like that but didn't know how I would put it into words.
Third Culture is an idiot that is envying the great percentage of people who have a greater rating of 1010 in standard.
Feb 24, 2016
0
#38
Ah hah.....maybe you dont know the story of how I dropped from 1150 all the way to 900 in one day?
The difference between a 2000 and a 1200 is one good blow to the head.
Drew, the difference between a 1200 and a 2000 is that the 2000 is a better chess player