I feel that I deserve a higher rating

then strive for it. im not exaggerating but i got my tactics trainer rating up 200 points from 1700-1900 in a week doing 30 minutes of tactics each day. Ive been reading 10 pages of heisman's elements of positional evaluation to give a decent overview of positions arising in the middlegame and studying 10 pages of silmans endgame course. the other two things i do as a daily routine is take some of the tests from the book chris ward - it's your move improvers which is very instructive because its a multiple based format and i finish the day of either by looking at some instructive opening books, for me its QGD and caro-kann or play a 30 minute rated game. this may take 2-3 hours but since its summer and if your dedicated enough then it is possible to make a huge leap. in 6 months i got my uscf rating to 1570. when i was only 900, i beat a 1770 rated player good times 

True.

Chess does require dedication. Anyone failing to realise that are kidding themselves on and are unlikely to succeed at the game.

Yep, gotta admit this is an insane thread.

what about this insane, thread people are still argueing even though the op has deleted his post .

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/kings-gambit-a-good-opening?page=58

I never deleted the original post. That would be counter productive.

its much easier to improve your rating...if your rating is low.

if someone "gave" you a 2000 rating and you played an 1800 and lost, you'd lose a lot of points. If you won, you'd only gain a few points.

if you are rated 1000 you are going to gain points easily and its harder to lose them.

-----

or look at it this way, if you are rated 1000 or 1200, almosy ANY type of study and effort will gradually make your rating go up. If you were rated 2000 it would be harder to pinpoint the exact areas that need help

I feel I deserve a lower one...

I often feel like this. I tend to have a quick lapse of focus once every game or two. In chess, something like that can bring your rating down several hundred points. So I feel like, barring those 1 or 2 occasional "outlier" moves... I am overall stronger than my rating shows. If that makes sense. Especially playing online at short time controls, where it's easy to get distracted or lose on time. I kinda hate chess because if most my moves are "1600 quality"... and then I make one "1100 quality" move, because I got distracted... I'm not actually 1600.....

In most sports, you can zone out, or mess up once in a game, and still be a really good player. One simple mistake or quick lapse of focus does not really bring down your level. Not so in chess. Rawr, ADD.

i can help anyone get up to 1700 fide if you want to be my chess partner/student message me.im a good teacher :)

Ah, another random guarantee!

My little pony is marvelous escapism. (and the colours are very vibrant!)

+1

Me too! ^_^

I feel that I deserve a million dollars...

2200 is not that hard to obtain. I have a question for you guys: Why does mood affect your chess games? When you lose a game, do you feel like your a terrible chess player or dont take the chance to analyze because  your too upset?

Yeah, I suppose Bobby would say that...

if a 15 year old can get to 1600 in  7 months im pretty sure anyone can get to 2200 in a couple years 

Talents are really different between people. That sets people really different from one another, therefor do I have to disagree with your reasoning. If that 15 year old is still at school, sitting in a class with other 15 year olds, does he think that all of his classmates can get that chess rating within a couple of years?

All ratings imply is your relative ability to win a chess game compared to others in a pool of players, if you were given a rating of 2000, you would lose it straight away because your ability to win a game is around 1000, you would have a 1/330 chance to beat someone rated 2,000.

Again though... rating is not a measure of how much you know about chess or how good you can be, its a measure of your ability to win a game compared to other people in a pool based on your previous results.

I used to play a lot at school. Then took 25 years off and have come back again. I now play 8-10 minute blitz games and mess around vs engines.

I play without time controls vs engines at about 1900 ELO but absolutely suck at blitz being old and slow and a m aways getting into time trouble..

So I play about 1400 rating and against players in the 1200 to 1600 range.

I am much stronger than almost all of them in the opening and transitioning into the middle game but my lack of time management and middle aged calculation tends to cause me issues fron then on. If I can get to an endgame I often have a slight edge again.

Younger players may well demonstrate other characteristics.

All in all though, we get the ratings we deserve...