I think the rating system on chess.com is fixed. I’m at 1080 and have been playing chess for year
Sort:
I beat a player rated 200-300 above me. I can confirm that I am not secretly a Chess.com account made to entice users into buying premium.
hmm...
Mar 3, 2018
0
#45
no!!!! this site is totally free
i play here morethan 5yrs..i never paid anything in this site..im totally play 100% free and i gain my rates by playing long game
#14 They don’t.
Mar 4, 2018
0
#47
@monster-mooster, you were at 1400 just a few days ago...
This site uses the Glicko rating system, which is a variant of the Elo rating system used by FIDE. Glicko is a widely-used and respected rating system intended to fix some of the shortcomings in the Elo system. Here's the Wikipedia article on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glicko_rating_system. The formulas are a bit more complex than Elo, but you could put it all in a spreadsheet and see exactly how your rating should adjust after every game.
Nobody's rating is kept artificially low. If you play at an 1100 level, you'll soon have a rating of around 1100. If you play at a 1400 level, you'll soon have a rating of around 1400. If you play at an 1800 level, you'll soon have a rating of around 1800.
However, you shouldn't assume that merely playing lots of blitz games is a good way to improve. Any experienced coach will tell you playing slow games and analysing your losses is a much better way to go if you want to improve.
MGleason wrote:
However, you shouldn't assume that merely playing lots of blitz games is a good way to improve. Any experienced coach will tell you playing slow games and analysing your losses is a much better way to go if you want to improve.
That's why I hired an inexperienced coach. I hate analyzing my losses! It's bad enough that I have to play them. I'm supposed to relive them?! Good grief!
Come to think of it, I don't even like analyzing my wins. I win the game and I feel pretty good. I finished him off with a brilliant queen sacrifice. So I analyze it only to discover that earlier in the game, my rook was en prise for four straight moves but neither of us noticed. I finally get to the good part and see that my opponent could've taken my sacrificed queen with not just one - but three pieces! Fortunately for me, he chose the wrong one. Okay, I'm no Frank Marshall.
Mar 4, 2018
0
#49
MGleason, I thank you for your good advice, unlike the other fruit cakes that want to attack me or not want to answer any questions I pose. I do know for sure that a 1000 players knows very little about chess. I’m not great at chess for the time I put in, but I can’t understand how better rated players can be dropped down to a beginners level and then having many 1000 1100 players playing like a 1400 rated player. Why doesn’t chess.com let you pick the level of rated player you want to play, like the excellent internet chess club site allows.
Mar 4, 2018
0
#50
monster-mooster wrote:
MGleason, I thank you for your good advice, unlike the other fruit cakes that want to attack me or not want to answer any questions I pose. I do know for sure that a 1000 players knows very little about chess. I’m not great at chess for the time I put in, but I can’t understand how better rated players can be dropped down to a beginners level and then having many 1000 1100 players playing like a 1400 rated player. Why doesn’t chess.com let you pick the level of rated player you want to play, like the excellent internet chess club site allows.
1000-rated players actually know more than you might think. Sure, any regular club player will destroy them, but they'll be totally dominant against someone who knows how the pieces move and plays a game every now and then. A 1000-rated player is pretty low compared to many of those who play regularly, but compared to the world at large it's pretty good.
And actually, a 1000-rated player is quite capable of playing at a 1300-1400 level in the occasional game. Not consistently, or they wouldn't be rated 1000. They'll also occasionally play at a 600-700 level.
You actually can set rating filters. Those rating filters have to include your rating, but if you go into your live chess settings (https://www.chess.com/settings/live), you can specify the range for outgoing seeks; if you set the lower limit to -50 and the upper limit to Any, then you will be matched against people who are rated no more than 50 points below you, and an unlimited number of points above you. Be aware that if you set a narrow filter, it may sometimes take a while to find a match.
Mar 4, 2018
0
#51
And again - if you want to improve, playing lots of games isn't necessarily going to get you there. You can have a lot of fun at the 1100 level, but if you want to reach 1500, you need to play slow games and analyse your losses to see where you went wrong.
Mar 4, 2018
0
#52
[Please don't advertise other sites; passing references are OK, but advertising/comparisons are not - MOD] is a better site if rating is your only concern . . . I think I cannot reach 1700 (Blitz) here.... I reached 1900 at lichess.org .. now I am still at 1300 (dis is my new account) playing for more than 4 years .. my goal is to reach 2000. i don't know if it will take me more than ten years ..
The problem with just playing lots of games is that you will just be making the same mistakes over and over again. I have noticed this in chess, duplicate bridge, poker and some other games. People just keep making the same mistakes over and over again and do not even realize what kind of mistakes they are making.
If you [or anyone] wishes to improve--you will need to play some slow games and then find a way to determine your mistakes. [and then try to not make the save mistakes over and over again]
Example, some players rated 1100 tend to move the same piece twice in the opening without good reason. If you do this and then improve by not making this mistake--you will raise your rating at least 100 points.
Mar 4, 2018
0
#54
defense-is-attack wrote:
[Please don't advertise other sites; passing references are OK, but advertising/comparisons are not - MOD] is a better site if rating is your only concern . . . I think I cannot reach 1700 (Blitz) here.... I reached 1900 at lichess.org .. now I am still at 1300 (dis is my new account) playing for more than 4 years .. my goal is to reach 2000. i don't know if it will take me more than ten years ..
Ratings across different sites can't be directly compared, They're different rating pools, with different mean ratings.
Chess.com's ratings are known to be lower than those at some other sites - and to be closer to FIDE ratings - while some other sites are relatively inflated.
Mar 4, 2018
0
#55
[Please don't advertise other sites - MOD] has a very nice rating system and many paying members. It has little dots on a scale that represents each player. Very easy to use and you know exactly how your play your time and his exact rating, you click on the dot and you chose the player, very nice graph.
monster-mooster wrote:
[Please don't advertise other sites - MOD] has a very nice rating system and many paying members. It has little dots on a scale that represents each player. Very easy to use and you know exactly how your play your time and his exact rating, you click on the dot and you chose the player, very nice graph.
read the last posting, it's not allowed to promote other sites in this forum. I don't particularly like the rule as well, but rules are rules
Mar 4, 2018
0
#57
Question can I place a request to play a 3 minute blitz with players between 1300-1400 and if not why. This way I know what rating player I want to challenge
Mar 4, 2018
0
#58
That is the problem with allowing people to choose there default rating.
monster-mooster wrote:
Question can I place a request to play a 3 minute blitz with players between 1300-1400 and if not why. This way I know what rating player I want to challenge
I am 1400, you can play me if you want to. in general, you can set the rating range of your challenges up to +400 of your current rating.
for beginners