Is 1100 considered a respectable and above average rating?

I consider 1600 players to be pretty bad at chess but I guess everyone disrespects heavily lower-rated players. Anyway 1100 is a decent rating to have if you're not playing tournaments.

Yes!
1,100 is a very respectable beginner ranking.
1,100 is slightly below average beginner ranking.
Average Beginner ranking is 1,200.
—————————
I break down the ranking into following categories:
- Novice is below 1,000
- Beginner is 1,000 to 1,399
- Intermediate is 1,400 to 1,799
- Advanced is 1,800 to 2,199
- Masters 2,200+
—————————
So yeah - you would be above Novice and close to middle area of Beginner.

Average Beginner ranking is 1,200.
If you've ever taught someone the rules you'd know a real beginner is probably rated below 0. The only reason it doesn't happen is they artificially stop ratings from going lower than 100.
But of course when you're that new you can gain rating fast. Your first 100 games you probably gain a few 100 points, so you're more like 500 than below zero.
Real Beginners are not called Beginners in Chess.
They are considered provisional or novice.
They are often not given ranking to ensure the stability of the ranking economy.

Every new account starts with a rating.
Words like "new" and "beginner" and "novice" are usually used interchangeably and for a variety of ratings. That's why I like to emphasize a "real" beginner as being someone who just learned how the pieces moved (and doesn't have experience in other chess-like games).
The words are not interchangeable is what I’m trying to say.
Its a completely different Classification.
A Beginner in Chess is a person who has played for months or years. They are not new in anyway.
They often are Adults or Teenagers with normally functioning mind.
————————————
The Tier below Beginners is Novice players.
Many years ago, It use to be called Handicap Tiers.
The term Novice is a better terminology which is less offensive to people so that is what it changed too.
The Tier is often filled with Children, Adults with Mental Disabilities, or True Beginners who are learning how the pieces move (Generally, they are considered to be players passing thru as that isn’t the norm. Unless, the person in question is a Child or has Mental Disability.)
This is 1 of reasons you can’t call a “real” beginner a beginner.
FIDE often uses Alphabet as classification.
Such as Class D player or Class A Player
Words like Beginner, Intermediate, or Advanced are terms people use to try to lump players into categories based on the different Alphabetical Classifications.

What does it mean "respectable" anyway? I am 1600 on chess.com blitz/rapid and I can't even play my own opening. How is that respectable?

Hey! A rating of 1100 is pretty standard for many folks starting out. It’s not top-tier, but it’s definitely a solid starting point. Just keep playing and practicing, and you’ll see your rating go up in no time!
4o mini

You're mostly making stuff up so not sure what to say.
I've heard of giving a handicap of course, but never "handicap tiers" and for example class A, B, C is USCF not FIDE.
It’s been around since 1978.
It was published in a Book.
Even Wikipedia knows about the categories.
Wikipedia isn’t even a reliable source and they know about it.
Its not something I made up.
You can find it in a lot of places.
The only thing “made up” is terms beginner, intermediate, and advanced because as you can see above the classifications are alphabetical.
What I do is lump Class E & D together and call them Beginners as that is what you would expect Beginner to start at.
Class C & B - I would say is Intermediate
Class A & Expert - I would say is Advanced
However, you could call Experts as just Experts.
I have done that before as well.
Expert is what they are generally called.
They just don’t seem to have a title in front of their name similar to Master players.
Yes!
1,100 is a very respectable beginner ranking.
1,100 is slightly below average beginner ranking.
Average Beginner ranking is 1,200.
—————————
I break down the ranking into following categories:
- Novice is below 1,000
- Beginner is 1,000 to 1,399
- Intermediate is 1,400 to 1,799
- Advanced is 1,800 to 2,199
- Masters 2,200+—————————
So yeah - you would be above Novice and close to middle area of Beginner.
Damn!
At 2300, I'M A MASTER!
CALL ME MASTER DUDES!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnvQ-f5ue94
Trying to say a beginner is 1400 is a misuse of the word and will only confuse people (especially beginners).
No one starts at 1400.
Cough
Yes!
1,100 is a very respectable beginner ranking.
1,100 is slightly below average beginner ranking.
Average Beginner ranking is 1,200.
—————————
I break down the ranking into following categories:
- Novice is below 1,000
- Beginner is 1,000 to 1,399
- Intermediate is 1,400 to 1,799
- Advanced is 1,800 to 2,199
- Masters 2,200+—————————
So yeah - you would be above Novice and close to middle area of Beginner.
Damn!
At 2300, I'M A MASTER!
CALL ME MASTER DUDES!
Your not a master your just a dweeb that thinks he's good anyway stop trolling or flexing your opinion isn't the most important one here

You're mostly making stuff up so not sure what to say.
I've heard of giving a handicap of course, but never "handicap tiers" and for example class A, B, C is USCF not FIDE.
It’s been around since 1978.
It was published in a Book.
Even Wikipedia knows about the categories.
Wikipedia isn’t even a reliable source and they know about it.
Its not something I made up.
You can find it in a lot of places.
The only thing “made up” is terms beginner, intermediate, and advanced because as you can see above the classifications are alphabetical.
What I do is lump Class E & D together and call them Beginners as that is what you would expect Beginner to start at.
Class C & B - I would say is Intermediate
Class A & Expert - I would say is Advanced
However, you could call Experts as just Experts.
I have done that before as well.
Expert is what they are generally called.
They just don’t seem to have a title in front of their name similar to Master players.
I don't think this exists anymore
The Glicko Rating System is the Modern Approach System many use today.
The Glicko Rating System is supposed to be an improvement on the Elo Rating System.
The Elo Rating System is what I showed in the picture showcasing the Category Break downs.
——————————
The Glicko Rating System altered the way the calculations happen.
The points you Win or Lose in a game can be different under the different systems.
—————————-
However, The category graph was kept the same which is the argument we was discussing.
We are not talking about how the points get calculated.
We are talking about what categories do a person fall under after the calculations are over.
People would use the above chart as the metric.
Their are some exceptions though some groups use different categories for example:
It depends on location & origination.
We are on Chess.com
Chess.com uses the Glicko System so they would fall under the Elo Categories.
Yes!
1,100 is a very respectable beginner ranking.
1,100 is slightly below average beginner ranking.
Average Beginner ranking is 1,200.
—————————
I break down the ranking into following categories:
- Novice is below 1,000
- Beginner is 1,000 to 1,399
- Intermediate is 1,400 to 1,799
- Advanced is 1,800 to 2,199
- Masters 2,200+—————————
So yeah - you would be above Novice and close to middle area of Beginner.
Damn!
At 2300, I'M A MASTER!
CALL ME MASTER DUDES!
Your not a master your just a dweeb that thinks he's good anyway stop trolling or flexing your opinion isn't the most important one here
LOL. You sound like you're still TILTED from the time that I defeated you in Blitz Chess on chess.com
Get over it dude. It was a long time ago. move on.
be happy for Me & my 2300 rating. After all, beating you was a part of Me reaching my current 2300 Blitz rating!
No actually I'm doing good I reached a peak a few weeks ago to a month ish I just stopped playing cause of school mostly I only play occasionally
Besides why would you think your so important that you would cause me to tilt ? I really don't get you ...
Yes!
1,100 is a very respectable beginner ranking.
1,100 is slightly below average beginner ranking.
Average Beginner ranking is 1,200.
—————————
I break down the ranking into following categories:
- Novice is below 1,000
- Beginner is 1,000 to 1,399
- Intermediate is 1,400 to 1,799
- Advanced is 1,800 to 2,199
- Masters 2,200+—————————
So yeah - you would be above Novice and close to middle area of Beginner.
Damn!
At 2300, I'M A MASTER!
CALL ME MASTER DUDES!
Your not a master your just a dweeb that thinks he's good anyway stop trolling or flexing your opinion isn't the most important one here
LOL. BigChessPlayer665 You sound like you're still TILTED from the time that I defeated you in Blitz Chess on chess.com
Get over it dude. It was a long time ago. move on.
be happy for Me & my 2300 rating. After all, beating you was a part of Me reaching my current 2300 Blitz rating!
I wasn't the one who brought this up you did so why do you care exactly ? Besides I don't tilt because of arguments online that would be dumb I don't get salty easily you can try I guess
"nope"
I disagree with NM darkunorthodox88.
1100 is a respectable & above average rating on Chess.com & in chess in general
I say this not as just a personal opinion but based on statistical facts on Chess.com as well as projections of actual players in the world today.
The vast majority of chess players average around 400 to 800 in their ratings for Blitz Chess online
As a 2300 level player myself in Blitz Chess, I'm within the top .2% of all players worldwide & rated at around the 99.8% level. Meanwhile, NM darkunorthodox88 is rated only 220 Blitz on Chess.com & 2269 Rapid; the former rating in Blitz being the significant rating for chess skill measurement based on performance analytics
So, hold your head up high & continue to Flex your 1100 rating dude!
1100 is atrocious in real life chess
the median elo is 1711 in otb
1711 otb is like 2100 on chess.com
so an 1100 is basically 1000 elo away from being average
Otb is different tho it's more competitive I do agree it's below average for competitive players but for casual players not so much
Yes!
1,100 is a very respectable beginner ranking.
1,100 is slightly below average beginner ranking.
Average Beginner ranking is 1,200.
—————————
I break down the ranking into following categories:
- Novice is below 1,000
- Beginner is 1,000 to 1,399
- Intermediate is 1,400 to 1,799
- Advanced is 1,800 to 2,199
- Masters 2,200+—————————
So yeah - you would be above Novice and close to middle area of Beginner.
Damn!
At 2300, I'M A MASTER!
CALL ME MASTER DUDES!
Your not a master your just a dweeb that thinks he's good anyway stop trolling or flexing your opinion isn't the most important one here
LOL. BigChessPlayer665 You sound like you're still TILTED from the time that I defeated you in Blitz Chess on chess.com
Get over it dude. It was a long time ago. move on.
be happy for Me & my 2300 rating. After all, beating you was a part of Me reaching my current 2300 Blitz rating!
I wasn't the one who brought this up you did so why do you care exactly ? Besides I don't tilt because of arguments online that would be dumb I don't get salty easily you can try I guess
you sound so TILTED
LOL
Look it's alright dude
I'm not making fun of your 2100 rating. I was just reminding you that you lost to Me & that was a part of your education
getting schooled on chess.com is a part of the learning process
I don't expect you to be in the 2300 level anytime soon, but keep at it and play more chess dude. its good for you! we can talk again when you raise your rating
right now it feels like I'm punching down on you so I'd prefer to just wish you well in your struggle to raise your rating. LOL
I'm not tilted tho I just took a break cause of school :/ why are you assuming everything is automatically about you your not good enough for me to truly care
idk why people would compare themselves to casual players tho
dude. you're still 2200
it's been over a month
Why do you care about ratings it doesn't matter ? It's just a number ...
This is what I'm confused about why do you care enough to bring people down when you should be lifting people up ?
idk why people would compare themselves to casual players tho
dude. you're still 2200
it's been over a month
a) what has this got to do with the thread? b) i got 2300 and went back down. i'm not a stable 2300 yet
To put context he flexes his rating to pretend he's ether smarter than you or knows more about you in chess so therefore his opinion is more valid even tho it's wrong
It's sorta like how a conspiracy theorist thinks when they say " do your own research "