Is 1100 considered a respectable and above average rating?

I'm trying to be respectful but it's hard when I literally got 1100 in like my first month of playing

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.

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.

chess.com 1100 is so much worse than an ecf 1100 keep in mind

in england 2000 is expert, 1800 is class a, 1600 is class b and 1400 is class c. theres no class d or whatever

so i think below 1400 would be a beginner then?

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?

hmmm cant 1300s be advanced beginners or smth

it feels weird saying a 1300 is average. because a 1900 is also average i think

i think this is below 1400 otb

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

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

1400 is the rating floor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnvQ-f5ue94

Cough

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

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.

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 ...

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

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