Is 1100 rating good after 2 months of playing?
Sort:
Came4Fame
May 29, 2018
0
#1
I've just reached it, and because I really want to improve and become solid player, I would like to know if that is good enough. It is rating in rapid games (30 min and 15|10).
May 29, 2018
0
#2
And I'm also rated 1300 in blitz but not on chess.com. On some other site.
May 29, 2018
0
#3
And I'm also rated 1300 in blitz but not on chess.com. On some other site.
Yes, definitely a good advancement!
It took me 3 months after starting to go from trash (600) to "beginner" (1200). You seem to be on track, if not faster.
Yes, that sounds like good progress!
May 29, 2018
0
#7
I went from learning how to move the pieces at age 19 to placing 2nd in a local under 1200 in 3 months.. then it took me 3 years to get to 1500 and another 6 years to get to 1700... lol
May 29, 2018
0
#8
Following that trajectory, the math dictates that I should be a grandmaster by the time I am 132!
May 29, 2018
0
#10
Came4Fame wrote:
I've just reached it, and because I really want to improve and become solid player, I would like to know if that is good enough. It is rating in rapid games (30 min and 15|10).
Stick with longer time controls, limit your blitz, and work on tactics...tactics...tactis.
No one has asked about his/her age. Not that matters, because if he/she didn't know anything about chess before it's still encouraging. However, age will determine how far can go.
How old are you, @Came4Fame?
Frankly it depends on what point you started from. If you were 500 when you started then 1100 is a very impressive jump. If you were 1050 when you started then 1100 is still an improvement.
The whole point though is that 1100 is not a bad point to be at assuming you were a complete beginner when you started
May 29, 2018
0
#13
CharlyAZ wrote: No one has asked about his/her age. Not that matters, because if he/she didn't know anything about chess before it's still encouraging. However, age will determine how far can go.How old are you, @Came4Fame? i cant believe anyone from "normal" environment, old enough to read, with internet, tv, etc, to say they never saw a chess board before. bullshit. nowadays, its unescapable, as its a comon board game in daycares, preschool and kindergarten. bullshit that anyonne who can navigate the web stumbled upon such an interesting game (chess) only in their 20's. come on. anyone with a brain can maje 1000, like thats some achievement, whether with a year or a day of exp.
i play chess rarely like 8-10 matches per week and i started 1 month ago, my elo is 1,000 am i on track and do i have to give more time for chess?
Definitely, you have to give it more time. That's the beauty and the tragedy of chess: incommensurable.
@piya_is_my_name The way you quote me, looks like I said all those terrible things that came after "How old are you, @Came4fame?" Hopefully wasn't on purpose. Also, why did you use that tone in your answer? If you have nothing positive to say, just don't.
Yes! Most people dont even get to 1100.
This is so cool 😎
If you are playing at 1100 and enjoying it, thats good enough. Its better than playing at a higher level but getting so hung up about "progress" and "ratings" that you aren't having fun anymore.
I did it 2 times to players!!!
!