is 1400 a good rating?

Sort:
LSChess

is 1613 a good rating because thats what i am

notmtwain
TaeKwonLogan wrote:

is 1420 a good rating because thats what i am

No. It is neither good nor bad.

It only applies to a particular time control group on a particular site.

Without knowing the time control group or the site, people can have no basis for comparisons.

Ratings used to be assigned only for over the board play. Now most people have multiple ratings on multiple sites.

notmtwain

I see 13 ratings from this site. And you posted a USCF rating too (that didn't fit).

Which one were you asking about? (And how was anyone supposed to know?)

DanielGuel

His USCF rating is 1420, probably not updated on his profile.

 

Top 20% of players nationally, top 8% among juniors nationally, and top 10% in Texas... why don't you answer your own question? happy.png 

Lord_Hammer

1400 on chess.com is...well, you know how to play chess, but you’re still...a patzer. 1500 is titled patzer, and 1600+ I’d say is good. 

This is different for OTB though. 

solskytz

Top 20% of players can't be bad - unless one aspires for more...

Kowalski_x

it's a good rating to someone who is below 1420

ActuallySleepy
Being better than 80% of players seems good to me. Being said I don’t think the level of chess being played by 1400 blitz players is necessarily good.
IcyAvaleigh
for all us non-titled players there will always be people thinking you are good at chess and there will always people thinking you are bad at chess, so the only one who can really tell you the answer on your question is yourself :) just enjoy the game and set your own goals, if YOU feel good YOU are good :)
WSama

It's hard to tell with blitz, especially online blitz. If it were rapid then things change drastically, but there are too many chances of finding bad matches with online blitz. The reason for that being the nature of online blitz itself... to put it simply and short, the level of competition drops and fluctuates with online blitz.

GoodKnight0BadBishop
TaeKwonLogan wrote:

is 1420 a good rating because thats what i am

1400 is an excellent rating for your age.

WSama

But I guess I'd rather not comment much on blitz beyond 3|0, because after all... I only play 3|0 blitz. At first I used it for balance training, warming up, or vacationing, but lately I've taken to seeing it much differently...

WSama

More on the matter of fluctuation in online blitz... not too long ago I read an article, by a master I believe, who plays blitz from time to time while taking a walk or riding a train.

WSama

In other words, you have a 1420 amateur league rating. Which is very impressive, I hope to obtain that level someday soon.

WSama

Amateur games spawn amateur ratings, online or offline, that is because they lack competitive consistency. It doesn't have to be a big federation that observes true ratings. Sometimes all it takes is a little club, online or offline, that views chess in professional regards, to instill some consistency...

blueemu

By the standards of international players, we're all patzers... me as well as you.

torrubirubi
It is all about which people you take to compare. If we compare with casual players, 1420 is okay. If you take strong club players, well, 1420 is just very weak. I am probably not much better, something like 1720 in correspondence chess here, less in rapid. I feel I begin to understand a little bit better the game, but I am rarely able to play a game without inaccuracies, mistakes or blunders.
LSChess

1420 is my uscf rating

 

WSama
TaeKwonLogan wrote:

1420 is my uscf rating

 

 

Congratulations, that's a good professional rating. I'm W, and I have an amateur rating of about 1420. Though some say I'm a little underrated.

ThatKidPlayingChess

NO