In my opinion its awesome, but chess is also kinda new to me so I could be wrong. I dont know the answer to your question. I wish you all the best. :)
Is 1500 a good rating?
Sort:
Yes, it's a good rating for that amount of time. Rapid is easier at the lower levels so your USCF equivalent should be a bit lower but you are progressing really well, just keep it up.
Apr 20, 2021
0
#4
Relative to what?
A titled player would barely regard you as a warm up game.
But the average joe gets trashed by you any day of the week.
A titled player would barely regard you as a warm up game.
But the average joe gets trashed by you any day of the week.
BroiledRat wrote:
Relative to what?
A titled player would barely regard you as a warm up game.
But the average joe gets trashed by you any day of the week.
A titled player would barely regard you as a warm up game.
But the average joe gets trashed by you any day of the week.
To the amount of time played... which is what he asked.
Apr 20, 2021
0
#6
And again, my question is still valid.
Getting to 1500 in that time frame is decent, it is about as fast as I’ve improved, but I’ve seen many improve faster, while on the other hand, I have seen many players stuck below 1000 after years of play and many thousands of games.
So again, asking if that is good improvement in that timeframe still begs the question of relative to what?
It is certainly more rapid improvement than average.
So, assuming they are asking relative to the general population it would be good.
Getting to 1500 in that time frame is decent, it is about as fast as I’ve improved, but I’ve seen many improve faster, while on the other hand, I have seen many players stuck below 1000 after years of play and many thousands of games.
So again, asking if that is good improvement in that timeframe still begs the question of relative to what?
It is certainly more rapid improvement than average.
So, assuming they are asking relative to the general population it would be good.
Well, I disagree. He is obviously asking it as a general question with the time attached to it. Why make it more than it is.
https://www.google.com/search?q=chess+rating+level+list&rlz=1C5GCEM_enUS940US940&oq=chess+rating+level+list&aqs=chrome..69i57.5146j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
this is a link, here you can check how good your rating is. I hope this helps
Apr 20, 2021
0
#9
I'd say that's an incredible rating. I've been playing for years and never got past 1300 and my average is 1100.
Apr 20, 2021
0
#10
That is a great rating in the short amout of time. I shot to 1280 in two months and then I got drunk that lead to a tilt.
The only thing I can critique you on is that your puzzle rating is low to go with your 1500 ELO rating. Something to consider moving forward.
Apr 20, 2021
0
#11
1500 is good for four months. Very solid. In fact, I made my account when I was 14...
B1ZMARK wrote:
1500 is good for four months. Very solid. In fact, I made my account when I was 14...
How old are you now?
Apr 20, 2021
0
#14
drmrboss wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
1500 is good for four months. Very solid. In fact, I made my account when I was 14...
How old are you now?
16
Apr 20, 2021
0
#15
Has taken myself 2 years to reach 1500-1600 but as an adult learner with all the life responsibilities that come with being old I’m happy with this progress.
1500 in four months is awesome. Just don’t burn yourself out when you hit a wall
1500 in four months is awesome. Just don’t burn yourself out when you hit a wall
BroiledRat wrote:
And again, my question is still valid.
Getting to 1500 in that time frame is decent, it is about as fast as I’ve improved, but I’ve seen many improve faster, while on the other hand, I have seen many players stuck below 1000 after years of play and many thousands of games.
So again, asking if that is good improvement in that timeframe still begs the question of relative to what?
It is certainly more rapid improvement than average.
So, assuming they are asking relative to the general population it would be good.
Getting to 1500 in that time frame is decent, it is about as fast as I’ve improved, but I’ve seen many improve faster, while on the other hand, I have seen many players stuck below 1000 after years of play and many thousands of games.
So again, asking if that is good improvement in that timeframe still begs the question of relative to what?
It is certainly more rapid improvement than average.
So, assuming they are asking relative to the general population it would be good.
"It is about as fast as I've improved"
I don't mean to be that one person, but at the same time, you've lost 210 points in a month. I don't know why I had to say that, don't mean to be toxic, sorry.
Apr 23, 2021
0
#19
R3tdog, it is still about as fast as I’ve improved, the fact that I lost over 200 points in the past month is the only thing stopping me from saying I improved faster, as I was in the high 1600’s, some thing you’ve yet to achieve.
My massive losing streak counterbalances the fact that I was considerably higher than your personal best at one point.
Thus, I said about the same.
And don’t feel bad for bringing it up, I’m comfortable with the fact that I’m bad, I’ve been playing seriously for a brief time only. :)
My massive losing streak counterbalances the fact that I was considerably higher than your personal best at one point.
Thus, I said about the same.
And don’t feel bad for bringing it up, I’m comfortable with the fact that I’m bad, I’ve been playing seriously for a brief time only. :)
Apr 23, 2021
0
#20
BroiledRat wrote:
R3tdog, it is still about as fast as I’ve improved, the fact that I lost over 200 points in the past month is the only thing stopping me from saying I improved faster, as I was in the high 1600’s, some thing you’ve yet to achieve.
My massive losing streak counterbalances the fact that I was considerably higher than your personal best at one point.
Thus, I said about the same.
And don’t feel bad for bringing it up, I’m comfortable with the fact that I’m bad, I’ve been playing seriously for a brief time only.
My massive losing streak counterbalances the fact that I was considerably higher than your personal best at one point.
Thus, I said about the same.
And don’t feel bad for bringing it up, I’m comfortable with the fact that I’m bad, I’ve been playing seriously for a brief time only.
Shake it off and give your self time. Time will reveal itself. I personally see things as premature at the momment and clearly bias right now based on you admittingly playing your friends and low puzzles rating.
I do like how you studying much more vs playing.
I'm 14 almost 15, and I've been playing for around 4 months now. Is 1500 a good rating for that amount of time playing, and I'm thinking of getting a USCF membership in the summer so I can go to actual tournaments, so what would my actual rating be?