Is 500 elo Good?

Sort:
Avatar of Ziryab
chesssblackbelt wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
chesssblackbelt wrote:
Ziryab wrote:

Here’s the most accurate guide to ratings that I’ve seen.

This is accurate for OTB ratings except for 2200 being "almost master"

It is NM or CM

CM is not a master. NM is absent from the chart. As I said, it was the most accurate I’ve seen. I didn’t say it was perfect. I’ve seen a lot of similar charts that are garbage.

wym CM is not a master? CM is better than NM

Yes, but the term candidate master means not yet a master.

Avatar of chesssblackbelt
dragonroar400 wrote:
chesssblackbelt wrote:

i only play him if i wanna show off by playing blindfold but even blindfold i'd never lose lol

i play him like evry week(i won 2 times in a row last 2 weeks!)

Ah nice. My sister plays and I play with her like everyday

Avatar of RyanShed

Uh so that's not really how it works, If you can beat a 1000 player as a 100, either you are not 100 or they are not 1000

Avatar of chesssblackbelt

you can get 900 rating difference upsets. i'm sure i can lose to a 1600 in bullet

statistically, a 7-0 result would take about 1 trillion years to get though lol

Avatar of klordsondarius
I used to be 594 elo but now I am 629
Avatar of klordsondarius
I can also definitely be
Avatar of Mr-Chill12

yygygtdyfr

Avatar of Weirdaustrian
klordsondarius wrote:
I used to be 594 elo but now I am 629

Crazy difference

Avatar of dragonroar400
Weirdgerman wrote:
klordsondarius wrote:
I used to be 594 elo but now I am 629

Crazy difference

ikr

Avatar of Steeeeeeeeevo
AtharvMishra7 wrote:

is 500 elo good?

I've played 500 games and I'm about 500. Sometimes 580 at best but then back down to 500.

Avatar of adeltheone

not bad i guess

Avatar of Nathanael-Ademuwagun

depends on how long you been playing and how many games you have took my around 780 games to reach 1000 and 87 days which is probably quicker then most but I'd say 1000 games to reach 1000 elo is reasonable

Avatar of Rogue_King
chesssblackbelt wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
chesssblackbelt wrote:
Ziryab wrote:

Here’s the most accurate guide to ratings that I’ve seen.

This is accurate for OTB ratings except for 2200 being "almost master"

It is NM or CM

CM is not a master. NM is absent from the chart. As I said, it was the most accurate I’ve seen. I didn’t say it was perfect. I’ve seen a lot of similar charts that are garbage.

wym CM is not a master? CM is better than NM

From my experience CM is not stronger than NM on average, maybe a bit weaker. FM is usually stronger than an NM, or at least equal to the strongest batch of NM's. IM is where a significant jump in strength occurs. 
Then again, that is just what I've seen and experienced playing in tournaments.

Avatar of itzzyyss

TRY TO BE 600

Avatar of Magnuslionhead

if its chess.com rating its not that good but if its fide rating its pretty good