Petition to create an only 1800+ Rated Subforum

this subforum will be used by smart people who are actually good at chess, and want to improve their game by talking with other high rated players. Dicussion of high-rated openings, psychological aspect of chess, and tactics/tips that an ordinary mediocre chess player would not understand.

In order to post in this subforum ( similiar to the premium subforum), you chess.com rating much be at least 1850. This way, this forum will be less cluttered, and less spam compared to other subforums that are infested with chess noobs such as General Discussion & Off Topic

Which rating needs to be 1850? Because you could have sub 1000's with a really high CC rating who think they're good.

there is a group you should join. http://www.chess.com/groups/view/advanced-theoretical-discussion-group-where-strong-players-go-to-become-stronger

oh wait. . .  your not quite up to par. Looks like your stuck with the riff raff.

"open to anyone who has a current Chess.com rating of 2000 or higher"

Avg. Rating: 1990

lol

Also someone should tell them that blitz 2000 and online 2000 are as much as... 500 points apart.

This is a great idea, I support it.

I don't think a rating block is a good way to create a place where people will actually have meaningful conversations. I would not be surprised if more sub-1800 players would cheat just to get up to 1800 and see what was in that forum. 

I think a step in the right direction would be to set a minimum amount of games someone would have to play before they could post, but even that would not help much at all. 

We should face the facts and accept that Chess.com is not a good place to have a serious discussion. 

What if I need advice of higher rated members, if they are on a different forum then I won't get help :(

The OP is rated 716 in turn-based chess out of 91 games!

Why 1850? Why not 2000? Oh, wait, I see...

My knowledge of English isn't enough to describe the way this kid is so fascinating to me. I would love to share my ideas. What I can say is I'm sure he's not from around here, maybe he comes from Andromeda galaxy?

I don't think there should be such a subforum. Chess.com ratings are not very accurate and don't really represent how good a chess player really is. There are probably just as many >1850 rated players with good insights as there are <1850. It is probably much easier to obtain a 1850 chess.com rating than it is to obtain a 1850 Elo rating, so >1850 shouldn't act like they are a elite, superior class of chess players and no one else can join their forums. Not only that, but a high bullet/blitz rating isn't all that spectacular. Bullet games can be won at least 50% of the time due to time controls, and with blitz less games are won than in bullet due to time, but the amount is still fairly high. A high bullet/blitz rating (especially if it is a bullet rating) means you play those types of games compulsively regardless of how good a chess player you actually are.

I run 3 groups with rating minimums of 1700, 1750, and 1800 respectively. 

http://www.chess.com/groups/view/kings-indian-corps

http://www.chess.com/groups/view/black-defenders-of-pirc-castle

http://www.chess.com/groups/view/white-knights-of-the-kings-indian-attack

If you add all my ratings together, I'm sure they add up to way over 1850 so I I decided that's good enough to post in your thread! :D Your idea is funny since you selfishly want to learn from your rating and higher and exclude anyone lower than you. Most of the nicest people I've come across on chess.com are rated far above or below me. It's sad to think I'd have never come across them if the forums were segregated. :(

To be fair, I have counterpart groups that have no rating restrictions.

http://www.chess.com/groups/view/kings-indian-defense

http://www.chess.com/groups/view/pirc-cafeacute

http://www.chess.com/groups/view/kia-inc

My comment was directed at the OP, not at you, Hector. :)

Kasporov_Jr -- Based on your post, I believe that you would be more comfortable in a special subforum for the immature.  

No problem.  I didn't take it that way at all actually.  I just tried reading over my own comment objectively and it sounded snobbish.

I say we start a group. Open only to those who are creative enough to make thier own username rather than using the name of someone famous.

        He appears to get off on being provocative and offensive to others. Why an 1800 rating somehow makes you more worthy of attention on the forums I don't know. He should be ignored, but here I am feeding his bizarre apetites by responding to his ludicrous suugestion.