Petition to create an only 1800+ Rated Subforum

OP probably treats online chess as bullet/blitz, that's my only explanation for the poor rating

Pretty sure at 1800 blitz you could play online chess at blitz speed and be pretty close to 1800.

No way.

I know this from experience

You'de be mistaken. It is quite easy to go through blitz/bullet games played by 1800's and see lots of exploitable weak moves.

Hehe, ok now I want to try online chess.

I used to play on another site and usually people moved within a few minutes.  Maybe here people take it more seriously.

What's a good way to start 10 games?

Not even lol. Compare an 1800s bullet games full of blunders to 1000 CC games.

Ok, well, that probably wont work because I'll cheat and take a long time...

What's a good way to start 100 games? 

Big difference between 1/0 games and 5/2 games.

Sometimes people do move within a few minutes. I think it depends on if they are around. 

You will find some who, like me, take their time and try to find the strongest moves. But, there are a lot of players who have many games going and will only spend a couple of minutes on a move, much like a live game.

Hey, I started some games, do I just keep seeking until I get the number I want?  How many do you think I can get in a day?

YOu can start as many as you like.

However, if you really are serious about playing Online Chess as a tool to learn, I would suggest no more than 5 games at a time. I usually only have 3 or 4.

If you want to just play games, then you might try the Live Chess system.

There should be one more stipulation.  People with padded ratings, and a low average opponent rating, not to mention unimpressive 'best wins' shouldn't be allowed to be in the 1800's only forum.  I only say this because I've noticed a lot of people on chess.com think that 1800+ is somehow a title that says they are 'good' at chess.  Well, I have news for people out there, 1800+ isn't all that impressive.  Maintain a 1900+ rating and be breaking in the 2000's, then I'll start to consider what y'all have to say.  Unfortunately for you Kasporov_Jr... You're one of those people with the padded rating, low average opponents rating, and best wins that aren't even realistic of an 1800+ player. 

On second thought....*exits stage left*

Haha! Anyone else notice this?

Oh yeah. KJ's avg opponent rating is more than 200 pts lower than his rating.

You see that a lot here. 

Average opponent rating will vary. I believe it only goes back 90 days.

Sure, but, really, anything more than 100pts is suspicious.

Not really. People play people they like, without regard to rating. Also, in live chess, you can put out a challenge for anyone 300 points higher or lower than your rating and you're probably going to get most games below your rating;)

Suspicious? Ok, I'll give you that.

My experience here is that I've played in many tournaments and played against many friends. If a friend invites me to play in a tournament, I may be the highest rated. I've also played in many where I'm the lowest rated. With only a 90 day snapshot, my average opponent has varied 200 points from my rating at some times. A number of us have tried to get cc to change this, but, it's cc.

I'm not nitpicking, just presenting an example of how average rating may not matter.

I've been playing online games for 3 months and started out at 1200. I play people within a certain range around my current rating. Since I am now at 1555 my average opponent is 150 or so points below me since my rating has yet to stabilize and reflects who I was playing when I was lower rated. Also, my best win is very close to my current rating.

Naa, I was just curious.

Started 30 and it's exhausting already lol.

Already it happened that one opponent hung a bishop and I totally missed it