Severe disconnect between my rating and my actual skill level.

catmaster0
ALXNDR89 wrote:
jackchilders wrote:

You'll be a a 1200 rated player when you tend to beat players rated below 1200 and lose to players rated above 1200.

 

No... Because what happens is I usually get more elo for a win than I lose for a loss. For example when I lose a game I usually lose 4 - 7 points, but when I win I usually get 8 - 12 points. So even when you're losing more than 50% of your games like I am, the website still keeps you at the same elo...

 

My elo just doesn't go down far enough. 

A quick glance at the difference in your rating after each game disproves this. 

llama47
ALXNDR89 wrote:

Severe disconnect between my rating and my actual skill level.

Me too bro. I'm like, Anand who? Carlsen who? I'm the big daddy GM killer. I'm the best, around, nothings ever gonna keep me down.

llama47
ALXNDR89 wrote:
this is probably a tactic suitable for 800 rated players, so why couldn't I find it if I'm rated 1500?

Maybe because you don't have good calculation habits yet?

A better topic title is that your performance doesn't match your knowledge... and that's true for all of us. All of us fall short of utilizing all of our knowledge during a game. Chess isn't about who knows more, it's about who preforms better. Good calculation habits are part of preforming at a high level.

LeeEuler

Two points: 

1) After a bunch of games, most people should expect ~50% of their games to be wins

2) Rating is a function of your opponents and scaling factor does not matter. An easy way to think of this is if you just multiply everyone's rating by ten. Their relative position does not chance, nor does the % difference between them. What is important is what the number represents, which is the relative position of you vs. other chess.com users.

TerminatorC800
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
ALXNDR89 wrote:

I am 1500 rated chess.com and 1850 rated on lichess yet it feels like my actual skill level is of a player around about the ~700 rating mark. I often hang pieces, I often blunder mate in 1 and I often miss the most rudimentary of tactics. This causes me to lose 60% of my games so even though I'm being matched against equally rated opponents, there's a severe disconnect between the strength the website ranks me at, as my actual real life skill level.

When are chess websites going to start rating me appropriately? I am not a 1500 rated player, I am a 1200 rated player, maybe 1300 when I'm playing my best. I'm thinking to just sandbag my elo on purpose because the rating system chess websites use just isn't legit.

For context, just played a rapid game with this position Black to play.

 
I spent about 2 minutes during the game searching for a win and couldn't find it, ended up trading off a bunch of pieces and lost the game. After analysing the game I saw the engine eval said I was completely winning so again I spend another 3 or 4 minutes looking and I just couldn't see the move. 
 
It's like I suddenly became braindead or something... After seeing the solution, it's obvious this is probably a tactic suitable for 800 rated players, so why couldn't I find it if I'm rated 1500?

 

That position and the tactic there is definitely NOT 800 level. That is for sure a 1700+ tactic. Let me explain why it's a 1700+ tactic

If you go deep in that position then u will realize why im saying this.  Rxh4 is what everyone sees because the pawn can't take because of Qxh2 mate.  However white does not NEED to take the rook. What if white plays Bd6 which attacks the queen and forces it off from that diagonal? Keep in mind that if the queen moves from the diagonal then white can take that rook. So what do you do now as black? if you move the queen then gxh4 and black is not "winning" anymore.  One move which people might see is Rh1+ after Bd6 because if Kxh1 then Qh5+ followed by mate.  However, again white doesn't NEED to take the rook, white can play Kg2 and now both your rook and your queen is attacked. Now there are only two "winning" moves, Rh2+ which forces the king back so that u can move your queen to h5(getting out of attack by the bishop on d6). Either that or you must see Qf5 which leads to checkmate in 7 moves(not so obvious).   Keep in mind you would have to see all of this before playing Rxh4

Do you see what i mean? maybe i am overevaluating the tactic but i am very very sure that it's atleast higher than a 1700 rated tactic.  You basically have to evaluate this variation in your head
Rxh4 Bd6(or Bd4) Rh1+ Kg2 Rh2+ Kg1 Qh5 and this will lead to mate. This is just the "winning" continuation. People might also give up the rook after Bd6 (say Qh5 after Bd6) and might think that the king is wide open with knight and queen near it so it will lead to mate, however a sneaky bishop move will defend everything.  I had to look very deep into this so as to find the absolute winning move. 

Not to mention there are other good looking moves like Nxf2 and something(Kxf2 is basically forced after Nxf2)

So basically before playing Rxh4 you would have to see Bd6 attacking the diagonal and forcing the queen off... then u would absolutely have to see that you can play Rh1+ because if Kxh1 then Qh5 after that leads to a mate in 2. However you would have to also know how to respond after Kg2 which simultaneously attacks both your rook and your queen and you can't even play Qh5 due to simple Rxh1.  ALL of this is very risky since you are "hanging" material in every single line except the winning continuation. 

However, I found Rxh4 in a few seconds. I’m way lower than 1700, and once I found the line, I only took a few seconds to calculate it. As you said, could you be overvaluing the tactic, but more than you think?

llama47

Even a near-beginner would find (or at least guess) Rxh4 after being told "black is winning, find a tactic"

That's meaningless though. Finding tactics during a game is completely different. It's not only that no one has told you one exists, it's that you have to budget your time and thinking process. Additionally not only are you pressured by the clock, but you're distracted by the thoughts and calculated lines in your head from the positions that have lead up to the current position.

kartikeya_tiwari
llama47 wrote:

Even a near-beginner would find (or at least guess) Rxh4 after being told "black is winning, find a tactic"

That's meaningless though. Finding tactics during a game is completely different. It's not only that no one has told you one exists, it's that you have to budget your time and thinking process. Additionally not only are you pressured by the clock, but you're distracted by the thoughts and calculated lines in your head from the positions that have lead up to the current position.

A beginner would see Rxh4 but will a beginner see what to do after Bd6? will he see that Rh1+ can be played and white can't take? will he see that Rh2+ followed by Qh5 will be played if Kg2 in response to Rh1+?  most people see Rxh4 because gxh4 isn't possible but i highly doubt any beginner actually saw what to do after Bd6.  It's a very nice puzzle actually because there is really only "one" winning continuation after Bd6

llama47

Of course not, and it's the same for tactic puzzles. Noobs guess moves without calculating all the time... and then they wonder why their sacrifices never work in real games, or they wonder why they're bad at finding defensive moves wink.png

TerminatorC800

I also saw a game with similar themes last night, so that may have helped. 

llama47

Oh, this wasn't meant to be mean to you. Actually I thought you were rated 1800 or something @terminatorc800. Maybe it was the 800 in your username tongue.png

kartikeya_tiwari
TerminatorC800 wrote:
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
ALXNDR89 wrote:

I am 1500 rated chess.com and 1850 rated on lichess yet it feels like my actual skill level is of a player around about the ~700 rating mark. I often hang pieces, I often blunder mate in 1 and I often miss the most rudimentary of tactics. This causes me to lose 60% of my games so even though I'm being matched against equally rated opponents, there's a severe disconnect between the strength the website ranks me at, as my actual real life skill level.

When are chess websites going to start rating me appropriately? I am not a 1500 rated player, I am a 1200 rated player, maybe 1300 when I'm playing my best. I'm thinking to just sandbag my elo on purpose because the rating system chess websites use just isn't legit.

For context, just played a rapid game with this position Black to play.

 
I spent about 2 minutes during the game searching for a win and couldn't find it, ended up trading off a bunch of pieces and lost the game. After analysing the game I saw the engine eval said I was completely winning so again I spend another 3 or 4 minutes looking and I just couldn't see the move. 
 
It's like I suddenly became braindead or something... After seeing the solution, it's obvious this is probably a tactic suitable for 800 rated players, so why couldn't I find it if I'm rated 1500?

 

That position and the tactic there is definitely NOT 800 level. That is for sure a 1700+ tactic. Let me explain why it's a 1700+ tactic

If you go deep in that position then u will realize why im saying this.  Rxh4 is what everyone sees because the pawn can't take because of Qxh2 mate.  However white does not NEED to take the rook. What if white plays Bd6 which attacks the queen and forces it off from that diagonal? Keep in mind that if the queen moves from the diagonal then white can take that rook. So what do you do now as black? if you move the queen then gxh4 and black is not "winning" anymore.  One move which people might see is Rh1+ after Bd6 because if Kxh1 then Qh5+ followed by mate.  However, again white doesn't NEED to take the rook, white can play Kg2 and now both your rook and your queen is attacked. Now there are only two "winning" moves, Rh2+ which forces the king back so that u can move your queen to h5(getting out of attack by the bishop on d6). Either that or you must see Qf5 which leads to checkmate in 7 moves(not so obvious).   Keep in mind you would have to see all of this before playing Rxh4

Do you see what i mean? maybe i am overevaluating the tactic but i am very very sure that it's atleast higher than a 1700 rated tactic.  You basically have to evaluate this variation in your head
Rxh4 Bd6(or Bd4) Rh1+ Kg2 Rh2+ Kg1 Qh5 and this will lead to mate. This is just the "winning" continuation. People might also give up the rook after Bd6 (say Qh5 after Bd6) and might think that the king is wide open with knight and queen near it so it will lead to mate, however a sneaky bishop move will defend everything.  I had to look very deep into this so as to find the absolute winning move. 

Not to mention there are other good looking moves like Nxf2 and something(Kxf2 is basically forced after Nxf2)

So basically before playing Rxh4 you would have to see Bd6 attacking the diagonal and forcing the queen off... then u would absolutely have to see that you can play Rh1+ because if Kxh1 then Qh5 after that leads to a mate in 2. However you would have to also know how to respond after Kg2 which simultaneously attacks both your rook and your queen and you can't even play Qh5 due to simple Rxh1.  ALL of this is very risky since you are "hanging" material in every single line except the winning continuation. 

However, I found Rxh4 in a few seconds. I’m way lower than 1700, and once I found the line, I only took a few seconds to calculate it. As you said, could you be overvaluing the tactic, but more than you think?

It's not about finding Rxh4, it's about knowing exactly what to do after Bd6. I saw Rxh4 immediately but i was stuck on what to do after Bd6 which forces my queen away from the diagonal. I saw Rh1+ can be played after Bd6 and white can't take because of Qh5+ but then i got stuck on what to do after Kg2... now my rook and my queen both were attacked....   I actually thought that this was NOT the winning move. I went back and tried to evaluate Nxf2... only after a few minutes i came back to Rxh4 and then i evaluated Rxh4 Bd6 Qh5 thinking that if gxh4 then Qxh4 and maybe black has a checkmate but the bishop defended everything... then finally i saw Rh1+ Kg2 Rh2+ Kg1 Qh5

TerminatorC800
llama47 wrote:

Oh, this wasn't meant to be mean to you. Actually I thought you were rated 1800 or something @terminatorc800. Maybe it was the 800 in your username

That’s kind of funny though. It’s fine.

llama47

Oh, I didn't even think of Kg2 tongue.png

Yeah, that's the right way to calculate. Find the most annoying moves. Don't calculate lines that help the tactic work. Good job.

TerminatorC800
llama47 wrote:

Oh, I didn't even think of Kg2

Yeah, that's the right way to calculate. Find the most annoying moves. Don't calculate lines that help the tactic work. Good job.

I learned last night that in that sort of position, the king covering the open squares can help get the job done. The rook covering squares too gets annoying.

Epiloque
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
ALXNDR89 wrote:

I am 1500 rated chess.com and 1850 rated on lichess yet it feels like my actual skill level is of a player around about the ~700 rating mark. I often hang pieces, I often blunder mate in 1 and I often miss the most rudimentary of tactics. This causes me to lose 60% of my games so even though I'm being matched against equally rated opponents, there's a severe disconnect between the strength the website ranks me at, as my actual real life skill level.

When are chess websites going to start rating me appropriately? I am not a 1500 rated player, I am a 1200 rated player, maybe 1300 when I'm playing my best. I'm thinking to just sandbag my elo on purpose because the rating system chess websites use just isn't legit.

For context, just played a rapid game with this position Black to play.

 
I spent about 2 minutes during the game searching for a win and couldn't find it, ended up trading off a bunch of pieces and lost the game. After analysing the game I saw the engine eval said I was completely winning so again I spend another 3 or 4 minutes looking and I just couldn't see the move. 
 
It's like I suddenly became braindead or something... After seeing the solution, it's obvious this is probably a tactic suitable for 800 rated players, so why couldn't I find it if I'm rated 1500?

 

That position and the tactic there is definitely NOT 800 level. That is for sure a 1700+ tactic. Let me explain why it's a 1700+ tactic

If you go deep in that position then u will realize why im saying this.  Rxh4 is what everyone sees because the pawn can't take because of Qxh2 mate.  However white does not NEED to take the rook. What if white plays Bd6 which attacks the queen and forces it off from that diagonal? Keep in mind that if the queen moves from the diagonal then white can take that rook. So what do you do now as black? if you move the queen then gxh4 and black is not "winning" anymore.  One move which people might see is Rh1+ after Bd6 because if Kxh1 then Qh5+ followed by mate.  However, again white doesn't NEED to take the rook, white can play Kg2 and now both your rook and your queen is attacked. Now there are only two "winning" moves, Rh2+ which forces the king back so that u can move your queen to h5(getting out of attack by the bishop on d6). Either that or you must see Qf5 which leads to checkmate in 7 moves(not so obvious).   Keep in mind you would have to see all of this before playing Rxh4

Do you see what i mean? maybe i am overevaluating the tactic but i am very very sure that it's atleast higher than a 1700 rated tactic.  You basically have to evaluate this variation in your head
Rxh4 Bd6(or Bd4) Rh1+ Kg2 Rh2+ Kg1 Qh5 and this will lead to mate. This is just the "winning" continuation. People might also give up the rook after Bd6 (say Qh5 after Bd6) and might think that the king is wide open with knight and queen near it so it will lead to mate, however a sneaky bishop move will defend everything.  I had to look very deep into this so as to find the absolute winning move. 

Not to mention there are other good looking moves like Nxf2 and something(Kxf2 is basically forced after Nxf2)

So basically before playing Rxh4 you would have to see Bd6 attacking the diagonal and forcing the queen off... then u would absolutely have to see that you can play Rh1+ because if Kxh1 then Qh5 after that leads to a mate in 2. However you would have to also know how to respond after Kg2 which simultaneously attacks both your rook and your queen and you can't even play Qh5 due to simple Rxh1.  ALL of this is very risky since you are "hanging" material in every single line except the winning continuation. 


I think I transcribed them all