The curious case of 1200: The Expert's rating

 

I have, in the last 3 torunaments, gained 500 points by beating 1400, 1400 1300 100 1100 1100 1100 and drawing 1600

If you look at your rating in full stats , you can see your percentile , quite similar to Academic percentage grade. As of today, my bullet rating is 2106 and I see myself as 99.2 percentile or  the top 1% of of the all players. I think experts can be assumed for those above 95% or two standard deviation ( may be rating around 1950- 2000).

I am Black in next game

well I play like 1500

gone to a lot of tournaments but have only started studying che

ss recently

 

My chess.com rating is actually below my uscf rating

 

Well "expert" is actually a loose term for players in the range of 2000-2200, right below titled level. 

I doubt it would apply to online chess ratings though, because those tend to be very inaccurate sometimes. 

You could say "online expert" or something, that would be better. 

 Heres one vs 1400, im white

 

If I were an online expert, I could repair a bad connection. Just saying. 

Somebody get me an online expert!

aa-ron1235

NOBODY CARES!

Let's say you're a super-talent like Hikaru Nakamura:

http://www.uschess.org/datapage/ratings_graph.php?memid=12641216

He started tournament chess in 1995 and earned the GM title in 2003. At the midway point in 1999, he was approaching 2300 USCF. That was a climb all the way from 684 USCF. I also have a feeling he was working much harder for those final 300 points than the first 1600.

This is just one instance, but maybe it gives some perspective.

1200 was reached in approximately a year, so maybe it's about an eighth of the way. ;)

Becoming a GM is totally different. Most will have started playing at a very young age and will already be strong club players or masters by the time they are 13 or 14 and at this point they are maybe halfway to GM. Their brains have neurologically adapted to play chess to a high level of accuracy and are still adapting. If you haven't had that upbringing becoming a GM is impossible. There is no half way to GM for most players because it is not a destination. In fact I would wager that most people who become GMs later in life in their 30s or 40s will have had similar upbringings and will have been immersed in chess from a young age as well.

Yeah, as a kid, he probably wasn't that serious with chess, just playing and improving with some instruction, but a lot of natural talent. Starting with a 600 rating doesn't really say to a parent that their kid will become world class. 

I reached 1200 3 months

 

1100

 

Great, that puts you on track to be GM in about 2 years. ;)

When I started up again at 50 after not playing since I was 14....I was 1200 almost instantly...if you can't reach that mark quick then chess isn't for you....the real hump for me came at 1500...to get higher than that I actually had to start studying just a little...but I'm 63 now and not willing to study too much so I guess will never be much better....like everything else in life worth doing you get out of it what you are willing to put in.

I hope this is sarcasm. 

I did not check man but zero may screw up the rating formula, ELO or others. If you divide by zero it is infinity.

The value can't be too low as well, say 500, because it is a provisional rating, if he beats a higher rated player then that player will lose a lot of points.

It takes about 2 dozen games (I guess) in the pool of players before the rating settles down and can be considered realistic.

I would prefer a nice round number, a happy medium between too low and too high.

1,000

 

If it took you 50 years to reach 1200+, I think we can safely assert 1200 is indeed a hump, and expert level.

By looking at his comments I think what he meant was after 50 years of not playing since he was 14 his rating went to 1200 almost instantly. I dont think the 50 years would count since he didn't play during that time. Since 1200 is where many beginners start at or reach quickly even a 50 year hiatus isnt much of an obstacle.