The curious case of 1200: The Expert's rating

you are a egotistical maniac 

I am from TURKISH

i'd say expert range is more 2000-2200

Still 1800 rated at Daily and beating club players around that FIDE rating at the other site regularly. Actually the games I've showed are mine. If you entire argument is "those games are not yours" then you've got no argument at all. 

In slow time control Im around 1750-1850 in strength considering the strength of players I face and beat, so have a cup of shut the f. up. 

Finally, I would be embarrassed to post a game in which a 2600 FIDE GM let me win by playing inferior moves, like you do in your profile. You know, I once played a guy from one of my previous jobs who was close to IM strength, he was retired from chess, and he let me win in one game ... I would not even dare to post it as if it's been a great victory when in reality he made a lot of random moves and avoided any tactical combination until I won ... 

No your daily rating is 1250

 You fail at reading comprehension, but what can I expect from a troll who was shown a match from a World Champion and a top engine and regarded it as a 800 elo trash match.

 Or you seem to think chess.com is the only site there is and has been for chess, which would be, frankly, hilarious.

Sure dude, you "earned your win" against a guy who's rated roughly 90 points below Nakamura and other SuperGMs.

You may want to grab Stockfish and run through the match before you brag about it. I mean, that is, if you can't already tell he played completely passive and even offered you an anchor on his King when he had moved all his pieces away from that area. This just screams "bait" but whatever.

As I said, when I got that win against this guy, he obviously never gave me any material or anything of the sort, so I too could claim "I earned my win" even though he barely tried anything. Mind you it was a few years ago, and at that time I had just started playing chess and I was around 1100 or 1200 strong, in slower time controls, rather than the 1700-1800 Im now. A 1000 elo player claiming "I earned my win" against an IM or GM that let you win, is funny.

  I would advise against siding with a person who fails to recognise the difference between a World Champion match and a U1000 elo. They are not the finest appraisers of chess skill, more like a troll. Just to make it more hilarious, he said that game WAS MINE. Yeah, he said the match was mine and I played badly, when in reality it was a Kramnik match when he was World Champion. 

 And since you fail at reading comprehension too, I will explain: I said "Still 1800 rated at Daily and beating club players around that FIDE rating at the other site regularly". The other site means a site that's not chess.com. Do you get it now, or would you like me to draw you a picture in Paint?

"He played fine and so did I." Looooool. I bet if you watch Finegold play 1200s and have them last 40 moves, you'd think "Wow that 1200 can go toe to toe with a GM". Lmao. 

 And yes, I was around 1200 when I started at slower time controls. Im hovering between 1750-1850 now. I dont know why that is so difficult to understand? 

 Based on what? My 10+0 games here? Pffft. Games where I frequently hang Queens or forks for no reason at all? Hardly a measure of skill since there are less blunders in a slower time control.  Once you remove obvious 1 or 2-move tactical blunders out of the equation it's not very hard to reach low 1800 as you can focus more on long term strategy and positional play.

 I've already shown some games in this post but you trolls just claim I lie and steal games from other people.

 And you also have to consider 1700-1800 is an atrocious rating too so why would it be hard to get there?

 You also have the low 1000 elo players here who play with a centipawn loss of under 40 here too - I've had some play 20+ too... how is that even possible? But that's a completely different topic anyway. 

In the US, C class is 1400-1599.

1200 is the bottom of D class.

Yes and? What's the point? I obviously don't blunder like that in daily chess or any other time control where I can look at a positions for a minute or so. I used to blunder like that on the other site when I started, and yes, I was around 1200 or so too.

To be fair, 10/0 is too fast for me. I even time out at 15/10 and 40/0.

FIDE still considers 10/0 as blitz FYI.

That Rookside_Castling guy has just been banned for violating the fair play policy

https://www.chess.com/member/rookside_castling

Lol, now we know how he managed to "earn his win" against that FIDE 2600+ GM.

As some would say, "get rekt". 

You are spamming your chess2play ad in several threads, you have not even played a single game on this site. Either bot or an incredibly dumb, borderline bot shill.

2000 FIDE yes. 2000 on this website no. 2000 on this website maps to around 1800 FIDE. https://www.chessratingcomparison.com/Graphs

Once you "just remove 1-2 move blunders" you will be a lot better. Removing those blunders isn't that easy. 

"Games where I frequently hang Queens or forks for no reason at all? Hardly a measure of skill since there are less blunders in a slower time control." Not blundering these things is the most important thing in chess. No matter how good you are at anything else, you are a horrible player as long as you make those blunders frequently. I am yet to see a player of your rating (1000) play long games and actually blunder a lot less. You can play 1h long games here, you can play 30 minute games as well. Go ahead, play those time formats and raise your rapid rating if you can. 

"Once you remove obvious 1 or 2-move tactical blunders out of the equation it's not very hard to reach low 1800 as you can focus more on long term strategy and positional play." is the same as saying once you become a decent player it is not that hard to reach 1700-1800. Getting decent at chess assumes removing those 1-2 blunders and that's something you have to work on, it doesn't happen overnight. Imagine playing a piano and saying "if you only never touch the wrong note you would be a good pianist". Being a good pianist means playing correct notes on time while also incorporating dynamics and all the other high level stuff. You can't say "I would play Fantasy Impromptu so well if only I could press the correct keys every time".

Also, you say this based on what? You have never got close to 1700 in any time control. You don't know how hard or how easy it is to reach 1700-1800 as you have never done it, nor got close to doing it.

Not blundering 1-2 move blunders is a part of chess. No matter how good you are you still constantly have to monitor for such things, it is not that when you reach 1700 you magically don't have to pay attention to 1-2 move blunders, you still have to pay attention, it is not like you are given help by somebody, like Rally drivers who have a co-driver, who will tell you "hey, this move blunders your queen in 1 move" or "this move blunders a fork". Getting better at chess means being able to do these things by yourself while thinking about more higher level stuff.

If only I had a ball control like prime Andreas Iniesta I would be a great football player as I have a good feeling for the game. Remove my bad ball control out of the equation and I am a professional football player!

 Of course I am 1700, 1800 at Daily time control. In some other site, not chess.com. 

 As a matter of fact I was stuck at Daily 1400-1500 for YEARS until I learnt a bit of positional chess. Just by getting slightly better at what to do when there's no obvious tactic, rather than making random moves or trying to "force" a tactic, helped me jump a few hundred points.

 It's really not hard at all if you don't blunder in one or two-move tactics, and try to improve your position. 

 In order to go higher than that, Im going to have to start studying chess, which I will not do.

I have a major doubt Why there is a sex partiality In chess?