The curious case of 1200: The Expert's rating

Sort:
Marie-AnneLiz
KennethBrent a écrit :

I am a very poor player.  I can't seem to beat level 5 on the computer.  Does anyone have advice on how to improve?

Check those 27 lessons?

How to Checkmate with King and Queen - Beginner to Chess Master #1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSA9se6t82I&list=PLQsLDm9Rq9bHKEBnElquF8GuWkI1EJ8Zp&index=2&t=74s

tyktonix
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:

The 1200 hump, as it is commonly referred to in Chess, is the sport's greatest obstacle.

Achieving this rating is the equivalent of graduating from an Ivy league School. No, it does not yet mean that you have mastered this pastime of intuition and pattern recognition. It does on the other hand suggest that you are well on your way to achieve such accomplishments. 

In other words by attaining the rating of 1200, you can claim the title of being a Chess expert, and deservedly so. The mark of 1200 separates the casuals from the serious. It is the dividing line between the average and the exemplary. 

I write this today because I want to address Chess.com's peculiar approach to rating new users. Many of you know that upon opening a Chess.com account, one is immediately gifted the rating of 1200. This means that every new user is recognized as an expert. Of course most of these users end up going below the 1200 mark and lose the title almost immediately, after all they are beginners and not used to such high level Chess. Does anybody know why Chess.com has chosen 1200 as a starting point? After all it's not just an arbitrary number. 

 

tyktonix

When I reached this point, I actually felt that I was winning a lot and my defense has gotten so much better. I also reached the point where I just felt like quitting early on when I could beat those who are above 500. Then, I kept learning from my mistakes and strengthen my defense. Feels good indeed to reach this point. My next goal is to reach 2000  in 6 monthshappy.png Can't wait to reach this milestone.

Marie-AnneLiz
tyktonix a écrit :

When I reached this point, I actually felt that I was winning a lot and my defense has gotten so much better. I also reached the point where I just felt like quitting early on when I could beat those who are above 500. Then, I kept learning from my mistakes and strengthen my defense. Feels good indeed to reach this point. My next goal is to reach 2000  in 6 months Can't wait to reach this milestone.

Good luck!

Just try to reach 1400 before the end of this year and 1600 somewhere next year and you will feel good!

2000 should take a few years but you can do it! happy.png

Bangladeshcricket

wrong. the first hump is 2000. i am not there yet but i am underrated.  (probably like 1950ish)

Marie-AnneLiz
Bangladeshcricket a écrit :

wrong. the first hump is 2000. i am not there yet but i am underrated.  (probably like 1950ish)

We talked about small hump....the first medium one (not for you but for most) is 1600 (a minority get there).

Good luck with your goals!

Bangladeshcricket
MetalRatel wrote:

Suggestion: Interchange the "1" and the "2".

If we're talking K-3 scholastic sections, 1200 is pretty strong but "expert" is not the right term. Or replace "expert" with "advanced beginner". It would be more than a bit misleading to say 1200 is "halfway to grandmaster level". 1200 is entry-level in adult tournaments and the study and playing experience involved to progress at the expert and master levels dwarfs the class rankings. It's like saying that taking a summer internship at a corporation is almost halfway to CEO.

no, i was above 1200 back in the old k-3

Bangladeshcricket
Marie-AnneLiz wrote:
Bangladeshcricket a écrit :

wrong. the first hump is 2000. i am not there yet but i am underrated.  (probably like 1950ish)

We talked about small hump....the first medium one (not for you but for most) is 1600 (a minority get there).

Good luck with your goals!

yeah, it is probably like that .

LeeEuler

This is some quality trolling

FlatEarther33

im 1200 now and im better than anyone i personally know . i would consider that an expert if you think about it . cheers!

blueemu

1200s are only expert at blundering.

Calamity_Destroyer

ikr

FizzyBand

Expert = 2000+ USCF ~2200+ here

Master = 2200+

1200 is not remotely close to expert

chessplayer109485

1200 = patzer

FizzyBand
FlatEarther33 wrote:

im 1200 now and im better than anyone i personally know . i would consider that an expert if you think about it . cheers!

Typical Flat Earther -_-

Calamity_Destroyer

uhhhh

let me guess, 1600 is bad

javamate123
Bangladeshcricket wrote:

wrong. the first hump is 2000. i am not there yet but i am underrated.  (probably like 1950ish)

We all feel underrated meh.png

sndeww

Dunning Kruger at its finest 

NikkiLikeChikki
There’s no such thing as a hump or a threshold. If you look at the distribution of all players, it’s a smooth curve up to about 1000, then a smooth curve down. It’s entirely continuous, not discrete.

There is no magic number. Humans like milestones and that’s all. There’s nothing more special about 1200 than there is about 1187 or 1213, except that 1200 is marginally more difficult to attain the first and marginally less so than the second.
Marie-AnneLiz
NikkiLikeChikki a écrit :
There’s no such thing as a hump or a threshold. If you look at the distribution of all players, it’s a smooth curve up to about 1000, then a smooth curve down. It’s entirely continuous, not discrete.

There is no magic number. Humans like milestones and that’s all. There’s nothing more special about 1200 than there is about 1187 or 1213, except that 1200 is marginally more difficult to attain the first and marginally less so than the second.

"1200" always meant around 1200 this is where many peoples are stuck for months or years!

For some it's closer to 1250 for other it's around 1300.

For me it was a bit under 1300 where i was stuck for months after 4 months of starting to  play online has a beginner ( around 900).

And to get to 1400 it did take many months.