I tried it and said score negative -100 elo. And by the way does anyone want to suck my hairy balls.
Use this test to get an estimate of your Elo rating !
Sort:
Wow - it gave me 1635 and I'm really happy with that! I'm probably no more than a 1200.
My moves for each position were as follows:-
1. c5 x d4
2. g2 - f1
3. c5 - c6
4. e5 - e6
5. e3 - b6
6. f2 - f4
7. d7 - c5
8. c8 - e8
9. e4 - b7
10. d4 - d5
Happy to provide my thinking on any of these, but I fully expect I've made some "not so good moves". Would be grateful for any input/thoughts.
H
hi
My score was 1415, I have no clue if thats good for someone that been playing chess for just a few months. I started learning how to play chess last Jan 2023.
ItalianScorpio wrote:
My score was 1415, I have no clue if thats good for someone that been playing chess for just a few months. I started learning how to play chess last Jan 2023.
The thing about chess, as with many things in life, is that it's not purely a matter of chronological time passing.
You can cork a bottle of wine and say that in 30 years, it will be a vintage, and you don't need to do anything to it. Or, if you're trying to decide on the comparative value of two antiques, you might with confidence say that the older one is more valuable, all else being equal.
With the learning of a skill, however, it's not really a question of you doing it only for the last three months, it's more a question of what you have done in those last three months. Do you play every day? Against multiple opponents? Do you study openings, middle games and endgames, and patterns of play? Does anyone teach or train you? Were you a complete beginner before January, never having played before, or did you already have some knowledge of the game before you took it up "properly" in January?
All of these things make a difference. The results we get in anything will depend on both the number of hours we put in, and the quality of what we're doing in those hours.
If you started from scratch, and/or play very casually, maybe a few games a week, and/or spend no more than a few minutes on average per day reading/watching/learning about chess, then I think 1415 is a great rating. It might indicate a natural aptitude for chess, or it might simply mean that you got lucky on the test.
On the other hand, if you live, eat and breathe chess, and have been doing so for the last few months, then 1415 would be expected and is probably going to be considered low. As I say, it's about the number of hours you put in, and what you do in those hours, so someone playing/learning for 2 hours a day every day will have the same number of hours after a month as someone that maybe plays a couple of games a week for a year, for example.
Ultimately, if ratings encourage people to learn and improve, great, but at the same time I hope they do not discourage or disappoint if they are not as expected or hoped.
Keep up your journey and keep having fun!
lol
I got 1500. I'm ~950.
i have 1780!
Elosottozero님이 썼습니다:
1365. No way i'm at this level.
⚠ ATTENTION! :
This test won't show any results under 1000 rating mark (which means if you do every single puzzle wrong, it still will show rating 1000 , so you have to be at LEAST 1000Elo strength to do this test).
how do i type the starting and ending squares
nvm i am 300 and i got 1500
I got a 1660 and i didn't really think them through.. I think i would've gotten at least 1800
Mine was 1915