What accuracy % do you consider a “good” game?

Hmmm

88+

If you are rated 2000+ I assure you it's harder to achieve 70% accuracy against a GM than 95% against a fool.

Bruh

69%

Someone at this point who's a tax payer and still supporting UK is expected to think 1% accuracy is something good

good game for white probs 70% ig

Ireland is the 6 and Great Britain is the 9.

I get 60 - 80 in average.

@w24ha what the hell do you mean Edited (MOD)

That is not related to discussion and politically offensive

What do i mean ? is quite clear isn't ? people who's tax payer in US and have a flag of Ukraine on the profile should stay away from chess for obvious reasons , and choose carefully your words towards me pal

Game accuracy doesn't mean much. If you win an eight-move game, your accuracy is probably 95%. But if you have a 95% accuracy in an eighty-move game, then that means you played very well. And sometimes capturing a hanging queen is considered a great move. Like blueemu said, "A walk-over is not a "good" game.".

If I disregard short and lobsided games, I see a consistency in the reported accuracies. I find that my game accuracy below 70% are sloppy performances, 70-75% mediocre, 75-80% average, 80-85% good, 85-90% very good, and just above 90% are the best games that I can offer. I imagine that intermediate and strong players make more accurate moves all the time.

You really deserve a medal for brilliance!

You still don't get it, don't you?

It depends on size of the target. It's easier to achieve greater accuracy on a larger target.

accuracy 101

jk