I got 100 befor
What accuracy % do you consider a “good” game?
Sort:
Dec 19, 2022
0
#84
I use centipawn loss average from Stockfish analysis to determine how accurately I played.
I've stopped caring about chess.com accuracy after I read somewhere the chess.com accuracy gets tweaked depending on the elo bracket you are in. I dont think it's very relevant.
The chess.com accuracy figure is just a chess.com thing - in analysis, the standard metric is centipawn loss - to either evaluate moves individually, or a sequence of moves.
25%
Dec 21, 2022
0
#87
My average accuracy is 75.29, but I think that’s because I play bullet games which bring down my accuracy because you have to play fast. Usually I get about 80% accuracy
Dec 21, 2022
0
#91
If you played a 5 move game 100% accuracy is really easy. You must’ve played a really short game, and also your opponent had 64.7% accuracy
Dec 21, 2022
0
#92
A good game isn't a matter of CAPS accuracy.
Certainly a game that's very one-sided can't be called a good game. A strong attack must encounter strong resistance and lead to a real battle, before I would class it as a good game.
Dec 21, 2022
0
#93
@blueemu I agree. Someone would win very quickly if the game is one sided, and you wouldn’t make any mistakes unless your opponent played well. If they blunder every move, you won’t miss a single chance, and will get 100% accuracy.
Dec 21, 2022
0
#94
BUCKLEYNYC wrote:
@blueemu I agree. Someone would win very quickly if the game is one sided, and you wouldn’t make any mistakes unless your opponent played well. If they blunder every move, you won’t miss a single chance, and will get 100% accuracy.
Here's my idea of a good game... an irresistable force encountering an immovable object.
The immovable object won.
A Heroic Defense in the Sicilian Najdorf - Kids, don't try this at home! - Chess Forums - Chess.com
Dec 21, 2022
0
#95
It all depends on your rating, if you are rated 600 you'd love to get 80% accuracy but if you're rated 2400 that would be considered a failure.
im at 350 and ive played a 92 accuracy game and a 91 accuracy game before https://www.chess.com/game/live/66079949175 the 92
https://www.chess.com/game/live/66148939757 the 91
Pity the fools who judge the quality of a game by the chess dot com engine % feature.
Suffice to say that chess dot com evaluates Anderssen's immortal game against Kieseritzky as patzer stuff: 77.8% for White and 63.6% for Black.
90%+
pfren wrote:
Pity the fools who judge the quality of a game by the chess dot com engine % feature.
Suffice to say that chess dot com evaluates Anderssen's immortal game against Kieseritzky as patzer stuff: 77.8% for White and 63.6% for Black.
Wow interesting
A game around 65% may be great, while another one with accuracy over 90% may be horrible.
In chess it takes two to tango, and a game where one player performed stellarly, and the other one played randomly cannot ge "good".
And accuracy alone does not say much. My 5 best games played OTB have many mutual mistakes. What makes them good are very specific elements during the course of the game, and not whichever computer-related "accuracy".
I have played half a dozen of games with both colors going like 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Bb7 10.d4 Re8 11.Ng5 Rf8 12.Nf3 Re8 13.Ng5 Rf8 14.Nf3 etc (1/2-1/2), which computer-wise are 100% accuracy for both players, but of course they are far from being "good"- actually they may not even be considered as "games".