What are each rating’s characteristics?

peki 3k

you guys stop taking that comment seriously i'm not a person to say something like that
it's understandable but a bit annoying to have to explain more than once

It's like believing in horoscopes.

I'm 54 yrs old my Dad taught me to play at 5 yrs old. Down through the years I played periodically but never steadily ; and I've never studied seriously. I learned to get better by trial and error and I learned to play & improve by feel. Best way I can explain what I'm saying. Is at the beginning before one piece is moved. It's as if in my mind I have stepped up onto a sphere in perfect balance. Once moves begin ; the sphere must be balanced like you were standing on one leg. As more moves are made you learn to not only visualize the equality of the board ; but you learn to feel it. When I've been playing alot and get into a flow ; I have beaten 1900's and once even a 2000. But that was on Instant Chess.Com... If I was able to survive the opening ; I could hold my own with most people. I admit Chess.Com seems to have stronger rating system. I was a steady 1600 there @ Instant Chess.Com. A level I have yet to achieve here. But I believe I'm gonna make it to 1600 fairly soon. I kind of agree with the analogy of there being a 1600 threshold. Without serious study of at least one good opening for both colors. Most folks will not surpass the 1600 mark. Just as I haven't been able to this far. I respect all those higher ranked folks. I know for most ; they must have studied chess considerably to achieve such high ratings. That may be why you are having trouble giving a description for those higher brackets ; cause it's hard to describe what you can't comprehend.

did you realize that OP is 1800? o.o

When I look at the board I see a war under dictatorial kings where the odds change

I don't think you need to seriously study one opening per se, more the opening ideas and ok sure maybe a few moves but the subtleties of different lines depend on positional knowledge that....1600s tend not to have if my memory serves me correctly . That said, I don't think that's accurate; you can reach 1600+ without doing said study. I would say that at <=1600 it's very important to study other things as well (definitely including but not limited to tactics ) I've def seen players focus too much on openings not realizing the other things they need to work on MUCH more immediately

I've met dozens of titled players in real life, and as a general rule the really high-rated players are typically modest and polite.

In real life... you can get punched in the nose for being arrogant and toxic.

On the Internet, the rules aren't quite the same.

Another old man.

I'm turning 67 this year, and I played in my first over-the-board chess tournament at age 11.

blueemu/depends on your position

That's what GM Boris Spassky said when a reporter asked him which was better, chess or sex?

I mentioned that titled players can change

Nobody uses chat in my rating range which really sucks because it's super funny when my opponents trash talk

The 1000 - 2000 pool has the same calculation skill but the difference is that some are fast at spotting the good moves and discard the bad ones

SO TRUE

I just go by the USCF categories and that’s good enough for me….

but uscf ratings don't correspond well with online ratings

Yeah but USCF is a real federation and has 90/30….