hi
What are each rating’s characteristics?
Sort:
Jul 31, 2023
0
#43
ice_cream_cake wrote:
What i meant is that the OP was referring to online ratings, so not sure how the USCF categories are (directly) relevant.
Because it’s real life.
Warping online views and opinions doesn’t change reality or facts.
This thread is about humour if anything.
Aug 1, 2023
0
#45
MyRatingIs1523IsBack 写道:
I guess I'm going to have to SHOW you again how 2000+ players on this site hang pieces
hot off the press my last 2 games were decided by hanging pieces.
awww that's sad i must say 
Aug 1, 2023
0
#46
@myratingis1523isback surely those are bullet games? Grandmasters blunder in bullet games. Judging everyone’s chess based off of bullet isn’t right. It makes more sense, now, but it’d be good if you didn’t tell new players that all they have to do to get 2200 in RAPID is to not hang pieces in bullet
Actually they do blunder a lot, but u still need skills to hold them up until they blunder. Most people who are below 2000 can't handle the pressure to handle constant threats and nasty tactics but we do. I was surprised by how 2200s blunder so much,but in the rematches,i feel how good they are.
It's just a part of online chess
ShannonThrowsInValorant wrote:
Is it true that almost all 2000 elos are toxic?
yes, we're extremely insecure and we hide the pain by devoting so much time to an ultimately useless game
Haha that's a good one. Chess is useless to be honest,we can't earn from it,it gives us stress and rage, we play it for hours and hours and waste our time.
MyRatingIs1523IsBack wrote:
chess on this site isn't about outplaying your opponent or strategy. it's all about who's better at pacman and chomps on hanging pieces.
That's not specific to "this site" - that's just a chess thing. We all make our own silly blunders, at every level.
Here's Magnus hanging his knight for no reason at all:
There isnt that big a difference between 1800 and 1600
What i meant is that the OP was referring to online ratings, so not sure how the USCF categories are (directly) relevant.