12962 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
The number for a good rating is dependent on what pool you are talking about. For example the 5 min and 3 min pools are much tougher than the 10 15 or 30 min pools.
In the 5 min or 3 min blitz pools a good rating in my opinion is anything above 1900. A great rating is anything above 2100.
one thing that always confuses me, is when people come up with a firm number for "a good rating"
is this number based on a percentile?
anyways, surely, 1900 for the 3-5minute blitz is very good. perhaps better than 97-98% of the whole site.
that seems off. to pick a number above just about everybody.
I can think of other measures of defining good.
Have you considered the simple- a "Good" Chessplayer is 400 rating points above the average rating. so what would that be- the average rating is about 1100?
then blitz 1500.... and someone at that ready would easily beat the "average" blitz player.
The average is distorted, because many people just create an account and dont play regularly. Thus the averages displayed are misleading. Averages for regular players are not available as far as I know.
For the purpose of this discussion ratings should be based on the 5 min or 3 min pools, as those are comparable to FIDE ratings.
I think anybody who plays regularly needs to be above 1900 elo to be considered a good chess player. This 1900 rating is in the middle of the rating range for class A players: 1800-1999.
Good for me is a class A player. Good is not very good (Expert) or excellent (Master classes). If good is neither an expert nor a master, I think class A would make sense.
90% approximately = 400 above average blitz
very convenient coincidence.
Why would you think that is coincidence? It comes out of the math in the Glicko rating system.
I understand that Glicko is an improvement on Elo, but essentially similar. Elo gives a player rated 200 above an opponent 75% win odds. Take the inverse and double it to get 15/16 chance of winning at +400.
Since the nominal average player starts at 1200, 1600 should be the 94th percentile.
Queens gambit vs kings gambit
by leklerk1 a few minutes ago
9/24/2016 - Rada - Kostal, Prague 1942
by Tirachess5 4 minutes ago
6 masters who proved that chess kills your brain and your life - YOU ARE WARNED
by Canada1st 8 minutes ago
by RedGirlZ 31 minutes ago
Shameless opponant making multiple draw offers in a lost position
by Strangemover 32 minutes ago
Could you give me some advices about my opening repertoire?
by HighestUnrated 36 minutes ago
Close win by passed pawn
by bunicula 53 minutes ago
i dont no openings please help me
by bunicula 64 minutes ago
what should i play after 1.e4 , but not the sicillian. i hate the sicilllian.
by WholelottaloveLZ 70 minutes ago
fair play rule
by VikeQueen 79 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
Try the new Chess.com!
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!