Chess - Play & Learn


FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store


What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

  • #301

    @SWED420BLAZEIT - Totally agree. The more I progress with the game the more I realize how badly I play and how amazingly hard chess truly is. Still for me I like the challenge of the thing so as long as I keep making incremental improvements I find it engaging and rewarding.


    Which brings me to the title of the thread: It's like asking how long a piece of string should be. Only the relative rating of the opponents matters. I think low rated players blundering their way to a win is as good a game as any - for the people involved that is.


  • #302

    so would you be considered hopeless if you were a 700?


  • #303
    darryl12345678012 wrote:

    so would you be considered hopeless if you were a 700?


    Live rating - 600 = real OTB rating. 

    So you'd be a 100 rated player. That's not bad if you just learned chess though. 

    (just kidding - you're still a total beginner though, but everyone starts somewhere)

  • #304

    Against titled players, as far as I can remember, I'm 1-1 against FM NoWuss2 in 3+2 blitz 960, 3-3 against NM Samuraichessman in 1+0 bullet, and 1-0 against Falzehope in 1+0 bullet. 

    I've also played against titled players in variants that aren't 960 (which is still real chess), but don't remember.

  • #305

    ...I'm definitely 200 points better than my blitz rating.in fact, with effort I brought up my blitz to my uscf a little while ago....


    so in 700 blitz; your likely a 700 player , maybe ±200.

  • #306

    lol I added the "just kidding" because I didn't want to mislead someone who might actually take it seriously. The correlation is very weak at best. 

  • #307

    Over 9000!

  • #308

    In agreement with the first post(OP) made a decade ago.

    1800-2000 is good.

  • #309

    I'll repeat:

    200 points higher than your best rating is a good rating, unless you're already +2800.

or Join

Online Now