What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

although were all of those puzzles tactics cuz I saw some very quiet positions, also two where I think the solution was to disallow castlng

bro that elo meter trash i only got like 1920 soemthing

mmmmmmmmmm

maybe it depends on the post-test questions, some of them were annoying

sfjeiajfwapfonmaweg

partial credit

dis is my actual one from a few weeks ago lol

yes for the endgames too but were there any positional ones or just forced wins?

i am taking it again rn

oh damn I dk why I had a feeling he was lying

it was text, not an image

Interetsing.

I thought all of them were tactics/forced endgame wins so I opted for Bxf6 several times maybe this was a removing the defender tactic, also it seemed good to me when I played it positionally

76 puzzles is alot tho

If you can beat me, you're good.  I'm very average.

if you cant beat me u r OK

Haha I've tried that elometer and it's so bad.  Way off.

I'm a 1300, and I would consider that to be very good. Now, 1300 isn't very good in comparison to tournament players or other serious chess players, but I can consistently beat about everyone I know.

I am just over 1300, and super happy with that. According to the stats, this puts me at the 75th percentile. What percentile is the cut-off for good? I have to admit to only reading the start and end of the discussion, but I think the top 10% would be "good", but if I'm at 95% then I think it would be the top 2%. "Good" is someone who can consistently beat you. I would like to see a bell curve of the ratings. The ones I see have 1300 as the cutoff between novice and dabbler, but that seems mean-spirited. If I am better than 75% of the players, then I am by definition better than average. The average is the 50th percentile. (Also, I am not good - just trying to get better )

Go to your rating, click on the word "global" above your graph and you will bring up the site's graph. I've been playing poorly lately and thing that anything below 1800 is a bad rating.

@ChristReignsAsKing

I think your generalizations hold true for blitz. For reasons that have been addressed in other threads, bullet and rapid ratings are often lower. My rapid was near 1900 until I became addicted to Arena 10 0 in six months ago. Now staying above 1700 is a challenge.

Correspondence is another animal entirely. I know a lot of masters who play their correspondence games as if they were blitz, and have ratings in the 1600-1900 range. At the same time, strong club players who use the research tools that are allowed, keep their game load small, and labor for several hours over several days on unclear positions, will frequently end up in the top 2% and even above 2200.