What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

Sort:
Avatar of Ziryab
DestroyTheJarrr wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Rhyperior464 wrote:
Ziryab wrote:

2943

LOL we all wish

 

yo we talking about actual rating not puzzle rating lol

2956

Avatar of p0rc

Anything above 2400 in the blitz pool on chess.com.

Avatar of tr4dingstocks
DestroyTheJarrr wrote:
deadmemer1 wrote:
TheRealThreat wrote:

What is consider a good rating on the site. Well, I think if you are rated above 1800 then you are a good chess player. If you are rated 1500-1799 then you are average. What do you think?

Bro got 13 dislikes when his opinion isn't even that far off the spectrum lol. Bunch of angry kids that are like "GWRRRR I IS NOT BAD AT CHESS"

average on this site is literally about 750. not 1500. 1500 is literally around top 4%. that's not average. 

That's because there are a lot of people that have never played chess that make an account here and just get a crazy low elo then quit because they don't win. I'm talking about average among people that actually play chess more than just a little bit.

Avatar of DestroyTheJarrr
p0rc wrote:

Anything above 2400 in the blitz pool on chess.com.

we said avg, not the top players lmao

Avatar of DestroyTheJarrr
deadmemer1 wrote:
DestroyTheJarrr wrote:
deadmemer1 wrote:
TheRealThreat wrote:

What is consider a good rating on the site. Well, I think if you are rated above 1800 then you are a good chess player. If you are rated 1500-1799 then you are average. What do you think?

Bro got 13 dislikes when his opinion isn't even that far off the spectrum lol. Bunch of angry kids that are like "GWRRRR I IS NOT BAD AT CHESS"

average on this site is literally about 750. not 1500. 1500 is literally around top 4%. that's not average. 

That's because there are a lot of people that have never played chess that make an account here and just get a crazy low elo then quit because they don't win. I'm talking about average among people that actually play chess more than just a little bit.

yet that's still wrong. I'm 1400, and of the 50-ish people in my senior year, I'm #1. The fact that u think the avg is around there is insane

Avatar of DestroyTheJarrr
shangtsung111 wrote:

2700 rapid

lmfao 

Avatar of ChessNexus22

A good rating=Your current rating+100 pts.

Avatar of Rhyperior464
ChessNexus22 wrote:

A good rating=Your current rating+100 pts.

That is infinitely true

Avatar of whiteknight1968

If you think that your rating is good, then it is

Some people are grateful for what they have. Some always aspire for what they don't have. Guess which group are happier.

Avatar of OhHayHay

Is 271 decent for someone who has been playing chess for 4 days

Avatar of DestroyTheJarrr
OhHayHay wrote:

Is 271 decent for someone who has been playing chess for 4 days

not really, but it's good that you've started and are looking to improve. Doing puzzles may help you get better and learn tactics, overall with time you'll get better

Avatar of Deadmanparty

271 is about average. If you are calling good not terrible, then yes that is good.

Avatar of NegativeZeroBrainCells

800 to 900 is average being in the 50th percentile

Avatar of Ziryab

Falling below 1850 in rapid yet again this morning, I feel that my game is rubbish.

Avatar of Crusader_NRG1227

Less than 1000 begginer, 1000-1999 average, 2000+ advanced

Avatar of developingdave

I think most people will answer like this: Whatever rating doesn't stand a chance against me personally is bad, just below my current rating is starting to be good, just above my current rating is good to quite good. 2000-ish players see it differently - they tend to think of where someone is at on the journey to where they are at, so 1200 is still a beginner from the point of view of one of the lucky few that ever reach 2000. But they are also comparing everyone else to where they currently stand, just adding a time dimension, if you will. If you want to be objective about it, go to your stats page, and pay attention to your percentile ranking, and the number of players. The larger the number of players (like rapid) the more representative a sample you have of all players across the site, the smaller the number of players (like bullet), the less representative it is (because not everybody can handle bullet time controls, it doesn't get as many players).
Once you know your percentile, ask yourself, if this wasn't chess, what would I consider "good"? It is a relative term after all. If you think of an above average runner as "good", then if your rapid percentile is over 50%, consider yourself "good". If you would only think of the top 10% of runners as "good" then, you need to be over the 90th percentile. And you need to lighten up. But big picture wise, I say just enjoy the journey. Judge yourself by your progress more than your rating. So long as you are improving, you are on your way.

Avatar of Deadmanparty

FIDE rating system applies for only FIDE.

If you are not FIDE, then your rating here is compared against this site. 1000 lands you in the top 20 percent. That means you are good, well above average.

Avatar of ice_cream_cake
developingdave wrote:

I think most people will answer like this: Whatever rating doesn't stand a chance against me personally is bad, just below my current rating is starting to be good, just above my current rating is good to quite good.

LOL, sounds like you believe humility is not a common virtue
Tbf I did see that once, a person posting their opinions of diff ratings, and put their own rating category as the first one that was "quite good" XDDD
I think that after @Deadmanparty raised the point of the issue of the inappropriateness of applying FIDE standards in all situations, I have now two standards in my head -- one more oriented towards the general population, and another which I measure myself by to goad myself forward, that aligns pretty well with the FIDE standard I think.
However, the claim that 271 is average is simply wrong. I just checked and 500 is about 35th percentile, so many of the active players here have learned the basics and are starting to grasp some things about chess.

Avatar of ertcag

Good

Avatar of Paulyboys

I'm at the level of 900 or just below that right now.

When I used to play games on chess.com without an account playing as a guest I found that if I picked the beginer option my games were too easy, intermediate was just about right. I'd probably be thrashed if I picked anything above intermediate.

My level on blitz games is something like 200, after taking a long break from chess I just don't have much instinctive knowledge about the game. I need to sit down and think about my moves slowly.