What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

Sort:
Anonymous_Dragon
JinchenW wrote:

I have rating 1600 and I can't figure out to get higher than that on this site.

You aren't 1600 . That's your provisional daily rating which will most likely reduce once you start playing

tonyskyer

https://www.chess.com/leaderboard/live

There's a graph on the right

Threirp

I am 2000 in rapid in chess.com and 900 in us chess

CavalierLover

In rapid 10 min, is 353 good?

I think it sucks like hell

sndeww

average rating is 600 chat now decide for yourself

Ziryab
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?

At the time that you posted this, you were on the money. Much has changes since then. For instance chess has grown in popularity while the average capabilities of most people have deteriorated. Today, an average rating on this site is well below average. 1800 is in the top 1%, but whether players at that level are “good” remains a matter of personal judgement. In the past few weeks, my rapid rating has been as high as 1905 and just below 1600. I had to play some terrible chess to fall below 1700, but getting above 1800 is mostly a matter of having terrible opponents who give me easy wins. Occasionally, I play a decent game.

Even this game, where I beat a 2000+ player in 12 moves, was merely taking advantage of horrendous errors of the sort that you might expect from a beginner. I was White.

MightyBorough

I reckon anything above 1100 5 minute blitz is good, above 1200 very good as you are getting close to the top 10%

awsJunky

i am 508. But I know on a given day I can beat even 2000 elo player. I know all the gambits. I just do simple blunders hence I am stuck at 500 elo. If I dont do these blunders then I can go pro like Magnus.

Tiberius9868
awsJunky wrote:

i am 508. But I know on a given day I can beat even 2000 elo player. I know all the gambits. I just do simple blunders hence I am stuck at 500 elo. If I dont do these blunders then I can go pro like Magnus.

your best win is 515

Tiberius9868

I think 1400 is good, 2000 is expert

stephenalacad

I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder. People seem surprisingly good on this site. I used to be able to swing a 1200 or 1300 briefly, but now it's hard to keep it at 1,000. Granted I don't play all the time. But I played an acquaintance in person recently who rarely plays, and I crushed him. So it's all relative.

MightyBorough
awsJunky wrote:

i am 508. But I know on a given day I can beat even 2000 elo player. I know all the gambits. I just do simple blunders hence I am stuck at 500 elo. If I dont do these blunders then I can go pro like Magnus.

How can you say that when your best win is v a 524 player ??? You have never beaten a 2000 player yet you say you can beat them- I say prove it. If you ever beat a 2000 player whilst you are playing at this level I’ll cut off my boutsa

Arush_KK5

1 elo is bad from 2 elo it will be a good elo rating

donohoeg

Surely you just look at your percentile

On Daily I am top 12% surely that means I'm well above average as I believe the calculation excludes dormant accounts 🤔

Francescos73

I would say 1900-2000 rapid and 1600-1700 blitz

CavalierLover

I got 432

LongLiveTheKing2000

0–399: Mouse Slip Apprentice 400–799: Blunder Wizard 800–999: Opening Gambit Enthusiast 1000–1199: Hanging Piece Collector 1200–1399: Tactic Miss-er 1400–1599: Average Elo Andy 1600–1799: Tryhard Strategist 1800–1999: Calculating Menace 2000–2199: Lowkey Genius 2200–2399: Chessfluencer Energy 2400–2599: Grandmaster Vibes 2600+: Stockfish in Disguise

AGC-Gambit_YT

anything over the global average of 600 is good cry.png

crystal0192

1000+ is good

crystal0192

700 is about average