What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

100-500 novice

500-1000 beginner

1000-1400 intermediate

1400-1800 advanced

1800-2200 expert

2200+ master

That other bro really just called every GM and IM world champion

1 is a pro elo rating

But not 0

Good is around 1300-1400 and beyond it is better but above 2000 is best

1 or 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

no ur slow

0-400 new

401-799 novice

800-1200 weak intermediate

1201-1600 intermediate

1601-1800 weak advanced

1801-2100 advanced

2101-2300 NM

2301-2350 CM

2351-2450 IM

2451-2600 GM

2600-3000 Super GM

To be good in chess i think you need to be 1000+ (?) Like if agree

no

"Good" is a subjective assessment. The global average in all live time controls is ~650. The majority of players in that rating band know the rules and are decent at applying the fundamentals.

~1000 rating, you are likely better than 90% of people that play chess every now and then. If that is sufficient in your opinion to be deemed "good," you are good. Personally, ~1600 rating is when I think players begin to show real strength at the game.

2400 is average on this site. If youre below 1800 youre a beginner

irl rating dumbahh

I've just reached 1000 elo at rapid for the first time. 127 points increase in the last seven days.

0/10 ragebait

Speaking facts isnt ragebait. If somebody is offended by this perhaps they should learn to chomp on hanging pieces to 2400.

it's ragebait if you tell an exaggerated vision that no one agrees with.

How come i got 2400 on this site so easily then

ragebait is decided by others, not by you or your rating.

Rage bait has to be false, not just some people getting offended. If somebody said 100s suck at chess and offended 100s, is it ragebait?