What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

Sort:
AGC-Gambit_YT
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
PlayerIDC wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:

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

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.

HangingPiecesChomper
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
PlayerIDC wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:

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

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?

AGC-Gambit_YT

Yes, because you are probably trying to get posts

PlayerIDC
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
PlayerIDC wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:

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

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?

I'm 1000 elo (was, just lost a lot) in bullet, but just because you're so good at chess, doesn't mean you have to throw smack at people who are bad at chess. Unlike them, they don't make ragebait content. So try harder next time 0/10.

HangingPiecesChomper

Just because you guys are offended by everything doesnt make everything ragebait

Dragonfire10996

The average elo is roughly 700-800 so id say to be considered good 900-1000 elo

AGC-Gambit_YT

average is 600 lol

whiteknight1968

"Good" is very subjective. Look at the percentiles.

Surely if you're making the top 10% you could call yourself a decent player?

Having said that I can make top 5% rapid here but struggle to make top 25% Lichess classical, much stronger and smaller pool.

Cdojj

say what

Cdojj
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
PlayerIDC wrote:
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:

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

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?

Cdojj

Agc

are you a chess master?

AGC-Gambit_YT
wrote:

Agc

are you a chess master?

*future master

whiteknight1968

I just beat Wallace the mammoth. He's 2000 so I must be good eh??

AGC-Gambit_YT

no, cuz I beat Magnus bot

MightyBorough

Just look at the percentile, 40-60 -average

61-75 your above average so good

76-85 - very good

86-95 excellent

above 95 - magnificent!!!

AGC-Gambit_YT

no not really.

Leonardodivi

Buenas! Como andan?

MightyBorough

What do you mean no not really ?

SixInchSamurai

> What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

100 and above

thuaforever
SixInchSamurai wrote:

> What is Consider a Good Chess Rating on this Site?

100 and above

lol