What rating is classified as 'advance'??????

Sort:
OttoMesiter

chesspawn.png

OttoMesiter
MohammadSANTN wrote:
1600 or above would be a advanced rating in rapid

Interesting, In my personal opinion I would say 1800+ 

LeeEuler

All relative and a matter of personal opinion. I put it something like so for chess.com ratings:

<800 just learning, 801-1200 beginner, 1201-1600 intermediate, 1601-2000 no-mans land/strong intermediate, 2001-2400 advanced, 2400+ master.

WilliamJohnB

I would consider anyone with a 1800+ OTB rating to be formidable (or at least advanced) players.  Here's how I would divide the formidable classes up:

[1] 1800-1999:  Advanced

[2] 2000-2199: Expert (or Candidate Master)

[3] 2200-2399: Master [Level 1]

[4] 2400-2599: Master [Level 2]

[5] 2600+:  World-Class

sndeww

1800+ is advanced.

llama47

The strongest non-masters are just below 2200 OTB... so as others have said, a class or two below 2200 could be called advanced.

By "class" I mean 200 points.

OttoMesiter
LeeEuler wrote:

All relative and a matter of personal opinion. I put it something like so for chess.com ratings:

<800 just learning, 801-1200 beginner, 1201-1600 intermediate, 1601-2000 no-mans land/strong intermediate, 2001-2400 advanced, 2400+ master.

Well put, I agree with you but I would say 1700-2000 not 1600-2000.But thanks for sharing!!))

OttoMesiter
icyboyyy wrote:

1900+ is advanced

Intresting, I would say the same thing to.Thanks for sharing 

OttoMesiter
B1ZMARK wrote:

1800+ is advanced.

Yeah votechess.png 1800-1900 is where player is at the start of the advance list!

fenrissaga

your rating is "advanced"

OttoMesiter
fenrissaga wrote:

your rating is "advanced"

Thanks man! but I would say more like 1800 because 1800s have alot more stratiges then 1700's.Anyway thanks for sharing !!!!

fenrissaga
OttoMister a écrit :
fenrissaga wrote:

your rating is "advanced"

Thanks man! but I would say more like 1800 because 1800s have alot more stratiges then 1700's.Anyway thanks for sharing !!!!

You may be right but i think the 1800 think the same of 1900 .

And this go so on endlessly ,at the end there is Magnus ,but Magnus isnt happy because of his actual form .

OttoMesiter
fenrissaga wrote:
OttoMister a écrit :
fenrissaga wrote:

your rating is "advanced"

Thanks man! but I would say more like 1800 because 1800s have alot more stratiges then 1700's.Anyway thanks for sharing !!!!

You may be right but i think the 1800 think the same of 1900 .

And this go so on endlessly ,at the end there is Magnus ,but Magnus isnt happy because of his actual form .

draw.png

chyss

1800+. Anything below that implies big gaps in a person's play. Once you get to about 1800 you are usually know a thing or two in every aspect of play, although of course there will still be weaknesses. 

OttoMesiter
Yurinclez wrote:

there are many standards and not all are the same. if i would have to mix some standards that i know

perhaps around 1600-2200

Good point!,Thanks for sharing!

OttoMesiter
chyss wrote:

1800+. Anything below that implies big gaps in a person's play. Once you get to about 1800 you are usually know a thing or two in every aspect of play, although of course there will still be weaknesses. 

ghezz thats insane that ur 2200, thanks for sharing 

chyss
OttoMister wrote:
chyss wrote:

1800+. Anything below that implies big gaps in a person's play. Once you get to about 1800 you are usually know a thing or two in every aspect of play, although of course there will still be weaknesses. 

ghezz thats insane that ur 2200, thanks for sharing 

I've not played many rapid games so that rating isn't very 'robust'. I'm less in real life. 

ThatGuyNamedJeff

I don't know what advanced is but I know one thing for sure, I ain't it.

OttoMesiter
ThatGuyNamedJeff wrote:

I don't know what advanced is but I know one thing for sure, I ain't it.

You mean 'I ain't it yet'

ThatGuyNamedJeff
OttoMister wrote:
ThatGuyNamedJeff wrote:

I don't know what advanced is but I know one thing for sure, I ain't it.

You mean 'I ain't it yet'

You sure are a nice person. Well, we can only hope my friend.