150 more or less than me.
A☺
What Rating Will You Play Against?
Sort:
Any bloddy!
I mean anybody :)
Feb 4, 2010
0
#4
My rating: ~1200 and I play 1200-1500
I really don't care about rating that much, at least not my own. I think playing player with 1300-1500 is better practice than playing someone <1200
I'm ~2100 and try to find 2000+ tournaments.
I'm currently ~1620, and play a lot of team matches with few players in my team. I guess that makes my ceiling ~2200 Lowest rating would be somewhere around 1400, unless it's a game with somebody I know.
i have played people in the 1200-1300 only to find a few months ago they
were in the 1500s so in a lot of cases i dont think the ratings give a true reflection
of ability.
Hi Gordon I briefly got to 1544 when starting as a 1200 and before rating settlled down after my intoductory period---. this is common but unfortunately I am unable to maintain it...some of the scores you encountered may have been similar and best win can be equally deceptive...some of these are (unstated) "Timeouts".
There are many (too me!)challenging players between 1300 to 1400 as well as some lower but getting back to original post I like to play into the above 1500 both for the experience of searching for the elusive Chess Grail and because the penalties for my practice losses are a lot smaller than in my own range.
Any rating is good for me I enjoy all games.
My rating is 2094 now. I play everyone who wants unrated, sometimes I can teach someone. I accept rated from about 1800 as that's quite a good fight. And I don't like to play over 2300 (with a few exceptions) because there's a big possibility that user uses an engine...
That is a great outlook Kacparov 
Afaf wrote: "I don't play people under 1300 because I feel like it's just not satisfying or fun to win."
Reading objectively, can you say, in earnest, that this is neither elitist nor snobby?
Your chess.com rating and mine are somewhat similar and I have had plenty of challenging games with people sub-1300. I think if Ozzie or Reb--you know somebody who is actually good at this game--made a similar statement, I could see it as being neither snobby nor elitist. However, at our level, to assume we are skilled enough to dispatch folks slightly less skilled at will is a bit snobby.
Heck, I've seen Ozzie write a couple of times that being able to defeat weaker folks regularly is a skill worth having.
I've never declined a game challenge based upon the challenger's rating.
Feb 4, 2010
0
#15
I would play basically anybody, anyone can give you a good game. I look at U 1300 as games that I should win (but sometimes I don't) and can perhaps practice a new opening or something. My real learning and challenging games are between 1400 - 1800, I always have to play my best to stand a chance and hence learn alot and progress. Above 1800, I basically struggle at the moment and rarely win, sometimes scrape a draw, usually lose. The chance to play some titled players (say 2300+) on chess.com is fantastic and a great opportunity. I have played a CM and an IM so far on chess.com - lost to both of course! but they gave me a few tips.
When setting a seek I have started setting the min as my current rating
The theory says that you should play with opponents who are around 100 ELO points stronger than you, while being able to defeat consistently the players rated with 200 points below you. So yes, I guess that you should play with persons below 1300 too. See then, if you blunder the queen and lose the game how you will sing a whole day "I have no brain! I have no brain!" :)
By the way Afaf, how come that everyhting you post becomes today's hot topic?
I actually give a lot of stock to my avg. opponent rating, so when there's a discrepency between them, as their is now of about 100 points, I try to take as many games as possible with players 100+ above my rating (1767). I understand chess.com ratings to be inflated, as I'm not a very strong player; but I am curious as to what rating group I am as likely to win as to be beat by.
Actually this thread is just for my personal satisfaction. I'd like to know your rating...and then the range you find challenging. These are not strict rules, but your general feeling. This is not about being elitist or snobby...just practical.
Current rating: 1450
I don't play people under 1300 because I feel like it's just not satisfying or fun to win. I also don't enjoy playing people over 1800 because I rarely make the appropriate effort nor do I expect to win so I find it a useless uninteresting encounter. What is your bottom and ceiling?