Would you rather have a title or high rating?

Sort:
Avatar of Gimfain

If you look at a title like CM, when you get 2200 you get it automatically so to be an untitled high rated player chess.com player you could never get a good classical otb rating.

Imagine knowing a lot of chess, being an impressive online blitz player but the moment you set your foot in an official classical chess tournament you fail. Most likely the failure would be due to your nerves not holding up.

If you look at a streamer like gothamchess that cherishes his IM title. No matter how good his online rating becomes he can only do clickbait videos when it comes to GM titles.

Avatar of Alexeivich94
tygxc wrote:

@34

"Doesn't a title stay with you for the rest of your life?" ++ Yes, a title is for life.

"everyone would prefer a title"
++ No. An untitled strong player is respected and feared. A low rated grandmaster or master is pathetic. He still gets invited to norm tournaments so upcoming players can score title norms by beating him.

Pathetic is a bit far mate

Avatar of ChessPro1016

You should be happy the way you are. You already have high rating and you definitely deserve a title.

Avatar of Analyzer-Pro

I would rather have a 100% accuracy. That's all I want

Avatar of medelpad
Gimfain wrote:

If you look at a title like CM, when you get 2200 you get it automatically so to be an untitled high rated player chess.com player you could never get a good classical otb rating.

You don't get it automatically when you hit 2200, you decide if you want it or not and if you want it you pay a small fee.

Picture below is an example: (untitled 3000 rated online and above 2200 with no title)

Avatar of Gimfain

#46 i take it back. I would rather reject a title and have 3000 ratings because that’s definitely impressive

Avatar of ccx_sg

rating

Avatar of JatinStrikes

Title

Avatar of Just_an_average_player136

Title

Avatar of Fet
Title inmediately. It's much better, obviously.
Avatar of Just_an_average_player136
Fet wrote:
Title inmediately. It's much better, obviously.

Why not immediately?

Avatar of biscuitparrot

Rather have a title

Avatar of darkunorthodox88

They are actual social benefits to being a titled player, it is more obvious when you at least IM, but even before that, its an easier proxy for respect, being able to get good coaching gigs, free chess.com membership etc. 
but the way you set up the thought experiment, if im actually that strong rating wise, then getting the title would just be a matter of time, so the answer is obviously the strength. the only major exception would be if due to where you live and /or economic circumstances, getting the norms for a higher title would be too difficult

Avatar of GraysonKellogg
3000 Blitz. With that skill, I’d be able to get a title in no time anyways.
Avatar of Salopian57

I personally would not want any online chess title as they are meaningless, unless its a Fide registered title or a local county over the board title or grandprix event title forget it not worth the brain sweat??

Avatar of blueemu

Neither one.

I'd prefer to be able to play chess properly.

Maybe some day.

Avatar of chesssblackbelt

I'd rather be a 1200 rated NM than a 2199 rated untitled person who never gets the last rating point

Avatar of Wlkr23
High rating. It’s always so sad to see weak NM’s or CM’s whatsoever. At least if your like 3000+ Chess.com you prolly have great potential for a title
Avatar of LieutenantFrankColumbo

If given the choice like it's a wish. I would take the title. A high online rating proves nothing. But honestly I would rather continue the never ending struggle for improvement. Like anything else in life. If you don't work for it, you don't appreciate it.