Me: 99.0
BenjaminArcos: 2.9
Actually this the legal trap
It is pretty sad to fall into a trap known for hundreds of years
It is pretty sad to be a 1300 rated blitz player when chess has been known for 1500 years
Me: 99.0
BenjaminArcos: 2.9
Actually this the legal trap
It is pretty sad to fall into a trap known for hundreds of years
It is pretty sad to be a 1300 rated blitz player when chess has been known for 1500 years
I've just played a random Blitz game. Not sure if 98.1 is something normal or special?
https://www.chess.com/live?#g=5378878152
lol 93.9 but in the endgame good moves did not matter, it was equal and good move made my accuracy worse, but 0 inaccuracies 0 mistakes and 0 blunders.
https://www.chess.com/live/game/5399820748 100% accuracy
70%-79% is the average
80%-89% is very good
90%-94% is superior
95%-97% is elite
98%-99% or better is one of the best players in that game or category for his or her level!
100% Is not a human and is an engine!
Among these I feel like giving respect to someone that is 90% or better is suffecient.
But if someone can get 95% or better consistently is someone that is an elite player in his or her level, and shouldn't be taken lighlty.
This is how I like to put it and it seems fairly accurate to me!
At 900 rating level, 90+% accuracy is playing like a 950
your opponents just are bad
accuracy score adapts the guy's rating
No I watched a video from IM Danny Rensch, he said accuracy can vary depending on the strength of the players/their accuracy in previous game. I am not sure but it is something along those lines
Well it depends on the consistency of a player more than the opponent he is facing.
For example if a player, player consistently good moves he will almost always be in the 80-95% range regardless of his opponent.
Consistency is Key! The more consistently good, the better and more reliable the results.
Me: 99.0
BenjaminArcos: 2.9
Actually this the legal trap
It is pretty sad to fall into a trap known for hundreds of years