Interesting post, thanks
maybe there's hope for me 1 day after all haha
From a 500 ELO Beginner to a 2000 ELO Expert
Sort:
Feb 7, 2020
0
#23
little_guinea_pig escribió:
One more thing: 1600-1700 with 6-8 years of experience? That's a good one. I've been playing chess for 7 months now
Lier lier pants on fire.
Feb 7, 2020
0
#25
ghost_of_pushwood escribió:
And thanks to Prometheus for reminding me of a fun 60s 45!
Feb 12, 2020
0
#29
dpnorman wrote:
This isn't really how things work. Among other things, there's no formula for how long it takes to get to a certain rating because that's highly dependent on age (and possibly also intelligence), even if we assume equal time and effort put in.
I kinda agree. There are other factors involved besides age, ability, and motivation that influence how high a person's potential rating can get. There's also opportunity (i.e. living in an area with frequent USCF-rated tourneys featuring high-enough rated players and/or having a large amount of spending money and/or having rich-enough parents). For example, a kid could have the potential to become the next Magnus Carlsen and show enough talent and motivation to do so, but if that child grows up with poor parents in the middle of nowhere far, far away from the city where USCF-rated tourneys are held, then that child might have a hard time progressing (or not progress as fast as he could in better circumstances).
Full support from parents such as books, chess engine, chess database, coach fees and tournament attendance...would be the fastest way to gain high rating and becoming (NM, IM or GM) at young age.
No other way to learn chess but to learn endgame...I Invite you to watch and learn my YouTube Chess Channel...its free to subscribe......FM Jesse
www.youtube.com/channel/UC19el2OO2z-aWnLlyuu8ToQ
Cheers...I hope my YouTube Chess Channel would be of help to improve your chess skills to attain much higher rating....kindly subscribe its free...just press click....FM Jesse
Hi All. I am just trying to help. I am just trying to help. Hi All.I see people want to reach 1800 ratings, but it only achieve able with hard work and being discipline as you have to spent time on a regular basis. Let me tell you a fact that, even i was 1200 here in chessdotcom and have reached 1900+ in 4 years because I was not regularly playing.I used to play only 3 months in a whole year which is not good enough.I didn't even try to think like 1500, 1700, 1900 mind sets in the game. Just be regular and try to play higher rated opponents so that you will come to know your weakness in your game. I stream chess games, puzzles ,puzzles battle for 1200-1800 rated players on regular basics and play with all people who wanted to feel how 1800 rated player game taste like.You can add me as friend and send challenges on chess.com. (Username you know already).You can catch me on www.twitch.com/corporatechessguy for livestream. I hope you all get a chance to play with 1800 Player like me, as other high rated players don't except challenges from lower rated player to be honest. Hoping to receive more friend request on chessdotcom and followers on twitch. Most important, you are always welcome to try out your tournament practise with me. Let's play together!
i'm at the 1200 level, do you have any good book recommendations that will help me improve?
Kai-Hedlund wrote:
i'm at the 1200 level, do you have any good book recommendations that will help me improve?
Rather than books, focus on tactics and making sure each piece is protected (bonus points if you can check and confirm the piece is also safe against tactics) when you move. Getting those down will likely push you up a hundred or so.
and learning basic king opposition in king and pawn endgames will likely add twenty-five to your score (by turning losses in to ties and ties into wins). I highly recommend 100 endgames you must know by Jesus De La Villa. I’ve read it twice and still pick things up when I use at as a resource following games
Jun 11, 2020
0
#35
What people need to keep in mind is that the ratings are only meaningful for a specific player pool at a specific place in time. 1400 at the time of this guy’s post could imply vastly different levels of game strength than 1400 does today, even on the same website. So his breakdown *may* have been accurate for the time he was writing and only on chess.com, but is likely completely obsolete now and definitely not universally applicable across different player pools. For example, there is over a 400 point gap between my rating on chess.com vs lichess for 30 min (rapid) games while I play on both platforms concurrently and have had enough games on both to balance out the differing default starting points. In other words, depending on which rating you chose, I would be in completely different skill categories as he described them, but of course the reality is I’m at the same level regardless of platform.
Dec 3, 2020
0
#36
It's a really well articulated article written with sound knowledge and experience of someone who has gone through all these ratings. I have read several pieces where people consider even a 1600 player an advanced beginner and an 1100 a beginner which is what you would expect a high rated player to think. This article provides a better insight about the rating system.
Feb 24, 2021
0
#37
This is very good except the amount of time it takes for people to reach certain ratings is a little off in my opinion. But like you said, it varies per person. However, you did say you played on and off for 15+ years, but I have been playing seriously for about a year, (previously I had only learned how the pieces moved), and I am already 1500 pushing 1600, beginning at a rating of high 500's to low 600's. Either way, nice article.
someone buy my account 2k elo
many people do worse or better, it means little, My very first USCF game i beat an expert!?
there is no set pattern....
PolarBearAttakk wrote:
Your scale seems way off. You're giving way too much credit to weak beginners. You can easily get over 1800 without knowing much at all about chess and just having somewhat decent tactics. At this level games go back and forth various times during the game and the player with the better tactics will win most of the time. Also your time frame is ridiculous. Not everyone is the same. For me, talking OTB classical here, I my first rating was in the 1600's, then I got into the 1800's in about 6 months, then expert (2000+) about a year after that, and I'm certainly no prodigy. These online ratings aren't necessarily accurate either. You should play OTB if you want to get a rating that you can take a bit more seriously.
Tf is up with your status, old boy?
You should stop trying to leech value off of places and people, and stand on your own two clownshoes feet.
Inactive on the weekend (which I personally told a few people I would be doing weeks ago, and have indicated on my profile), and on Monday some random goof pops up bumping stuff.
In a topic on Monday just above this, some guys claimed with evidence that you've been at 1800 over the board for a long time. Yet here you are saying quite the opposite, spreading misinformation to the beginner and lower-intermediate players.
There were some other claims that I'm really not sure whether to consider extremely sad or hilarious. You seem quite unpopular. Proof was given for all assertions made.
Imagine lying about a board game.
I think new players should do their own thing which fits their own lifestyle.
This isn't really how things work. Among other things, there's no formula for how long it takes to get to a certain rating because that's highly dependent on age (and possibly also intelligence), even if we assume equal time and effort put in.