What is considered a beginner rating? - Chess Forums - Page 19

Marie-AnneLiz

Jan 4, 2021

0

#361

"When I started playing chess, no one I knew had the faintest concept of much. We would move all of our pawns, then array the pieces behind, and then break. Or we would bring out our rooks first because we thought we knew how to use them.

After seven years of the worst play imaginable, I learned about chess books. I found several at the library."

This is where i disagree with you!

Before playing my first OTB game ever i went to the library and read my first book at 12 and i knew enough to follow the opening principles! but not enough to make me very comfortable.

So to know more i got a few books at the chess club on opening one in the end game by Pandolfini and Weapons of Chess by Pandolfini,The ABC's of Chess by Pandolfini,My System by Nimzo and a few on tactics and the big one 448 pages Comprehensive course by the russian coach.

I love to read! and when i started my first game online many years later in 1997 i knew by heart all the Italian and the Ruiz Lopez opening and many others...

So why did you waited 7 years before reading a book about opening?

Marie-AnneLiz

Jan 4, 2021

0

#362

theendgame3 a écrit :

Ziryab wrote:

Marie-AnneLiz wrote

"I have more experience teaching beginners than Hikaru does. "

But not even close to Levy the IM that did that in the last 10+ years!

I don’t know. I’ve taught beginners 21 years. Over 1000 children have learned to play chess from my instruction in their classroom.

Chess has never been my full-time job, but have spent as much as 12 hours per week teaching young players.

Again, emphasis on openings as the cure for obvious tactical failure is where I disagree with you.

I’ve played the French Defense as my main reply to 1.e4 since 2003. I’ve played tens of thousands of games in the opening. I’ve been through every single game published in Informant in one of the main variations, and easily 1000 GM games in all variations of the French. I’ve beaten masters in correspondence and blitz playing the French. A FIDE master needed 72 moves to force my resignation OTB, and I could have claimed a draw on move 62 (I suspected, but was not certain that we had repeated the position—we did on moved 58, 60, and 62).

Nonetheless, I’ve been crushed in 15-20 moves in the past week more than once because inattention resulted in tactical failure.

what you you class a 1450 player please?

There are a lot of very casual players on Chess.com. They are just playing for fun and never study the game. There are also very good players, but there are many more mediocre and weak players there than there are in “real life” tournaments.

In the “real” chess world of over the board tournaments, that rating of 1450, if you were to achieve it playing in tournaments over the board, would be below the mean.

Marie-AnneLiz

Jan 4, 2021

0

#363

theendgame3 a écrit :

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

theendgame3 a écrit :

Ziryab wrote:

Marie-AnneLiz wrote

"I have more experience teaching beginners than Hikaru does. "

But not even close to Levy the IM that did that in the last 10+ years!

I don’t know. I’ve taught beginners 21 years. Over 1000 children have learned to play chess from my instruction in their classroom.

Chess has never been my full-time job, but have spent as much as 12 hours per week teaching young players.

Again, emphasis on openings as the cure for obvious tactical failure is where I disagree with you.

I’ve played the French Defense as my main reply to 1.e4 since 2003. I’ve played tens of thousands of games in the opening. I’ve been through every single game published in Informant in one of the main variations, and easily 1000 GM games in all variations of the French. I’ve beaten masters in correspondence and blitz playing the French. A FIDE master needed 72 moves to force my resignation OTB, and I could have claimed a draw on move 62 (I suspected, but was not certain that we had repeated the position—we did on moved 58, 60, and 62).

Nonetheless, I’ve been crushed in 15-20 moves in the past week more than once because inattention resulted in tactical failure.

what you you class a 1450 player please?

There are a lot of very casual players on Chess.com. They are just playing for fun and never study the game. There are also very good players, but there are many more mediocre and weak players there than there are in “real life” tournaments.

In the “real” chess world of over the board tournaments, that rating of 1450, if you were to achieve it playing in tournaments over the board, would be below the mean.

would you say it was intermediate?

Yes;you are not a beginner!

https://www.chess.com/article/view/ratings

Marie-AnneLiz

Jan 4, 2021

0

#364

theendgame3 a écrit :

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

theendgame3 a écrit :

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

theendgame3 a écrit :

Ziryab wrote:

Marie-AnneLiz wrote

"I have more experience teaching beginners than Hikaru does. "

But not even close to Levy the IM that did that in the last 10+ years!

I don’t know. I’ve taught beginners 21 years. Over 1000 children have learned to play chess from my instruction in their classroom.

Chess has never been my full-time job, but have spent as much as 12 hours per week teaching young players.

Again, emphasis on openings as the cure for obvious tactical failure is where I disagree with you.

I’ve played the French Defense as my main reply to 1.e4 since 2003. I’ve played tens of thousands of games in the opening. I’ve been through every single game published in Informant in one of the main variations, and easily 1000 GM games in all variations of the French. I’ve beaten masters in correspondence and blitz playing the French. A FIDE master needed 72 moves to force my resignation OTB, and I could have claimed a draw on move 62 (I suspected, but was not certain that we had repeated the position—we did on moved 58, 60, and 62).

Nonetheless, I’ve been crushed in 15-20 moves in the past week more than once because inattention resulted in tactical failure.

what you you class a 1450 player please?

There are a lot of very casual players on Chess.com. They are just playing for fun and never study the game. There are also very good players, but there are many more mediocre and weak players there than there are in “real life” tournaments.

In the “real” chess world of over the board tournaments, that rating of 1450, if you were to achieve it playing in tournaments over the board, would be below the mean.

would you say it was intermediate?

Yes;you are not a beginner!

https://www.chess.com/article/view/ratings

Thank you- That has really made my day- thank you, I always thought i was a half decent club player

Ziryab

Jan 4, 2021

0

#365

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

Ziryab

"When I started playing chess, no one I knew had the faintest concept of much. We would move all of our pawns, then array the pieces behind, and then break. Or we would bring out our rooks first because we thought we knew how to use them.

After seven years of the worst play imaginable, I learned about chess books. I found several at the library."

This is where i disagree with you!

Before playing my first OTB game ever i went to the library and read my first book at 12 and i knew enough to follow the opening principles! but not enough to make me very comfortable.

So to know more i got a few books at the chess club on opening one in the end game by Pandolfini and Weapons of Chess by Pandolfini,The ABC's of Chess by Pandolfini,My System by Nimzo and a few on tactics and the big one 448 pages Comprehensive course by the russian coach.

I love to read! and when i started my first game online many years later in 1997 i knew by heart all the Italian and the Ruiz Lopez opening and many others...

So why did you waited 7 years before reading a book about opening?

I didn’t know there were books on chess until I’d been playing seven years. Chess was just another game like Clue, Connect Four, Parcheesi. My family played a lot of games. No one studied them.

When I started playing chess with a friend who was a little better than me and who had a chess book, my interest was piqued. However, I did not read any books on openings that I recall until a few years later. As a result of playing through many miniatures, I started opening with my center pawns and bringing out my pieces to attack f2/f7.

My friend and I started a match of 21 games or so. At the beginning of the match, he was a little better or we were close to equal. After a few weeks, I was far better.

Chess ceased to be just another game.

I was number two in my high school when I started studying openings. Number one always played the Pirc. I learned the four pawns attack and beat him. That was 43 years ago.

AndreasTorres

Jan 4, 2021

0

#366

Below 1000

Ziryab

Jan 4, 2021

0

#367

DD_MR wrote:

The founder of this forum has expired a long time ago.

Were you at the funeral?

Marie-AnneLiz

Jan 4, 2021

0

#368

Ziryab a écrit :

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

Ziryab

"When I started playing chess, no one I knew had the faintest concept of much. We would move all of our pawns, then array the pieces behind, and then break. Or we would bring out our rooks first because we thought we knew how to use them.

After seven years of the worst play imaginable, I learned about chess books. I found several at the library."

This is where i disagree with you!

Before playing my first OTB game ever i went to the library and read my first book at 12 and i knew enough to follow the opening principles! but not enough to make me very comfortable.

So to know more i got a few books at the chess club on opening one in the end game by Pandolfini and Weapons of Chess by Pandolfini,The ABC's of Chess by Pandolfini,My System by Nimzo and a few on tactics and the big one 448 pages Comprehensive course by the russian coach.

I love to read! and when i started my first game online many years later in 1997 i knew by heart all the Italian and the Ruiz Lopez opening and many others...

So why did you waited 7 years before reading a book about opening?

I didn’t know there were books on chess until I’d been playing seven years. Chess was just another game like Clue, Connect Four, Parcheesi. My family played a lot of games. No one studied them.

When I started playing chess with a friend who was a little better than me and who had a chess book, my interest was piqued. However, I did not read any books on openings that I recall until a few years later. As a result of playing through many miniatures, I started opening with my center pawns and bringing out my pieces to attack f2/f7.

My friend and I started a match of 21 games or so. At the beginning of the match, he was a little better or we were close to equal. After a few weeks, I was far better.

Chess ceased to be just another game.

I was number two in my high school when I started studying openings. Number one always played the Pirc. I learned the four pawns attack and beat him. That was 43 years ago.

Now it make sense why you think this way! and I'm sure you do well while you teach your opening principles!

Can I ask you at what age you played your first chess game?

Ziryab

Jan 4, 2021

0

#369

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

Ziryab a écrit :

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

Ziryab

"When I started playing chess, no one I knew had the faintest concept of much. We would move all of our pawns, then array the pieces behind, and then break. Or we would bring out our rooks first because we thought we knew how to use them.

After seven years of the worst play imaginable, I learned about chess books. I found several at the library."

This is where i disagree with you!

Before playing my first OTB game ever i went to the library and read my first book at 12 and i knew enough to follow the opening principles! but not enough to make me very comfortable.

So to know more i got a few books at the chess club on opening one in the end game by Pandolfini and Weapons of Chess by Pandolfini,The ABC's of Chess by Pandolfini,My System by Nimzo and a few on tactics and the big one 448 pages Comprehensive course by the russian coach.

I love to read! and when i started my first game online many years later in 1997 i knew by heart all the Italian and the Ruiz Lopez opening and many others...

So why did you waited 7 years before reading a book about opening?

I didn’t know there were books on chess until I’d been playing seven years. Chess was just another game like Clue, Connect Four, Parcheesi. My family played a lot of games. No one studied them.

When I started playing chess with a friend who was a little better than me and who had a chess book, my interest was piqued. However, I did not read any books on openings that I recall until a few years later. As a result of playing through many miniatures, I started opening with my center pawns and bringing out my pieces to attack f2/f7.

My friend and I started a match of 21 games or so. At the beginning of the match, he was a little better or we were close to equal. After a few weeks, I was far better.

Chess ceased to be just another game.

I was number two in my high school when I started studying openings. Number one always played the Pirc. I learned the four pawns attack and beat him. That was 43 years ago.

Now it make sense why you think this way! and I'm sure you do well while you teach your opening principles!

Can I ask you at what age you played your first chess game?

8 first game. My younger sister learned from the neighbors, then came home and taught me.

I was 15 when I discovered chess books.

Gandalfschach

Jan 4, 2021

0

#370

Ich habe schon 3 partien gegen den computer gewonnen aber mein rating verändert sich nicht

wieso?

EdwinP2017

Jan 4, 2021

0

#371

Gandalfschach wrote:

Ich habe schon 3 partien gegen den computer gewonnen aber mein rating verändert sich nicht

wieso?

Spiele gegen die Computer-Bots sind ohne Wertung. Sie tauchen auch nicht in der Statistik auf.

Gandalfschach

Jan 4, 2021

0

#372

danke habe jetzt gegen 2 andere gespielt, jetzt habe ein rating. danke für deine Antwort

Marie-AnneLiz

Jan 4, 2021

0

#373

"8 first game. My younger sister learned from the neighbors, then came home and taught me.

I was 15 when I discovered chess books. "

Now I understand you a lot better!

Ziryab

Jan 4, 2021

0

#374

Marie-AnneLiz wrote:

"8 first game. My younger sister learned from the neighbors, then came home and taught me.

I was 15 when I discovered chess books. "

Now I understand you a lot better!

Quite possibly. But, the advice I was giving, as well as my critique of yours, is rooted in my experience teaching chess, beginning with my own children in the mid-1990s, and other people's children since January 2000.

After a few years of teaching, I developed both methods and convictions. This curriculum, developed fifteen years ago, offers structure to what I do.

Scholastic Chess Awards

Pawn: the Pawn Award recognizes that the recipient knows how to play chess (and should be able to teach another).

Sets up board (light on right) and pieces correctly.
2. Demonstrates basic movement of each piece.
3. Demonstrate and explain castling.
4. Demonstrate en passant.
5. Demonstrate ability to recognize checkmate (complete “Pawn Award: checkmate in one” worksheet).

Knight: the Knight Award recognizes that the recipient has learned certain fundamental endgame and checkmate skills.

Previously earned Pawn, or achieve an Elo (e.g. USCF) rating over 500.
2. Demonstrate understanding of checkmate of lone king with heavy pieces:
* queen and rook,
* queen and king, and
* rook and king (each from two random positions selected by the coach).
3. Demonstrate understanding of “fox in the chicken coop” pawn promotion technique.
4. Complete “Knight Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet.
5. Demonstrate ability to read chess notation.

Bishop: the Bishop Award recognizes that the recipient has developed skill in coordinating the chess pieces, including honing his or her checkmate skills.

Previously earned Knight.
2. Force checkmate of lone king with two bishops and king.
3. Demonstrate understanding of opposition and outflanking through success with king vs. king exercise, and two king and pawn exercises selected by the coach.
4. Complete “Checklist of Checkmates: Corridors” and “Checklist of Checkmates: Diagonals.”
5. Complete “Bishop Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet.
6. Demonstrate ability to write chess notation.

Rook: the Rook Award recognizes that the recipient has developed his or her endgame and checkmate skills, and has become a tournament player.

Previously earned Bishop.
2. Demonstrate understanding of Lucena (building a bridge) and Philidor (sixth rank defense) endgame positions (rooks and pawn).
3. Complete “Checklist of Checkmates: Intersections” and “Checklist of Checkmates: Knights.”
4. Complete “Rook Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet.
5. Complete two scholastic tournaments (no voluntary byes or forfeits).

Queen: the Queen Award recognizes that the recipient has developed the habit of chess study, and has proven his or her abilities through success in tournament competition.

Previously earned Rook.
2. Demonstrate understanding of queen vs. pawn endgames (winning and drawing ideas).
3. Complete “Checklist of Checkmates: Combinations,” “Checklist of Checkmates: Queens,” and “Checklist of Checkmates: Challenges.”
4. Complete “Queen Award: checkmates and tactics” worksheet.
5. Complete three scholastic tournaments (no voluntary byes or forfeits), scoring three points or more in at least one five round event.

King: the King Award recognizes that the recipient has become a strong scholastic player.

Previously earned Queen.
2. Demonstrate correct play from five opposition exercises selected by the coach.
3. Correctly solve fifteen problems in fifteen minutes selected at random from “Checklist of Checkmates” exercises with 86% accuracy (13 of 15).
4. Show evidence of independent study of tactics exercises book, such as those by Fred Reinfeld, Bruce Pandolfini, Murray Chandler, Paul Littlewood, Lou Hays, or others.
4. Earn Elo rating above 1200.

It would appear that I do nothing with openings. But, in fact, one of the Knight Award exercises is a standard opening tableau. White has two good moves. One is sharper than the other.

Ziryab

Jan 5, 2021

0

#375

Maybe White has three good moves, or maybe two good and one dubious move that is successful against weaker opponents. In any case, the position is not presented as one with a clear line, but rather worthy of study. Of course, White can easily win a pawn if the bishop retreats on the following move.

5.Bxf7+ wins a pawn
5. Nxf7 is called dubious in Informant 3/253. I think it is playable, but White must be prepared to contend with 5...Bxf2+.

@pfren extolls 5.d4 and has played it with success. See https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/the-traxler-counterattack-always-wins?page=2

RussianDeflector

Jan 5, 2021

0

#376

Poppycock! I say anybody can beat anybody on certain days. Nobody should be taken for granted. You just should play because it is a beautiful game.

Strangemover

Jan 5, 2021

0

#377

RussianDeflector wrote:

Poppycock! I say anybody can beat anybody on certain days. Nobody should be taken for granted. You just should play because it is a beautiful game.

An interesting word 'poppycock'. From C19th Dutch 'pappekak' meaning 'soft dung' 😆

Nuclearpoweredplayer

Mar 8, 2023

0

#378

Is 904 a good rating?

Averagewordleplayer

Mar 29, 2023

0

#379

ChessDragon950 wrote:

i am actually 863...So am i a good player?

Don’t worry, we all start somewhere. Just because you aren’t rated what Bobby phisher was at your age doesn’t you mean you don’t have potential.

Averagewordleplayer

Mar 29, 2023

0

#380

KabirSheikh wrote:

Is 904 a good rating?

Don’t worry we all start somewhere. As long as you try to win games and study you’re a good player.