What is considered a beginner rating?
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Jul 30, 2018
0
#22
FaceCrusher wrote:
1874 USCF, an OTB rating issued by the US Chess Federation for official tournament play, is pretty damned good, and would be invincible to all normal casual players who "know how to play" chess. That guy in the office who is "kinda good" at chess or your Uncle Larry who "plays chess" would get murdered by an 1874. He would seem like a god to them.
Beginner is about 650 actually. 900 is someone who has won a few games at their high school and is pretty decent among his friends. He gets destroyed in his first tournament. 1200s are starting to take the game kinda seriously and know some openings and some strategy. Likely won't lose to normal people anymore. 1400 is good enough to be "The guy is beats everyone's ass in chess" in his area of a small town and would be champion at a small to medium size high school.
Chess.com ratings are hard to corrolate to USCF ratings, and while some people say subtract about 200 pts from your Chess.com rating to get your real rating, some loose studies people have done have come out to show the ratings are kinda close, and if off maybe only by 100 pts or so.
Don't listen to the elitists who say "If you're under 1400, your a rank beginner and shouldn't read anything but 'Bob the Bunny's first Chess Book, how the pieces move." They just want to make themselves sound important by saying only they are ready for the more advanced stuff.
1874 is a good rating, is a person who is good at chess, is 99.8% of all people who know how to play chess, and will go the rest of his life probably never losing to a regular person who hasn't seriously studied chess. He'd get destroyed in a state championship, but he's good enough to where the only time he'll lose is in tournaments or to other fairly serious players.
Fantastic Analysis. He said everything right. An 1800 Series would beat anyone who has not studied chess everytime. He can even sneak a win against an FM or if an IM slips up, he will shut him down with a tact of brilliance. He know a bit
FaceCrusher wrote:
1874 USCF, an OTB rating issued by the US Chess Federation for official tournament play, is pretty damned good, and would be invincible to all normal casual players who "know how to play" chess. That guy in the office who is "kinda good" at chess or your Uncle Larry who "plays chess" would get murdered by an 1874. He would seem like a god to them.
Beginner is about 650 actually. 900 is someone who has won a few games at their high school and is pretty decent among his friends. He gets destroyed in his first tournament. 1200s are starting to take the game kinda seriously and know some openings and some strategy. Likely won't lose to normal people anymore. 1400 is good enough to be "The guy is beats everyone's ass in chess" in his area of a small town and would be champion at a small to medium size high school.
Chess.com ratings are hard to corrolate to USCF ratings, and while some people say subtract about 200 pts from your Chess.com rating to get your real rating, some loose studies people have done have come out to show the ratings are kinda close, and if off maybe only by 100 pts or so.
Don't listen to the elitists who say "If you're under 1400, your a rank beginner and shouldn't read anything but 'Bob the Bunny's first Chess Book, how the pieces move." They just want to make themselves sound important by saying only they are ready for the more advanced stuff.
1874 is a good rating, is a person who is good at chess, is 99.8% of all people who know how to play chess, and will go the rest of his life probably never losing to a regular person who hasn't seriously studied chess. He'd get destroyed in a state championship, but he's good enough to where the only time he'll lose is in tournaments or to other fairly serious players.
But I am 1199 fide and am state champion!?
A good player is someone who can compete within their class regardless of rating. I highly doubt if someone at 1850 can really compete against 2000+ and above classifications. Classical OTB are very hard to win against much higher players.
Use of engine or any form of cheating is strictly prohibited at chess.com.
My blitz rating at chess.com is around 1600. It means I am in the top 10% of all registered players. It means I should win 9 out of 10 matches with RANDOM players. I think it is very good. On the other hand, there are around 120 000 players better than me. So it all depends on point of view. Amongst the whole population, I am very good, amongst skilled players I am just a beginner.
Dec 10, 2018
0
#27
aleksandarvukelic wrote:
meh 1800 rating uscf is like 1500 fide so less than master candidate.That means u are solid but not good player.
That's actually completely wrong. 1800 USCF is very close to 1800 FIDE. The difference between FIDE and USCF really only shows up above 2000. There's a graph somewhere online that shows the difference between the two rating systems.
Dec 10, 2018
0
#28
Here's a formula that was posted on another forum here for calculating FIDE vs USCF ratings:
USCF = 720 + 0.625*FIDE if FIDE < 2000
USCF = -350 + 1.16*FIDE if FIDE >= 2000
http://www.glicko.net/ratings/report08.txt
Dec 2, 2019
0
#30
No its like that 1000 ok
1000 to 1400 good
1400 to 1799 very good excelent player
2200 to 2599 is a prof.
1800 2199 an expert
2600 2999 candidste for world chsmpion
3000you are gone be world chsmpion if youre not yet
Dec 2, 2019
0
#31
600 is a player who nearly knows how to play chees he gets destroyed by an amauter
800 is a player who knows how to move pieces and a little bit more maybe he isnt good insf for tournsments
900-1000 good inaf to be at the school tournsment and be ok snd he knows some tricks and easiest strategys
1200 thats already a seriouse player who could be chsmpion in a small tournsment. He knows some strategys and rules about psrt of the game.
1400 thats a very good player who is already very advanced. He must know something more sbout teory snd endgsmes. He could be a champion of a small region
1600 thats an excellent player who would defenetly be good at the country tournsment. He must kniw sime complicsted strategis and hes already good inaf to teach chees.
1800 thats a fantastic player sn expert.H
e is probably one of the best in his smsller country. He must know slmost all tricks and tactics snd he csn be an excellent teacher.
2000 thats a player with his first title. Candidate master. Thats the perdon who trsins chees for about 6 hours a day and he must have won the title tournsment and hes good inaf good to go to Europeun championchip where only title player battle. Hemust know a lot of secrets and he dominates endgame and midle games because he studiet
Master That is a profesional player who chees knowing is very simular to candidate master's inowing but he knows some secrets more. He could win a country championchip and he must have not just talent but an amszing talent
International master thats a stronger master who could be at the world championchip he must combinste a lot moves in a future but there are chsnces he could lose agsinst csndidate master or master he isnt a lot better and he probably knows how to answer all the tricks thst excist that are st least 3 mives in the future. He knows to cslculate s little bit better thsn a normal master because he plays more often
A grandmaster. He knows everything about chees all secrets and they saw 5 mives in future. If you sre a grandmaster you will be one 9f the best in the world. Theyre potentional is crazy snd they almost live in a chees world. They know the whole tery if chees hiw to counter that trick and that snd that. They can fsil only because they arent concentradet. Thats the best title of chees. Chees knowing 100%
If you are better than a lot of grandmsster you vould easily be a world chsmpion sooner ir later
Dec 2, 2019
0
#32
Is this another "I'm a beginner rated over 1800" thread? Definitely a regular to these forums 🤣
I've been playing for years but my rating stays in triple-digit. I can't seem to beat my competition if they're above about 950.. it's some point in each match my game gives in..
"... for those that want to be as good as they can be, they'll have to work hard.
Play opponents who are better than you … . Learn basic endgames. Create a simple opening repertoire (understanding the moves are far more important than memorizing them). Study tactics. And pick up tons of patterns. That’s the drumbeat of success. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (December 27, 2018)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/little-things-that-help-your-game
https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-start-out-in-chess
https://www.chess.com/blog/michechess89/8-tips-to-increase-your-online-rating
https://www.chess.com/news/view/rapid-chess-improvement
https://www.chess.com/news/view/a-new-years-resolution-improve-your-chess-with-new-lessons
https://www.chess.com/article/view/mastery-chess-lessons-are-here
"... In order to maximize the benefits of [theory and practice], these two should be approached in a balanced manner. ... Play as many slow games (60 5 or preferably slower) as possible, ... The other side of improvement is theory. ... This can be reading books, taking lessons, watching videos, doing problems on software, etc. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627084053/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman19.pdf
"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
Here are some reading possibilities that I often mention:
Simple Attacking Plans by Fred Wilson (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090402/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review874.pdf
http://dev.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Simple-Attacking-Plans-77p3731.htm
Logical Chess: Move by Move by Irving Chernev (1957)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104437/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/logichess.pdf
The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Irving Chernev (1965)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/most-instructive-games-of-chess-ever-played/
Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld (1948)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093415/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review919.pdf
Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233537/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review585.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-back-to-basics-tactics
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5856bd64ff7c50433c3803db/t/5895fc0ca5790af7895297e4/1486224396755/btbtactics2excerpt.pdf
Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf
Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014)
http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/openings-for-amateurs/
https://www.chess.com/blog/ForwardChess/book-of-the-week-openings-for-amateurs
https://www.mongoosepress.com/catalog/excerpts/openings_amateurs.pdf
Chess Endgames for Kids by Karsten Müller (2015)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/chess-endgames-for-kids/
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Chess_Endgames_for_Kids.pdf
A Guide to Chess Improvement by Dan Heisman (2010)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708105628/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review781.pdf
Studying Chess Made Easy by Andrew Soltis (2009)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090448/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review750.pdf
Seirawan stuff:
http://seagaard.dk/review/eng/bo_beginner/ev_winning_chess.asp?KATID=BO&ID=BO-Beginner
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090229/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review492.pdf
http://www.nystar.com/tamarkin/review1.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-winning-chess-openings
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-winning-chess-endings
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708092617/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review560.pdf
Dec 24, 2019
0
#36
NoahDr wrote:
Is 1874 a good number? I'm a beginner but I'm starting to get the hang of chess. Btw what does "rating" mean?
If you are American, under 1200 is a beginner. If you are Russian, though, it's under 2000. Also the average 1600 Russian school boy is equal to most Americans over 1900.
Jan 4, 2020
0
#37
You can increase your rating to 1000 if you work id your not talented
Jan 4, 2020
0
#38
L8ke this
600 beginer
800 bad player
1000 ok
1200 good
1400 very good
1600 excelent
1800 fantastic
2000awesome
2200 profesional
2400 legendary
2600 or more god
Jan 4, 2020
0
#39
1874 is an expert a 1st category player he must have stuidet cgees his whole life