20 Apr 06
Originally posted by powershakerThere's no answer to this question. Calling someone good is relative to those around them, and even that isn't a fixed percentile.
When is a player considered good? I'm not saying in the chess world. I'm saying in the entire world. If one considers the game, what rating begins to be considered "good" by the average layman who ponders the ratings and the percentages? Just wanted to know people's opinion.
20 Apr 06
1 edit
Originally posted by powershakerLike I mentioned several times
When is a player considered good? I'm not saying in the chess world. I'm saying in the entire world. If one considers the game, what rating begins to be considered "good" by the average layman who ponders the ratings and the percentages? Just wanted to know people's opinion.
1800 = top 15% of all chess players in the world.
This was from 2002 but is still true today. Check out Rhp, USCF, CFC. All of them agree with this, not perfectly but its close enough.
But for me, I saw 2000 is good. They you can say, HEY I'M an Expert.
Hey I'm an class A player just doesn't sound so great. Plus you can charge a reasonable amount to teach chess, give simuls etc.. You words are taken more seriously in a chess club, etc..
20 Apr 06
1 edit
In the USCF, an "A" player (1800+) is considered a GOOD player. They have studied the game enough to win a "won" game, and generally don't make any stupid blunders. "A" players are good solid technicians, they won't win any brilliancy prizes, but they're not schmucks.
Around newbie players, an "A" player could get away with claiming to be a master, none of the fish would be the wiser.
I believe 1800+ in the USCF is around the top 95% of all players.
21 Apr 06
Originally posted by ark13That's a weak reply. It is pretty easy to give an answer, you know, since it is relative and all, you could give you opinion.
There's no answer to this question. Calling someone good is relative to those around them, and even that isn't a fixed percentile.
I hover around 1200, but I am considered "good" compared to all of my friends who only play here and there. Of course, I am not very good at all when pitted against a real chess player 🙂
21 Apr 06
1 edit
Originally posted by RahimKIf you're in the top 30% of all chess players, wouldn't that also mean you are a good player? Or just a decent player? I would think if you're in the top 30% of all chess players, that's not saying you're bad. I would say an 1800 "A Class" player would be considered abnormally strong if he's in the 15% of all chess players. I would say a 1500 player (being he is in the 30% of all chess players) would be considered good... the A class considered GREAT, and the grandmaster considered phenomenal. Fair enough? So, I think I'm good! So there! hehe
Like I mentioned several times
1800 = top 15% of all chess players in the world.
This was from 2002 but is still true today. Check out Rhp, USCF, CFC. All of them agree with this, not perfectly but its close enough.
But for me, I saw 2000 is good. They you can say, HEY I'M an Expert.
Hey I'm an class A player just doesn't sound so great. Plus you ...[text shortened]... t to teach chess, give simuls etc.. You words are taken more seriously in a chess club, etc..
21 Apr 06
Originally posted by powershakerIs a person in 70th percentile for height tall? That person wouldn't even be 6 foot. Calling them tall would be a bit of stretch don't you think?
If you're in the top 30% of all chess players, wouldn't that also mean you are a good player? Or just a decent player? I would think if you're in the top 30% of all chess players, that's not saying you're bad. I would say an 1800 "A Class" player would be considered abnormally strong if he's in the 15% of all chess players. I would say a 1500 player ...[text shortened]... grandmaster considered phenomenal. Fair enough? So, I think I'm good! So there! hehe
21 Apr 06
1 edit
Originally posted by XanthosNZI would call a person 6 feet tall pretty tall when compared to the world's heights. Yes. I am 6 feet tall myself, and often people tell me I'm tall. So, I guess someone who is six feet tall is like a 1500 chess player if you compare height to chess ratings. hehe
Is a person in 70th percentile for height tall? That person wouldn't even be 6 foot. Calling them tall would be a bit of stretch don't you think?
21 Apr 06
Originally posted by powershakerDid you read the "wouldn't even be" before the 6 foot before mashing your keyboard?
I would call a person 6 feet tall pretty tall when compared to the world's heights. Yes. I am 6 feet tall myself, and often people tell me I'm tall. So, I guess someone who is six feet tall is like a 1500 chess player if you compare height to chess ratings. hehe
The 70th percentile person would in fact be around 5 foot 10. Staggeringly tall really.
21 Apr 06
Originally posted by General PutzerSomethings strange about how they added up the numbers.
Here's a rating distribution chart, giving percentile ranking in the USCF.
http://www.uschess.org/ratings/ratedist.html
Regular ratings go to class a 1800-1899
non scholastic 2685 memebers 85.66%
(See 15% is 1800+, that proves my point, anyways)
scholastic 19 memebers 99.9%
And somehow you added them up 2704 all memeber for that row and 92%?
How did they get that!!!!???
21 Apr 06
Originally posted by RahimKin finland 1800 gets you only in the top 23.6%
Canada
1800 player is in the top 18.1%
www.chess.ca
can it really be true that on uscf 1800 gets you into top 12%? even with uscf ratings being around 100 pts higher than fide or finnish national rating??
what about other countries?