At what level are chess players considered strong between common non-chess people? I mean, in real world..? I think 7 or 8 people out of 10 knows how to play chess (excluding "en passant" of course 🙂 )
So would it be, 1100, 1200, 1500..?
what do you think? When you ask someone if he knows how to play chess and he says "yes" usually it means about 1000 ?!
To people who don't play chess, you don't have to be that good to impress them. A few years ago ( when I was about 400 points worse than I am now) a kid challenged me to a game in study hall that thought he could beat me. I checkmated him in 9 moves 🙄
I don't know exactly. 1200-1300 would be a good estimate, but I have never read any chess books in my life or even studied chess all that much (except for that Josh Waitzkin Chessmaster Academy on CM10 which I went over twice)
I would probably rated around 1600-1700 after my rating really gets going though.
Originally posted by ivan2908 At what level are chess players considered strong between common non-chess people? I mean, in real world..? I think 7 or 8 people out of 10 knows how to play chess (excluding "en passant" of course 🙂 )
So would it be, 1100, 1200, 1500..?
what do you think? When you ask someone if he knows how to play chess and he says "yes" usually it means about 1000 ?!
1200 would beat them... the people that say theyre "good" are between 700 and 800...
Among club/tournament people who take the game seriously, an "A" player rated 1800+ is considered a strong, solid player. Among casual players who say they play chess but really mean they just know how the pieces move, a 1400 player could squash them all and claim to be a master.
0-1100 I can beat anyone!
1100-1200 very good
1200-1300 good
1300-1400 intermediate (I'm really a 1600, but...)
1400-1500 advanced (I'm really a 1700, but...)
1500-1600 I have strong openings, tactics & reasonable endgame (I can play like 1800 on a good day, but...)
1600-1700 strong openings, okay tactics, not that good endgame.
1700-1800 I have a reasonable grasp on tactics, openings and engame.
1800-1900 my tactics are okay, but a patzer considerin everything else...
1900-2000 I have some familiarity on openings, but everything else..
2000-2100 my basics are sort of okay, but my *lists everything* needs a LOT of work...
Originally posted by wormwood 0-1100 I can beat anyone!
1100-1200 very good
1200-1300 good
1300-1400 intermediate (I'm really a 1600, but...)
1400-1500 advanced (I'm really a 1700, but...)
1500-1600 I have strong openings, tactics & reasonable endgame (I can play like 1800 on a good day, but...)
1600-1700 strong openings, okay tactics, not that good endgame.
1700-1800 I have a re ...[text shortened]... else..
2000-2100 my basics are sort of okay, but my *lists everything* needs a LOT of work...
I have proof that I can play like an 1800 on a good day! ðŸ˜
Originally posted by wormwood 0-1100 I can beat anyone!
1100-1200 very good
1200-1300 good
1300-1400 intermediate (I'm really a 1600, but...)
1400-1500 advanced (I'm really a 1700, but...)
1500-1600 I have strong openings, tactics & reasonable endgame (I can play like 1800 on a good day, but...)
1600-1700 strong openings, okay tactics, not that good endgame.
1700-1800 I have a re ...[text shortened]... else..
2000-2100 my basics are sort of okay, but my *lists everything* needs a LOT of work...
Ha ha, very nice! I have always considered myself a patzer who doesn't have a clue, though...
I would, rather conveniently say that 1800 is the level when someone can universally be considered good. I think an 1800 is probably stronger than 90% of rated players. The top 10% in any sport is considered rather good and chess is no different. Of course, below that many may be considered good too, but some may disagree. I don't think there is any debate that an 1800 is a really good chess player.
Originally posted by exigentsky I would, rather conveniently say that 1800 is the level when someone can universally be considered good. I think an 1800 is probably stronger than 90% of rated players. The top 10% in any sport is considered rather good and chess is no different. Of course, below that many may be considered good too, but some may disagree. I don't think there is any debate that an 1800 is a really good chess player.
I agree. In North America that rating puts you into the Class "A" category, a stepping stone away from attaining true Expert status (2000 rating) which is a recognized title in Canada more formally called "Candidate Master". I think the percentage of A players and above is smaller than 10% though, although I don't have statistics handy I would put it closer to 5% of tournament players. Extrapolating to the unwashed masses who play no formal chess it may be as small a group as 1% of the chess playing population.
What is the good chess player ?
16 Jan '08 22:43
Back to Top