If I'm an 800 and the average rating is a 1200, does that mean I'm bad?

I'm just wondering if a 1200 is a good level to be.

Vary your practice, just playing can get stale. Read (good books for me have been Bobby Fischer Teaches Ches. and the Complete Idiot's Guide) and do tactics puzzles as well as playing.

I'm 15 and I picked up the game 2 months ago. I was a 500.

My advice would be forgetting about that for now and just practice the game.

In actuality, your ability in chess is not really determined by a score or number as subjugated by these ratings. Though these ratings provide insight on your ability pertaining to chess, the true factor that establishes how good you are at chess is your diligence to play, your patience to lose, and your sportsmanship in playing. Plus, you just need some practice and you too can one day become the greatest chess master of all time.

I recommend everyone to register with Chesstempo.com and make chess puzzles daily. Since there for which standard or blitz chess.

then are also some better in Blitz or Bullet Chess, some is better standard; I prefer to play Blitz or Bullet, because I think fast: D

sorry google translator ;)

No such thing as a bad chess player.  Just learning how the pieces move, puts you ahead of billions of people.  

If you just started a couple months ago I wouldn't worry so much about a number. Just focus on learning the game and your rating will rise. Study basic strategy and tactics and you should crush most 800 players in no time.

Seconding what people are saying here about rating just being a number at your level. If you are improving steadily, there is no need to worry whether you are good or bad. Just be better than you were yesterday. If you are only playing chess to be the best, you won't get much out of it. If, on the other hand, you are playing to improve, to find new ways of enjoying the game, you will.

Only one person can be the best.

By the way, don't be dismayed when your progress slows. In my experience the distance between 800 and 900 is far "shorter" than the difference between 1100 and 1200. In other words, it is easier to progress from 800 to 900 than it is to progress from 1100 to 1200. 

   Your not bad, your just a beginner.

cm peppinu,,, nice guy... what a mouth on you.  shame on you.

If i worried about stuff like that i would quit. Everyone is terrible compared to someone lightyears ahead of them. Even the best players are far behind the computers. What matters is getting something out of it. I play beacause i enjoy it, and i dont care about my lack of ability or improving.

It's all relative. Carlsen would probably view the best players on this site with contempt . There is a sense, as a chess player that you are playing against yourself. Wins and losses are the vehicles to long term personal improvement.

@Peppinu: Your criticisms come across as vituperative and are not helpful. Why not look at one or two of the OP's games and offer some concrete, helpful advice?

This comment not only shows ignorance of the variety of skills in chess, it shows ignorance of how rating systems work.

Wow.

I mean, there are thousands of USCF rated players with ratings below 200.  That's two hundred, not two thousand.  It's not at all unusual.

@peppinu Gee, thanks.

Ignore the rating. It took me ~1 year to break the 1800 barrier, even though I hit 1799 at least twice or thrice. Every time I hit that mark, I'd start to think "Just one more game and I'll be over 1800! I just have to draw this", or similar thoughts, and I'd always end up losing. I got caught up with school for a couple of weeks, came back, and went on a winning streak, smashing 1800.

In other words, focusing on the rating is the surest way to lose rating. Just play games, notice why you're losing the games that you're losing, and you'll steadily increase (although probably not at ~150 points/month, that's an insanely high rate). If you're rating's increasing and you're having fun, you don't have a problem.

Also note that plateaus are really common. In general, I find every time I hit an even numbered rating (1000, 1200, 1400, 1600, 1800), it takes me a long time to break it, and then I'll start gaining quite a bit.

Seriously dude, stop being such a stuffed shirt. You're undercutting your advice by demonstrating a total lack of knowledge about the way learning works.

The fact that you're a CM makes me think you had enough innate chess skill that you've never been "bad" at it. Take a moment to realise that there are people who have to work at not hanging pieces, etc. 

If someone comes here asking how they can get better, they deserve understanding, not to be the punching bag for a skilled player who obviously needs an ego-stroking. You gave some okay advice... but why on earth did you need to put this poor kid down in the process?

Gross.

Thanks for the tips, but you're still an asshole.

Your ratings (including FIDE) are surprisingly low for a CM. Maybe focus on your own chess instead of giving random insults to beginners online lol.