Hi there. Can I trust that I will meet a beginner as a beginner? I doubt that. Much of my experience has told me that "beginners" are cheating. Not fun at all!
How beginner a member may be depends on multiple factors, but the vast majority that choose the beginner level likely are sub-1000 players.
There will be some that are stronger, but they will very quickly reach a much higher rating and not be paired with lower rated players.
It is very tempting to be blunt on this q. To prove that a chess player is (not) a beginner is obviously hopeless. But let me just say this: it feels far better for one player to win a game than to loose it. So if I register myself as advanced maybe I could scare away the cheaters who pretend to be on "my level" - a beginner? But an alternative could be to check how long each chess player has joined chess.c
Your opponents aren't cheating, they are beginners as well. Maybe you are extremely new to the game and your rating should go down even further.
Your opponent blundered many pieces... even his queen. You had mate in one here... but instead you blundered your queen. No one can win the game for you. This is as easy as it gets, all you needed to do was take the win.
It is very tempting to be blunt on this q. To prove that a chess player is (not) a beginner is obviously hopeless. But let me just say this: it feels far better for one player to win a game than to loose it. So if I register myself as advanced maybe I could scare away the cheaters who pretend to be on "my level" - a beginner? But an alternative could be to check how long each chess player has joined chess.c
This is nonsense. You are not playing against good players or cheaters. If you registered as an advanced player you would get smashed even harder. Cheaters are a very small portion of players and at your level they are virtually non-existant.
Focus on improving and not excuses.
Take responsibility for your errors and do not blame losses on divine intervention.
I watched some of your games and i think the main issue is that you started on the wrong rating from the start. Thats why meet people that are a bit better then you.
I watched some of your games and i think the main issue is that you started on the wrong rating from the start. Thats why meet people that are a bit better then you.
Yeah, but it's hard for him to go much lower... his opponents are giving him free wins and he is not taking it.
I watched some of your games and i think the main issue is that you started on the wrong rating from the start. Thats why meet people that are a bit better then you.
Yeah, but it's hard for him to go much lower... his opponents are giving him free wins and he is not taking it.
But what you said is not true. Jimemy is correct. I'd still suggest he play on the other website where he will be matched properly at a beginner level.
This makes no sense. Chess.com has more casual players at the rapid lower levels than what ever other website. He also has only played enough games to make him settle down into an easier rating. So now once the hard part is over... you suggest he move on? Not everyone is a quitter.
I watched some of your games and i think the main issue is that you started on the wrong rating from the start. Thats why meet people that are a bit better then you.
Yeah, but it's hard for him to go much lower... his opponents are giving him free wins and he is not taking it.
We all gotta start some where.
My tips would be to play daily chess and to look at the board on every single piece before making a move. In daily you got lot of time to check the board.
I watched some of your games and i think the main issue is that you started on the wrong rating from the start. Thats why meet people that are a bit better then you.
Yeah, but it's hard for him to go much lower... his opponents are giving him free wins and he is not taking it.
But what you said is not true. Jimemy is correct. I'd still suggest he play on the other website where he will be matched properly at a beginner level.
This makes no sense. Chess.com has more casual players at the rapid lower levels than what ever other website. He also has only played enough games to make him settle down into an easier rating. So now once the hard part is over... you suggest he move on? Not everyone is a quitter.
first of all the rating is meaningless if he is not getting competitive matches. The number is arbitrary and only defines beginner within its respective playerbase. I'm a beginner myself, and I prefer playing blitz on the other site cause I get properly matched, unlike on chess.com. That is not quitting, that is moving to a more competitive forum.
HE JUST STARTED PLAYING. Do you not know ANYTHING? It first has to adjust him down to where he belongs. The rating system doesn't scan someone's brain. Goodness... the amount of clueless drivel you post.
I watched some of your games and i think the main issue is that you started on the wrong rating from the start. Thats why meet people that are a bit better then you.
Yeah, but it's hard for him to go much lower... his opponents are giving him free wins and he is not taking it.
But what you said is not true. Jimemy is correct. I'd still suggest he play on the other website where he will be matched properly at a beginner level.
This makes no sense. Chess.com has more casual players at the rapid lower levels than what ever other website. He also has only played enough games to make him settle down into an easier rating. So now once the hard part is over... you suggest he move on? Not everyone is a quitter.
first of all the rating is meaningless if he is not getting competitive matches. The number is arbitrary and only defines beginner within its respective playerbase. I'm a beginner myself, and I prefer playing blitz on the other site cause I get properly matched, unlike on chess.com. That is not quitting, that is moving to a more competitive forum.
HE JUST STARTED PLAYING. Do you not know ANYTHING? It first has to adjust him down to where he belongs. The rating system doesn't scan someone's brain. Goodness... the amount of clueless drivel you post.
And how many games should he play before he is accurately rated? Cause I can tell you i played 100s and never was, unlike the other website. Where after 20 games I was well matched. Probably less actually.
He chose the wrong starting level when he registered. His account started at 1200. You can't blame the website for that. So now, it took him ~20 games to drop down. But it would have been less. You are also being matched well and you have not played 100s of games on here, unless you have another account.
How do you not grasp this...?
I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here.
I inadvertently started too low and it took 16 Daily games to get my rating up 700+ points to pretty much match my over-the-board FIDE-equivalent rating (though still more than 150 points below my peak OTB rating from a few decades ago).
It has taken the OP 22 Rapid games to drop his rating 700 points and he might now be close to getting down to a competitive rating range. I've seen adults who play OTB chess at a low-100s level (usually with some positional knowledge but prone to tactical blunders - one such player lost his first 42 OTB games in his late 60s and it was another dozen games before he finally reduced his tactical blunders to the point where he could reach a 200+ rating and reaching 1000+ would be a long road for him).
I like the suggestion of trying daily games to improve. Another option would be joining a club that is active in VoteChess with teams that actually discuss their moves and the reasons for them.
It might be that beginners on this site are more experienced than those on another site. Or it might be that the minimum rating on another site is lower than this one, so a 650 on chess.com is significantly further above the minimum and thus stronger than a 650 on another site.
I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here.
I inadvertently started too low and it took 16 Daily games to get my rating up 700+ points to pretty much match my over-the-board FIDE-equivalent rating (though still more than 150 points below my peak OTB rating from a few decades ago).
It has taken the OP 22 Rapid games to drop his rating 700 points and he might now be close to getting down to a competitive rating range. I've seen adults who play OTB chess at a low-100s level (usually with some positional knowledge but prone to tactical blunders - one such player lost his first 42 OTB games in his late 60s and it was another dozen games before he finally reduced his tactical blunders to the point where he could reach a 200+ rating and reaching 1000+ would be a long road for him).
I like the suggestion of trying daily games to improve. Another option would be joining a club that is active in VoteChess with teams that actually discuss their moves and the reasons for them.
It might be that beginners on this site are more experienced than those on another site. Or it might be that the minimum rating on another site is lower than this one, so a 650 on chess.com is significantly further above the minimum and thus stronger than a 650 on another site.
Your start depends on what you answer to your chess level. If he put "new to chess" He would have started around 400 and not 1200. This is his fault, not the website.
There are extremely few cheaters with low ratings, like practically none. Why? they tend to start a new account with the highest rating possible and beat good players until they get caught. Think about it. Why would anyone who cheated bother to beat up on people with 400 ratings? If they were any good at cheating, they'd be 1500 within a few hours.
You just lost. That's all. Sorry.
Your start depends on what you answer to your chess level. If he put "new to chess" He would have started around 400 and not 1200. This is his fault, not the website.
I'll sort of agree.
A lot of people think they are stronger than they really are and opt for the level they truly think is their strength instead of the one that is more appropriate (the high school coaches in the US regularly get e-mails from parents of incoming freshman saying their kid is great at chess, beats everybody in the family and neighborhood, and will be the school's new top board - and then they turn out to be nowhere near good enough to even make the competition team - at least not initially, but they can join the school's club and play people they can learn from until they do make the competition team).
My issue was the other direction. I knew 1900 FIDE equivalent was a (big) step below master and master was a (big) step below professional GM, so I erroneously opted for two levels from the top and found myself starting at 1200.
So I don't really fault starting erroneously at 1200. Chess.com has Glicko-like heavily weighting the initial results to quickly move an erroneous rating to a more accurate level.
The problems start coming when somebody thinks that the erroneous level is the one that should be accurate and has difficulty accepting that a lower rating is the more correct one.
Your start depends on what you answer to your chess level. If he put "new to chess" He would have started around 400 and not 1200. This is his fault, not the website.
I'll sort of agree.
A lot of people think they are stronger than they really are and opt for the level they truly think is their strength instead of the one that is more appropriate (the high school coaches in the US regularly get e-mails from parents of incoming freshman saying their kid is great at chess, beats everybody in the family and neighborhood, and will be the school's new top board - and then they turn out to be nowhere near good enough to even make the competition team - at least not initially, but they can join the school's club and play people they can learn from until they do make the competition team).
My issue was the other direction. I knew 1900 FIDE equivalent was a (big) step below master and master was a (big) step below professional GM, so I erroneously opted for two levels from the top and found myself starting at 1200.
So I don't really fault starting erroneously at 1200. Chess.com has Glicko-like heavily weighting the initial results to quickly move an erroneous rating to a more accurate level.
The problems start coming when somebody thinks that the erroneous level is the one that should be accurate and has difficulty accepting that a lower rating is the more correct one.
Agree with that yeah. But this guy didn't choose new or beginner, he chose above that... then wonders why he is getting smashed.
But I also agree it doesn't really matter that much. I also started at 1200 when I joined I can't remember there being a feature to select my starting point. I quickly got to 1750-1800 where I belonged and have improved since then.
Hi there. Can I trust that I will meet a beginner as a beginner? I doubt that. Much of my experience has told me that "beginners" are cheating. Not fun at all!