I believe the rating equivalent is as follows:
1 400
2 600
3 800
4 1000
5 1200
6 1400
7 1600
8 1800
9 2000
10 2600
As a beginner I would suggest you play people rather than the computer as the computer at low levels will make artificial bad moves which a human would never do. Much better to learn from playing people slightly stronger than yourself IMO.
@Strangemover - many thanks for the advice and recommendations, agreed that playing people will undoubtedly teach me and other beginners more than endless rematches against the computer.
when you play on the Phone APP there is a rating equivalent there for each level, you can see on the slider
I believe the rating equivalent is as follows:
1 400
2 600
3 800
4 1000
5 1200
6 1400
7 1600
8 1800
9 2000
10 2600
As a beginner I would suggest you play people rather than the computer as the computer at low levels will make artificial bad moves which a human would never do. Much better to learn from playing people slightly stronger than yourself IMO.
Any reference based on your claim? I have never played chess.com computer before but I might try level 10 with 5/3 blitz.
When I play on the app the rating is in brackets when selecting the computer level as @Kanor_Jr is saying.
Wah, there is no time control setting!? Computers will be playing insta move and human play unlimited time, lol. There is no point in predicting the rating when there is no standarized time control.
I play the computer to warm up. It's a good way to get in "game mode" before playing a real person, where if you're not warmed up you can get crushed, and your rating will suffer.
When I do play the computer, I agree that it tends to make really bad moves. Moreover, it seems that if you make your counter-move almost immediately, the computer plays even worse. Lately, when playing the computer, its moves have seemed so questionable that I've thought it's programmed to let me win so that I'll like Chess.com more than should be expected.
The funny thing about playing people, rather than the computer, is that when playing people, adrenaline kicks-in and the wildest games result. I'm on a winning streak right now solely due to blunders from my opponents. I'll be losing, feeling miserable, and then one blunder will turn the tables in my favor. Since my adrenaline soars at that point, I figure my opponents have had their adrenalines soaring up until then, and it leads to them making blunders just at the point when victory was theirs.
Go to Live chess, play vs computer!
You can see estimated rating of computers!
Playing vs computers is the way to train tactics, computer will punish you every time you make blunder in tactics, haha.
Many thanks to all who have responded so far. Taking @Kanor_Jr 's tip on the chess.com iOS app levels and putting these against the Android / 'quick' web app levels as described by @Strangemover, and the Live vs Computer ratings pointed out by @drmrboss we have the following tables:
Agreed that playing the computer has its uses but as @Strangemover pointed out it's not a substitute for playing against humans.
Isn't that the computer (selected from "finger on pawn" > computer) automatically adjusts for your profile rating? It's beating me every single time on level 1!
Thanks for pointing this out @deafdrummer - on the main web site (i.e. not on a smart phone app), I get ten levels from going to 'finger on pawn' > computer, but these have no rating description, which is what prompted me to start this thread:
Whereas if - again on the web site rather than the app - I go to 'finger on pawn' > 'Live Chess' > 'vs Computer', then I see the Komodo list as @drmrboss explained in post #10.
Is it these Komodo engine levels which are adjusted for your profile rating @deafdrummer? This looks to be the case as the ratings values for @drmrboss in the screen shot above are different from the ones I get.
correct partially, problem with this "punishment" is that your moves and general approach to chess game become defensive orientated. it means, maybe you ll survive against computer (at calculated 2400 ELO) but in real you ll be not able to deal with real human with 1900 ELO because to make something on board, initiative is required, not only to wait until all possibilites are exhausted and some draw like engame appeared. and this initiative-active (advantage seeking or cal it however you want) style you may not develop by playing against hard computer levels since most of your energy and time will be consumed to solve the main question "how to survive?".
As a beginner I would suggest you play people rather than the computer as the computer at low levels will make artificial bad moves which a human would never do. Much better to learn from playing people slightly stronger than yourself IMO.
good comment. completely agree with artificial bad moves.
one of famous was Chessmaster who introduced all kinds of levels (personalities) with different strenght (rating) and this did not look good.
i could write book on this, since long time i had to play only against it (no internet connections, no clubs available...)
i used to play some rapid games 30m+30s, recently for training, for instance, against personality "Fischer" score was 4 draws and i lost 2 games, this can not be, i am not so strong. what is the point?
computer is straightforward, it will always go for best move (of course, in accordance to level or strenght choosen, but it will go for it), and many times this led to some endgames or simplified position where my oponent indeed had +0.7 or +1.2 evaluation of position, but positions were not winning ones. because computer is "stupid", it can calculate perfectly, but it has no sense of position and what to do with that position when occured. problem of this (I used to call it) STRAIGHT style is that as opponent i know what to do in certain position, it is hard position with lots of threats, but i know what to do, what to defend, where might be the problem...
when playing with humans, things are different, people are more flexible, there are more backlash in human moves, backlash during which i have room to "express" my ideas and plans which may turn wrong, may end with unnecessairly weakening of pawn structure, kingside, wrongly calculated variations and all these kind of things...
for instance, stockfish will stubbornly give +3.5 for black, but try to win this position as black...
Stockfish 13 gives -0.6 for the above position without consulting the tablebase. Pretty reasonable.
As a beginner who just joined chess.com this month I was wondering if anyone knows or is happy to estimate approximate ratings for each of the 10 Computer opponent levels?
Even if grouped e.g. Levels 1-2 approximate to x-y ratings?
I'm very new to this so would appreciate any input from more experienced players here.
Thank you in advance!