So he's a high school chess champion who's played in state and national tournaments, but is only rated 1200? That sounds a little hard to believe.

Back to your question, though... it's impossible to tell. Your strategy of developing your pieces towards the center, creating a battery, "destroying pieces", and then going for checkmate says nothing about your ability. All it says is that you understand a few basic opening principles, and like to kill his pieces and checkmate him.

Therefore, I would estimate your elo to be anywhere between 600 and 2800. In other words, you are somewhere in between a beginner and Magnus Carlsen (but probably towards the lower end of that range).

Try playing some standard length games on this site, and then look at your rating. That will at least give you some idea of your skill level.

His senior year yes, because he had been playing since middle school, and he was dealing with a lot of freshman. He never won any tornuments, and played as part of a chess team. You don't have to believe me, but as always there are facts we can not deny.

 Why did you wink after you said (but probably towards the lower end of that range)? If I beat a chess champion in highschool who's scholastic tornaments, I would say I'd at least be in the middle to upper range of your range. Anyway, 1200 is actually in the 90th%tile of scholastic players.

Also, given that I confirm the authenticity of beating the player, given the caliber I was playing, what do you think it is? I want an answer, desicive, doesen't have to be precise, but + or - 100 or so. I'm thinking, 1500-2000, so I'll split and say about 1800. I don't know though

1. 1200 is weak for a high school chess champion. When I began playing chess at 8 years old (so 10 years younger than that guy), just based off of natural ability alone I was around 1000. By the time I was 12, I was rated 1300, and never even studied chess.

2. Scholastic players include everyone between the ages of 0 and 17. If he is a senior, then he is at least 17 years old, so being at the 90% of scholastic players isn't impressive, since he's older than 99% of scholastic players. The average rating of all tournament players is around 1500, so he's well below the average if you include adults.

3. You claim that you should be in the "middle to upper part of my range". When I said you should be rated 600-2800, I was obviously exaggurating the upper end...there's no way you would be above 1500 just based off of your post. 

So here's what I think your actual rating is: 600-1500. If you still disagree with me or don't like my approximation, then just play a few games on this site and see what your rating is for yourself.

You're seriously overestimating this guy's strength. At a rating of 1200, his "caliber" is beginner / early intermediate strength. 

You said you'd approximate your own strength at around 1800. Generally, people reach 1800 after at least a couple years of studying and playing chess regularly. If you're calling pieces "powerpieces", and are describing your strategy as "destroying his pieces and then trying to checkmate him", I'm afraid you're years away from that rating.

I'm sorry to dissapoint, but that's the truth. Ratings are overrated, anyway, so you shouldn't worry about it. Just enjoy the game!

I'd agree, I'd estimate both of you are probably at least 2400. Especially if it's true that you beat someone who plays against chinese foreign kids.

Here is a recent game where Magnus Carlsen had to play a chinese foreign kid, http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1705201 so I'd say you're definately towards the middle or upper end o the range.