Yeah, I have no idea how to navigate to it from the site. I do have the link though since I bookmarked it after someone shared it in the forums.
Chess.com rating distribution
Sort:
Oldest
under the share tab click members
Here's the problem - the mean isn't representative. What about all the players that play a single game and then never return? Or the ones that never even play a single game? That skews the mean towards 1200. Here you'll see a very different compilation of ratings: http://archive.uschess.org/ratings/ratedist.php. I'm not saying this is any better, just food for thought.
Oct 30, 2016
0
#7
tylersloeper wrote:
https://www.chess.com/livechess/players
The most interesting thing to note is that there's an exponential rise in ratings.. in the 1000's you have to surpass 1000 players or so every time you gain 50 points in rating. Once you get past 1500 or 1600 you're not surpassing 250-500 players every 50 points.. and 2000 rating or better is more like 25-50 players for 50 rating points. Of course at every level up you're playing significantly better competition/ well trained
Oct 30, 2016
0
#8
I also suggest that you don't use cheap tricks or exploits, and to fully appreciate all the skills at each level of growth. That's why I stay confident, because I know I play good games at every level. For instance from 900-1100 there's certain players who will just play for a scholar's mate every game in 1 minute, and win enough % of games in the opening to get their ratings up, and then play out of a worse position.. or flag opponents etc.
I suspect that there is a rating distribution for live play chess but I am kind of new here and haven't yet found it. Can anyone help?