What are the common characteristics of each level of play?

Using the USCF class system. What are the common characteristics of each class of player?

• 2400 and above: Senior Master
• 2200–2399: National Master
• 2000–2199: Expert
• 1800–1999: Class A
• 1600–1799: Class B
• 1400–1599: Class C
• 1200–1399: Class D
• 1000–1199: Class E
• 800-999: Class F
• 600-799: Class G
• 400-599: Class H
• 200-399: Class I
• 100-199: Class J

I am somewhere around class C and D. I am actually in the process of leaving class D and advancing into C. I would like to someday make it to expert. Will an expert or above please tell me what they observed are the key features of each class as they rose. What do you have to know to be a member of each class? What was it specifically you learned that made you advance out of one class and in to another?

The following is greatly simplified and is from my admitedly limited experience and a viewpoint of a person in the middle of this pack. So my drawing lines for those above me in OTB rating may well not be accurate. I have also been pretty inactive in chess for many years until coming back to this site, so the differences might have changed slightly in that time -- though I doubt by much.

D-J = poor understanding of opening play, poor understanding of middle game play, poor understanding of endgame play, drop pieces and pawns regularly, miss basic tactics

B-E = basic understanding of opening play, basic understanding of middle game play, poor understanding of endgame play, drop pawns regularly, miss complex tactics

Expert - C = good understanding of opening play, basic understanding of middle game play, basic understanding of endgame play, rarely drop anything in unforced lines, sometimes find complex tactics

NM - B = solid opening play, good understanding of mibble game play, basic understanding of endgame play, don't drop unforced pieces, regularly find complex tactics

2400+ - Expert = solid opening play, solid middle game play, good to solid endgame play, doesn't drop pieces or miss tactics. 

Lots of overlap between the levels, but in my experience this seems to be about where things sit. 

The big differentiators are endgame play and tactics. There are class C players who know their pet openings as well as any GM, but have limited understanding of what to do in the middle game once they reach the end of the book. The lack of understanding happens because they don't know what trades are best for them because of the resulting structures in the end-game. 

Tactics just continually get better as you go up the chain, as does the understanding of how to create tactical problems for your opponent.

Class K [0-9] I hear chinese go and majhong are good maybe I should try that instead.

Class J [10-199]- drops everything and makes random moves

Class I [200-399] - same as class J but they know a couple of basic mates

Class H [400-599]- Same as I but wont drop pieces for completely nothing but will still ose the exchange. Ex. I  traded my queen for 2pawns but its ok cause I have less number of pieces of the  board

Class G [600-799]- knows the value of pieces and simple attack and defense and basic mates but will still make random moves that they think is good like going for check cause they can and will drop pieces to simple tactics

Class F [800-999]- I know opening principles now and other stuff that class  G players already know to and know a few tactical meaning.

Class E [1000-1199]- same as class f but knows basic tactical meaning but only like 2-3move ahead tricks.

Class D [1200-1399]- same as class e but doesnt fall for simple tactics  and doesnt drop pieces any more but opening,middle, and endgame knowledge is poor.

Class C [1400-1500]- decent enough and rarely blunders but a phase or 2 maybe lacking in understanding.

Class B [1600-1799]- above average opening and/or middle game knowledge with decent understanding in the other phases

Class A [1800-1999] - above average in everything but still makes inaccuracies but you'll have to find them ;)

Expert/CM (candidate master) [2000-2099]- same as class A but dominately better in one phase

lolz at Class K but besides that I think this is a nice a way of classifying unrated players.

This characterizing-rating-levels discussion may interest you.

Dan Heisman's book  The Improving Chess Thinker is a good examination of this topic if you're interested in learning more about it.  Strengths and weaknesses of players at the different levels are quite varied even within a class.

This topic has actually become very important to my future improvement so I must know just how accurate is my assessment on player characteristics in post #3.

Someone please this is very important to me .

This would be important to me aswell.

No.

no what?

No, this topic has not actually become very important to edrobin's future improvement.

Oinquarki was right. Your assessment and the other poster's before you are not so useful (if not at all useless). Solid, good, poor, extremely poor, all those words are even worse meaningless.

But this topic might be usefull for experts or class A players, i.e. by knowing what makes stronger players stronger.

Imo, a level jump happens when there is synergy between two or more skill aspects. You can improve your skill aspect #10, but you may hardly see an improvement in your rating because skill aspect #10 doesn't work in synergy with other skill aspect that you have. Or you may learn a new skill aspect #12 and it suddently work in synnergy with your skill aspect #5 and you have a leap in your rating.

So it is important to have a NEW skill that you currently don't have. For this, it will be usefull if you know all the possible skill aspects. Layed out in detail, so you will see which one will work in synergy with which.

For low class players, just focus on tactics skill.

Oh, here is a "skill" that low class players will benefit from (if doesn't have it already): zwischenzug (this belongs to tactics skill of course. There are many of them)

I rarely play chess OTB. Before I found internet (gameknot.com and chess.com) I played with computer. One day I decided to find my weakest link by analyzing my games with Junior 10. I was amazed that I found I consistently made the same mistake: when I'm attacked, I tried to move the attacked piece, or worse defend it, while actually I should have attacked back.

I did it slowly to build a new thought process. Currently, the first thing that come to my mind when I'm attacked is to find a counter attack, instinctively.

Making reference to just one of the classes. Personally I began to develop my positional game quite a bit when progressing through Class A. Good bishops...bad bishops etc...

I'm only class A, but in playing experts, it doesn't seem like they necessarily have better positional or endgame skills.  The main difference is reasoning.  They think through the consequences of each move very quickly and find 'something that works', even if it's kind of an odd move.

"But this topic might be usefull for experts or class A players, i.e. by knowing what makes stronger players stronger."

This ^

I just wanted to say this is an awesome thread :)

OK let me say this better . Would my assessment of level characteristics be at least decently accurate for computer/engine opponents NOT human sorry I didn't say this before.

We get that but we just want to know is this ok for computer estimates. edrobin is mmy uncle and we both have he same reason for this info.

Imo, many players cannot see or fully understand the wide distance or gaps in chess skill. It is because these various "skills" are unknown to many. It will be easier if you can lay down all these skill from novice to grandmaster level.

Stronger players tend to have many skills. They are good at many things, not just one or two. My friend is 1500+. I told him that he can never win a game with me, not even one. One day, I blundered and lost a piece. But I still was a "stronger" player, so I did what what he couldn't do, and I won the game. But he always said that he almost win. I said almost didn't count. I possess many more tricks and skills that he doesn't possess.

Look at my game below. My opponent's highest rating is above 2000, and he drew the strongest player in my group (2100+). Being one pawn ahead I calculated a combination where I thought I won more "pawns". Two days later I was a bit confused because I didn't take note of my calculation, and I was so surprised that I ended up with one pawn down in a Queen endgame! Did I look for a draw? No. I found many easy ways to draw the game, but I didn't go that route. This may look simple to an "untrained" eye, but I know something that my opponent don't, that's one skill that I have built.