Depends. If you do not study, if you do not care about chess and you do it just for fun then rating should not even be important for you.
But if you are dedicating time to it, you are studying, you really want to play good then I would say something like 1700-1800 is relatively decent.
You are like in a middle point, so I think for you 1300-1400 should be good enough.
I read that 1800 separates boys from men. I think that'd be a good goal for me haha but it all depends on who u are. if u are doubling ur ranking, that's good. remember: the keyword is 'progress'
Also keep in mind that it is much much easier to get from 400 to 800 than to move from 1000 to 1400.
A DECENT rating in 10 minute is 1700.
The term decency, in my opinion, is wrong. It is wrong because this decency could be associated with intellectual abilities for chess which perhaps is not available to all. is decency a certain objective level or, conversely, a subjective desire?
In my humble opinion, the most decent level in chess is that you do not cheat, enjoy the game and never make chess your life, but use it in your life to develop yourself as a person.
English is obviously not your first language, but I applaud you for learning it. "Decent" in this context has nothing to do with "decency"....English is a complex language....decency has to do with your character as a person.....decent here just means "good".
I've played chess since youth,but only knew basic moves and took many years off.Seven months ago I got into this fun site and have begun to study and play.I began with 1000 and quickly dropped to 430(lower than Patzer,I know).Well,after digesting much good advice here and reading 2 books I've slowly climbed to 814.Reasonably happy,but wonder what's considered a fairly good 10 minute blitz rating after this amount of time? To be honest,I'm relatively serious about good play and though I enjoy reading books and study,it's just a hobby to me.Still,the competitive genes do kick in a bit,so I ask you folks what your thoughts are? Much thanks...and...I really admire the forum members here.....except when you beat me! -
I sympathize with you. My chess backstory is about the same as yours, and I've developed similarly. When I first got onto this site I fell to about 600, and then in a month I've jumped to about 1250. I'm hoping to get to 1600 in another month or two.
Anyone with a 1000 10-minute blitz rating should be able to easily beat any of his friends that are casual chess players, so that's what I'd call a decent rating.
To get there, I heavily recommend John Bartholomew's Chess Fundamentals series, free on YouTube. I watched them a week ago and since have climbed from 1000 to 1250, with a 12-game winning streak. Good luck!
A decent rating is always ~200 points higher than your current level 
This is true for most players.
Are you folks stating that these ratings are as applicable for 10 minute Blitz as well as longer games? I'd think the 10 minute Blitz rating would be a bit lower,since you don't have as much time to scrutinize everything....Just a thought. Either way,i know my 814 rating (10 minute) is poor,but I am studying books,lessons,videos and doing tactics fairly often(within reason,as I have a busy life).I've been on a steady ascent.It's really enjoyable to actually have something to strive for.Not necessarily so much in getting a better rating,because I stll make dumb mistakes,but to continually have a better grasp and understanding of chess in general......Much thanks to all,btw.
The term decency, in my opinion, is wrong. It is wrong because this decency could be associated with intellectual abilities for chess which perhaps is not available to all. is decency a certain objective level or, conversely, a subjective desire?
In my humble opinion, the most decent level in chess is that you do not cheat, enjoy the game and never make chess your life, but use it in your life to develop yourself as a person.
English is obviously not your first language, but I applaud you for learning it. "Decent" in this context has nothing to do with "decency"....English is a complex language....decency has to do with your character as a person.....decent here just means "good".
Hello, universityofpaws;
First of all, I am grateful for your kind words and I also thank you for seeking my good and correcting me.
Seeing the meanings of the dictionary, I think one of its meanings corresponds to what I wanted to represent. According to Cambridge Dictionary, to be decent is to be something socially acceptable or good. The same is defined in another reputed dictionary as is the dictionary of the University of Oxford as something conforming with generally accepted standards of respectable or mora behaviour. These definitions are not strange since they come from the root "what will people think of me or my acts?". Thus, the decent, can be the good, but, what is the good but an individual perception?
The reason for all this is to recommend to a player that, if he/she is not a professional, to enjoy chess as an instrument to build him/herself as a person. because the most valuable thing is to enjoy chess, not superficial aspects.
I think you write english rather well, SovietCitizen.
lol I can imagine it's a tough language to learn these days. For example a foreign guy that just learns english visits America and asks 3 of his new friends if they want to grab a beer, the first guy says I'm up for a beer, second guy says I'm down for a beer, and the third guy just says sick.
https://www.chess.com/member/sovietcitizen
Just another discriminatory action by chess.com. Probably got banned just because he was proud of Soviet Russia, our motherland.
Out of all the people here saying 1700 is decent, only one is actually anywhere near it lol. On this site friend, 1200 is good. 1400-1600 is great. But decent? I'd say hovering between 1000-1100 is decent. Hope this answers your question.
the average blitz rating on chess.com is 1038, so get above 1038 and you'll beat most of the people on chess.com
I must say that when I first joined the site(last year) my rating in Blitz dropped to 430 and I realized I knew pretty much nothing! I began to study books,videos and many tactics.I let playing take a bit of a back seat,though I still try to play fairly often(experimenting in many situations)....I've got my 10 minute Blitz rating up to 900(in the year since I joined)....but...the more I learn,the more I realize I don't know!! I'm fine with that and simply continue to study/learn/play....Hopefully,I can be half way decent in time.....I definitely appreciate the better players on this site....Most,better than me! -
There's obviously no single definition of "decent". At your current rating of 900, you are at the 44th percentile, i.e. 56% of members are rated higher than you. It is skewed by the fact that players (like myself) who do not play blitz are arbitrarily assigned a rating of 800, AKAIK, we are still counted in the percentile distribution. Hard to know the exact impact of that on the overall distribution, but in rough terms, you're in the middle of the pack. Whether or not you consider that "decent" is entirely subjective.
I've played chess since youth,but only knew basic moves and took many years off.Seven months ago I got into this fun site and have begun to study and play.I began with 1000 and quickly dropped to 430(lower than Patzer,I know).Well,after digesting much good advice here and reading 2 books I've slowly climbed to 814.Reasonably happy,but wonder what's considered a fairly good 10 minute blitz rating after this amount of time? To be honest,I'm relatively serious about good play and though I enjoy reading books and study,it's just a hobby to me.Still,the competitive genes do kick in a bit,so I ask you folks what your thoughts are? Much thanks...and...I really admire the forum members here.....except when you beat me! -