Chess ratings and actual performance • page 1/1 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

Hi,

I am new to playing chess. Started a few months ago. Currently I am rated around 1400+

One thing I noticed is that some days I play against players in the same rating range who make similar mistakes or blunders that I would also tend to do and other days they play with such precision and accuracy that I just wonder how are they even rated in the 1400's/1500's.

In fact, in some of the competitions I see even lower rated players playing at such high levels that sometimes I wonder if there is something wrong with the rating system.

Has anybody felt the same way. And is there any technical/ scientific explanation to this. Would love to have a discussion on this with some knowledgeable or experienced players.

Hi, I am new to playing chess. Started a few months ago. Currently I am rated around 1400+ One thing I noticed is that some days I play against players in the same rating range who make similar mistakes or blunders that I would also tend to do and other days they play with such precision and accuracy that I just wonder how are they even rated in the 1400's/1500's. In fact, in some of the competitions I see even lower rated players playing at such high levels that sometimes I wonder if there is something wrong with the rating system. Has anybody felt the same way. And is there any technical/ scientific explanation to this. Would love to have a discussion on this with some knowledgeable or experienced players.

on1000000squares

#2

Well your strength is not a constant and it's easier for your opponent, when you don't play at your best.
There is a difference for a new player at rating and an established player at the same rating.
As a beginner one usually lacks intuition to avoid most basic mistakes. This uses up your resources on every move, because you need to check for simple mistakes.

People have their rating for different reason, one important factor is skill(but as I said this fluctuates), others are: specific time mode, current playing environment, opening choice(you may put that into skill but there are also some separate qualities there),
not finishing games, deliberately playing underrated/overrated players(should be rare) and of course some are cheating, but if they are consistent with that, they will rush past your rating range

Well your strength is not a constant and it's easier for your opponent, when you don't play at your best. There is a difference for a new player at rating and an established player at the same rating. As a beginner one usually lacks intuition to avoid most basic mistakes. This uses up your resources on every move, because you need to check for simple mistakes. People have their rating for different reason, one important factor is skill(but as I said this fluctuates), others are: specific time mode, current playing environment, opening choice(you may put that into skill but there are also some separate qualities there), not finishing games, deliberately playing underrated/overrated players(should be rare) and of course some are cheating, but if they are consistent with that, they will rush past your rating range

gues9876543210

#3

That makes sense. Even I consider about +/- 50 points every time I see a player for factors like abandoned/ time out games. And some days I am not really in the best frame of mind, so that would affect the game play as well. Although it still doesn't explain how somebody can perform so well when they have been playing for years and their rating is 200/ 300 points lower and they product such flawless games. Cheating could be an explanation but I like to think if there are any other alternative reasons.

Can you suggest how can I improve on my rating ? Especially in terms of middle and end game ?

That makes sense. Even I consider about +/- 50 points every time I see a player for factors like abandoned/ time out games. And some days I am not really in the best frame of mind, so that would affect the game play as well. Although it still doesn't explain how somebody can perform so well when they have been playing for years and their rating is 200/ 300 points lower and they product such flawless games. Cheating could be an explanation but I like to think if there are any other alternative reasons. Can you suggest how can I improve on my rating ? Especially in terms of middle and end game ?

mkubecek

#4

It is IMHO natural than the lower level, the less consistent the performance is. At the 1400-1500 lichess level, even most rapid and classical games are still decided by blunders (meaning the "hanging a piece" or "missing i simple checkmate" type blunders). When you have two such players, it's pretty much random who blunders first (or last) and loses the game. Even at the ~1800 level where I'm now, while there are games that can be won without one of the players blundering a piece, those that are decided by stupid mistakes are still way more frequent than I would like (but certainly less frequent than when I was in the 1500-1600 range). And the lack of consistency is one of the reasons why we are not better.

on1000000squares edited

#5

@gues9876543210 said in #3:

That makes sense. Even I consider about +/- 50 points every time I see a player for factors like abandoned/ time out games. And some days I am not really in the best frame of mind, so that would affect the game play as well. Although it still doesn't explain how somebody can perform so well when they have been playing for years and their rating is 200/ 300 points lower and they product such flawless games. Cheating could be an explanation but I like to think if there are any other alternative reasons.

Can you suggest how can I improve on my rating ? Especially in terms of middle and end game ?

look at opening principles and try to apply them in every game.
Go to puzzles, put difficulty level to easier(-300) and aim for 100% accuracy

@gues9876543210 said in #3: > That makes sense. Even I consider about +/- 50 points every time I see a player for factors like abandoned/ time out games. And some days I am not really in the best frame of mind, so that would affect the game play as well. Although it still doesn't explain how somebody can perform so well when they have been playing for years and their rating is 200/ 300 points lower and they product such flawless games. Cheating could be an explanation but I like to think if there are any other alternative reasons. > > Can you suggest how can I improve on my rating ? Especially in terms of middle and end game ? look at opening principles and try to apply them in every game. Go to puzzles, put difficulty level to easier(-300) and aim for 100% accuracy

gues9876543210

#6

@mkubecek said in #4:

It is IMHO natural than the lower level, the less consistent the performance is. At the 1400-1500 lichess level, even most rapid and classical games are still decided by blunders (meaning the "hanging a piece" or "missing i simple checkmate" type blunders). When you have two such players, it's pretty much random who blunders first (or last) and loses the game. Even at the ~1800 level where I'm now, while there are games that can be won without one of the players blundering a piece, those that are decided by stupid mistakes are still way more frequent than I would like (but certainly less frequent than when I was in the 1500-1600 range). And the lack of consistency is one of the reasons why we are not better.

Thank you for the perspective that you have shared. It helps to understand what's it is like to play at such levels. I have lot of stuff to learn.

@mkubecek said in #4: > It is IMHO natural than the lower level, the less consistent the performance is. At the 1400-1500 lichess level, even most rapid and classical games are still decided by blunders (meaning the "hanging a piece" or "missing i simple checkmate" type blunders). When you have two such players, it's pretty much random who blunders first (or last) and loses the game. Even at the ~1800 level where I'm now, while there are games that can be won without one of the players blundering a piece, those that are decided by stupid mistakes are still way more frequent than I would like (but certainly less frequent than when I was in the 1500-1600 range). And the lack of consistency is one of the reasons why we are not better. Thank you for the perspective that you have shared. It helps to understand what's it is like to play at such levels. I have lot of stuff to learn.