Typical rating progression pace?

Hi All,

I know this is a subjective question based on individual effort, ability, dedication, etc - but typically, how long does it take to reach each milestone?

Example:

<500 (instantly)

500-750 (perhaps after a week or two of understanding some basic chess principles like controlling the center, not opening with A3/H3, etc)

750-1000 (1-3 months of play)

1200 (3-4 months)

1300 (5 months??)

1400 (6-8 months??)

and so on.

Or put differently, if you are rated 1400/1500 or beyond - after you reached 1,000. How long did it take you approximately to progress through each 100+ milestone?

I started playing Chess in February, and over the past 90 days have managed to improve my score from 670 to 1225, but I'd also say I've done a fair bit more than the average patzer when it comes to trying to improve (analyzing games, watching youtube videos, etc) but have no idea of the 'typical pace'.

There is no typical pace. Too many external factors. But teach a precoccious 5 year old to play chess, with a good coach, by the time he or she is 9, they could be a top player in the for their age group. Essentially the younger a player learns chess, the more likely they will become a GM. someday, presuming they have a coach and stuff. Temperment also plays a factor. Parents are the ones that realize their little kid actually likes looking at a chess board.

I got to 1200 after 4 months, but since then I haven't made any significant progress

I got to 1200 after 10 months from 0, 1500 in 6 months from 1200. 4yrs later I'm now 2130

I've been playing for a touch over 3 years and have gone from about 700 (I knew how to move the pieces and little else) to about 2200 bullet and 1950 with longer time controls. I got to about 1800 (Blitz and bullet) within a year and since then my progress has slowed but not stopped.

Impressive, and very encouraging to read that you broke the 1800 mark after 12 months. Well done.

I wonder if some people are asking how long it takes to reach a milestone because they want to avoid getting there too fast. I'm not necessarily referring to the OP. To answer the question, I reached 1200 after about eight months. Getting to 1000 was a real struggle, the 200 points after that were just a bonus. 

I'm not sure why someone would necessarily want to 'avoid' progressing to a milestone too quickly. It's just interesting to see typically how long it takes different people - it makes for a good barometer to understand if you are progressing at a reasonable pace, or if you're progressing really slowly.

1,000 for me was definitely a satisfying milestone to break, as I was sub-1000 for my first 500 games!

I've made 1000-1850 in one year in rapid now my goal is 2200 for next year.

I cant break 800, i'm a decent player on a good day, but i play distracted and tired alot. Idk maybe 6 mos casually. 

Just like any skill, variation based on ability and effort is surely huge. 

Well, this is something that complicates topics like this, you have people who don't tell the truth.

No one gets to 1800 blitz and bullet in just 12 months. Not if they're starting as a real beginner. That's completely silly.

If they told you the truth, it would be more like

"oh, yeah, I learned to play when I was 10 years old, and played for 5 years and got better, but I wasn't taking it seriously. After I took it seriously I was 1800 in 1 year, but before that year I was 1600"

I've never seen a real beginner progress that fast. By real beginner I mean they're not an expert at Shogi or something, and e.g. on January they're learning how the pieces move... by April maybe they're 1000, maybe not.

(Unless we're talking about 1300 in chess.com daily or something)

I've never heard of such a rule.

Although you'll occasionally hear people talk about their own experience as if that's the rule for everyone. I recall in the last topic I read like this, it was some 2000 player talking about how you slow down at 2000 and zero to 2100 is as long as 2100 to 2200.

But, you know, if you look at rating graphs of people who became GM, it's not really like that. Sometimes it's smooth progression up to 2500. 

Archipelego closed his account on June 14, 2019.

That has nothing to do with what I was telling the OP.

But yes, I noticed that, shrug*

I've known beginners who became interested. They usually watch some videos, solve some tactics, play online. I knew a few who went to some OTB tournaments. They're maybe 1000 after 3 months.

Of course if they're not a real beginner, then it's different.

I agree it doesn't take much knowledge. It's mostly building habits necessary to not give away pieces.

But chess.com daily is different. It's honestly really hard to have a daily rating below 1000 even if you learned chess 1 hour ago... as long you're motivated to do your best to win and have enough intelligence to realize losing pieces is not good.

I've been playing for six months, dropped to the 400s in my first weeks, and only reached 800 a few months ago, where I have plateaued. This is after ~800 games.

Some of us just can't "git gud".

You have 800 games in Rapid, but only a few in Daily.

Most people rated under 1000 in daily play their moves very quickly and don't use the analysis board. That's part of what I mean by motivated to do their best.

I've been playing here for two years and haven't really made any progress. Just got used to play blitz.