Guess my rating

Hi chess friends ,

I'm currently an unrated player with the following results :

Games won:

-1680

-1492

-1204

-1203

-1195

-1190

-1157

-1133

-1089

Games drawn:

-1718

-1253

Games lost:

-1292

- unrated

What do you think my Elo rating would be according to the following results?

First 20 games USCF uses this formula for provisional rating (or they did when I was playing 30 years ago):

For games you win add 500 points to opponents rating ,  games you lose subtract 500 points from the opponents rating. Draws use their rating.  Add them all together and  divide by number of games. 

9

I'm not sure exactly what the correct method to calculate is, but not including the unrated game you scored 83% against an average of 1300 rated players which I think makes you somewhere around 1550-1600.

Well you have a similar Blitz and Tactics Trainer rating to me (we should play sometime) and my OTB ratings are 1650~1700, so I'd say you are about 1675.

I can't really tell from your results, since you did not specify which time controle decipline you played in. 

3 of the games time control were 1:30 + : .30per move. The rest were 1:45 per game

Seems like you got a good estimate.

But this seems weird.

You draw and lose to 1200.

And you draw and win to class B.

?

Yes, I was winning all of the games accept the one where I played a 1253. In those 2 loses I was completely winning but lost due to stupid blunders. I thought me a lesson not to relax.

I've beaten a 1900 and lost to a 1000 before; everyone does it.

You're not one of those kids who has 1:20 left on their clock when the game is over are you?

I've never lost or drawn someone rated 500 under me. I've never beaten someone rated 500 above me.

The people I've seen who have results like this are very risky players. E.g. crazy sacrifices that on a good day surprises your strong opponent and on a bad day loses to a fish.

@leiph I am a 14 year old that uses all of my time, and blundered a mate in 2 to the 1000 when I was 1650, and I beat the 1900 in an endgame when I was 1600.

@ Leiph , I'm a kid (15 years old) but I spent all of my time lol.

Oh, the time thing was directed at the OP.

300 points is fine, yeah, that happens from time to time.

The mate in 2 thing sucks. I've had big oversights too of course. But I wonder if he wasn't possibly a little underrated at 1000 :)

I don't play risky, I'm a positional player that and try to outplay my opponent that's it.

The risky comment was @ zigwurst who said it happens to everyone.

By the way , you can see an example of my game here: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/i-analyse-your-games-in-live-chess-free

I used to play 4.g4 too.

I also had some bad games after g5. The way I learned it, you want to avoid that structure actually, because the kingside is completely locked (and ideally, that's where you'll have some play and a pawn break in the future).

So because h4 can be met by black's h5 to lock it up (as in the game) it's better to have a knight on e2 before you move your h pawn. Then black's h5 can be met by Nf4 or Ng3. From there white might make a capture, or continue to build pressure, but almost never wants to push g5 (although sometimes g5-g6 is nice to open black up).

I only say this because he didn't answer you, and I got this advice after a game I lost and it helped me enjoy that line a lot more.

The 1000's highest rating was around 1050 and still is at 1000 so I'm sure his rating is reasonably accurate.

Yes Leiph, I was black In that game. The g4 move is considered to give away the whites opening advantage actually.

Oh sorry haha. I thought you lost because you posted it for analysis. If I'd looked at the label I would have noticed you said you were black.

Yeah g4 gives up a few tenths of a pawn, but the positions usually get really crazy which is unusual for a caro.

So crazy in fact, I stopped playing it.