Are 1500s actually good, or just better beginners?

@Toscani said ^

So a player sitting in the middle of the Lichess distribution isn't a beginner or even a mediocre player who hasn't progressed. They may simply have found a comfort level of play that suits them.

Competence and ambition are different things.

Oh wow, I haven't thought about it like that before, thanks for the perspective

@petri999 said ^

1500 does not mean beginner. I know OTB players who are about as weak as I am, and they have played chess since the eighties. They’re just not very strong.

And what is good and what is not is highly subjective. On Lichess, 1500 is around mid-pack, so you could say that’s pretty good. But a Lichess 1500 would probably place in the bottom quarter of section B in a Finnish OTB tournament (with only ...

I don’t believe 1500’s are beginners but once a 1500 blundered stalemate up a queen.

Against me.

1600s play amazing in comfortable positions but struggle when hit with something unfamiliar

Ive lost to a 500 elo on chess com in an equal endgames way more times than I'd like to admit...

Computer equipment can reduce latency, but it can't compensate for a time control that demands reaction speeds beyond the player's ability. Besides that, the hastiness of playing too fast is probably the main cause of game losses. Internet chess has become a battle between the clock and the correct moves. It's more like a trade war on our screens, making it easy to push back, and then we see the rating changes and the consequences of our actions.

At what rating does chess become an art? I think that line would help define what it means for a game to be “good.”

I can formulate my own plans, but they are not necessarily good plans. If they were, I’d be a master. At my level, chess is not yet an art; it is primarily a game of identifying and avoiding mistakes.

When we can harmonize ideas and concepts in a way that appeals to the tastes of others, then perhaps it becomes art. The Chess Games of the Month (GOTM) tend to showcase games that have this artistic quality.

https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/lichess-game-of-the-month-july-2026-contest

I'm only like 750, but I think even at this level I'm better than 90% of the world since most don't even know how to play, so yeah 1500 is pretty good that's way better than most people who play

@Iateadogyesterday said ^

I recently went through many games played by 1500-1600s, and the sheer variance of game quality is wild. As a 2050 elo player it makes me wonder, what does it actually mean to be good at chess? Is 1500 elo really a respectable milestone, or are 1500s just better beginners who understand the game a bit better? What do you think?

I think 1500 is definitely a respectable milestone. Rating doesn’t mean that someone plays every game consistently well — even much stronger players can have great games and terrible games.

To me, being “good at chess” is less about playing every move accurately and more about understanding why your moves work, recognizing your mistakes, and gradually improving. A 1500 probably still has plenty of weaknesses, but they’ve already learned a lot compared to a complete beginner.

@BIGBIG31 said ^

A 1500 lichess should be kicked out of an over the board chess club

I strongly disagree. A rating is just an indication of playing strength, not a measure of whether someone belongs in a chess club. If anything, a 1500 player joining a club and playing stronger opponents is one of the best ways to improve. Everyone has to start somewhere.