Hey! I’m Nelson’s editor and I just wanted to let it be known that I did not intentionally pick bad games for this. My method was 100% random! I went to his friends, chose a random player, chose the first rapid game I saw that was within 20-50 moves, and then skipped through to make sure it was at least somewhat interesting. The order was also random and I didn’t move around the games. It just happened to work out this way lol My aim is to make them as fair and random as possible!
It is simply almost impossible to try a judge a person's ELO by 1 game in isolation especially at lower levels. Too many factors involved, lower rated players may not always take it seriously. One day they might then next day they could be just playing chess for fun relaxing with a bottle of wine. One day they could play above their rating then next day below.
In all fairness, if your editor is picking games that are not typical of the rating of the players, maybe they just had a freakish game and played like players in another range that once in a hundred games, then you shouldn't feel bad about being off by so much.
@@andruha1067 I wouldn't go so far as to say trolled. From what he said it was his editor. I would just say that like anything when you do it for the first time everyone is learning. Nelson is learning to judge this way, his editor is learning to pick games and so on. They'll all get better together.
I think your editor intentionally picked games with crazy inaccurate ratings. Which I don't feel like is fair, because that artifically adds a _huge_ bias in the ratings and only mess up Nelson's sense of judgement in future episodes. If the editor is reading this, just don't look at the ratings when picking games. That way actually guessing the ratings will be more fair and unbiased, and will be more fun.
Hey! I’m Nelson’s editor and I just wanted to let it be known that I did not intentionally do what you suggested. My method was 100% random! I went to his friends, chose a random player, chose the first rapid game I saw that was within 20-50 moves, and then skipped through to make sure it was at least somewhat interesting. The order was also random and I didn’t move around the games. It just happened to work out this way lol My aim is to make them as fair and random as possible!
High rated players don't realize how competitive lower elo chess has gotten. Some of these games I play around 800 elo have maybe 1 blunder and they see most things
@scottc2076 I am up to 1100 now, I actually notice more blunders and my oppnents see less things above 1000 than they did from 900-1000, that 900-1000 was brutal, everyone is playing super serious, get above 1000 and all the sudden people more relaxed, some have even went back to trying the scholars mate or cow opening lol, I hadn't seen those since the 700s, until I got above 1000. I think to get to 1000 was super competitive in that 900-1000 range, but once above it, kind of just playing and if you go up great, but once at 1000 most of us know we arent going up to 2000 or anything, so can play a little more loose, probably gets more super competitive again around 1500, I would assume
@@scottc2076 but I could be completely wrong about that, I just started playing october 2nd this year, so not much expierece, but I noticed it was really hard to get above 700, then after I got over that mark, it was easy to 900, then hard again until over 1000
@@getcloveryourself that’s crazy fast improvement but nobody plays troll openings at my level except I had a game today where someone played the Stafford gambit
I really like this type of video. I think it would be really fun if you played someone without knowing their rating and then tried to guess as you're playing them
hey nelson, now that Gotham stopped doing guess the ELO, there is a huge opening in the chess world for this content. I hope you continue making these videos
In one game i play like a GM and in another im just a blunder king. That's especially true in rapid games. So you cannot estimate the rating from a single game. That's why your elo is also the product of all of your games and not just one.
It would be interesting to check also with the engine eval of the players' rating for that specific game, because it could be anomaly. For example I'm the measly 1007 ELO, but I have about 66% wins, so I think I have some potential for progress, but I was annoyed by the stupid blunders I made, and I switched back to playing bots and puzzles and watching YT chess videos in the hope I'll train my brain to spot mistakes before I try to get few hundred more ELO. My point is the engine eval on my games has varied from 100 to 1900 (yes apparently I have played worse than Martin :D), and while my ELO fits nicely in the middle, it varies greatly.
One thing you could do that Gotham doesn't is to get some conversation with the player to see if they knew the reasons to play certain moves or if they knew it was a great or terrible game relative to their rating etc.
Very nice (maybe Levy Rozman inspired) content! Your editor really chose games that threw you off. Threw me off too. My guesses: 1. 1280 2. 1160 3. 550 4. 460
I love seeing comments talking about “thank you, I’ve jumped 400 elo, 1200 to 1600 because of your content” Then there’s me, learning and learning but still stuck at 400 Elo. And I’m perfectly content with that because I love the analysis side of chess and your consistent, wacky, and educational positions paired with your awesome guiding questions and hints works so well to keep me entertained and sometimes proud when I actually find the right moves. Thanks for your content brother.
I'm enjoying this way better than Guess the ELO. Nothing against Gotham Chess, been watching Levy's channel for years, but it's the same concept without all the drama. Keep it up my friend!
Really enjoying your channel- especially when you talk through a game with your thoughts. It has been many years since I played chess, but back into it with 4 games under my belt in the past month. 3 W 1 L... the loss was a blundered Queen. Anyway- THANK YOU. I am playing tactics, forks, and pins with confidence. Keep up the great work- you are appreciated!!!
That was fun, Nelson! The 1950 was a big surprise! I'm hardly one to critique anyone else, but 1950 is a pretty decent rating, for the errors you pointed out they made
You look at the game review and see what rating the person played rating. Sometimes, this can help to see if it was a bad game for the person or they were on par.
My guess for game 1: 850 Actual rating: 805 Guess for game 2: 1250 Actual rating: 1948 Guess for game 3: 600 Actual rating: 1084 Guess for game 4: 670 Actual rating: 752
My guesses were closer to Nelson's, but I got the last one spot on. To be honest the first game was impressive for a 800. I am around 1200-1250 myself and that could very well have been one of my games. My guess for game 1: 1250 Actual rating: 805 Guess for game 2: 1150: Actual rating: 1948 Guess for game 3: 650 Actual rating: 1084 Guess for game 4: 750 Actual rating: 752
Nelson, it's been a year and I have to know... Are you still having nightmares about getting checkmated by the bishop that had been stuck behind 2 pawns the entire game?
The reason I guess white didn't play En Passant at 3:20 is probably because that move will open the scope of the d8 queen, e7 bishop and f8 rook. Even though stockfish likes En Passant, it's quite scary for a human to do that
@Nelson - Interesting Challenge / Variant - Complete Conquest Chess - The only way to win a game is by taking all the 16 pieces of the opponent. (Or opponent resigns) Treat the King as any other Piece. You must capture it. So all the rules related to check & checkmate & stalemate are not applicable. Rules for draw - 1. If no captures are possible & both players have same no. of pieces and same no. of points of those pieces - example bishops of same colour. 2. If no captures or pawn moves are done in 50 moves - typically can happen when both players are left with any single same piece. 3. When players mutually agreed for draw.
Love it! I watch your (old) rating climb videos every day for at least 30 minutes! Could you do the Dutch Leningrad? I have trouble getting my right side out.
Should have checked the GAME REVIEW to see what they played like. There are many times one plays like a superstar and it would have been fun to see if your guesses were close to what they played like. You may have been more accurate than you think.
I don't mean this in a negative way. But i don't think this type of format is your thing. Id rather see the other kinds of videos from you personally..
Nelson I think you will be surprised nowadays some 1000 rapid 800 blitz players are playing very well. It’s the rating I’m at and I’m sometimes getting into games that are 40+ moves and we are both sitting like 80+ accuracy it’s crazy
Keep going with it, I found it enjoyable. Then again, there hasn’t been a video you’ve put out I haven’t enjoyed. Although I’m not sure I ever saw a follow up to the gout/blood clot scare. Obviously you’re here thank god, but your road to recovery went pretty well? Definitely know how debilitating gout can be, so my thoughts are with you. Take care.
The first game was obviously lower. As someone stuck in the 1200 range people at that range almost never miss the bishop trap. Gave it away. The chasing the queen with no real developmental reason or coordinated attack. I also think a couple of their good moves looked accidental.
Interestingly, I find that at different times of the day, the elo's feel very different. In the mornings, im winning at elo 1000, and in the afternoons im getting crushed. I wonder if different areas of the world (and therefore timezones) makes a significant difference?
Definitely want to see more. Im in your Breaking 1500 course and was just thinking how great it would be if you rated our game play. Looking forward to more content
The only way this exercise makes any sense is if you choose games where the player plays exactly as strong as their rating is. Or otherwise, you could just guess the strength of the player, and then see what the engine thinks the strength of the player is. Otherwise, what's the insight in guessing a player's strength if for example a 1950 plays like a 1000, and then correctly guess 1000 only to see that they're in fact rated 1950?
If you do this again, add in the analysis from Stockfish, that way you compare your estimate to Stockfish and not their current rating. Otherwise it kinda sets you up to fail, and that doesn't feel like its fair on you. 😊
Hey! I’m Nelson’s editor and I just wanted to let it be known that I did not intentionally pick bad games for this. My method was 100% random!
I went to his friends, chose a random player, chose the first rapid game I saw that was within 20-50 moves, and then skipped through to make sure it was at least somewhat interesting. The order was also random and I didn’t move around the games.
It just happened to work out this way lol
My aim is to make them as fair and random as possible!
Lmao I was wondering if he picked these randomly or he had someone curating them for him.
I would love to submit a game, I had a super wild one that I’d love for Nelson to see lol
It is 57 moves though
Yeaa totally....-×
I believe in your honesty
putting herculean amounts of effort into avoiding saying "guess the ELO"
Different types of content.
Dude it doesn't matter gotham doesn't own the idea, plenty of youtubers have done it.
It's not copywrited 😂
I also thought that first game was about my current level around 1250 !!
That 1948 game rating shows how much stronger a 2300 is , or poss a newish account who started as an " advanced " player !!😊
Guess the ELO: Nelson edition! I'm so pumped 🔥
Same
Maybe they'll all do it .. Ivan Vodka could be next.
that 1900 one was wild , what
When Nelson hung his mouth open and froze it was just pure comedy I was laughing so hard
Yeah, I guessed 750 hahaha 😂
I think what this proves is that players below 2000 are wildly inconsistent, no matter how high or low. Consistency is the hallmark of a good player.
Dont worry about the 1900 one, that was straight up trolling.
😂😂
😂😂
You should not judge that 1900 elo player by only one game , you know how hard it is to reach that level
It is simply almost impossible to try a judge a person's ELO by 1 game in isolation especially at lower levels. Too many factors involved, lower rated players may not always take it seriously. One day they might then next day they could be just playing chess for fun relaxing with a bottle of wine. One day they could play above their rating then next day below.
17:19 if I got opponents who played like this I'd win way more games, I'm an 1100 and that looked like a game between 700's to me
Yeah I’m stuck at 1000 and wish I had opponents like this lol
I am 1350 rapid elo and that 1900 guy just give me heart attack 😂
You do get opponents like that but you don’t always see it in games with no evaluation bar and commentary
In all fairness, if your editor is picking games that are not typical of the rating of the players, maybe they just had a freakish game and played like players in another range that once in a hundred games, then you shouldn't feel bad about being off by so much.
Good thought 😵💫
Good thought 😵💫
The guys who picked these games trolled you or just wanted to help make "interesting" content. These games are anomalies.
@@andruha1067 must be surly - we've all had these types of games !!
@@andruha1067 I wouldn't go so far as to say trolled. From what he said it was his editor. I would just say that like anything when you do it for the first time everyone is learning. Nelson is learning to judge this way, his editor is learning to pick games and so on. They'll all get better together.
I think that your friend trolled you a bit hehe, he picked good games by low rating players, and bad games by high rating players.
That’s exactly my meaning. The games are not typical for the belonging ELO.
You are exactly right bro
Please definitely do more of these !!
I think your editor intentionally picked games with crazy inaccurate ratings. Which I don't feel like is fair, because that artifically adds a _huge_ bias in the ratings and only mess up Nelson's sense of judgement in future episodes.
If the editor is reading this, just don't look at the ratings when picking games. That way actually guessing the ratings will be more fair and unbiased, and will be more fun.
Hey! I’m Nelson’s editor and I just wanted to let it be known that I did not intentionally do what you suggested. My method was 100% random!
I went to his friends, chose a random player, chose the first rapid game I saw that was within 20-50 moves, and then skipped through to make sure it was at least somewhat interesting. The order was also random and I didn’t move around the games.
It just happened to work out this way lol
My aim is to make them as fair and random as possible!
I like a lot that you were honest about not beeing accurate in guessing the elo.
You're watching a bunch of players who should have signed up for your breaking 1500 course.
High rated players don't realize how competitive lower elo chess has gotten. Some of these games I play around 800 elo have maybe 1 blunder and they see most things
I’m 1700 and still make a lot of blunders
@scottc2076 I am up to 1100 now, I actually notice more blunders and my oppnents see less things above 1000 than they did from 900-1000, that 900-1000 was brutal, everyone is playing super serious, get above 1000 and all the sudden people more relaxed, some have even went back to trying the scholars mate or cow opening lol, I hadn't seen those since the 700s, until I got above 1000. I think to get to 1000 was super competitive in that 900-1000 range, but once above it, kind of just playing and if you go up great, but once at 1000 most of us know we arent going up to 2000 or anything, so can play a little more loose, probably gets more super competitive again around 1500, I would assume
@@scottc2076 but I could be completely wrong about that, I just started playing october 2nd this year, so not much expierece, but I noticed it was really hard to get above 700, then after I got over that mark, it was easy to 900, then hard again until over 1000
@@getcloveryourself that’s crazy fast improvement but nobody plays troll openings at my level except I had a game today where someone played the Stafford gambit
@ I just beat a guy who is 1650 who hung his queen. People hang their queens even at my level although it’s not as often
In the first game, black trades away the white knight protecting the d4 square, then consistently misses the fork on the knight and bishop.
if you have moment to pause the video and guess the rating. Now if you have guessed the rating, the rating is: ...
I really like this type of video. I think it would be really fun if you played someone without knowing their rating and then tried to guess as you're playing them
hey nelson, now that Gotham stopped doing guess the ELO, there is a huge opening in the chess world for this content. I hope you continue making these videos
12:00 Nelson, you're forgetting that most people don't think logically the way you do.
In one game i play like a GM and in another im just a blunder king. That's especially true in rapid games. So you cannot estimate the rating from a single game. That's why your elo is also the product of all of your games and not just one.
9:55 looks like they went Ne8 to protect against Qxc7 while also blocking check
Do more of these… I love seeing that 1900s miss the same tactics I miss
How are the second and third game much worse than the first, I legitimately thought they were 700
Legitimately didn't know anyone above like 1100 played the Englund gambit.
It would be interesting to check also with the engine eval of the players' rating for that specific game, because it could be anomaly.
For example I'm the measly 1007 ELO, but I have about 66% wins, so I think I have some potential for progress, but I was annoyed by the stupid blunders I made, and I switched back to playing bots and puzzles and watching YT chess videos in the hope I'll train my brain to spot mistakes before I try to get few hundred more ELO.
My point is the engine eval on my games has varied from 100 to 1900 (yes apparently I have played worse than Martin :D), and while my ELO fits nicely in the middle, it varies greatly.
Playing with your oponnents yourself and guess their rating would be more fun too..
I am preety sure some of them were trolling, guys this is not GothamChess, lol.
Nelson don't get disheartened. We need more videos in this series
15:12 Nelson what you think Nc7+ is that good or mistake?
Make this a series Nelson
Please do this kind of analysis more
Thank you Nelson, I reached 1500 thanks to your videos. 😁
Same, I reached 1200 cuz of his videos!
One thing you could do that Gotham doesn't is to get some conversation with the player to see if they knew the reasons to play certain moves or if they knew it was a great or terrible game relative to their rating etc.
Please do some more Guess the rating videos
Love this series... gotta keep it going
What could be interesting is seeing what the estimated elo by stockfish is as well, im really curious what stockfish thinks of the 2nd game here.
Already waiting for next video
''I have all sense of rating"- Nelson
Very nice (maybe Levy Rozman inspired) content! Your editor really chose games that threw you off. Threw me off too.
My guesses:
1. 1280
2. 1160
3. 550
4. 460
I like watching Gotham but lately I’m into Nelson’s stuff, Nelson is an adult, sometimes that is a better vibe than Gotham who is basically a big kid
I love seeing comments talking about “thank you, I’ve jumped 400 elo, 1200 to 1600 because of your content”
Then there’s me, learning and learning but still stuck at 400 Elo. And I’m perfectly content with that because I love the analysis side of chess and your consistent, wacky, and educational positions paired with your awesome guiding questions and hints works so well to keep me entertained and sometimes proud when I actually find the right moves.
Thanks for your content brother.
All these caused by lack of experience
I'm enjoying this way better than Guess the ELO. Nothing against Gotham Chess, been watching Levy's channel for years, but it's the same concept without all the drama. Keep it up my friend!
Really enjoying your channel- especially when you talk through a game with your thoughts. It has been many years since I played chess, but back into it with 4 games under my belt in the past month. 3 W 1 L... the loss was a blundered Queen. Anyway- THANK YOU. I am playing tactics, forks, and pins with confidence. Keep up the great work- you are appreciated!!!
Props to the editor for picking the 1948 player right before the Israeli player.
As 1900 rapid player my last game I trapped my queen in 10 moves
I feel you bro , why did nelsi made this video without there permission, like they played bad game but why everyone saying that 1900 player was bad,
That was fun, Nelson! The 1950 was a big surprise! I'm hardly one to critique anyone else, but 1950 is a pretty decent rating, for the errors you pointed out they made
Wow you were unlucky with those 3 games. The 3rd one definitely looked like an ELO under 1000.
I'm thinking gotham's job might be safe for a bit.
"I have lost all sense of rating. I don't know what rating means any more"
You look at the game review and see what rating the person played rating. Sometimes, this can help to see if it was a bad game for the person or they were on par.
Yes, I want to see more vids like this. Thanks!
that 1900 hundred one can be explained EASILY. Whites played just like a 1900, and black just had a bad game.
Castling queen side gets the queen's rook into action faster, although the king isn't as safe.
I love your content chess vibes
4:21 Rde1 is good Nelson say but computers say No!
the reactions are the best part
My guess for game 1: 850
Actual rating: 805
Guess for game 2:
1250
Actual rating:
1948
Guess for game 3:
600
Actual rating:
1084
Guess for game 4:
670
Actual rating:
752
My guesses were closer to Nelson's, but I got the last one spot on.
To be honest the first game was impressive for a 800. I am around 1200-1250 myself and that could very well have been one of my games.
My guess for game 1: 1250
Actual rating: 805
Guess for game 2: 1150:
Actual rating: 1948
Guess for game 3: 650
Actual rating: 1084
Guess for game 4: 750
Actual rating: 752
@@themorosov7 I didn’t find the first game very impressive at all game 3 is what really threw me off. I’m around 950 rating
@@themorosov7 I thought the first was about my level and I am about 950 on one account and about 1100 on another.
2 and 3 are quiet weird
I thought 2game could be 1300 up but 1900 is kind of weird
@@김승철-l2k becouse that 2 one is wort game of the player and he actually find and shows in video to troll evryone
2:00 White castled queen side. I estimated white may be above 800 and didn't change my mind. 805 😅
20:10 Nelson, sometimes a good player plays like a amator player to trap the opponent. This can also be a player tactic to win games.
Nelson, it's been a year and I have to know... Are you still having nightmares about getting checkmated by the bishop that had been stuck behind 2 pawns the entire game?
We need more of this
The reason I guess white didn't play En Passant at 3:20 is probably because that move will open the scope of the d8 queen, e7 bishop and f8 rook. Even though stockfish likes En Passant, it's quite scary for a human to do that
@Nelson - Interesting Challenge / Variant - Complete Conquest Chess - The only way to win a game is by taking all the 16 pieces of the opponent. (Or opponent resigns)
Treat the King as any other Piece. You must capture it.
So all the rules related to check & checkmate & stalemate are not applicable.
Rules for draw -
1. If no captures are possible & both players have same no. of pieces and same no. of points of those pieces - example bishops of same colour.
2. If no captures or pawn moves are done in 50 moves - typically can happen when both players are left with any single same piece.
3. When players mutually agreed for draw.
I love this new series
Love it! I watch your (old) rating climb videos every day for at least 30 minutes! Could you do the Dutch Leningrad? I have trouble getting my right side out.
Honestly this is guess the elo but without Gotham roasting everyone. But still W content Nelson. Love the idea of guess the elo: Gotham edition
Maybe guess the brilliant move next.
Should have checked the GAME REVIEW to see what they played like. There are many times one plays like a superstar and it would have been fun to see if your guesses were close to what they played like. You may have been more accurate than you think.
I like these. You should do more
I don't mean this in a negative way. But i don't think this type of format is your thing. Id rather see the other kinds of videos from you personally..
I thought Nelson's reasoning for his ratings was really good - these games are wild lmao. The 1900 game looked like one of mine and I'm 700
That's a great idea Nelsi! Please keep 'em comin' ! :D
Man's been at the top so long he forgot chess is hard!
Would watch more of these. You're more likeable than the maker of 'typical ELO query' type videos.
Nelson I think you will be surprised nowadays some 1000 rapid 800 blitz players are playing very well. It’s the rating I’m at and I’m sometimes getting into games that are 40+ moves and we are both sitting like 80+ accuracy it’s crazy
yo Nelson they just submitted their worst games u didn't lost ur sense of ur elo
Your editor did you dirty picking those first 3 games XD
Good video enjoyed watching it.
I enjoyed this!
A lot of times high rated players submit bad games for content.
And to keep their egos in check
they weren't "submitted." As Nelsi said, his editor chose them.
@@Penguin4096-si9fz Why these games specifically?
@@Markaras probably because they were crazy
@@Penguin4096-si9fzbecouse they played some bad games and his editor chosen there worst game and disrespect them maybe
11:19 - around 900-1000. It is tough to guess their exactly ELO, so I will leave these hundreds
That 1900 was crazy ... crazy
Keep going with it, I found it enjoyable. Then again, there hasn’t been a video you’ve put out I haven’t enjoyed. Although I’m not sure I ever saw a follow up to the gout/blood clot scare. Obviously you’re here thank god, but your road to recovery went pretty well? Definitely know how debilitating gout can be, so my thoughts are with you. Take care.
The knight comes in, the rook comes down, hickory dickory dock!
Great video. Really surprising ELO and so many beginner mistakes.
The first game was obviously lower. As someone stuck in the 1200 range people at that range almost never miss the bishop trap. Gave it away. The chasing the queen with no real developmental reason or coordinated attack. I also think a couple of their good moves looked accidental.
17:05
750 rating for player going for
Interestingly, I find that at different times of the day, the elo's feel very different. In the mornings, im winning at elo 1000, and in the afternoons im getting crushed. I wonder if different areas of the world (and therefore timezones) makes a significant difference?
I feel the same, I dont't know why
Definitely want to see more. Im in your Breaking 1500 course and was just thinking how great it would be if you rated our game play. Looking forward to more content
Awesome! I hope you’ll do one of these live!
This is how I play at 2am, and my ELO is around 750
The only way this exercise makes any sense is if you choose games where the player plays exactly as strong as their rating is. Or otherwise, you could just guess the strength of the player, and then see what the engine thinks the strength of the player is. Otherwise, what's the insight in guessing a player's strength if for example a 1950 plays like a 1000, and then correctly guess 1000 only to see that they're in fact rated 1950?
I guessed both were around 800 because that is my rating, and this is how I tend to play.
11:05
Going to say 975 for player
More of these please!!!
If you do this again, add in the analysis from Stockfish, that way you compare your estimate to Stockfish and not their current rating.
Otherwise it kinda sets you up to fail, and that doesn't feel like its fair on you. 😊
Nelson more guessing rating please i like this series.
Btw I love this channel and only decided to comment as a means of constructive insight, not to simply criticize or complain 😊