I found it hard to read the board with the graphics.
Seems about right. I got to 1700 after 2 months playing lichess, then quit classical for the past year and went to blitz. My classical rating peaked 1796 four different times (exact #).
And I'm 1650 on chesstempo tactics (which I also quit a year ago).
1505. Surprise to me. I'm only 1200 on this site. Also, when it asks you to write starting and ending squares, I wrote them in algebraic notation, but you were only supposed to write the square names, omitting the piece. For example, Bb4 from Ba3 would be written b3 b4 in their site.
I gave me 15 minutes clock timed for every Diagram to study and did a break of 5 minutes after each diagram when time ran out to get my optimum on deep thinking and freshness there.
Since I was on lichess about 2200 with an earlier account for a consecutive longer time in classical and since iam able to beat 2300+ players here aswell from time to time, i think the estimation isnt in bad hands with this test!
Danke für einen weiteren tollen Beitrag @Sarg0n !
2180. I'd like to think so! Only 1857 USCF...I have been studying recently though.
I got 1665, quite realistic since ultimately I'm studying and analyzing games to improve :)
I got 1485. I'm trying to improve it by studying a lot as @Francesco_Super is doing.
1485 is not bad, but I'm sure you will get better with more practice and study :)
I made a database/pgn file if anyone wants to see what your engine says is the best moves:
I only got #1 and #4 right. But I was close on 2-3 others. On most puzzles at least I found most of the candidate moves stockfish suggests.
On #8 I almost chose the right answer, but couldn't see deep enough so went with safer move.
I was way off on #2, 5, 7, 9. Or surprised I mean.
I got 2035. I think it is quite precise considering my classical rating on lichess(2150).
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.