ouachita, 2928

 tmrnambissan, 2928

Wow! The two top players are rated at 2928! That's simply amazing...

Just wondering if chess.com's first 3000 rating is soon forthcoming. (Is that even possible?)

Perhaps! My vote is on Ouachita. By the way, how did you find out who the two top rated players are? 

On Ouachita's profile, it says he is #2 and Tmrnambissan is #3. Who is #1?

Go to this link, which is available by clicking "View Players" on your Chess Home page...

http://www.chess.com/echess/players.html

Regarding their profile ratings, my guess is Erik has established himself as the permanent #1 player... heheh

#1 was a player who was caught cheating and had a 3000+ rating. He had no game going at the time so he stayed #1 even after his account was closed.

Ahhh... So not only is a 3000+ rating possible, it's already been done here.

Sorry to hear it was accomplished via cheating... 

but a 3000+ rating can be accomplished for the first time by a real player, so that still is interesting.

Indeed! I can't imagine I'd stand a chance to either player, let alone 99% of the players in the next several pages... LOL

Ah, but 3000 has already been achieved, by the mystery #1 player you are trying to remember:

http://www.chess.com/echess/profile/Kamasutra

I knew who it was it was discussed in multiple forums. I was just saying #1 is a closed account.

 LOL... Looking at Kamasutra's game archive, all but two of his opponents were also banned for cheating.

That's funny...

It is perhaps naive to believe that either of the two players in the first post are "real players" in that sense of the word. But hey, this isn't the time or place.

When I was playing on Yahoo a couple of years ago, I believe that I once ran into a player that Yahoo had rated at 5,000.  I checked his stats and they said that he had played over 15,000 games and won every one!  Needless, to say, when I saw that, I realized that ratings do not tell the whole story of a player's strength.  If this guy's rating was true, wouldn't he be able to beat Carlsen, Anand, Quachita, etc., easily?

Dee

that guy had cheating down to a science, but he was kinda flounting it. It isn't a surprise he got caught. LOL

A takeback game against one of those top guys would be great. I'd still lose, of course, but it would be great for the learning experience.

A common misconception is that these ratings can be compared to other systems. Carlsen and Anand's ratings are FIDE, but these are Chess.com ratings. Were these players to join the site (and put in the considerable amount of effort these guys do) they would have ratings higher than their over-the-board ratings also.

Perhaps naive. And --  as you referred to -- we'll let Erik and Company determine the "reality" of the players.

My hope is they are genuine, and until determined otherwise by chess.com I will not infer otherwise...

Agreed...

My chess.com rating is "bloated" compared to what I would accomplish in the real world. I typically play OTB here -- I belong to a group where that's all we play -- but I also have an enormous amount of time to consider moves... a luxury that is lacking in OTB tournies...

Did those 15,000 games have date/time stamps? There are yahoo chess bots that will let you "play" thousands of games a day to jack up your rating. Because it's computer vs computer the games only take a minute or two.

but 3000 rating is only possible in online chess, not in OTB rating... is'nt it? kasparov has the highest OTB rating of 2851 till now..

At Stan's NetChess, I think ratings are a little inflated. There are 3 guys with 3000+ ratings

The top guy is 101-0-0, rated 3652

#2 is 140-0-4, rated 3268

#3 is 23-5-1, rated 3054

I'd be curious to see how the top chess.com players would fare against them.