Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Chess rating system


  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1241

    PJAJ4321

    I really don't care much about my rating, though I like to see it go higher.Smile

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1242

    PJAJ4321

    I knew that

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1243

    AndyClifton

    I cared more about my rating when it was going up... Frown

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1244

    blackrabbitto

    I'm fairly new to this ... my rating is useful because it gives me an idea of whether I'm improving my game.

    I seem to have become a victim of Hastings' Law ... no matter how many I win or lose I always return to 1066. Laughing

    This might be due to the way I select whom to play against. It's currently set at -20 to +200. I can get +10 points for a good win and only lose a few if I lose. Playing better players is beneficial, of course.

     
  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1245

    CaptJackAubrey

    travis1010 wrote:
    So the reason Kasparov is better than me is because his rating is higher than mine?

    Actually, the reason Kasparov is better than you is because he could beat your arse without even looking at the board! LOL!

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1246

    Scottrf

    joeschmo123 wrote:

    ratings are garbage i keep my rating low to sneak attack higher ranked players, and when they lose it hurts there score even more. chess is a game of skillwith no luck involved before every game the board is equal so there is no pregame advantage other than if you get psyched out by the opponents score

    Yeah if you ignore the fact that their rating is higher because they get better results in their chess games.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1247

    CaptJackAubrey

    joeschmo123 wrote:

    ratings are garbage i keep my rating low to sneak attack higher ranked players, and when they lose it hurts there score even more. chess is a game of skillwith no luck involved before every game the board is equal so there is no pregame advantage other than if you get psyched out by the opponents score

    What a loser. People count on the rating system to keep them in a range of competitors in which they can be competitive. If you have any skill to speak of then why do you need "sneak attacks"? Why do you need to artificially represent your skill as being lower than it is? You're a liar.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1248

    ChazR

    I regret to inform that you are all wrong.  There is a direct statistical correlation between ratings and anatomy.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1249

    pooptastesgood

    EVERYONE HERE THINKS POOP TASTES GOOD

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1250

    pooptastesgood

    Please be relevant, helpful and nice

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1251

    Yamada1998Sone

    Knight for me! I love it how I captured Queen when I checked the King lol <3 

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1252

    ChazR

    Apologies if I was irrelevant, hurtful, and mean.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1253

    verydead2

    Maybe these questions are stupid but I dont care:

    What is the approximate relation between chess.com rating and FIDE rating? 

    What approximate chess.com rating should have a player with FIDE rating e.g. 1800?

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1254

    wilford-n

    verydead wrote:

    What is the approximate relation between chess.com rating and FIDE rating? 

    Based on brousing profiles of active players, it appears that FIDE ratings most closely correspond to Online Play ratings here, and chess.com ratings are inflated by about 200 points. So to answer your second question, FIDE 1800 ≈ chess.com 2000.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1255

    TonyMooney

    I agree that FIDE tournament ratings should most closely correspond to Online ratings but I suspect the gap is wider than 200 points and increases at higher levels. A player with a 2,400 FIDE rating would score higher than 2,600 at Online on Chess.com. It is hard to be precise but as a guess FIDE 1800 - C.com 2200. Interested to hear what other people think.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1256

    ChazR

    The elo rating system is an extremely accurate method of determining not only your strength, but the likelihood of chances of winning when you go against another player.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1257

    Scottrf

    joeschmo123 wrote:

    higher ranked players arent necessarily any better they just make fewer mistakes

    Well that's an oxymoron. Chess is a game of eliminating errors.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1258

    deencarney

    pawnshover wrote:

    Everyone knows a higher rating makes you a better person, increases your wealth, makes people nod in agreement when you speak, and whitens your teeth.

    The hideous secret is that there IS NO RATING SYSTEM. They use a super-secret method to hand out ratings based on baseball statistics and tax forms.

    In computing technology we just call it a random number generator.

    Seriously, The rating is mainly useful for assessing your personal growth by just comparing it to your previous rating of a few months ago. Comparing ratings is like measuring your weight. It is a number that will change based on different variables. You weigh more after eating than before and you play better if you are rested than if you are fatigued.

    It is best to just use your rating a few time a year. Most of use will have those 100 point drops and 100 point gains. so really your rating is just an estimate of the median of the range of your rating in chess.

    LMAAOO love the sarcasm pawnshover

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1259

    sorouush

    hi

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1260

    sorouush

    nice


Back to Top

Post your reply: