18450 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
In general, how do online ratings compare to USCF ratings? I realize that there is no set rule, I am just looking for any general guidlines
There really aren't any. Any attempts to formulate some +200/-100 rule is murky at best.
There is some, albeit poor correlation that high online ratings indicate a comparable rating strength (only for live chess at slow time controls!) if said person were to be playing on the USCF.
Though the reverse direction seems to be a bit more promising. A strong USCF player tends to perform just as well at live chess at SLOW time controls on usually any chess server.
Trying to compare the ratings of some XYZ Chess server's One-move-a-day-chess (Online chess) or blitz/bullet/anything-but-slow to USCF tournament play seems like a waste of time.
what is considered slow time controls for live chess? would that be standard live rating?
From a USCF standpoint, anything above a G/29 (With or without a time-delay) is considered sufficient for a slow game.
So 15 mins doesn't count, but 30 mins does ... though the chess.com live rating makes no such distinction => another reason why trying to compare the two very different rating systems is murky!
Also, curious ... have you or are you considering playing OTB chess under the USCF federation?
ok then none of these ratings on chess.com are helpful
I am rated 1504 and rapidly rising, but since I play more on here than in real tournaments I was trying to get an idea of my acual strength
chess.com ratings are probably at least 300 points higher than USCF
Thats what I thought, or about 200 I heard, but then It really seems to differ depending on the number of games and focus. Some people are rated lower online than in person. It is going to take more research I think haha
The idea that populations with substantial overlap, playing the same game, and rated by two similar but slightly different systems, won't be predictably correlated, can only be true if one or both of the two rating systems is an ineffective predictor. Since this is likely not the case, there is almost certainly a strong and predictable correlation if anyone would bother to do the analysis. In my limited experience, the chess.com ratings are rather close to the USCF ratings, and if anything might be lower.
Higher ratings > lower ratings.
Well people do tend to say it's +/- 100 or 200 points, it's just the individual has to be careful that they don't immediately believe "I must be one of those who's underrated!" so it comes with the warning that it's "murky" as shivsky said.
I think nearly all players believe they're underrated heh.
Well people do tend to say it's +/- 100 or 200 points, it's just the individual has to be careful that they don't immediately believe "I must be one of those whose underrated!" so it comes with the warning that it's "murky" as shivsky said.
Yes, it does seem most people think they are underrated. Just as most people rated below 1500 think they are too advanced for beginner books and want to study Kotov.
Your way of stating it "+/- 200" seems much more correct to me than saying just "- 200". To me, when I get over 1350 on chess.com, I start to feel like the opponent is really better than me and I'm barely hanging on. In USCF, I start to feel like that about the same point. So that is why I think they are about the same, and not too different.
I tend to think my USCF should be higher too... and of course I could give all sorts of reasons I believe this is true... but I remind myself so do nearly all other players, so it is what it is until I go to more tournaments and prove otherwise
Told you that Carlsen would do absolutely nothing to popularize chess.
by knightspawn5 a few minutes ago
by Poldi_der_Drache a few minutes ago
Live Chess Fullscreen
by GIex 120 seconds ago
How many chess sets do you need?
by Eyechess 2 minutes ago
Magnus Vs Anand WCC 2014
by NewArdweaden 6 minutes ago
Beer + chess = disaster?
by allthegoodnamestaken 7 minutes ago
Playing 1.e5 as Black for the first time, your recommendations?
by Jenium 9 minutes ago
11/21/2014 - On To The Next
by sanjaykumarpaul1 10 minutes ago
What if the opponent doesn't cooperate?
by XPLAYERJX 10 minutes ago
All the good names taken
by allthegoodnamestaken 12 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!