Hi all,

If your rating on chess.com for standard games is 1200 what would (roughly) be your FIDE rating or what is the general rule for comparing chess.com and FIDE ratings? 

Thanks, 

Rook250

You cant compare 1-15 minute live chess rating, either 1-15 days turn based rating, to 2h OTB rating. If you wanna find out how good you are or want a FIDE Elo rating, then go get one in a FIDE rated OTB tournement!

Just a few of the many forum threads at chess.com that have covered the same question.

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/chesscom-rating-vs-quotrealquot-otb-rating

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/chess-rating-at-chesscom

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/internet-elo-ratings-compared-to-actual-fide-ratings

Well, my rating here is around 1290, so I'm going to assume that makes me at least an IM in USCF/FIDE.

(This assumption could be wrong, but as long as no one really knows how to translate one into the other, I might as well take advantage of the loophole.)

Thanks a lot for all of your wonderful help. 

Finally an answer that helps me. Thanks TheMouse.

No, it doesn't really help you, since what's true for TheMouse probably isn't true for you.

FWIW, my Live rating is 1357 and my FIDE is 2009. And I wouldn't be surprised if the exact opposite is true for someone else.

I actually appreciate your comment kwaloffer as it shows me that ratings can be random. All I was trying to say was that TheMouse's comment was much more helpful than other comments in this forum topic.

Ugh, yes, sorry. About a year ago I stopped using another account and started this one later, and I don't play much live yes. But I didn't realize it was that bad.

The old account had 1693.

Still, over the board my blitz rating would be at least 300 points below my standard rating too. I just suck at blitz.

Seriously? You don't think people's comments in previous threads on this topic are helpful? They are commenting on the exact question you were asking. I don't see how it's not helpful to know where some of those threads are.

No, I am talking about this thread(the one started by me).

So you don't think that if someone answered your exact question in another thread that's useful to you? It's only useful if someone comments in the thread you started? Seems like a silly way to approach getting your question answered.

You know, all Rook250 wanted was a "rough" estimate, not a lecture!

Loomis, if I offended you I am sorry but you are completely misunderstanding me. I was just curious! You need to relax.

I get that you were curious, but then when people spent their time trying to help, you dismissed them as unhelpful.

I did not! I mean do think the fourth comment on this page is helpful?

The fourth comment, no, not so much helpful. The third comment, yes, I thought that one was very helpful since it linked to several discussions on the very question you asked.

The most helpful and accurate comment is the very first one... the comment by SinonSeirup.

However, I'm guessing it wasn't the answer or the type of answer Rook was looking for so he didn't think it was helpful.

I happen to agree with it.  You simply can't compare chess.com ratings with FIDE ratings at all.  Some players will have higher chess.com ratings, others will have higher FIDE ratings, other ratings will be similar... etc.  The two figures mean nothing.