You're obviously quite sincere in your question, but if you type "ratings" into that little box in the upper right corner that says "search the forums" you will find about 40 previous threads on the same subject.
What's your REAL rating if you've never played anywhere but chess.com?
Sort:
i do think this is a good read .
i play three different types of games on here , and i have found that before i choose to play one of the three types of games i have the option of choice to suggest the rating i want to play , my highest rating i only select higher players than myself when i go for new game , hoping to learn and win , i should add this is with live playing , my second is in the 5 min games which i enjoy to learn my openings and see how they work before ever trying them out on high rated players , so the option to select the rating is comparable to mine
i find my flaws much quicker and see the results of most basic responses , but then on one min games i just let the computer choose my opponent , for the fun of it and test memory and adreillin , not good at it yet and i am not sure in real life how fast id be able to hit the clock , letting the computer do this for both of us , i have just started playing opponents on the longer three day games and have no rating , so far not so well lol , seeing how there rated above 2000 , but lets keep learning and enjoying the game and know what is important that some of you rated very high have worked very hard to achieve this and it shows please keep up the good work , you'll be very dangerous , when you get better we will all be in fear
Ratings don't mean anything outside of the population that generated them. Just because you're 1400 here, doesn't mean you'll be 1400 in any other population - in fact, you could be much higher or lower, especially if the group you play in is very small, or if you play only a small number of games.
That said, a nice rule of thumb is that a difference of 300 points between two players translates to a 95% win/loss ratio. So, if you can find someone whose skill level on Chess.com and USCF/FIDE are both known, you can come up with a nice ballpark figure for your approximate rating in the unknown system, based on your record against them.
Thank you for your responses.
What's your REAL rating if you've never played anywhere but chess.com?
Unrated 
But your real strength would obviously be above beginner (if you played a lot anyway).
bro... ajedrezenpuertorico.com ... Aqui vas a ver todos los torneos organizados por la Federacion de Puerto Rico. Yo e ido a 2, siempre va bastante gente, si encuentras alguno y quieres ir me avisas para yo tb ir :P...
Dale, el algun momento quiero jugar un torneo en vivo, me avisas igual si sabes de uno a ver si puedo ir.
Some chess players on chess.com have probably only played chess on this website and recreationally. It could be a few, or maybe alot. With so many users from around the world; I think the chances are it's the latter. I'm sure that either way I'm not the only one. I'm one of those players who has never entered a tournament that wasn't on here. I wonder what my rating would be if I played against players in actual tournaments?
I know I've gotten better since I actually started playing [and studying] the game about 6 months ago. Still, I don't know how good of a scale is the rating that I have on chess.com. My Standard Online rating is much higher, logically, as I have time to think and even analyze before making the move. Live games I'm 200 points behind, give or take at any given time.
I see the rating of some players I play against quickly drop, even though we started the game pretty even. This means they might have just started playing, and the rating is still being evened out. Sometimes I check games of players I've played against before (I check online and live games the same). I notice some players play against weaker players religiously. Which makes me think: "yeah, that win was void" if I beat someone like that.
If I play and win against players this way then my rating must be innacurate, which isn't alarming, but true nonetheless. I have tough games against much lower rated players and I know that this means that if anything I am lower than what it says here. I know that higher isn't possible. Sometimes I analyze early mistakes I know I shouldn't have made. I'm sure that goes for everybody, and everyone loses a game at some point(s).
I try to use the average opponent in the last 90 days as a good scale. At least for myself, since I play every day about the same. But that's still tainted. I also use the tactics trainer, which I know has a couple of extremely easy tactics, but I still fail on them here and there. Then again, I am much better then when I started.
So while my rating is a good reflection of how I have learned and improved, I know it's not real. I'm sure the answer is just to enter a tournament and find out, and I will when I hear of one available around here. Until then, I wonder how close this rating is. Does anyone ever think of this?