14008 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?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
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!
I believe the blitz ratings are ~300 points lower than online ratings on chess.com.
Mostly, I think this is because there are some people who only play online, who are pretty weak - not slamming people, just the facts - and this elevates the numbers. (My online chess record is 35-2-4. I am not that good.)
I suspect the blitz ratings are closer to an OTB USCF rating, but they may be inflated, too. (My blitz rating is 1630. It has been years since I had a USCF rating, but I think it would be lower probably.)
My bullet rating is 1550. To me, bullet inevitably turns into a clickfest at some point.
It's interesting to read this thread, where everyone accepts as true that blitz and standard ratings are deflated compared to online ratings, and are close to OTB ratings, but on another thread, the mere suggestion that such a thing is possible is treated with vitriol.
I agree with the posters on this thread that blitz and standard ratings are on average ~200-300 points lower than correspondence ratings, and that they are more indicative of over-the-board ratings than correspondence ratings would be. Of course, there are plenty of outliers, but generally, it is possible to compare ratings even in different populations and predict about how a person would perform OTB.
I have standard rating around 1500 and my blitz currently is ~900 and slowing down. What am I doing wrong?
My ratings are as follows:
Bullet 1211, Blitz 1061, Correspondence 1651
Part of the discrepancy is how I play Live Chess. I usually play when I'm on the train, and often lose cellphone signal. I play lots of fast games, and usually play for amusement, and experiement with risky/suicidal moves.
With Correspondence I mostly play tournaments, and take extra care with all my moves. I use the Opening Explorer, and make use of the analysis board. My blunder rates are a lot lower, and I've beaten a 2000 level player.
I definintely think my actual rating is closer to my Live scores than my correspondence, though when anyone asks my estimated ELO I'll always quote my Correspondence score ;)
Cause the ratings are totally messed up. Even down at 500 rating, I'm struggling to beat these people. I swear, these people make brilliant plays every game.
This is true, there are guys with 1500, 1600 ratings on "on line" (correspondence) games here that I doubt are barely over 1000 OTB.
I am that guy! I'm about 1100 rated standard and for the moment 1500ish rated on-line. My on-line rating is inflated by a lucky winning streak and very few actual games under my belt.
So the general consesus is that serious chess players only use the internet to play blitz and the (insanely fast) bullet chess to keep their skills up. Presumably to play longer, more considered games these players would always play 'otb'.
The ratings on blitz are closer to what you would expect in a chess club or tournament. The ratings on standard are higher because there are less high standard players using it, and the ratings on the correspondance chess are considerably higher because it is full of weaker players who need lots of time to make good moves (like me!).
it's a bit easier to get to 2000 in correspondence chess than it is in live blitz because the player pool is stronger on the live server. most serious chess players play their standard time control games in real tournaments and simply don't bother with online correspondence I would guess.
However, once you get to 2000 or above in correspondence chess on here it becomes just as hard as it is on the live blitz server.
none of this has anything to do with correspondence chess being qualitatively easier than blitz chess or anything along those lines.
Because in some cathegories there are more players than in others and more people share a lower score.
My percentile scores would seem to support your contention, and yet I'm not certain about your analysis.
Your final statement, however, is absolutely correct.
The differences have nothing whatsoever to do with the kind of chess and everything to do with the nature of the pool.
THE WHOlE WORLD Is STUNNED BY THE MOST UDEAFEATED PLAYER IN THE HISTORY OF CHE$$
by Rob3rtJamesFischer a few minutes ago
If You Could Go to Dinner with Any Chess Player, Who'd You Pick?
8/24/2016 - Shock And Awe
by BryanCFB 16 minutes ago
A game with the Nimzovitsch defense
by Ampediotitz 26 minutes ago
2826-4000 Worst Things To Do While Playing Chess
by ChessPlayinDude47 34 minutes ago
Vintage 1940's English Made Set Possibly Jaques?
by goodknightmike 36 minutes ago
by InfinityVZero 38 minutes ago
FIDE vs CHESS. COM rating
by mariosuperlative 40 minutes ago
Why not win with Kinght + Bishop?
by nvthauclone002 41 minutes ago
8/26/2016 - Kouatly - Tsheshkovsky, Hoogovens 1988
by usernamefoot 42 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 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!