Chess.com ratings are inflated

Is it my imagination or are the chess.com ratings much higher than ELO/USCF ratings? I joined fairly recently (July) after not playing chess for a long time, but clearly remember the players of 1800+ being God-like when I was playing as a kid in our junior tournaments. Now I have a rating of 1800+ and I don't think anybody would suggest I'm God-like in any way! Ok, I read a couple of chess books in between times, but it shouldn't have made that much difference!

Also, has anybody else had the experience of playing someone who puts in a really strong game with a 1500 or so rating and then another where a 1500+ player just rolls over and dies? I don't know how much I'm going to take notice of these ratings, but perhaps time will prove me wrong?

I'm estimating chess.com ratings about 200 above ELO ratings. What do you think?

yeah I would say the ratings are a little inflated, my chess.com rating is over 100 points higher than my uscf rating

Yep i rekon 200 points above the fide one too,but i couldnt be sure. You have to remember that u have greater options and alot more time as well in this slower style of chess to balance it out abit....

Yeah, my chess rating here is definitely higher than IRLOTB. I know one person who is 1527 USCF, and I lose most of the time against him in casual play.

The ratings are higher here.  It would make a nice statistical analysis for someone.  One reason has to be the large number of players who play a few games, lose and drop out, thus giving a lot of freebie points.

yeah, they are inflated here definitely.  As well as the freebie points with online chess, I think my elo grade is calculated from 1000 not the 1200 used on most websites.  In Wales at least, someone with a grade of 1200 is definitely not new to the game. 

Btw, how do you know what an 1800 player is with the crappy, and completely unnecessary bcf rating system? 

sstteevveenn wrote:

yeah, they are inflated here definitely.  As well as the freebie points with online chess, I think my elo grade is calculated from 1000 not the 1200 used on most websites.  In Wales at least, someone with a grade of 1200 is definitely not new to the game. 

Btw, how do you know what an 1800 player is with the crappy, and completely unnecessary bcf rating system? 

Beats me. The English system is totally weird. I haven't got back into OTB chess yet, intending to get my chops back by playing online for a year and then I'll join a local club, so I guess I'll figure it out then.

When I was a kid I played in Northern Ireland, so we used the ELO system rather than the English one. In my opinion I'm playing at 1600-1700 ELO, but my chess.com rating is getting on for 1900. Maybe the system needs a review?

rich wrote:

Rolls over and dies lol. As for ratings on this website I've played most ratings, and some 1250 players have been better than some 1500 !

Definitely! Maybe others are like me and come in from a night out and decide it might be a good idea to play a few moves before going to bed. The plan which seemed so good at 1.30am after a bottle of wine may not look quite so inspired at 9am!

OK now I figured it out, those pints I drank before I played affected my rating and game, guess I'll have to give up playing at night...  LoL

               IrishMike

I definately think they're inflated but I don't think it matters much...  I guess I look at it independently as having no correlation.  In addition to the freebee points I also think some players play really well in correspondence chess because they can research the opening and get far enough into the game to let their tactical abilities shine but when they are playing over the board they get smoked in the opening.  So they might have a high rating here but a horrible one OTB.  Just my thinking anyhow.  I'm sure I would not play as well in real life chess.  My last USCF rating was like 1087 but that was 10 years ago.  I've improved quite a bit since then.

Anthony

I agree with the consensus that chess.com ratings are inflated, however I have noticed that a number of players who list their USCF rating on their profile actually have a higher USCF rating than chess.com rating.

Timeouts can affect rating offset. Would love to see that analysis.

ah right, makes sense.  Thought you must have moved from somewhere, because whenever i've seen people try to convert bcf to elo, the grades they end up with always seem inflated too, at least at sub-2000 level. 

I forgot about that.  Timeouts are big ratings boost.

As of right now, my turn-based rating is 1799.  But I'm not much better than a friend who's rated 1100 USCF!  My live chess ratings are significantly lower than my turn-based chess rating, however.

Thus, we use Chess.com ratings only within the  Chess.com environment.

Turn-chess ratings will be higher than USCF since you have unlimited resources between moves including 1 Game explorer 2 Learn book openings 3 Analysis board where you can move pieces to explore move branches which is not possible in OTB play.

pilgrim68pdx wrote:

Turn-chess ratings will be higher than USCF since you have unlimited resources between moves including 1 Game explorer 2 Learn book openings 3 Analysis board where you can move pieces to explore move branches which is not possible in OTB play.

True, we all have extra tools available and we all have extra time available, but if we ALL have these advantages then should it not average out?

It's simple.People on this site are about 46000 players.It'a a number smaller than the real world!

jonnyjupiter wrote:

pilgrim68pdx wrote:

Turn-chess ratings will be higher than USCF since you have unlimited resources between moves including 1 Game explorer 2 Learn book openings 3 Analysis board where you can move pieces to explore move branches which is not possible in OTB play.

True, we all have extra tools available and we all have extra time available, but if we ALL have these advantages then should it not average out?

 You would think that but, and there is a forum topic on this, some people believe it is wrong to use such and therefore don't since it violates the "purity" of chess. 

Some don't know you can and others lack the resources.  Game Explorer just came online for everyone.  I've been playing a few decades and have collected several (too many) books, etc. and I've had time to learn how to use them.  I have won games because people walked into traps and inferior lines that a simple check of a database or book would have shown to be bad. 

Many players treat online/correspondence chess the same as OTB.  They play the same obscure/trappy/tricky openings that gain them points face to face and wonder why it doesn't work here.  If I were to face the line OTB I might fall for it, lose or get an inferior position.  I might punt and play a safer, less forcing alternative that doesn't give me as many chances.  In CC/online I don't have that problem.

So I get free points from those that won't, can't or don't know how to use the many resources available here, on the web or in print.  You can argue they are'nt "free" since I do use my time and effort to get the most out of them but I note that my chess.com rating is still 100+ points over my "real" ICCF (International Correspondence Chess Federation) rating.