Player Ratings seem VERY low?

I have gone through periods of play, relative to my level, which match what you describe, but not recently. Maybe last was about 9 months ago?

I do not believe they have anything like true-rated-computers, though that would be interesting.

I agree. I have played a lot of 1300-1400 players in the live chess here that make way fewer mistakes than you would expect. This being after viewing the computer analysis of some games. And in many of these games, the other player is moving so quickly while still being accurate. I suspect cheating occasionally but try to not worry about it and still play my best. Or maybe, a lot of these people are truly rated higher, but have only played a handful of games on here. I have noticed there aren't a lot of 1400++ players in live chess....

my live rating here is about 300 points lower that my OTB rating.

Dude i dont know but i play live 10 minute games and yesterday i reached my highest rating to date 1369 and before the night was through i lost 110 rating points all the way down to 1250. As i look at the games i won and the games i lost they all look like i played just as well, but its a real bummer for me, If i could reach 1500 i swear id just quit and walk away. So i guess my point is i am exactly the player you described (proficent in those specific styles), and i play lots of players in that bracket, and i have huge highs and low lows. But over the board at the chess club ive beat some people rated 1800-1900 on a few differnt occassions so long as there were no time controls and i was given plenty of time to think. So i am curious to know the answer to your question as well, it would definitely boost my morale if the answer was yes. So i hope so lol :)

I totally agree. I dont come on to this site expecting to become a grand master, but it is a bit annoying to think that my playing level is going to hell. I think someone at chess.com should use either an expert player or a computer program to try and work out how many players are cheating, or whether they really have 1500 and 1600 players playing with ratings that are too low. Does anyone know (roughly) what rating of players know the main lines of openings (and by that I mean the 10-12 most common openings using the king's and queens pawn) for about the first 8-10 moves? I am sure that just a few months ago when I played the fried liver attack or the king's gambit, that most players in the 1300-1400 rating bracket had absolutely NO IDEA what I was doing. Now, they can all see it coming and are able to counter or nullify the attack without even a second's thought.

In your play or in your rating?

well.... i might not be rated much, but i have a bang on knowledge of many of the openings. it's mainly because i dont take online chess seriously.... i have beaten a 1700 OTB, yet here i underperform, cause it just doesnt matter ;)

Last few weeks my TT jumped up to hovering around 1900, but I'm struggling to keep my CC over 1500.

I remember you saying you rush your CC games though?

I was rushing when I hit 1700 too :)

Welcome to the tech. world. Of course there are those people who have yet too be caught. My fear is the younger players may be many and think it's legit to use short- cuts.

Well, my chess coach said I am playing around 1500 and havent lost a standard game for a LONG time and am now coming up on 1400. Also I have a very strong base of basic and advanced opening knowlege. Hope this helped.

My live rating is artifically low because of disconnections and serious time lag.16 and 1700 players get into trouble with me when they patronizedly play ,',non-openings'.

I wish my blitz and bullet opponents would only play book openings that are bad for them.

In chess, the "non-openings" are almost uniformally bad. So if you are playing a slow time control you should be able to win. The only thing patronizing is the implication that if they played sound chess they'd lose.

If you are being beaten by irregular openings, work more on the fundamentals of development and tactics rather than rote memorization.

All I know is I've lost about 40 points over the past 5 months, and somebody needs to answer for that!!!!!!!!

That-a-way, i hope my opponent plays the elephant opening :D

My rating keeps dropping too. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I keep losing...

I'd check their stats.  If they're 1400 but have only played 5 games they may still be underrated.

And there are players whose peak was a few hundred points higher, and they're just coming off a bad streak too.  In that case maybe you're both rated 1400 and both wondering why their opponent is playing much better than 1400.

A month's worth of results is a long time though, so these things should even out.  The only other thing I can think of is fatiuge.  If you're anything like me you'll feel the same, and think you're playing just as well, but the results don't lie.

By the way in the last 72 hours I've slept 41.  5 days worth of sleep in 3 heh.

I know you said it's also that their speed and knowledge is high, so maybe it's a combination of this stuff.  Maybe chess.com players are just getting better as you're wondering.

no wonder some players at 1150-1200 are tough to beat on bullet blitz or I get a beating, when I check their history, they had reached 1400-1500 in the past, if not higher !

In other words, there are a lot of 'crocodiles' out there !

EDIT : all those "crocodiles" with rating at 1200 when they had reached 1400/1500 even 1700+, I'll kick their ass now.  I'm fed up !

Maybe, 1400 today is simply worth more today than a few years ago. With the huge increase in players over that period of time, maybe there's been rating deflation. With an influx of strong players, it is quite possible to imagine such a scenario. Either that, or I'm not improving, and that's worrying considering all the chess tactics I do over at chesstempo :)