Name that rating!

whites bishop sac, and blacks response for the rest of the game makes me think white is something like 1830 (why not?) and black is a bit lower probably 1400.

 I'm guessing that there is a 300+ point gap. 

I HIGHLY doubt that black is a master. 

Congratulations to RyanMK, for only being 675 cumulative points off (!). Your turn.

V. Anand vs. Peter K Wells
London, 1984
Lloyd's Bank Open, round 8

White - 2345
Black - 2350

White - 1300

Black - 1150 

Only sad middle aged Americans discuss their problems on a couch, sound familiar?

white - 1400

black - 1320 

I've been waiting for someone else to post, but it looks like it's not going to happen. Congrats to jackoneill. The ratings were White-1711 Black-1671. Now it's your turn.

 Oh, what a pitiful win, 500 or so points off ^^

 So here's the next game:

White 1820

Black 1730 

http://www.chess.com/games/view.html?id=4044108

jackoneill (1862) vs. huitdetref (1606)

What do I win? :)

@ hansen, solution is already out

white - 1862

black - 1606

Mad Dog:

I did get permission for my game that I presented earlier, and I think that those that ARE thinking critically can benefit to see how well they can differentiate good level of play from weaker.  Very often we just listen to the Masters tell us the dogma of what is good and what is weak. It is a skill that if more of us practiced, we would be better at analyzing our own level of play.  I am curious if those poeple that evaluated the closest ratings HAD a higher rating, because they were able to ascertain the level of play most accurately. But, we must keep in mind that one game may not reflect an individual's ability level, as we have all had great and poor games. 

Sorry for the delay, i forgot to see the result!

Here is the next game:  

white - 1650

black - 1550 (assuming 9... Nc6 was a blunder)

 white 1650

black1596