You just now realized this? 
The way I see it, cheaters in standard made a glass ceiling around maybe 2000. It looked bad when some master has a 1700 standard rating. So they pumped up the higher rated players by 400 with the goal of attracting more players in the short term.
Which... probably accomplished that goal to some extent. But players who have been here will just laugh at it.
Yes I have definetly found my opponenets in Blitz far stronger than Standard, even if they are 200 points ranked lower.
My blitz rating is 1317 and standard rating is 1669. Not sure what my true rating should be.
Although I do like to have more time since it allows me to make better decisions, its just the quality of opposition is also lower and they make easy mistakes.
Standard ratings are not inflated. They are similar to OTB ratings.
Blitz ratings are strongly deflated. I will never lose to a 1200 in real life, but I lose (sometimes horribly) to 1200 blitz players on chess.com pretty often.
standard ratings are horribly inflated. the 1600s here play like absolute beginners, OTB is 10 times harder.
blitz ratings are probably only 100 points higher than USCF and maybe around 200 points higher than FIDE. but standard is literally 500+ points overinflated compared to USCF.
No, standard used to be deflated, which is why they added points to the pool. Now it is about even with OTB. Blitz pool was stronger than standard even back when it was deflated. Now the gap is massive. As I said, 1200 is a joke to me OTB, but beats me half the time in blitz chess.com. Granted, I am not a great blitz player, but 1200 blitz players on chess.com make MUCH stronger moves in a much shorter amount of time than 1200 USCF players. It's not even close, like two or three class difference.
Standard ratings are not inflated. They are similar to OTB ratings.
Blitz ratings are strongly deflated. I will never lose to a 1200 in real life, but I lose (sometimes horribly) to 1200 blitz players on chess.com pretty often.
+1. The blitz ratings are woefully off. My OTB rating is 1533, my standard rating is 1562, and my blitz rating is 1207. If I were to use my nation's grading system to work out my expected results against a 1200 player. Then my expected results would be 88 wins, 6 draws, and 6 losses over 100 games.
It doesn't really matter if the numbers are low, high or whatever at the end of the day. It matters if they are accurate in comparison to other players. The standard ratings clearly aren't any more. Just check the graph. Players that were 100 points apart and so the expected score for the better player would be 66% could be 350 apart after the boost, despite their expected results being the same. The pool is no longer accurate.
If the math doesn't make money in the short term, the businessman isn't going to bother having some IT guy explain it to them. Elo? Glicko? That's below my pay grade. Tell Jeff to add a few hundred to everyone's rating by next Tuesday. I don't care if Jeff is the photoshop guy and can't read code, have him google it. What's that? Ok fine, we'll get an intern or something. What's this site written in anyway?
who gives a rats ass if the ratings are deflated or inflated compared to OTB ratings.This ain't OTB!just play and have fun.
Again, it depends on the player. My USCF is higher than any of my ratings on here except chess mentor.
as some have pointed out: chess.com ratings do not reflect any OTB ratings and have no obligation to do so. In the same line of thought there is no need for comparisons between blitz, standard or bullet ratings, as they are meant to be different. One can only compare ratings within a ceratin pool. Asfor the comments on the recent rating inflation. This really should only be a problem in the short run, wouldn't you agree?
No. Ratings never really correct completely. When you add that some are more active than others and that people stick to certain rating pools they don't really correct. Especially when people have low RD, as most of the high rated players where they made it the least accurate do. It's been months already.
Standard ratings are not inflated. They are similar to OTB ratings.
Blitz ratings are strongly deflated. I will never lose to a 1200 in real life, but I lose (sometimes horribly) to 1200 blitz players on chess.com pretty often.
standard ratings are horribly inflated. the 1600s here play like absolute beginners, OTB is 10 times harder.
blitz ratings are probably only 100 points higher than USCF and maybe around 200 points higher than FIDE. but standard is literally 500+ points overinflated compared to USCF.