any idea what a 1950 rated chess.com rapid player would be on fide

They both are different. As they said, chess.com gives 8 and lichess 6. This means they gain and loose more less by 25%. So...

Thanks everyone

My rating is probably between 1700-1850 or 1900, and I'm happy bout that

Thanks for letting me know

It depends on the K factor. I did more research and apparently the K factor is 40 until a player has played 30 games and then 20 until 2400 after which it is 10. With a K factor of 10, they would gain 5 points, 10 points if K = 20 and 20 points if K = 40. The K factor is also 40 for players of age 18 or less who are under 2300.

The rating floor also recently became 1400 for FIDE ratings as well as ratings being raised as much as 400 points depending on a players rating at the time of the change. That means FIDE ratings will most likely be comparatively higher than both lichess and chesscom ratings under 2400. Which means that a 1950 rapid on chesscom might actually be closer to 2000 FIDE. Anyone who gives anecdotal evidence that their FIDE is a lot lower than their chesscom rating is due to the strength of their local player pool being above the norm because there isn't enough FIDE events against outside competition or because they haven't played many FIDE events since the recent changes.

Yes, below about 2000-2100 most people's lichess rating will be higher than their chesscom rating but after that it will start to flip.

It depends on the person some are 2000-2100 some are 1600 is say 1900 rapid is probably closer to 1700-1800

General rule of thumbs:

- Chess.com rating is not determined with the same mathematical formula as FIDE Elo.

- Chess.com rating is (usually) higher than FIDE Elo rating,

- Assuming that you keep playing, by the very nature how it is measured, the chess.com rating will jump around constantly.

- Chess.com rating can be grinded, i.e. you can find a player whom you can dominate more than the rating difference suggest, and then you can get a higher rating that you ought to hacve; FIDE Elo by the way its measured does not allow such tricks.

Therefore, there is no direct correlation of a chess.com rating X to a FIDE Elo rating Y.

The FIDE ELO system uses the Glicko2 algorithm, exactly as Chess.com [Edit: I did some more research after and now know that it doesn't. But the point's not here, as immediately after said]. The point is that you generally play more online games that rated FIDE OTB games so you get higher ratings on Chess.com, especially if you're improving lately (as you have more time/games/chance to gain Chess.com ELO rather than FIDE.).

Chess.com ELO is a legitimate measure of the strength of a player if he/she played a decent amount of games for a given time control (generally Rapid Chess.com performance ELO is the most used one; performance as said on average by the Game Review, which is generally a little too OP so you have to subtract 50-100 ELO to approximate better, again especially if you're improving a lot.).

Other chess sites, like Lichess, use different ELO systems (like Glicko, not Glicko2) that are generally too OP as well as Chess.com Puzzles ELO and are less reliable in direct proportionality (you have to approximate to a linear variation regression line.). But Chess.com Rapid ELO is generally a great measure of <your potential peak ELO without improving (your performance as stated by the engine)> -k*100 (where k differs from one player another based on how much they study, their IQ, and memory.).

All that said, a 1950 Chess.com Rapid ELO player is very likely to be in the range 1900-2150 FIDE ELO (depending one more time on how much <he, she>'s improving.).

Edit afterwards: can you write any reply to this comment with correct information if this is flagged by y'all as "false"? I did some research for 2 to 3 hours and that's what I got. So, if not accurate, just provide the right range (and other info), obviously only if your objection's well-founded. And I hope no one's gonna question the performance part.

I'm? 2200 and I'm 1700 Standard with only 50+ games of play. I don't think it's my suitability of rating because people at my rating are really weak so I think mine should be somewhat nearby 1850 or something. But I don't think that 1950 should be somewhat nearby that. In my ex club there are and used to be 2400s who are 1500 classical (currently). It actually depends upon

1. Number of games you play.

2. Visualization on the board

3. Practice on the board. Without it your rating would be somewhat less than the expected. Remember: Online is 2d while real is 3d.

The only Chess Federation that uses the Glicko2 system is the Australian one.

I won't comment on the rest of your post, as it is even more false and ridiculous.

Agreed 👍. The answer is false as well.

Of course. "Practice is everything". But I beat almost all 1900 FIDE very easily while I didn't beat any of the 2000 Rapid chess.com players. In my and my chess friends' experience, that are 35 I know in real life and even more on the Internet, that is. So it is more a matter of specific players than all of them; but since I know so much I people I adjusted my reply accordingly. Well, if you don't agree it might just be because of the three things you said either with you or your opponents.

And I'd like to add three other important ones no one can reasonably question: sleep, focus, and tension.

I have the same issue like 1900, fida I can almost adopt meanwhile random 2000s(keep in mind they were around 2100 rapid online );

You're right actually about this. I did some more accurate research and asked some CMs and this is right. But you're not at all about the rest of the post. Also any wrong thing does not make the post "ridiculous", because I'm not even trying to troll anyone, and "ridiculous" has a very negative meaning in this context, at the limit with being offensive.

He probably doesn't play a lot OTB, and passes most of its chess time on chess.com. Also, as commonly acknowledged, there is surely more tension during an OTB tournament than when playing online, especially if you're not used to it.

Daily is also not a good estimate online cause a lot of the elonis based on how many games you play more so than blitz chess

I actually have seen 2000 fida be 2300 daily meanwhile some nms are only 2000-2200 in blitz chess

Moving fast isn't exactly everything you can still think every ten seconds in blitz chess bullet maybe it is mouse speed but you can't just hang all your peices more accurately pattern recognition is what counts in blitz and the right tempi or speed of moves

Bullet and blitz isn't just speed

Bullet is speed and keeping peices on the board basically if you make your opponent think you win

But keep in mind it speed isn't the only thing that counts a 1000 that plays faster than a 2000 would still get adopted almost every time

meh.. I'd feel like they'd probably be around 1400 to 1600 FIDE

Look at my bullet ELO. Would you believe me if I said I'm actually over 1600 FIDE? If you play bullet, that doesn't mean you only play it. But if the people in question were to be players who only played bullet for the last months and no analysis or other time controls, you would probably be absolutely right. It depends....

Nope, that is what volatility means in this context. Volatility means how much or "far" the data varies from it's average.