Are the chesskid.com ratings deflated or are the chess.com ratings inflated

I joined chess.com 24 days ago and before I was playing on chesskid.com (as the username ObservantComet) . I noticed that all the ratings of me and my friends were lower in chesskid.com than in chess.com. I have ocassionally played on chesskid.com even after I have started to play on chess.com so it can't be that I got better when I joined chess.com. Here is the data I collected of my friends and my ratings on chess.com and chesskid.com:

My chesskid fast chess (15min rapid) rating: 1090

My chesskid slow chess rating: 1202

My chess.com rapid rating: 1566

My chess.com slow chess (daily) rating: 1298

My brother's (his username is BoundlessCity on chesskid.com) chesskid fast chess rating : 681

My brother's chesskid slow chess rating: 266 (I know lol and he is older than me) 

My brother's (AmbroseWinters on chess.com) chess.com rapid rating: 1105

My brother's chess.com daily rating: 1203

One of my friend's (koko on chesskid.com) chesskid fast chess rating: 1283

My koko's chesskid slow chess rating: 1599

My friend's (Kokolam on chess.com) chess.com rapid rating: 1643

Kokolam's chess.com daily rating: 1550

It seems to me from the data, as well as games that I have played on both sites, that chesskid.com ratings are deflated or chess.com ratings are inflated (less likely). If you have a chesskid.com account post your ratings on both chesskid.com and chess.com. Thanks!

1. The reason that I'm a 266 on chesskid.com is because I've only played 4 slow games, all of which were against you.

2. You can't really use your chess.com rapid rating of 1566 as evidence, since you've only played a few games on that time setting.

3. The same goes for my chess.com rapid rating of 1105--I haven't played enough games for that number to really mean anything.

4. All the ratings that you mentioned were below 1700. There are quite a few players on chess.com with ratings much higher than that, so the range of your data is limited.

5. Don't forget that on chesskid.com, most of the people playing are, well, kids.

I would imagine ratings are relative to the amount of users and their frequency of use. Chess.com has what I think is the largest online chess userbase. Chesskid is probably a fraction of that. And since it is mostly kids, and therefore mostly new players, the competition is probably pretty low so the ratings don't get pushed very high overall.

@AmbroseWinters

1. you played 8

2. 10 games is half decent

3. see above

4. it does not matter as long as long as they do not play on chesskid we cant count them

5. why does it matter if they are kids i am comparing the chess.com people and the chesskid peeps and the chesskid.com  kids are better!

1. Either way, 8 games isn't enough to tell one's "real" rating

2. 8, not 10. 2 Glicko RDs for that rating with that many games is 298, which means that it could reasonably be as low as 1268 or as high as 1864 (which I highly doubt)

3. See above

4. That's my point.

5. That's why the ratings are probably different on chess.com and chesskid.com

I joined chesskid and noticed that they start me out at like 500. On chess.com it's between 1100-1800. That will account for a significant difference. I also shot up to 1300+ with no opposition. The competition at ~1300 on chess.com is a lot tougher than what it is on chesskid, at least from what I've seen so far.

But also, all you're going off of is anecdotal evidence. Which doesn't really mean anything. I don't have the time to look at all of their accounts on each site but I'm guessing they play more on one than the other. And it matters which one they play more on recently as well. But I'd stick to chesskid.com. It's really starting to make me wonder if I'm not just facing a bunch of cheaters on chess.com lol. Chesskid is way more what I expect to find for the ratings they give out. 

They start at different ratings, so they stay at different rating.

IM Jeremy Silman, in his brutal put-down of newbies wondering how soon they'll be IM's or GM's (https://www.chess.com/article/view/can-anyone-be-an-im-or-gm)  "Though your Chess.com rating is in the 1400s, your tournament [USCF Regular OTB] rating would be closer to 1100 or 1200."

He's saying chess.com ratings are inflated by about 250 pts. over USCF OTB ratings and, based on the games I've seen people present here, that seems about right to me.  Of course, it's difficult to compare Blitz games with regular games and if you've ever seen 5 minute Blitz games OTB - as a TD, I used them, unrated, to break ties for trophies, they are real athletic contests with the players standing while playing and making quick moves and slamming the clock button/lever as fast as possible. So I don't know how to compare OTB with online for short time periods.

my chesskid rating is 1540, and it is deflated.Yeah my rating here is only 1450,but I beat 1800s all the time.

If you beat 1800's all the time, you would be 2000+. Ask back your math teacher!!

my chesskid is 200 points higher than my chess.com.

The other website uses a totally different rating system. The default is 1500 for starters. At the lower ratings (sub 2200), the ratings over there are inflated. According to another poster here, at around 2300 the ratings between the two websites tend to converge.

they  are ddll

lalalaallaaaaaaaa

I’m a kid but I hardly ever use it it always asks for membership 

my chesskid rating is 1116 but my chess com rating is higher

Yet another 3 year old thread bumped... sigh

????????????????

Indeed...