Can a 1100 be better then a 1900?

Can a 1100 (daily rating) be better in daily then someone rated 1900 in blitz and bullet? 

Background story to this question is that I am having a conversation with a person that saying that someone rated 1900 in blitz can be so bad at slow games that he only got 1100 in daily. Im new to chess and have only played a year, but for me its hard to believe that you can get to 1900 in blitz and then struggle to beat 1100 in daily. Because in order to get to 1900 in blitz you have to be good in chess. 

I do believe there can be a gap between your slower games and faster games but what would be a reasonably gap? 

Because i dont think 1100 to 1900 would be a reasonably gap. But lets say 1650 in daily and 1900 in blitz, that would to me sound like a reasonably gap. 

I think the gap can be significant but a gap of 800 seems like a stretch. I am easily around 300-350 points better in classical than I am in blitz and i can see how blitz players can have it reversed but, as I said, 800 points difference is a huge one and I don't think it's possible to have that kind of a gap

Yesnt

It makes alot of sense. Like some gap I expected because one might be good at flagging or good at slow games. But I dont expect the gap from fast to slow to be that big. I understand that strong players in daily might be a bit to slow and lose on time in 1min bullet or less time. 

But that a 1900 blitz player wouldnt be able to score better then 50% winrate vs a 1100 in daily I find unlikley. 

I highly doubt it. However there are some people who are absolutely horrible at fast time controls yet are great players. 

No.

-

Maybe they saw a single account like that, but you have to look a little deeper... how many blitz games have they played? How many daily games? In either time control, if only a few games were played, then it's not an accurate rating.

Look at the peak ratings, and look to see whether the person has recently timed out in 100 daily games... things like this.

If someone is really trying their best in daily and has an 1100 rating, then they're in a completely different universe from someone who can maintain a 1900 blitz rating over 100 games.

1 900 blitz rated player will not be worse than 1 100 daily rating.

There is one but however. Daily rating totally depends on how much effort people employ while playing those games.

For instance 1 900 blitz rated player might play 50 daily games at the same time spending 20 seconds on his moves, and have an absolutely dreadful daily rating compared to his blitz. On the other hand, there are 1 100 blitz rated people who take their time in daily games and eventually find some moves that are in most other cases above their pay grade so to speak.

That is why there are some people with let's say 1 200 rapid rating with 1 700 - 1 800 daily rating, and some 2 000 rapid rated players with 1 500 daily rating. The first ones try their best, the second ones just don't take those games seriously enough, blitzing out moves game after game.

Like the others have mentioned, the probability of this happening is quite low. The 800 rating differential is too high.

A 1500 or 1600 rated daily player should have decent chances against a 1900 rated blitz player. But again, this lone statistic might not be sufficient. There are simply too many factors involved. Put me in daily and I would probably lose 99.9999% of my games.

Nah, I bet you could play them like blitz and get to around 1800.

At least that's how it used to be.

I guess that's exactly what the OP meant when using the word "better".

Yeah i dont mean 1-2 game getting lucky. 

I mean consistenly. 

+1

When I was 1700 blitz I could definitely beat 1100s in daily unless I played it like bullet...

Maybe 1700 more people seem to be THINKING these days...

I mean, even if if you played it like bullet probably...

This IM has finished over 10k daily games
https://www.chess.com/member/kacparov

I remember back when he was about 2400 blitz, he had over 1000 daily games going at once, and his daily rating was 1900.

In other words playing them as fast as bullet was about a 500 point different. So at 1700 blitz you could probably play them like bullet and be 1100.

Nearly hit 1700 daily playing like blitz.

Finally, i got some free time to write here...

ok, so.... yeah, that guy i said timed out a lot of games, that's why his daily rating is so low compared to his blitz/bullet. I'm sorry for not checking that out deeper.

But, then, why my rating went so high in daily and so low in blitz? 

And i play daily like i play blitz, no second board, no looking at opening database, etc. no external help at all. The only difference is in daily i have more time to think, i think deeper and wider, in blitz i'm nervous cause i don't have enough time to think, but my blitz oponents should not have enough time as well.

It's so strange...

And why am i able to beat more than 2000 rated bots, if i'm just 1200 rated vs humans?

They say it's because of my playing style... but that doesn't convince me completely....

Of course you can win. You can beat Magnus if you're incredibly lucky. But assuming that the ratings accurately reflect true strength and that the game is on the up-and-up, the odds of an 1100 player beating a 1900 are exactly 1 in 101. Not good.