Yeh, I could have worded that better but that was the point I was trying to convey.
Chess.com rating estimates are way way off
Sort:
Apr 18, 2025
0
#24
They are estimates on your performance rating, I want to clear things up
Apr 18, 2025
0
#25
It is your performance rating, I just said "estimate of your performance rating", because its not exact
Apr 18, 2025
0
#28
And I'm talking about a single game
By overall I mean for that game
Apr 18, 2025
0
#29
MoreMovesMade wrote:
KeefeScencen94 wrote:
What I mean is, if you scroll down the game review highlights at the bottom chess.com gives an estimate of what rating you played like, it could be 600 or 2600
Ok, that's not an estimate of your rating. That's your performance in the game. Your overall rating is based on your play. Your performance is based on not only your moves but also your opponents. If they played poorly it will show you have a higher performance rating. But that doesn't mean that is your overall rating.
Apr 18, 2025
0
#30
You brought up the overall rating while I was just talking about one game
Apr 18, 2025
0
#31
I never said anything about overall rating you brought that up
Apr 18, 2025
0
#33
nah you're good, some people overreact over someone miscommunicating a lot
The problem is all the 950 blitz players who in reality are 1600 to 1700 elo rapid players in disguise.
Apr 19, 2025
0
#36
I sometimes feel bad playing 750 ELO blitz when I'm 1202 sporadic
Apr 19, 2025
0
#38
I was about to argue to this guy but chess.com won't let me send 5 consecutive messages, so it was a message from the Holy Spirit in disguise
Or anything 100- about 3800 if you're a GM