Chess.com ratings have massively deflated since 2020

Sort:
ChessAce1111
KmBoor wrote:
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

People at higher levels don’t play rapid nearly as often as blitz, that’s generally why the ratings are lower for rapid. Especially titled players, look at how many rapid verse blitz they played in the last 90 days, tons don’t even play rapid at all.

Or maybe they simply have an alt for playing rapid, and don't tell that to everybody.

KmBoor
ChessAce1111 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

People at higher levels don’t play rapid nearly as often as blitz, that’s generally why the ratings are lower for rapid. Especially titled players, look at how many rapid verse blitz they played in the last 90 days, tons don’t even play rapid at all.

Or maybe they simply have an alt for playing rapid, and don't tell that to everybody.

I guess that could be an option, but I think the majority of people after a certain level prefer blitz/bullet for the fast dopamine hit and less chance of cheating, along with having a larger pool of higher ratings and titled players in the queue.

BigChessplayer665
KmBoor wrote:
ChessAce1111 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

People at higher levels don’t play rapid nearly as often as blitz, that’s generally why the ratings are lower for rapid. Especially titled players, look at how many rapid verse blitz they played in the last 90 days, tons don’t even play rapid at all.

Or maybe they simply have an alt for playing rapid, and don't tell that to everybody.

I guess that could be an option, but I think the majority of people after a certain level prefer blitz/bullet for the fast dopamine hit and less chance of cheating, along with having a larger pool of higher ratings and titled players in the queue.

It's probably the cheating plus the stalling annoys me too much to play rapid frequently

BigChessplayer665

@KmBoor do you have an old alt your accounts new (not judging just curious )

KmBoor
BigChessplayer665 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
ChessAce1111 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

People at higher levels don’t play rapid nearly as often as blitz, that’s generally why the ratings are lower for rapid. Especially titled players, look at how many rapid verse blitz they played in the last 90 days, tons don’t even play rapid at all.

Or maybe they simply have an alt for playing rapid, and don't tell that to everybody.

I guess that could be an option, but I think the majority of people after a certain level prefer blitz/bullet for the fast dopamine hit and less chance of cheating, along with having a larger pool of higher ratings and titled players in the queue.

It's probably the cheating plus the stalling annoys me too much to play rapid frequently

It’s def a time thing for me, I’m not on here to improve my game, speed chess is terrible for that, I’m on here for fun. I use other time to study and improve, so rapid takes too much time away from being able to do both.

BigChessplayer665
KmBoor wrote:
BigChessplayer665 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
ChessAce1111 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

People at higher levels don’t play rapid nearly as often as blitz, that’s generally why the ratings are lower for rapid. Especially titled players, look at how many rapid verse blitz they played in the last 90 days, tons don’t even play rapid at all.

Or maybe they simply have an alt for playing rapid, and don't tell that to everybody.

I guess that could be an option, but I think the majority of people after a certain level prefer blitz/bullet for the fast dopamine hit and less chance of cheating, along with having a larger pool of higher ratings and titled players in the queue.

It's probably the cheating plus the stalling annoys me too much to play rapid frequently

It’s def a time thing for me, I’m not on here to improve my game, speed chess is terrible for that, I’m on here for fun. I use other time to study and improve, so rapid takes too much time away from being able to do both.

Actually speedchess is good for endgames and openings and endgames tend to be what people struggle with the most but speed chess is really only good for improving certain things middle game strategies it's not really that great for

techwiz911
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

Thanks, that explains it. I am a slow and tactical thinker so my rapid rating is like +600 from my blitz rating lol. Its unfortunate a lot of strong players don't play rapid, for me its the number 1 way to get better at chess as beginner.

BigChessplayer665
techwiz911 wrote:
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

Thanks, that explains it. I am a slow and tactical thinker so my rapid rating is like +600 from my blitz rating lol. Its unfortunate a lot of strong players don't play rapid, for me its the number 1 way to get better at chess as beginner.

Rapid is typically better for beginners but once your better it's whatever stronger opponents you can find so it can switch between blitz and rapid

KmBoor
BigChessplayer665 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
BigChessplayer665 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
ChessAce1111 wrote:
KmBoor wrote:
GrunfeldSlam wrote:

@ Techwiz911: That's a great question. The Blitz and Rapid ratings mostly don't line up with each other. This is due to the Blitz rating having a greater standard deviation (fluctuation range) than Rapid. Blitz are shorter games with more mistakes, due to the shorter time of the game. Thus, it is a greater probability for a blitz game to not truly reflect your skill level (especially if you're on "tilt"!). Notice the high end of the Blitz range (Nakamura/Carlsen) is hundreds of points higher than the high end of the Rapid Range.

If Chess.com wanted to attempt to make Blitz and Rapid ratings to line up with each other, (which would be difficult at this point), they would need to reduce the number of points lost/gained per game in Blitz compared to Rapid. (right now it's the same). I can't say I know exactly how much it would need to be reduced. It's difficult to say, since within Blitz there is still a significant range of time controls, with and without increments.

On your last point - it is true that this last sharp fluctuation of May 9th is due to some kind of bug in the system (from what I read in a different forum). But it is true that gradual deflation is happening over time, from the data I have examined prior to May 9th.

People at higher levels don’t play rapid nearly as often as blitz, that’s generally why the ratings are lower for rapid. Especially titled players, look at how many rapid verse blitz they played in the last 90 days, tons don’t even play rapid at all.

Or maybe they simply have an alt for playing rapid, and don't tell that to everybody.

I guess that could be an option, but I think the majority of people after a certain level prefer blitz/bullet for the fast dopamine hit and less chance of cheating, along with having a larger pool of higher ratings and titled players in the queue.

It's probably the cheating plus the stalling annoys me too much to play rapid frequently

It’s def a time thing for me, I’m not on here to improve my game, speed chess is terrible for that, I’m on here for fun. I use other time to study and improve, so rapid takes too much time away from being able to do both.

Actually speedchess is good for endgames and openings and endgames tend to be what people struggle with the most but speed chess is really only good for improving certain things middle game strategies it's not really that great for

Endgames are the area most struggle with. I won a game yesterday against a +2600 who had more than a minute on the clock to my 13 seconds, we wound up in a trebuchet and he missed the correct move. I was shocked that a person as that level missed it with that much time but I managed to win because of it.