chesscube is a pretty overrating website, for instance I'm about 2350 there, which is absurd, chess.com only overrates a little bit, maybe 50-100 pnts compared to otb, but it also greatly depends on whether you're a better speed player than otb-player. If you're 1500 blitz here, you're fide probably isn't far behind it.
Hunh, I find chess.com CC rating to be a little low for me. But I've always played worse in 2d. I dunno why but I just don't think as well staring at the screen. I float around 1550 to 1600ish on chess.com but am fine playing B players otb.
Well if some people posted a comparison between OTB, Chess.com, and Chesscube, maybe we could make a solid comparison between ratings
They have. We have. The averages have too high of standard deviations.
There were enough posts to get a STD worth a squat?
A rating is a statistic based on your win, loss, draw record against specific opponents. There is no way to make an accurate comparison from one to the other.
It can be compare based on what the site or otb system used to rate chess players. Let's see if you have 10 wins 10 lose for Chess.com and 10 wins and lose in chesscube, do you believe that they are the same?
What makes a person a 2000 rated player in the first place? There has to be a requirement and a fixed point of reference to establish an understanding of what X rating represents.
The greatest chess player in the world is only "the greatest" because of the limitations of his competition.
Those two statments don't go together ;)