Chess rating system

turtlebert

Totally! I agree 100% and add 10% more that makes 110%! Holy shi*! This is amazing! :D

Daniel55423

isnt queen worth 9 not 10?

jrgoy

i have differnet ratings in diffent games.i useually at around the 900 range but sometimes i am given a rateing of over 1000 witch is chess.com being nice. why? why do i have different ratings in my games?

oyyek

i dont know anything about rating...i just wanna play chess, it's fun

jerrycrabill

dogged if I know:):)

Daws74

You have a separate rating for each type of chess you play on the site.  So your regular online chess rating is separate from your Chess960 rating and your Live Bullet, Blitz and Standard ratings.

shengyi

Glicko ratings system is very interesting...

PJAJ4321

I really don't care much about my rating, though I like to see it go higher.Smile

PJAJ4321

I knew that

AndyClifton

I cared more about my rating when it was going up... Frown

blackrabbitto

I'm fairly new to this ... my rating is useful because it gives me an idea of whether I'm improving my game.

I seem to have become a victim of Hastings' Law ... no matter how many I win or lose I always return to 1066. Laughing

This might be due to the way I select whom to play against. It's currently set at -20 to +200. I can get +10 points for a good win and only lose a few if I lose. Playing better players is beneficial, of course.

 
CaptJackAubrey
travis1010 wrote:
So the reason Kasparov is better than me is because his rating is higher than mine?

Actually, the reason Kasparov is better than you is because he could beat your arse without even looking at the board! LOL!

Scottrf
joeschmo123 wrote:

ratings are garbage i keep my rating low to sneak attack higher ranked players, and when they lose it hurts there score even more. chess is a game of skillwith no luck involved before every game the board is equal so there is no pregame advantage other than if you get psyched out by the opponents score

Yeah if you ignore the fact that their rating is higher because they get better results in their chess games.

CaptJackAubrey
joeschmo123 wrote:

ratings are garbage i keep my rating low to sneak attack higher ranked players, and when they lose it hurts there score even more. chess is a game of skillwith no luck involved before every game the board is equal so there is no pregame advantage other than if you get psyched out by the opponents score

What a loser. People count on the rating system to keep them in a range of competitors in which they can be competitive. If you have any skill to speak of then why do you need "sneak attacks"? Why do you need to artificially represent your skill as being lower than it is? You're a liar.

ChazR

I regret to inform that you are all wrong.  There is a direct statistical correlation between ratings and anatomy.

Yamada1998Sone

Knight for me! I love it how I captured Queen when I checked the King lol <3 

ChazR

Apologies if I was irrelevant, hurtful, and mean.

verydead2

Maybe these questions are stupid but I dont care:

What is the approximate relation between chess.com rating and FIDE rating? 

What approximate chess.com rating should have a player with FIDE rating e.g. 1800?

wilford-n
verydead wrote:

What is the approximate relation between chess.com rating and FIDE rating? 

Based on brousing profiles of active players, it appears that FIDE ratings most closely correspond to Online Play ratings here, and chess.com ratings are inflated by about 200 points. So to answer your second question, FIDE 1800 ≈ chess.com 2000.

TonyMooney

I agree that FIDE tournament ratings should most closely correspond to Online ratings but I suspect the gap is wider than 200 points and increases at higher levels. A player with a 2,400 FIDE rating would score higher than 2,600 at Online on Chess.com. It is hard to be precise but as a guess FIDE 1800 - C.com 2200. Interested to hear what other people think.