I've been wondering if your chess.com reflects what you would be rated outside of chess.com (Like if your rated 1400 on chess.com would you be playing at a 1400 level in a tournament?)
I understand that your rating would probably be less outside of chess.com when playing against a person who is sitting write in front of you (psychological and physical asspects). So would it be around 100 less maybe? And I'm refering to someone who doesn't think about their moves for hours and doesn't use outside help. The average time it takes me to move is bout 30 secounds, maybe a min so not that slow.
And I'm refering to someone who doesn't think about their moves for hours and doesn't use outside help. The average time it takes me to move is bout 30 secounds, maybe a min so not that slow.
No outside help, ok fair enough. But you have to realize that correspondence chess - i.e., 'turn-based chess' here - is not the same as playing over-the-board. In correspondence chess there is an expectation that the opponent has a long time to consider his next move - "hours" if he wishes. If you make every move in only a few seconds in correspondence chess, then it's your own fault for not using your allotted time properly. Time management is an important chess skill, even (perhaps much more so) in OTB play. Time management is just like tactics, endgames, openings, etc. - something every good chess player should know.
As far as whether or not there is a correlation between ratings here and FIDE ratings, I'm sure this topic has come up before in these forums. The short answer is that while there may be some correlation, it's not possible to say something like "chess.com rating = squareroot(FIDE rating x 200)/7". FIDE ratings are meant to be a statistically accurate representation of a player's strength in playing official over the board FIDE tournaments - which has little to do with playing correspondence chess on the internet.
Ok, I understand. The fact that you've only been playing for 4 months and you're already a decent player is very encouraging, and I'd like to congratulate you on your progress. I'll try to put this as concisely as possible:
1. Don't worry about ratings. A rating increase is not a "reward" for winning a game; a decrease is not a "punishment" for losing. Ratings, if (and I emphasize if) they are accurate, are simply a reflection of your current playing strength. As you improve, your rating will improve. If your rating drops over a period of time, chances are you were overrated to begin with and it is now correcting itself. (Note: I consider FIDE ratings to be accurate, and internet ratings to be only very, very rough approximations).
2. Internet ratings are very likely to be inflated.
Thanks for taking the time to explain that.
WTF! how the hell did u manage to get a rating of 0...
I think he's kidding.
through great determination and using the skills i learned in connect four ;P
in most of my recent games i've played at the best of my ability until the fourth move then i resign cuz i feel bad for my opponent not standing any real chance of becoming victorious. my earlier games i let my dog bark out the moves she thought i should make and she sux hardcore at chess.
i hint a bit of sarcasim in that comment =P
What about live ratings (not correspondance ratings) here? How do those compare?
chess on line just for fun!
It's impossible to compare Chess.com ratings with FIDE ratings. FIDE ratings are all in supervised conditions, OTB with an arbiter present, and have to be slower games to be classically rated. There is also a different rating pool of players, most of whom have the FM or NM title or greater.
Chess.com even uses a different system to calculate ratings. There is no way to compare them at all.
Definately FIDE ratings have an edge over chess.com ratings although it is critical to note that chess.com may enable growth of chess playing skills more so if you are lucky to meet serious and skilled players.