Chess.com ratings

Sorry, but thousands of USCF members are playing on Chess.com.  So the "rating pools" actually overlap.

And the Glicko systems will tend to produce "similar outcomes," broadly speaking.

Except that it's much easier to use "engines" on Chess.com at G/15 speed and slower.

Recently, I reported someone regarding same, and they were "closed out" the next day. They had added 300 points to their rating in the past 30 days.  Neat trick, using an engine. And very easy to do.

Guys like that "muck up" the Glicko calculations on Chess.com for "standard ratings."  

Quick chess in USCF is played between G/10 and G/60.  That roughly compares to "standard chess" on Chess.com.  And both USCF and Chess.com use the Glicko system.

Thousands of USCF members are playing on Chess.com between G/10 and G/60.

Assuming no engine use, their USCF Quick Chess ratings and "standard chess" ratings will tend to be similar.  A simple assertation.  

Not all simple assertations are "stupid," they're just simple rules of thumb.  A strong claim is NOT being made.

And yes, many posts are "stupid."  Indeed, the majority of posts in this threads might fall into that category.  Yours and mine excluded.  

More info in the two threads below.

http://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-ratings---how-they-work

http://www.glicko.net/glicko.html

Thought you were unfairly accosted by Trolls on your thoughtful post?  WRONG.

Those "Trolls" perform a "Darwinian Public Service" by culling morons like you from participating freely, without fear of consequences for your otherwise tool behavior.  

And without them, these forum threads "would be as interesting as paste."  Q.E.D.  

But if you prefer convoluted, syllogistic logic, with a circular, self-referential bent, just whip up a "hypothetical exception."  Like the post immediately below.

The gist being -- "But what about the exception that I just thought up?"  Duh?

If pigs could fly, pork would be a low fat food.  So what. 

I think you're overestimating the effect of a pool overlap (the existence of which I'm not sure you've shown). For instance, if most of the overlap is from low USCF ratings (because the high ones don't want to play against engines) and most of the non-USCF players are weaker than even that (because they don't want to get stomped in OTB tournaments), then the effect of the pool overlap will be meaningless because the mean is what's driving the rating difference. The pool overlap is only going to be meaningful if it's spread evenly across the rating spectrum.