I feel that I deserve a higher rating

make it 200000000000 more

I can see your point of view, and it comes from either a troll (probable) or an idiot.

Yesterday, I dug a hole, then put back the soil inside the hole, then dug another hole somewhere else, then put back the soil, and so on for five hours. How come that none îs ready to pay me for that ? I put so much effort in it !

I call it the "Menhir syndrome". It applies to some contemporary art too, where the artists believe that the work and reflection they put in a painting / sculpture / etc. makes it of high value.

astronomer999... I think this male thing is exaggerated. The average male is not smarter than the average female... SAT scores have long shown that female students do slightly better... HOWEVER... when you get to the extreme of cognitive and creative ability somehow the Y-chromosome seems to produces more freaks of nature...BUT it is very difficult to control for cultural environment, women still want to be mothers and raise kids not sit OTB 6hrs straight.

For example my daughter is 8yrs old and can already do fairly advanced mental arithmetic (16x17) for example (nothing genius but much better than I was at her age), as much as I try to encourage her, there is still a strong cultural, social antipathy to female achievement freaks... thats my take. However the average Joe Bloe is no better than the average Jane Doe but for some reason the male sex makes up a good portion of extreme cognitive ability. Girls for one learn how to read and speak much faster and in countries where there are standardized tests of grade 8 (14yr olds), the top 0.01% of girls perform just as well as the top 0.01% of the boys.

For example in Kenya's KCPE (a very a difficult exam that wouldn't be allowed anywhere near British grade 8 pupils)... out of 400,000 candidates about 40girls and 38boys achieved a 520+ score, thats an incredible score, good enough to crack a fairly good US college entrance exam.

So its a conundrum at best since its impossible to control for cultural and social biases in a study. Another thing plenty of incredible male geniuses are not very masculine at all so testosterone is clearly not a factor.

I dont understand why chess.com dont use ELO rating!

But they do...? They use a different adjustement system, which is needed to have rating adjustement fast enough, but the main ideas of Elo rating are still there.

They cannot align their ratings on FIDE's if it is what you mean because too few players are FIDE rated (and there is no way to check the rating of those who are). 

If I had an ELO rating would it be higher than chess.com?

Chess.com has Their own rating system but FIDE use ELO rating.

"Elo rating" means a system where

1-each player is associated with one real variable "rating"

2- ratings are relative to the other players' strength

3-the difference of ratings should reflect the probabilities of outcome of a game between two players.

The chess.com system fulfills those conditions.

1.00 +800

0.99 +677

Chess.com use another performence rating system.

0.9 +366

0.8 +240

0.7 +149

0.6 +72

0.5 0

0.4 -72

0.3 -149

0.2 -240

0.1 -366

0.01 -677

0.00 -800

What the... Listen, if you don't want to make the effort to communicate so that we can understand it, it is your problem, not mine.

Oh by the way, an important announcement : 6/5 ; 7/9 ; 54-9 ; 114 - 15 6 789.

EDIT : actually, I got it - this is the table of expected winning probabilities for various elo ranges.

But isn't it the same for FIDE and chess.com ?

To be fair OP, if you stopped playing so much bullet and actually focused on playing at a slower pace you might learn an awful lot more and become better.

Funny, the thing I noticed about the OP was that the online rating was far higher than the live rating. Why?

I was taking the piss. Didn't you get it?

tsk tsk I give a crap.

"Taking the piss" hahahaa i didn't get it... but its been a while since I lived in Sydney...

I can put in effort every day and night trying to become the best baseball player in the world, but if I can't hit a 90 MPH fastball or am slow running to first base, I'm not going to get signed by any MLB team despite how much effort I put into it.  If I suck, I suck.  Same goes for chess.  Your rating is only a reflection of how well you play, not a reflection of how much effort you put into it.  If you can't see the best moves, you can't see the best moves, and your rating will reflect that.

Actually, I have an idea for you, OP, to quantify the effort you put in chess !

You will not need to convince the chess.com crowd !

It is not costly to implement, actually probably free !

It reflects very accurately the time you spend training chess !

It is a chronometer, start in when you log in and suspend when you log out. Beware, do not count forum time either.

 I too was digging yesterday and da-- if i didn't dig and fill in 5 holes.Now if i were filling in holes u dug or vica versa we have to pay off some labor debt. ?    Anyone up for advanced math ?

 Problem...how do we define "good" in chess terms ?

Perfect_Idiot: I hereby give you an "effort rating" of 1500, and you may increase it by 10 points for every hour that you put in to tactics training or other study or play.

You are welcome to post this rating on your "About Me" page, and others can see how you are making progress. Problem solved.