Hi guys,
I think Chess.com should rework their rating system to bring these numbers down. Every other day someone starts a new topic about how Chess.com's ratings do not match up with other ratings systems. They (Chess.com) have mathmaticians available that could do this easily (and fairly). Of course, everyone will belly-ache, but I think it would be best in the long run.
I agree!
I think we don't need to take this rating so serious. All Internet ratings (ICC, Playchess, ches.com , etc) are absolutely virtual and have not any practical importance.
A titled player in this site jokingly asked ...'to compete with the top guys here I will also have to get Rybka 3 , then wont we draw a lot?'
My reply: I believe that a super GM aided by Rybka 3 always has an advantage over a lesser GM who is also using the same engine. Both should produce very high quality games devoid of blunders. This is the essence of Advanced Chess being promoted by Kasparov. Kasparov added, while computers are helping us in our everyday tasks (in research, at work, at home, etc. and even in analysis of other sports) why can't we do the same in chess? Instead of making it an enemy, why don't we make it an ally?'
I wish chess.com would realize the futility of stopping or even minimizing cheating and embrace Advanced Chess. Then the playing field will be leveled.
As of when I'm posting this comment (aka 11 years later), there are 3k elo players
Of course it is!!! I even can show the example and how GM Gabuzyan got there, just read this article https://chessmood.com/blog/crossing-the-plateau-and-reaching-3000-on-chess-co
Yes, @ChessNetwork did reach 4200 in bullet, and Hikaru, I think he has 3300 or 3200
Oh and these extremely OP legends @HuntressesofArtemis and @Snowflake have a rating of 3000 bullet.
yes, future is now old man
I recently decided my rating is not so important. As long as each year it has risen slightly that will do for me. I recently got caught up in going for a higher rating all out and to be honest it didnt do my overall chess much good.
In my opinion i think Elo on chess.com is affidable like Elo Fide, i reach 2152 Elo Rapid for the moment and i can see when i increase my elo on chess.com i beat the most strong player of my club that has about 1800 Elo Fide and online i draw with Rani Hamid ( Woman International Master) and win a Fide Master in a bullet. I am almost strong like they, and they have more than 2000 Elo FIDE
So there are no big differences about Elo Fide and Elo on Chess.Com, i think max about 100 or 200 Elo.
yeah because chess.com overinflated their ratings
Overinflated, as opposed to inflating them just the right amount.
Anyway, this topic is older than the kids who bumped it.
Is walking on water possible?
About half a step, sure. One, or even two if you are quick.
The reason why we have people achieving over 2700 so easily is that they're outliers in the distribution of chess.com members. We don't have enough people around their playing strength so the rating is proportionally higher than if they were in a population with the strength that FIDE has.
4000 rating in Chess Network! Hmmmm....isn't that absurd? Then we can say that compared to that our rating system here is more 'sane.' I wish we can tighten it a little bit further to make ratings here more realistic. (Here goes my idealism again!) :)