Is it normal for your rapid rating to lag behind you daily rating?

I know, in general, playing with shorter time controls is harder than classical chess play. My daily rating is currently ~200 points better than my rapid rating.

I definitely play more daily games & acknowledge this is probably as simple as play more rapid games & I'll get better. But is this a common experience?

yup

I seem to have noticed quite a number of people who are very good at Rapid and not seemingly good at all in daily games. It would be interesting to try to compile some numbers on that. To me, they are two different games.

I've also noticed that strong Daily players are some of the strongest Rapid/B/Blitz players.

My daily rating is 200 pts higher than rapid. I believe it's because I've only played a handful of games and the two ratings will converge as I play more daily. 

You gotta look at the number of games played, and also the number played at once. I see a lot of relatively weak players playing several dozen or more “Daily” games at once. It is clear form the quantity that they are essentially playing blitz. Correspondence players, on the other hand, keep their game load manageable and expend a great deal of time researching and calculating. Their ratings, consequently, tend to be much higher than their ratings in other time controls.

@Ziryab

I think you nailed it. I keep to no more than 2 daily games at a time and think long and hard between moves with no regard to time, as I know my opponents do as well.  I've had 3 games going at once on occasion, and even that unnerves me. Two is optimal. 

One exception.... I did rush a move recently because it was dinner time. I blundered and lost a bishop, and eventually lost the game. The move could have waited 3 days.....but NOOOOOO...I had to make it right THEN!

@Mike_Kalish

Thanks.

I played correspondence chess quite actively 1996-2018. First post card, then email, then websites. When chessdotcom came into existence, I had games going at half a dozen sites. My peak quantity was in the 70s. When I limited myself to six games and one site, my performance improved dramatically. I peaked over 2200, while my USCF OTB peak was 1982.

70's?  That's mind boggling. It seems to me that that would dilute the significance of any one game and none would feel important. I could see myself just making moves quickly trying to "keep up" and thinking "So what if I blunder in this game? I've got 70 others to compensate."

Maybe you were more disciplined?

Things got out of control because I was playing on teams. Some of those team events could add a dozen games or more. Before they finished, another round would begin. 

As @Ziryab alluded to, the typical person who plays daily games spends at most a few minutes per move. I spend as long as I need to be convinced that I have explored every relevant line. Which sometimes takes 2-3 hours. It makes a monumental difference in quality of play.  As a result, my Daily rating is about 500 points higher than my Rapid rating.

I never have more than 3 correspondence games at once.  That's a pretty good number.

I think this is the best approach. It seems to be how Grand Masters answer the question too regarding genuine growth in your chess-playing-abilities. I have dedicated more time and effort to daily games so far.

I review my losses carefully. I am beginning to play 15 | 10 and 30 minute time controls. For me, these controls are about as 'fast' as I'd like to get. They're fast enough, yet allow for deeper calculation.

I am confident if I continue investing time into playing more games here and reviewing the games carefully, I'll see the growth I want. 

I laugh at your blunder only because I know this pain all too well. You did better than me! My rushed moves invariably lead to the loss of my Queen!!!!!

@ChessCaviar93

If you're laughing at my blundering a bishop, you should have seen how I got checkmated. You'd be hysterical!

Is your OTB rating way lower usually?

I disagree. I can definitely tell the difference between a player 200 points above me from one 200 below me. When I play someone at my level, it's usually a tough game. Online ratings are extremely meaningful for playing online games.