Online chess ratings do not count for much.

I agree, ReedRichards.

Ofcourse rating still says something, they aren't an exact way to measure someones Otb ability, but if someone is rated 900, then that does say something about his skill. Just as if someone is rated 2500, that does tell you atleast one of the following two things, that he's a fairly good player, or/and that his computer is fairly strong.

First, the existence of people using chess engines is irrelevant to the ratings of the people who aren't using chess engines. Second, no rating gives any direct indication of ability: they are performance ratings, not ability ratings. So ratings here are as real as any other rating.

Yes "Tricklev" I see your point. What I can't understand...is that the discussions on these blogs seem not to realize this or just ignores it all together...so if you have a high rating you must be saying something important...and if your rating is low, then you don't know what you are talking about....this is what I'm getting while reading blogs online.

Correct "ichabod801"...my main point though is why is it that one's lower rating is looked down upon during conversations here...as though the lower rated individual's opinion is less than that of say a higher rated player...don't tell me you have not seen any of these discussions.

Well, the rating is pretty much a measure of your ability (or well, your performance) to use your understanding and ideas in practice. If your rating is low, that suggests that your ideas aren't very good, or that you just fail to express them practicly.

Assuming two players with say a real rating of 1600 each joins chess.com.

 One plays only players say over 2000, then it is easy to see that this player's current rating may be low...because he has been trying to learn more by playing opponents better than him.

Two only plays opponents below his rating, then it is easy to see that this player's current rating may be high...because he probably would have a higher percentage of wins. 

So now player One has a rating of 700, while players Two has a rating of 2000.

But yet their real chess ability may be the same.

exactly, well put

Why brother to use a chess engine if your going to play somebody online?  To me the rating is only a goal for you to play against yourself, to see if you can better yourself. What praise is there if you cheat against yourself by playing online using such a thing?  I guess if might be helpful to see if your ideas are sound.

That's why I said "...do not count for much"...there is some value, it is an indicator...but it has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

The real reason I started this blog is that during conversations one would mention the other's rating and deliver disparaging remarks based solely on the other's lower rating...this I believe is wrong.

That won't happen. The guy playing high rated players will occaisonally win/draw, bringing his rating back up to 1600. Meanwhile, the guy playing the low rated players will occaisonally lose/draw, bringing his rating back down to 1600. There may be some discrepancy, but it will be more on the range of 50-100 points.

This is generally wrong. It's called an ad hominem attack, and is a logical fallacy. The person who presents a logical argument is irrelevant to the validity of that argument.

However, not all the arguments here are logical. If you are just saying a move is bad, without supporting your assertion with a solid analysis, you are basing your claim on your chess skill. If you have a low rating, it is reasonable to call into question your conclusion.

Your point is taken "ichabod801".

There are many factors that influence a person's rating, this is true. But you seem to be implying that if someone's rating is higher than yours you can discount that fact because chess engines exist.

I guess the issue here is how prevalent is cheating. Do you believe 1% cheat? 10%? More? Does your suspicion rise as the rating rises? I can't say I've ever suspected any of my opponents of using a chess engine. This doesn't mean they haven't.

With regard to the way lower rated players are treated on forums, sometimes their opinions are disregarded unfairly. But if someome with a rating of 1000 says that two bishops are always better than two knights, I don't think they should be surprised when someone suggests that they crack a book.

Some people express their points articulately and others don't. Chess rating doesn't come into it.

Some people put forward their opinion on chess matters as chess truth. Rating does come into it.

Some people can put forward rather aggressive opinions, inviting aggressive retorts. Those retorting will look for any ammunition they can use, including low rating.

All posts should be weighed on their individual merits. Sometimes rating is an important factor to take into account and other times it isn't. Trying to make people feel inadequate because of a low rating is a bit sad.

"electricpawn" I am not implying anything...I am pretty aware that most chess players work hard to be stronger player...my point is that ratings can be easily manipulated if this is the intent...with little hopes of detection.

No the issue is not one of cheating...those who cheat obtain no real benefits for doing so...the issue is more in your last paragraph..."sometimes lower rated players' opinions are disregarded unfairly." And my point was that the only reason this is so is because of their rating...something open to manipulation.

Why do we pay more attention to someone's rating rather than the content of their contribution...it happens a lot on this site.

My online rating really only serves about one purpose for me, to show me if I'm getting better.

The reason is because higher rated players feel that lower rated players have nothing to contribute, I read this quite frequently.

Well, that's a sad fact of life.  I hope that we are here to learn and teach, not just to get a thrill out of putting people down.  But I guess that is also a sad fact of life.  I hope to learn from the higher rated players and in fact have done so.  I really appreciate chess.com for that reason.