My guess is that most of the rating exams show tactical problems, and your tactical abilities are exceptional.
Rating Exams
Sort:
I get the same kind of problem myself. One rating "exam" put me in the 1600s, but I get my clocks cleaned against players with that OTB rating. Granted, I admit that my strategy sucks.
Well, I do not know what the exams test you on, but your rating depends on a variety of factors. Even if you know everything a 2000 person would know, that does not mean that you will not make mistakes more often than one, nor does it predict the state of mind you will be in during a game, especially an OTB one, when psychology plays a very important role.
Funny that I came across this thread.... I was just pondering my rating/ability ratio a few mintues ago.
I kinda came to a rash conclusion that is someone opposite of your situation. I surmised that even though my rating on this site is now 1700... I only play on a regular basis of an accurate rating of about 1550 (give or take).
I was wondering why this was (before I found this thread) and I thought to myself, I probably have the tactics and ability to see a certain position like a 1700'er.. but my performance in actual games, and the moves I make on an actual chessboard during a real game... and far below that!! Which is a shame... and infact is the real rating of my performance.
Interesting topic.....
I have taken a few rating exams and they rank me as a 2000 rated person. But how come I can never pass 1900 on this site and 1700 OTB? Are the exams not accurate? Or am I just not playing well?