Rating on chess.com
Sort:
Thanks, I'll read it.
How comparable is it to USFC or other national rating methods?
Chess.com ratings aren't directly comparable to USCF or FIDE ratings and don't directly measure chess talent... they predict how well you'll do in a game against others here, and they're good at that! Some people take 30s/move, others 30m/move. Some people use an analysis board, some people do not. Some people play only when they're alert, some play even when they're tired. These are some of the differences. 
thats exactly how I see it, but one of my friends, wont mention the name, got depressed after his rating went beneath his expectations on this site. I tired to explain to him that this is not some national rating or it doesnt mean he is bad at chess. anyway, thanks for all the responses...
There is another thread on this if you want to see it here as well. Then you can see what others think of this.
Oct 23, 2007
0
#7
the best I can come up with is a list of a few top players with their FIDE or USCF rating and their www.chess.com rating here.
Name FIDE/USCF chess.com
Vovk 2557 0
Khmelnitsky 2517 0
Dembo 2464 2278
Gill 2455 0
Paolo 2414 0
Ginsburg 2414 0
Perunovic 2407 0
tarrasch 2400 1912
Roghani 2358 1991
Belgrade 2354 1968
Turzo 2331 2000
Milanovic 2308 0
edwar 2300 1813
Monty82 2297 2020
Mont-Reynaud 2250 1153
Blalock 2240 1814
Communisis 2227 1836
phobetor 2215 1899
Rogersky 2210 2191
Schiller 2200 0
belissimo 2195 1914
Wall 2170 2243
startstek 2168 1927
andrzej 2165 1800
Detective 2026 1812
zorryxx 2000 1825
chesstyle 2000 1824
Euri 1987 2067
chessiq 1964 1904
AlekhinesCat 1950 1817
rockytal 1940 1916
Creg 1937 2019
Mustang_66 1898 1934
erad 1891 1999
Warrior 1891 1806
lubo 1856 1853
jay 1850 1904
darce 1842 1981
knightwolf 1813 1982
piotr 1800 1797
gideon 1650 1914
littleman 1646 1921
KnightNotHorse wrote: There is another thread on this if you want to see it here as well. Then you can see what others think of this.
thanks mr. KNH
This could be a factor of online chess with 3 to 5 day time per move. May be lesser players are able to think through because they are not under time pressure, nullifying the advantage of better players.
The chess.com rankings may be worse than real rankings for better players. However, for most regular players, the chess.com rankings are definitely inflated. Mine is case in point. I am a beginner and I win a few games against other beginners and my rating approaches 1600. I am definitely not a 1600 player at this point....
Wow Bill that's real nice. No wonder a lot of the people on that list beat me, now I don't feel as bad :D
Oct 23, 2007
0
#11
I am sure there are a lot more I could have added with FIDE/USCF ratings, but not advertised. I could had added richardhayden, rowrulz, and matthelfst, for example.
I beleive that rating numbers are inflated if the statistical sample size is low. I am in 1700's with 24 games played. That is not a sufficient sample size to reflect my true rating.
Well, if you take out the players who don't play, you can take a corrolation factor and make a best fit line.
Excellent thread. Was curious about this.
Hello all;
I would like to know about the accuracy of the rating on this forum. How comparable is it to USFC or other national rating methods? Thanks.