Well, I'm 1568 FIDE. It depends.
The curious case of 1200: The Expert's rating
Sort:
It all depends on the person is the point. And I refrenced an article that I read. It's on one of these forums. He talked about rankings Fide in comparison to chess.com. It seemed logical. But who really knows? Is there really an honest way to decifer?
Very fair assessment Tonya. Don't know your real name obviously. But blitz is hard to gauge. I use blitz to learn different ideas. Never really played slow serious games.
Tonya_Harding wrote:
Optimissed a écrit :
I also suspect that people who say that chess.com over-rates players are wrong. There may be quite a complex relationship.
Mwell, I can't claim I have got any solid, irrefutable universal truth about it, but I can testify, the common opinion of OTB Chess competitors, is that, most of the time, Chess websites ratings are inflated compared to FIDE ratings.
This is very indirect but backyard professor has a few videos of his OTB 1700 rated friend in youtube and he missed things i would expect a 1700 to find in chess.com. Things like you can just push the h pawn to h6 to defend against a bishop queen diagonal battery (in queen's gambit declined for example). He suggested some good moves too but not as often.
On the other hand, sometimes 1700s in chess.com are so accurate that they touch 95%+ accuracies(and beat the crap out of me, talking about longer time controls) so im not so sure about that claim.
I would guesstimate that online ratings are probably 50-100 points inflated above national OTB ratings which are in turn 50-100 points (or more) inflated above FIDE ratings. So for example if you're 2400 on here you're probably around 2300 USCF and 2200 FIDE.
I say this because some of the ratings on here are nonsensical, e.g. 3200 for GM Nakamura. Now I'm not saying Nakamura doesn't play 3200 chess, he probably does, but when the world champion is 2880 FIDE, online ratings like 3200 don't seem to mean very much other than "I can beat everyone who logs into this server."
Just my opinion -Flotnikov
daxypoo wrote:
i was able to start at 800 fwiw
Me too, they started me at 800...but I'm talking about rapid
nTzT wrote:
I'm glad 150 is trivial, you are actually 900 in rapid then. Not bad for 3 weeks.
Well, technically, 900 is only 150 points away from 1050, which itself is only 150 points away from 1200, so he really isn't that far off, objectively speaking.
rishabh11great wrote:
1350 on here is not 1500 FIDE. First check properly what you write. Also a 1500 FIDE should not at all be below 1700 on chess.com.
Secondly, are you a serious noob who is calling FIDE infamous?
How do you explain then how I am rated 1510 FIDE but 1160 chess.com on a good day (I'm counting before chess.com gave 150 freelo to every body for no reason)?
https://ratings.fide.com/profile/551060655
https://www.chess.com/stats/live/bullet/4xel
FIDE itself isn't infamous per se, but their rating system is gaining a bad reputation because of a pedantic bunch which takes a great pleasure in using them to belittle online players.
Tonya_Harding wrote:
Optimissed a écrit :
I also suspect that people who say that chess.com over-rates players are wrong. There may be quite a complex relationship.
Mwell, I can't claim I have got any solid, irrefutable universal truth about it, but I can testify, the common opinion of OTB Chess competitors, is that, most of the time, Chess websites ratings are inflated compared to FIDE ratings.
That's because it's based on rapid chess and not real OTB chess. Playing a 40/90 or longer game results in a noticeable change in the quality of your moves.
Also your rating will slowly increase as you defeat weaker opponents. Chess.com has many more opportunities to defeat weaker opponents than USCF or FIDE rated.
Flotnikov wrote:
I would guesstimate that online ratings are probably 50-100 points inflated above national OTB ratings which are in turn 50-100 points (or more) inflated above FIDE ratings. So for example if you're 2400 on here you're probably around 2300 USCF and 2200 FIDE.
I say this because some of the ratings on here are nonsensical, e.g. 3200 for GM Nakamura. Now I'm not saying Nakamura doesn't play 3200 chess, he probably does, but when the world champion is 2880 FIDE, online ratings like 3200 don't seem to mean very much other than "I can beat everyone who logs into this server."
Just my opinion -Flotnikov
Also different time controls. Comparing mostly offhand blitz/bullet games on the internet with classical OTB games is weird even before taking the different pools into consideration.
The ratings will mostly correlate, but there isn't going to be some e=mc^2 benchmark to translate these ratings with any precision. Someone whose strength is opening prep and deep calculation is going to be different across time controls than someone who is great at tactics and thinking quickly.
Feb 3, 2021
0
#353
Tonya_Harding wrote:
Ratings are surely some inflated on Chess.com...
You feel that my 2751 rating was inflated?
... well... maybe a little.
adityatrivedi777 escribió:
@VladimirHerceg91, is that Harry Houdini in ur profile
Best post ever.
Feb 3, 2021
0
#355
blueemu wrote:
Tonya_Harding wrote:
Ratings are surely some inflated on Chess.com...
You feel that my 2751 rating was inflated?
... well... maybe a little.
How is it that the vast majority of games you play are around 98% accuracy? Even beating cheaters in your past games with 98-99.5% accuracy.
Feb 3, 2021
0
#356
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
blueemu wrote:
Tonya_Harding wrote:
Ratings are surely some inflated on Chess.com...
You feel that my 2751 rating was inflated?
... well... maybe a little.
How is it that the vast majority of games you play are around 98% accuracy? Even beating cheaters in your past games with 98-99.5% accuracy.
I'm JUST THAT GOOD.
He's a damn good player.
Feb 3, 2021
0
#358
If you were curious about my method of beating Engine Monkeys, it relies on the fact that cheaters rarely cheat in only one game. If they cheat at all, it is typically in several games. So as soon as I realize that I'm playing against an Engine Monkey, I immediately go into damage control mode and try to slow down the tempo and draw the game out as long as humanly possible. This gives the Cheat Detection team as much time as possible to catch the cheater in one of his OTHER games, which results in me winning on time when the cheater gets banned.
It actually works the majority of the time.
Feb 3, 2021
0
#359
Basically, yes.
Give a monkey an engine, and he thinks he's a chess player.
Feb 3, 2021
0
#360
blueemu wrote:
If you were curious about my method of beating Engine Monkeys, it relies on the fact that cheaters rarely cheat in only one game. If they cheat at all, it is typically in several games. So as soon as I realize that I'm playing against an Engine Monkey, I immediately go into damage control mode and try to slow down the tempo and draw the game out as long as humanly possible. This gives the Cheat Detection team as much time as possible to catch the cheater in one of his OTHER games, which results in me winning on time when the cheater gets banned.
It actually works the majority of the time.
How do you know you're playing against an engine monkey? I feel like its too arbitrary to simply say "they play too good". So, what's your analysis kind sir?
Calling bogus. The infamous Fide. Talk about overrated. The guy plays in a chess tournament and all of a sudden he's better than players playing online. Yeah a 1500 Fide may not even be a 1400 on chess.com. It varies on the person. Some Fide players stated they struggled to reach 1300 on here. Others are obviously doing well. The fact of the matter is nobody really knows. But I read an article that the average chess.com player at the lower levels is roughly 150 points lower than what their fide rating would be. So a 1350 would be a 1500 Fide. But at the upper levels chess.com starts to get more inflated with the rankings like a 2000 is really an 1900 and so on. Seemed like an accurate assessment. They had a tremendous amount of data supporting this idea
1350 on here is not 1500 FIDE. First check properly what you write. Also a 1500 FIDE should not at all be below 1700 on chess.com.
Secondly, are you a serious noob who is calling FIDE infamous?