The curious case of 1200: The Expert's rating

@xor_eax_eax05 - If you want to continue your delusional that the chess.com ELO system is broken, then try lichess.

1800 FIDE is equivalent to 2050 on lichess. 

@auntheknight - What time control? The corresponded FIDE rating for 1900-2000 lichess is 1650 FIDE. 

I'm 2050 on lichess classical. I'm also inclined to believe that the rating subtraction should be bigger. 

@auntheknight - do you have any kind of OTB rating? 

@AunTheknight - What is your USCF online rating? 1400?

Ive started chess here 10months ago and dropped down to 290 rating... Shortly to go back up to something like 800.

Then I've played on lichess a bit and got 1300blitz and 1500rapid there. People are curtious, gentleman and resign when they've lost.

So knowing what everyone say it's about 200 points difference I've come back here. But, it seems like difference is more like 300 points at least. At the moment, I am 950blitz and 1100rapid here and getting more points should be easy, but it isn't. Every game is a strugle here. People are so much more faisty here. They'll literally try to drag your soul down in any way possible not to loose in -6 positions. They'll play just like you've got nothing in -2 to -3 positions. So, clearly one needs to develop merciles attitude. I've completely erased from my mind, it's done, he's lost to, finish him in quickest and least risky fashion or if you can't keep the current advantage and use it to queen or checkmate with rook and knight, he wants it, he deserves it.

People here rarely drop their peaces, but pawns drop a lot and I'm starting to use strategies now, it makes game more enjoyable the better your oponents are. But, people here have talent to drag you down to their level and you really need to get above the 1200rating to start playing chess here to look anything. And this 1100 rating better than 80% players here is silly. It just shows how many people don't know anything about chess then.

@NDc89 - I think rating inflation with lichess is most prevalent at the 500-1500 level. However, it diminishes gradually as you go up. Quite the opposite here, where the 500-1500 level ratings are accurate, but there's more rating inflation at the top level. 

Not really,you need to be patient and they all blunder before 35 moves under 1300 here.

@NDc89 - I'd say players even at 1500 still blunder, it's just more convoluted and rarely 1-2 move sequences. 

 So in that game I had 3 inaccuracies and 2 mistakes in 61 moves, and according to you that's FAR BELOW 1200 play. 97.3% accuracy against a 2090 player implies Im far below 1200. Right. Go to the profile of any under 2000 player on this site and look at their games, check to see if they all average just 1 or 2 inaccuracies per game all the time. Every player on this thread under 2000 can attest they average far more than 3 or 4 inaccuracies per game. Hardly a sign of being "far lower than 1200". 

 For example YOU had 11 inaccuracies, 2 mistakes and 1 blunder in one of your last losses, as a matter of fact if you look at many of your games you have as many mistakes as under 1000 elo players from this very same site (or more). That's 14 mistakes in one game. What would that make you?

 This also just goes to show how bad the elo ladder on this site is, that someone like you can be 1500, but many 1000 elo players I've faced play stronger, more accurate chess than you - which was the main point of my posts in this thread before you and all the other trolls derailed it by attacking my chess play and try to convince me so hard Im fabricating lies and games (and you keep trying so hard, at page 39 of this post).

 I also noticed most of the games you analyse on this site are your one-sided wins so it's obvious your accuracy in the Rapid time control will be so high. The system calculates the accuracy for your profile based on the analysed games. So I would nor brag too much about that - you have only analysed 140 games out of your 900. Hardly a trustworthy stat as it stands now. Go analyse a big majority of your games - maybe 90% of your games - and then you can talk about "accuracy".

 Finally, you may not know, but I own a Chessbase + Mega Database license. I dont study chess  as in reading books, etc., but I LOVE analysing games with an engine. And it's a lie "at that level you can't afford to make a mistake per game". I analyse OTB games from players above 2000+ FIDE all the time. They make mistakes and blunders ALL THE TIME, especially the under 2300. And not just 1 or 2 per game. You just have to let Stockfish analyse each move for 10/15 seconds and you will see their game is plagued with mistakes. Run them through average centipawn loss and you'll see. 

 You can't say someone who made 5 slightly inaccurate moves (according to an engine) made 5 worse mistakes per game than someone who had one mistake and stepped into forced 1-move mate either. Even someone who steps into forced 1-move mate could have played stronger chess than his opponent and just lose due to this blunder. We are talking about playing strength. Anyone can blunder 1 move and lose. Go check Kramnik vs the computer and how he missed mate in 1 against him. Is he not a strong player? Lol.

 This is exactly why I claim the low elo ladder on this site is meaningless. I've analysed games from 1000 elo players on this site and the centipawn loss is incredibly low - then you pick up games from players 500, 600 elo points higher than them and they are so bad (statistically analysed with the Stockfish 13 engine). And then you have other 1000 elo players who really are 1000 elo and you are up 10 points in material by move 10. So you really can't trust the elo here, rendering the topic about 1200 being the expert rating, meaningless. 

 You still dont believe me? Look at this:

www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/26680824163

 Until I blundered I was destroying this 1500. -3.5, he was completely outplayed. He had 8 errors. According to your criteria that's far far far below 1200 strength, right? 

www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/26701178065

I outplayed this 1700 from the start until I hung a rook. Is it normal for a 1700 to go -2.5 by move 8? Lol. "Strong" 700+ elo difference, lol.

Oh look, a 1900 I beat in Daily

https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/daily/304560324

5 or 6 mistakes on each side. Guess we are far below 1200 right? 

I have also posted games from the other site, including a loss vs a FIDE WIM and you are here telling me that's below 1200 play, lol. Go and tell the titled player that's also 1200 elo play too. Wtf.

Troll. Just like that catmaster guy. 

I win 55% of my games at another site, playing at a 1700 level. My puzzle rating comes in between 1800-1900 at both sites. My lowest win ever at the other site is against a 1300. Here at Chess.com, my best win is against a 1092. 1000 rated players here are harder to win against than 1600’s at the other site. I almost never lose against 1500 FIDE players. People who I know that are true 1000 rated players, they literally never win against me in OTB and at the other Chess sites. 1100’s here are using engines, and when my last daily game is finished here, I will not be playing any more daily games. I also can’t win against 600-700 blitz players here. It’s a joke. I have no interest in playing against a computer. Online cheating in Chess is ruining the game. I understand to just play and learn, but it is too frustrating knowing that nobody is doing anything about the cheating. Then you add the fact that chess.com encourages cheating in daily games by paying members (automatic vacation when they are about to flag), it is ludicrous. I will continue to use this site for training, but the cheating that is allowed and encouraged has ruined the games.