USCF Ratings

Of those of you out there that are USCF rated (or even FIDE), how much inflation of ratings online would you reason there to be?

Edit note: The forum has somewhat transposed into a discussion of the place of ratings, OTB vs CC, etc. Which is good.

The time-honored tradition continues....

I wonder if women's ratings are inflated vs. men's?

Obviously there is inflation.... But i'm just wondering what the comparison is between this site and real life. Let's say that my real life rating was 1600. That would make the inflation +250. Catch my drift?

I am also wondering this. Anyone know the specific inflation between Live chess standard and USCF?

Yeah, I don't think you can compare.  My CC game isn't affected much by research or the lengthy time given per move...whereas there are some who really really make the most of the time and database. 

 I don't know crap about ratings, but I don't see why they should be.

I don't believe in inflation.

I believe in inflation, but anything above the manufacturer's specified value is bad for your tires.

schachgeek posted:

"For example, Reb (who is 2500 on chess.com) is only rated 1600 something in USCF postal, and 1800 something in ICCF. And yet his FIDE and USCF otb ratings are in the neighborhood of 2200. But he is primarily active over the board. So who's to say his chess.com rating is accurate. If he were to focus on chess.com play, I have no doubt he'd be capable of 2700-2900 (chess.com rating points)."

this might be very accurate.   I would speculate:  Reb hasn't played USCF postal since he moved overseas many years ago, nor has he played ICCF chess for quite a few years either.    During those years, his skill has risen well above his previous playing level.     That his USCF rating is about the same as his FIDE rating is because USCF "adjusted" to the higher of either rating a while back.   Reb is primarily active over the board, and that means FIDE events, not USCF events as he lives in Europe.

     Due to the ability of all users (capability/encouraged behavior) to analyze at depth in turn-based Chess.com games, they are more like correspondence games - in that the player's rating might be considerably higher than his/her OTB rating....      it is entirely likely that schachgeek's estimate of his potential 'high' rating is quite accurate.

essentially:  concur.

The explanation should be clear for any normal human. You were told this many many times and refuse to accept it: nowadays CC ratings are meaningless because of computer assistance. Shall we try to make a drawing for you to understand?

2700-2900 here means 95-100% agreement with the first choice of Rybka. If Reb were so good, he would get first his GM title :)

 No, because you're the one that doesn't understand. Just because some CC ratings are actually indicative of computer play and not the play of the person they are ostensibly doesn't mean that CC ratings are meaningless. My rating is a reasonable predictor of my performance playing CC on this site. Just because some of that performance may be against computers does not affect it's predictive ability.

The ratings on this site are an excellent guide to an appropiate selection of opponents on this site, and they serve well to to assess proabilities of certain results. Comparing ratings here to ratings elsewhere or presuming some mythic "real world ratings" has entertainment value, but no statistical significance.

Your arguments are too logical, you don't happen to be a chess player or somethign do you?

huh?  What do chess players and logic have to do with one another? 

I've seen a guy on here with a 1800 rating who is only 1100 USCF...

Correct me if I am wrong, but to compare USCF (or FIDE) ratings with CC ratings or Live Chess ratings is to compare completely different things.

- USCF / FIDE ratings refer to games played incertain conditions: long games, certain time settings, no databases available, "live" play ...

- CC ratings refer to games played in other conditions: databases are allowed, time rules are different, no "live" play ...

- And Live Chess ratings normally refer to fast games (1 to 20 minutes?), so time rules are again very different than in USCF/FIDE, ...

So, I believe than it is not possible at all to find any kind of conversion between USCF/FIDE, CC and Live Chess ratings as they refer to games played in totally different conditions.

This is what my common sense tells me; I may be wrong and any experienced player can, of course, correct me.

P.D.: BTW, I strongly believe that it is a mistake to refer to USCF/FIDE ratings as "real life". CC is also "real life": it is chess played in certain conditions and rules. CC is not "fake" or "simulation" of "real chess". This is how I see the whole matter.

I've seen gaps even more dramatic that that. These differences arouse suspicions, but prove nothing.

Your chess.com rating is very important. With it and the requisite cash, you can buy coffee at Starbucks.

My USCF rating is 1564, but I only play in one tournament/year.  I estimate my actual OTB strength to be around 1630-1650.  So in my case, my online rating on chess.com is inflated by around 300 points. 

Online rating at chess.com: around 1900.

Blitz on chess.com: 1650-1700

Bullet rating on chess.com: around 1650

Chess mentor rating: around 2100

Tactics trainer: around 1900-2000

That's not totally shocking. 

I think people with actual OTB tourney experience have a pretty big advantage right out of the gate when playing against other "average" chess.com members.

Erik (founder of chess.com) is rated 1700 over the board, but has a 1950-2050 online rating.

Another guy I sorta know (Likesforests) has a 1500 otb rating, but 2100 on chess.com.