What should be rating here for A class player or expert ?

Basically, having a rating in one does not guarantee the perceived rating difference in the other.

What you are talking about here, is just the arc of the curve. You have to know what the deviation is between the 2 low points of the curve.

On one of the posts you were talking about where someone had tried to create a correlation, I remember the point range between the 2 low points was more than 300 points. That is ALOT of points (diviation) in a scale that only goes to about 2500.

If the difference had been 100points or less, then there might be a valid point. 

One thing I think can be said; if you have a truly earned high rating on Chess.com, you probably would do well with an official OTB rating.

That's a nice thing to say. Not sure I would agree.

Funny enough, I just returned to the U.S. and have been looking into playing USCF rated games. Perhaps one day I will see where I fit on the scale.

Obviously there's no individual guarantee. From what I've read and seen posted live standard and USCF are usually very similar. So far in this thread a guy with a 1900 USCF has displayed a 1700 blitz and an 1850 live standard. This is consistent with the numbers I would predict, give or take 100 odd for every rating.

Sure, it is not problem to find people who match or come close to matching the top of the curve.

When you say 'give or take 100....', you are actually talking about a 200 point range. This is nearly 10% of the entire scale. That's alot.

Perhaps one day Chess.com will collect stats on this so we don't have to rely on poorly collected stats.

Nah I mean within 100, not adding or subtracting 100 from both.

I've barely played live standard on here so its rating is actually below what it should be. My blitz has been up to 1850, too.

During the time that I've been an A Class player (USCF), my blitz rating here has fluctuated from 1633 to 1929. My peak USCF is 1982.

I don't find that ratings here are inflated, at least not blitz ratings.

Ziryab is your current USCF rating comparable to your 1980 live standard? If so, then I'm batting 100% (from a sample size of two) in my presumption that live standard and USCF are comparable while blitz is about 200+ lower on average.

A sample size of two is not any evidence to prove a point.

That was the joke. The point is that basically everyone who posts their recent USCF rating and who also plays live standard have very similar ratings. Similar enough that we can basically equate them. Blitz is nearly always much lower. Seriously, go look at any other rating thread and you will find plenty of people with USCF ratings almost exactly equivalent to live standard on chess.com.

You yourself have an 1839 live standard rating and a 1900 USCF rating.

I barely play live standard games...

Well you've played 350. But okay then you're not a good person to use as data as I admit there are plenty of individual reasons why certain discrepancies might appear and if you don't believe your personal love standard results are indicative of your playing strength, well, you would know. Still I offer anyone to go read past threads and note the replies of people who both play in USCF rated tournaments and routinely play live chess standard. You will see there is very rarely a 100 point difference.

Nope. After years of success avoiding losses to underrated children, I have a string of such draws and losses over the past fifteen months. My rating is 100 Elo below one year ago at this time, and thus ~130 below my Live Standard rating.

I used to play live standard more often, hence the couple hundred games. However, the only time I play now (except random games when I have a ton of time to kill) is when I play in the USCF online rapid tournaments on here.