Which ELO is more accurate?
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
I think chess.com is pretty accurate. Blitz / bullet ratings usually correlate well with each other, and are quite close to actual FIDE ratings (see mine for reference). With the recent boost, standard ratings are also reasonably close to FIDE ratings, but they have to at least be matched by appropriate bullet / blitz ratings in case of you know what...
MyFIDEis1579 wrote:
neither, online ratings are horrendously inflated, proven by statistics
ratings are comparisons within a pool, real ratings are based on people who take the time to go to tournaments and generally take chess seriously. online ratings the pool is anybody who can go online and feels like playing chess. these players are usually extremely bad compared to the people who go to tournaments.
but the problem is the cheating problem, some good players online get their ratings deflated by 1000 rated cheaters, and don't play accordingly against an engine user, so their online rating might be a bit lower.
"Proven by statistics" Care to cite your references?
Also, what is with the second paragraph - a false dichotomy? Maybe lower rated players have inflated ratings, but I think the higher rated guys on here, most of them titled players, do "generally take chess seriously."
Cheating in bullet? Hmm...
I think Chess.com uses Glicko ratings. Professor Elo designed his ratings algorithm before computers and the 'Net came along and allowed a massive increase in both the size of the pool and the speed with which ratings could be adjusted
Which site gives the most accurate ELO rating, Chess.com, or Chess 24? I would especially like the feedback from players that have an actual USCF or FIDE rating. Chess 24 seems to be the more `generous` rating, at least at my rating level. Over there I'm rated well over 1800 in 15 minute, here at Chess.com, I'm 1500 in 15 minute on a good day. I don't really fool myself into thinking I'm anywhere near actual 1800, but it looks good in print, lol.