chess.com ratings are deflated against USCF

I am just disproving his points with evidence; it has nothing to do with my credibility.

Have you considered employment with the CIA? Your knowledge of North Korea is truly impressive.

Do you have more than one username on this website?

http://www.chess.com/members/view/adam_rinkleff

You're only allowed one.

See, reading comprehension is your problem... I'm not going to respond to anything more you say, sorry. There is a very obvious response that I could type, but if you just re-read what I've already written, you will see that I have addressed the issue more than once. I'm sorry some of you are so illiterate that this just confuses you. I just don't have time to waste on every idiot who wants to argue. You could also figure it out for yourself, this is really not complicated.

Corrijean's data is interesting, and I appreciate her collecting the information. However, it is not a random sample.

We see a wide variance among those players, as most people who commented suspected. Also, I do not know what inferences we can make about USCF and chess.com ratings for players with lower ratings based on the information Corrijean collected.

Still, Corrijean's post shows that it's at least possible that something interesting and informative may come from this thread!

Do I care what you think? No.

I think that you do.

Do I care what  you think? No. Some of  you just can't take a hint.

this is just a 1326 rated player.  He doesn't know what he's talking about.

lol, what a tool.

I still think you do.

what I am just repeating history?  you should be an expert on history since you're a history teacher.

That's the main objection I have to it myself. But I could not think of a way to accomplish randomness in the limited amount of time I was willing to devote to the data search. It was quite time consuming even without trying to achieve randomnesss. Any ideas?

Too bad the OP refuses to share his random data set. As I said, it is very easy to run a linear regression in Excel, so if the data set was provided, it would be easy to find the correlation.

My blitz here is 1513.

There is no way my USCF (f i had one) would be 1763.

OTB I'd expect to score maybe 2½/10 against players of that strength.

Surely there is some correlation, if you use a very large sample. But there are going to be so many exceptions it would be useless to try and calculate for individual players.

If there is a real correlation between USCF and blitz here, surely it must also hold true for everything else here, not only blitz. What makes Blitz special?

So, here are my stats for this site, please give me your estimatation of my potential USCF rating, and how you got there?

It seems odd to me to spend more time refusing to share a data set than it would take to post the requested data set.

Yah, I agree, if you would read what I have written a little more closely, you would know that I am talking specifically about people who actively play both blitz and standard at both chess.com and in the USCF. You are not such an individual and I was not talking about your rating.

Trolling is an odd concept to you? How long have you been here? 

Ah, ok, it works for carefully handpicked samples only, sorry if I missed that hidden in the preceding 270+ posts.

Quite a while. Guess I should be used to people pulling stunts like this by now. 

I think I understand now:

This is a picture of a Blackheaded heron.

Now, my theory is that all herons have black heads, and all birds with black heads are herons. I know this to be true, because that was the case with 20 blackheaded herons I examined.