What really makes me wonder is since the average rating of standard chess is higher than blitz how come they highered standard ratings of all players... now the average will be about 200 points above blitz or what????
I noticed computer4 Impossible has around 2.2-2.4 elo in blitz but only around 2.0-2.1 elo in standard chess!!!!!!!!!!!!!
XPLAYER; what don't you understand??
Why people don't read long posts full of giant font.
What really makes me wonder is since the average rating of standard chess is higher than blitz how come they highered standard ratings of all players... now the average will be about 200 points above blitz or what????
I noticed computer4 Impossible has around 2.2-2.4 elo in blitz but only around 2.0-2.1 elo in standard chess!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The average rating of standard was lower than blitz.
The average rating of standard has never been lower than blitz.
You can still see that on the stats which haven't been updated.
XPLAYER; what don't you understand??
I have perfect understanding there is no competition on the higher end level of standard games so it causes players to not compete they go to were the competition is mainly Blitz and Bullet do you think if every1 on chess.com played standard the same way they play bullet there would be a need to increase peoples points? The answer is NO
It wasn't that there was no competition, it was that the high-level competition had low ratings due to everybody else's ratings being deflated. Put simply an 1800 standard player would have been playing at around a 2000-2200 level, a 2000 level standard player would be playing like a master, FM-IM strength.
What really makes me wonder is since the average rating of standard chess is higher than blitz how come they highered standard ratings of all players... now the average will be about 200 points above blitz or what????
I noticed computer4 Impossible has around 2.2-2.4 elo in blitz but only around 2.0-2.1 elo in standard chess!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The average rating of standard was lower than blitz.
I am confused so this says the average is
http://www.chess.com/livechess/players?type=Standard
Bullet: 1135
Blitz: 1087
Standard: 1159
Are you saying those are wrong or calculating them in a different way?
Yeah, now boost the blitz pool 300 points ;)
I don't understand the ratings so I can't comment on it. Obviously something's being changed because we've had 6 threads on it in 24 hrs. Remember the messages a while back?? "I can't delete!, I can't archive". I'm sure staff is doing the best they can. If you see them post an answer in one thread, spread the word.
you have a 2259 live bullet ranking where is your standard ranking?? I rest my case
Anecdotic evidence FTW!
XPLAYER; what don't you understand??
I have perfect understanding there is no competition on the higher end level of standard games so it causes players to not compete they go to were the competition is mainly Blitz and Bullet do you think if every1 on chess.com played standard the same way they play bullet there would be a need to increase peoples points? The answer is NO
It wasn't that there was no competition, it was that the high-level competition had low ratings due to everybody else's ratings being deflated. Put simply an 1800 standard player would have been playing at around a 2000-2200 level, a 2000 level standard player would be playing like a master, FM-IM strength.
I'm not trying to get into an agruement. If you wish to believe that their is competition in high level standard chess that is entirely on you, but let me ask you 1 thing your a monitor and you have a 2259 live bullet ranking where is your standard ranking?? I rest my case
I have played around 800 standard games on Chess.com, my highscore was around 1940, highscore in blitz was 2180 and highscore in bullet 2365.
"let me ask you 1 thing your a monitor" Ok, SEE SPOT RUN he's a staff member, and his user name is monitor
This points adjustment lines us back up to what our official yahoo rankings were. Yahoo transactions were double the points transferred.
So all the ppl who came here after yahoo shut down, have their yahoo ratings restored. Yahoo always had an influx of new accts, so there was always a source of fresh points.
I ran a points system on paper, i had to use pencil and paper, as well as a printer and calculator. It was for elementary kids, and i started them out at 800. Next year i boosted them up to 900, and then 1000, if they stayed another year in the class.
Since i didn't have an equation, I had to manual chart everything out, and then look at the chart to see what the transaction amount was.
equal level players transacted 15 or 16 pts. max pts transacted is 30 to 33 pts. from someone. min pts transacted is 0 or 1.
i later found there was an equation online, took a look at it, but liked my chart better. I had worked so hard to make that chart. I had to watch a ton of games, and record how many pts changed from what ratings they were.
I only had about 30 or so kids in each class, and told them that their rating is only reflective of what is in the class, but outside of their class could be different and be shaken up. I've seen a few undefeated kids cry when they lose for the first time.
I'd never thought something like a couple hundred points boost that I did for elementary kids would be something that applied to professional adults. But it was something I did to adjust the ratings to make it more accurate.
I did feel underrated at standard chess. I only chose that because the ads slowed me down and i couldn't play blitz. But i didn't care because i'm on a memorization quest. It doesn't matter if it's a cheater or a computer, memorization will eventually defeat it all, eventually i'm going to turn into a computer.
Hopefully before you memorize chess you will remember that that would be a huge waste of time. Good luck though?
Before solving it, he will have to quit his job.
1160 to 1315
If the goal is to get chess.com ratings close to OTB ratings,
Next steps:
1) boost the blitz pool
2) deflate the online pool... 
XPLAYER; what don't you understand??