Yeah, I think they may have over-corrected by about 200 points at the top.
Standard Ratings Boost
Sort:
Well, it's nice having a rating over 1000 points higher than your best win. :)
.
Even my rating also jumped 200 points suddenly. When I last played my std rating was around 1560. Now it's showing 1700+
mine didn't jump at all? is there reasoning behind that ?
I have had no boost!!!!!!!!!!!!
The difference between fide rating and chess.com rating can easily be manifested: Every players rating begin on chess.com with 1200 Elo-Point, so it deepends on wich players "leave" the system, if it is inflationary or deflationary. In my opinion it is deflationary because the most good players start with low rating and play only fast matches when they reached high ratings in standart.
The fide rating seems to work a bit different. You will be apart of the rating-system when you're results of playing would achieve a rating of 1200. Years ago 2200 was the border. So there are many players which leave the system with under 1200 elo which means the system is inflationary.
In my opinon the best to fix differnt ratings is to chose the best 10 players (which have ratings in both sysmtems) and add the average difference between both ratings to all players. So 200 elo still mean a chance to win by 75%. Now we have a broken rating system, because chess.com ratings are not representing the result of the matches and we have to play many games to fix it. 
What a comedic mess. Who will take the fall for this one ? Computers make our emotional lives so much easier. 
Probably one win against a 2000 and you'd go up a ton as an unrated
Oct 23, 2014
0
#172
Hey all. I have read the feedback. Thanks for letting us know.
Before doing this, we took a hard look at the numbers, and on average, saw a HUGE disparity between standard, blitz, and bullet. We had some theories on why, but the truth was they were there. Not for every single person, but it was significant and across the board. I mean, people rated 2500 in blitz were 1900 in standard. That's not right.
Anyway, we made the change. It is ONCE and DONE. Now things will settle out as you play. After a few games it should be more stabilized, normalized, absorbed into the ecosystem. If you are not happy about it, I'm very sorry. For every complaint we have here, we've also had a complaint in customer support that "Your standard ratings are rediculously low!! I'm leaving the site if you don't fix it!" etc. We are often in a no-win situation, and do the best we can to please as many people as we can.
Was this perfect? Maybe not, and I'm sorry. Again, we try really hard!
Oct 23, 2014
0
#173
To those complaining that their rating increased, decreased, didn't change... here are two points. One, this is a free online chess site, a courtesy provided to us, and the ratings here are not real over the board ratings. There are tons of people here who pad their ratings against much weaker human and computer opponents, and that is something you cannot do in real tournament play. These are not real ratings, try to not take them too seriously. If you want a real rating, go play in a real tournament. Which leads to point two. Chess is a game: try to have fun with it. Chess.com provides us a free place to play, with tons of members, and you can always find a decent game. Isn't that the whole point?
A chess.com rating is a real chess.com rating.
im no 1580 rated player
Oct 23, 2014
0
#176
pocklecod wrote:
A chess.com rating is a real chess.com rating.
True, but how much does that mean when (1) games aren't sectioned by strength; (2) ratings can be padded against much weaker human and computer opponents; and (3) arbitrary, not performance based, rating inflations are added?
The ratings here are loose and easily manipulated, and many here do just that, because the rules are set in a way that enables it. On the flip side, this is a feature laden site, with tons of players and lots of excellent info, and you can almost always find a good game or team match. To that end, it serves its purpose exceedingly well.
Oct 23, 2014
0
#177
My rating was not boosted and remains almost 200 below my current USCF. My USCF recently declined due to playing a couple of underrated juniors. It will go back up when I play adults. My USCF peak (two years ago) is nearly 300 above my standard rating.
Oct 23, 2014
0
#178
I'd like to thank the good folks at chess.com for boosting my rating after two straight losses...lol
No boost for me either. Perhaps I'm considered "inactive". But what is the definition of "active"?
Anyway I'm really frustrated by the fact that Chess.com said nothing about this rating change. If I had not checked this forum, I could not have known what happened. Disgusting.
My rating has dropped about 200 points lol.
Wow, it's fixed. Unbelievable.
... but I never ever had an OTB rating of 2250, not even in USCF :-)
IMHO the standard ratings on chess.com were way too high.
Anyway, thank you :-)