blitz/bullet rating is the only thing that matters in internet chess

Yeah, it's not like you use the same board, the same pieces and the same rules.

Statistically, the OP is right. Blitz ratings here has a much higher correlation to OTB ratings than correspondence ratings do. 

His hypothesis that this is due to cheating has been stated by many others, but there's not enough evidence to support such a claim. 

What other reasons are there for the disparity in ratings?

xmon720 wrote: What's your opinion on standard time control, such as 30|0 or 45|45? Do you think it accurately represents chess skill? 

Yes, I think it is more accurate than correspondence, at least you playing your opponent and not the sources that could be available in correspondence chess. I prefer to play the player with current knowledge and not what sources they can use against me ( that is not real chess game).

Let's just think simply.
Most people either play one or the other.
A player that plays hours of blitz while juggling with dozens of correspondence is pretty rare.
Obviously, thus, there'll be a difference between the ratings. 

I have decent correspondencerating, and blitz 500 below. There are reasons for it. In correspondence i have the explorersupport, which secures that I dont loose in the start, but the main factor is time. Give me 90 minutes +30 sec pr move and I can both avoid a lot of blunders and do some nice thinking. Give me ten minutes, and I will not have enough time to think well and examine the board good enough.

Its different with the sharp young players. They are much faster, and can also play ok quite fast.

I have relatively little experience, a very low degree of automation, so I really needs a lot of time to figure out things. New problems pops up everywhere, which requires a lot of thinking.

IronedSandwich wrote: indeed. Correspondence Chess allows you to think, play the best move you can. It's truer than championships in some ways 

I agree, that is the beauty of correspondence chess, I played many beautiful and complicated endgames and if they were blitz or bullet game I would ruin some these endgames. So, I agree if a players are honest correspondence can be a big benefit to a player. But is it real chess when your opponent is playing like a grandmaster in the opening and his online rating is a mere 1500 and sudden he play like grandmaster in the endgame because of endgame manual; I want to know I playing my opponent true strength not what chess sources is available to him or her.

I'm about the same age as Djonni. I've won my city's blitz and standard championships several times. Blitz is far closer to standard chess than correspondence is. 

 I give you another example in correspondence let say 200 to 300 rating points more to your otb rating, so if player is 1500 uscf his online rating can be 1600, 1700 and 1800. I know a player from my chess club who is a 1500 uscf and his highest rating was 1650 uscf but his correspondence rating is 2450; there is something wrong here. In this same chess site I brought four experts, one the strongest is rated 2160 uscf and his online rating is a high 2300 and now chess.com he was at 2400 and drop to a mid 2300. How can a very strong expert be outrated by a mere 1500 uscf in correspondence, think about; the conclusion is this 1500 uscf is cheating. The beginning of this year this 1500 uscf play in our chess club and in six round he only score two points and lost to players lower than his otb rating.

i keep losing to a guy rated 1700 blitz on here and i am 2000 on here when we play OTB blitz. He won't play me online though.. I beat him in long time controls, and I draw him at rapid.. This is annoying as I have a higher rating on lower time controls.. luckily he loses to some of the other players that i beat which results in me winning the tournaments anyways..

It's quite funny how the OP decided to have a dig at CC players, yet his rating is 716 in correspondence chess with a total of 7 wins, 83 losses and 1 draw and a standard live rating is non-existent for him. Obviously he fails miserably in longer time controls.

Since this is a 12 month old thread I hope he's stuck around long enough to see this.

By definition, the rules are not the same.

If you went fishing and immediately started reeling in your line the second it touched water, would you still call that fishing?  Bullet "chess" is a similarly absurd concept.  Once you cross the 1 min or less threshold the game is far more about the clock than about winning a game of chess.

If that were true, the highest rated bullet players here would be kids who play video games. Well, it's possible that Naka and Caruana, and So and all those other titled players at the top of the bullet ratings here are video junkies. But it's far more likely that you're wrong. 

Here's the top of the bullet charts here. How many IMs and GMs are at the top of the correspondence charts?

<td id="c14_row18_5" style="margin:0px;padding:7px 4px;border:0px;

Name	Rating	Win	Loss	Draw	Last Online
GM Hikaru	3110	1633 (89%)	126 (7%)	67 (4%)	11 minutes ago
GM 2Vladimirovich90	2835	59 (70%)	18 (21%)	7 (8%)	7 weeks ago
GM LyonBeast	2819	340 (85%)	40 (10%)	21 (5%)	35 hours ago
GM gmwesley_so	2819	13 (43%)	14 (47%)	3 (10%)	3 weeks ago
NM BulletMercenary	2814	98 (59%)	64 (39%)	4 (2%)	22 hours ago
GM Genghis_K	2808	314 (65%)	147 (30%)	23 (5%)	4 hours ago
GM LiemLe	2806	55 (76%)	13 (18%)	4 (6%)	7 weeks ago
IM Yaacovn	2792	9046 (63%)	4499 (31%)	922 (6%)	online now!
GM EltajSafarli	2766	76 (70%)	23 (21%)	9 (8%)	2 months ago
FM wonderfultime	2760	1256 (54%)	922 (40%)	146 (6%)	39 hours ago
GM Nouki	2760	8122 (62%)	4292 (33%)	725 (6%)	30 minutes ago

Sorry, didn't realise copy and paste would mess that up so much. 

There are 12 GMs in the top 20 in bullet here. There are 3 in the top 20 in correspondence chess. 

Skotheim2 wrote: i keep losing to a guy rated 1700 blitz on here and i am 2000 on here when we play OTB blitz. He won't play me online though.. I beat him in long time controls, and I draw him at rapid.. This is annoying as I have a higher rating on lower time controls.. luckily he loses to some of the other players that i beat which results in me winning the tournaments anyways.     

 It could be his style and you are having a difficult time adjusting to it. Play sharper and you will win, some player even though they are low rated play well in quiet position but crumble in sharp position. Set up traps, make it very tactical and make his position very uncomfortable, if he the type that moves without thinking he will start to fall apart and  playing sharp slow down a player who move the mouse quick.

To be fair, there aren't that many GMs playing correspondence at all. In your list above only two have games in that format and Nakamura is the only one with any significant number. I looked through the first 12 or so pages of correspondence and only found a few there (down to about 2100 rating).

There's an easy way to see how good a blitz/bullet player is: they can get their games analysed. If they are consistently playing moves that would be good at a slower time limit then they are good players... 

He's doing psycology on you, kiss his hand softly before the next game, and say something kinda sweet. <3

you're welcome ;)

Martin that lack of GMs playing correspondence but willingness to play bullet (which some here claim isn't even chess) speaks to the general point that strong players prefer blitz and bullet.

People claiming bullet chess isn't chess are also effectively claiming that the chess played by > 90% of people at any time control isn't chess.

The rules of how the pieces move are exactly the same.

All that is different is the speed, yet Nakamura, Anreikin, Vachier-Lagrave and others player higher quality bullet chess than > 90% of people do however long they have to think of their moves so the argument that it isn't chess doesn't hold up at all.

What you are really saying is there is a quality threshold to what counts as "chess" in that case so most people's chess fails to pass as "chess" since it is worse than some people's bullet chess.

Bullet isn't chess because it's too fast, correspondence isn't chess because its too slow, blitz isn't chess because it is too fast and people cheat, 45 minute chess on a computer isn't chess because people browse the internet between moves.  Nothing is chess.

Some titled players play correspondence as if it is blitz. Keep that in mind while considering those with low correspondence ratings. I recently beat an NM whose correspondence rating was close to mine (but USCF 300 higher). He was playing seventy correspondence games to my six.