Chess.com Rating system

Sort:
DutchDevisser

I am an advanced beginner level chess player, knowing people who reached higher levels I must say, chess.com is under inflated at this level. It maybe true that once you get to 2000 it’s inflated, but the lower levels are not accurate at all. 1200-1400 has some of the best players I have ever played against in my life. The strength of there opening knowledge, middle game no where resembles a 1200-1400 rated player. It’s absolutely insane to me how chess.com does address as being stuck at these levels is frustrating and we all know what is causing the deflation at the lower levels. But I can’t say in fear of being locked. 

DutchDevisser
DutchDevisser wrote:

I am an advanced beginner level chess player, knowing people who reached higher levels I must say, chess.com is under inflated at this level. It maybe true that once you get to 2000 it’s inflated, but the lower levels are not accurate at all. 1200-1400 has some of the best players I have ever played against in my life. The strength of there opening knowledge, middle game no where resembles a 1200-1400 rated player. It’s absolutely insane to me how chess.com does not address as being stuck at these levels is frustrating and we all know what is causing the deflation at the lower levels. But I can’t say in fear of being locked.

DesignerWaffle
Find brilliant for white [Event "?"]
[Site "Chess.com iPhone"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[FEN "r2qkbnr/ppp2ppp/2np4/4p2b/2B1P3/2N2N1P/PPPP1PP1/R1BQK2R w KQkq - 0 1"]

{*}
DesignerWaffle
[Event "?"]
[Site "Chess.com iPhone"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[FEN "r2qkbnr/ppp2ppp/2np4/4p2b/2B1P3/2N2N1P/PPPP1PP1/R1BQK2R w KQkq - 0 1"]

{*}
DesignerWaffle
Dang
DesignerWaffle
?
DutchDevisser
DesignerWaffle wrote:
?

Hi designer waffle unfortunately I am unable to understand you. Hope you have a great day though.

sleepyzenith
DutchDevisser wrote:

I am an advanced beginner level chess player, knowing people who reached higher levels I must say, chess.com is under inflated at this level. It maybe true that once you get to 2000 it’s inflated, but the lower levels are not accurate at all. 1200-1400 has some of the best players I have ever played against in my life. The strength of there opening knowledge, middle game no where resembles a 1200-1400 rated player. It’s absolutely insane to me how chess.com does address as being stuck at these levels is frustrating and we all know what is causing the deflation at the lower levels. But I can’t say in fear of being locked.

give examples

DutchDevisser
sleepyzenith wrote:
DutchDevisser wrote:

I am an advanced beginner level chess player, knowing people who reached higher levels I must say, chess.com is under inflated at this level. It maybe true that once you get to 2000 it’s inflated, but the lower levels are not accurate at all. 1200-1400 has some of the best players I have ever played against in my life. The strength of there opening knowledge, middle game no where resembles a 1200-1400 rated player. It’s absolutely insane to me how chess.com does address as being stuck at these levels is frustrating and we all know what is causing the deflation at the lower levels. But I can’t say in fear of being locked.

give examples

If you look at my games you’ll see me playing at a 1200-1400 level consistently because that’s my strength. You will my opponents playing way above. With random moments of absolute genius. When I play over the board I rarely ever lose to players in 1400 range and am considered a 1500 rated player.

NoemiS05

Are you comparing chesscom ratings to FIDE ratings or do you mean something different?

sleepyzenith


you’re telling me people playing like this is some of the best chess you’ve seen in your life? and you ended up blundering an easy mate in two. Look at your time, don’t start such a long time control if you’re not even gonna bother using half of it

DutchDevisser
sleepyzenith wrote:

you’re telling me people playing like this is some of the best chess you’ve seen in your life? and you ended up blundering an easy mate in two. Look at your time, don’t start such a long time control if you’re not even gonna bother using half of it

Actually no I don’t, if you look at the majority of my games, that player played how a normal 1400 plays over the board. Look at my losses

AGC-Gambit_YT

SKILL ISSUE

NoemiS05

You are firmly an "Intermediate" player not a beginner if you are over 1300 - this is in the top 10% of chess players in Rapid. True beginner probably ends at 400, and advanced Beginners ends at maybe 800-900 (average 50% chesscom rating is 620).

AGC-Gambit_YT

(Average Global Rating) 600 I think

DutchDevisser

All I will say is you guys should try and play over the board, you will be genuinely surprised to see your a higher rating then your online rating. That’s all. I can’t say why because chess.com will lock me.

AGC-Gambit_YT

That's true...

NoemiS05
DutchDevisser wrote:

All I will say is you guys should try and play over the board, you will be genuinely surprised to see your a higher rating then your online rating. That’s all. I can’t say why because chess.com will lock me.

Would you say Lichess ratings are closer to FIDE then?

AGC-Gambit_YT

Hmmm...

DutchDevisser
NoemiS05 wrote:
DutchDevisser wrote:

All I will say is you guys should try and play over the board, you will be genuinely surprised to see your a higher rating then your online rating. That’s all. I can’t say why because chess.com will lock me.

Would you say Lichess ratings are closer to FIDE then?

I would say at beginner level no that’s the problem online chess really neglects us lower level players from an accurate rating. Higher level players don’t deal with dishonesty nearly as much because those are people who genuinely love the game.