Chess rating system

Ah... no need to reply erik... I see the answer above. Players start at 1800 with phone app. and 1200 with a comp ? Seems I've been correct in aborting. I started at 1200 and "paid my dues" to achieve my rating. Any new yo-yo can sign up, possibly use a program and start at 1800. Defiantly needs a fix, but I understand no new code is being written.

With the app, players choose their skill level when creating an account (my understanding is that v3 will have the same feature when it goes live). Something like beginner, intermediate, expert (don't know the exact titles). That choice determines what rating shows 1200, 1400 and 1800 (not sure on the middle rating).

Thanks Martin. May I suggest all players start at 1200 unless titled? Doesnt take long to reach 1800 if in fact players are 1800. I've been around 1800 for years now. Started at 1200. For established 1800 to play 1st timers at 1800 doesnt make much sense. They are provisional, no points to win, only lose points. Besides, players like to check profiles and game history before accepting a challange. Chess.com will find alot of aborted games, does not abode well for new players. We know that many 1st timers try out their programs. Also I think new players will over estimate their strength.

Let's not forget that the online chess ratings are already inflated... Everyone that has a rating around 1800 with Online Chess is around 1400 with their live play ratings...

@codexone ... to say everyone is nonsense. Many, in fact most who have an established turn-based rating of 1800+ are also 1800 OTB.

I see you have never played turn-based, hence your"opinion" is uninformed and merely an incorrect assumption.

Oh the irony, I just saw your ratings... Thou doth protest?

1. I don't need to play turn based against people spending inordinate amounts of time or using engines for analysis when I can just play blitz or classical time controls OTB. Yet, that doesn't keep me from being able to look at site wide statistics... And I do happen to be fairly handy with numbers so...

2.  The average Online Chess rating is 221 points higher than the average blitz raiting. The average USCF rating (for example, obviously this site is intl) is 1097, but the average Chess.com 'Online Chess' rating is 1314 compared to the Blitz rating of 1093.

Using the phrase "many, in fact most" needs to be substantiated with evidence at this point. Because at first glance it definitely appears that 'Online Chess' ratings have been inflated by around 200 points.

apparantly you do not know the differance between turn-based (on-line) as compared to standard, blitz and bullet (live chess). On-line ratings are comparable to OTB ratings in tournaments. I agree live ratings are inflated, blitz and bullet as compared to OTB ratings. Notice I said OTB and not live chess.

@codexone.. I assume you do not play on-line games because you assume it is all just reference, but you are mistaken.

How dense are you? The turn based ratings "Online Chess" as I've called it the entire time are inflated.

By 200 points. The live ratings are more akin to the USCF ratings, just because you don't want to admit that your highest rating is greatly inflated doesn't mean that I'm mistaken. 

     "How dense are you"?     You have NOooooo idea!

Inflated in comparison to OTB? They are different pools, often played in different manners, and thus one would expect that the ratings would not be the same and might be higher or lower than those in other pools.

For online/correspondence/daily, there are people playing their games like blitz (they come on, see they have to make a move and they make it). There are people that time out a lot and lose rating and conversely cause others to gain in rating (my Correspondence rating here is about 200 points higher than it probably should be, in comparison to the ratings of my opponents, a lot of that due to timeouts). There are people here that use a lot of their time, that use the resources allowable in that format and are able to play a lot better than they do in  blitz, or even OTB time controls.

If everybody played correspondence in the same way, there probably shouldn't be such a disparity in ratings across the rating pools. It would probably be more like an artifact of the rating systems across pools, like the differences between OTB ratings in the USCF and FIDE.  Since the pools are different, the inflation/deflation argument doesn't really make a whole lot of sense; arguing if the rating pool in a particular time control here over what it was a year or two ago, does.

Well said Martin.. a counterpoint I made was a blanket statement was made of online ratings here are inflated by 400 points. Graphs were used, proving his point. I countered with , in comparison to what? Often an online rating is higher than a persons blitz rating. Some are better at blitz, some not so good. It was suggested that because a persons online rating was higher than their blitz rating, the online rating was inflated. As if a persons blitz or standard rating on a website was the measure of true playing strength. I compared established online ratings to be comparable to OTB ratings. A comparison I think is valid for the most part. Always the exemptions.

I have been 1800+/- for 30 years. Back when I played OTB, correspondence (by postcards) and now online via a phone app. Started a few clubs, directed a few tournaments. Point is I'm a little familiar with ratings, which can be wildly differing depending on the circumstance. Which I think you pointed out quite well.

Then What rating do we need to be  NM?

In the USCF it is an OTB rating of 2200 minimum on a regular rating (have to meet that at least once,  but can subsequently drop below). Other national federations may have their own requirements or may just use FIDE which has the CM title which is achieved with a 2200 or above rating. 

1% of all players reach a master rating 2200. 1% of all masters reach 2400 IM rating, then 1% of those players reach a GM rating which requires "3 norms" to be met. Not up on how that all works, but the 1% is built into the rating system.

What rating we need to be a Super Grandmaster?

2700+ but is not a "fixed" number.

I don't care if my rating goes down when I lose because losing is learning

Everyone  should do it even i do