Most important rating

Since Chess ratings are split up between Correspondence, Standard, Blitz and Bullet Chess, I came to wonder which one is the most important one to other players, or which one is considered to be the most 'true' rating' of a players strength. 

For me, it's my Online Chess rating. Blitz and even occasionally Standard Time Controls are too speedy for me to fully analyze a given position and I miss sometimes little tactical ramifications which result eventually to my loss. I lost countless games on account of a little silly blunder, which I could have spotted with more provided time. So that's why I believe the purest 'form' of Chess is CC and this is the rating I estimate the highest.

What are your opinions?

Probably something along the lines of "whichever rating of mine is highest at the moment" is what I would go by. 

Remember your blitz rating is a rating for blitz games among the chess.com blitz players.

The CC rating is for CC games among chess.com "online" players.

Chess rating of 1500 is not a measurement like meters or grams.  It's always relative to the other players.

So as long as you play often and against many different players the rating (no matter which rating it is) is very close to perfectly correct.

on chess.com I think live chess rating is the most important.

since you can use database and analysis board in cc. in endgame on cc you can use analysis board until you find the win.

on live chess it is your chess knowledge and experience thus less blunder over time.
live chess is the closest to otb rating.

In terms of someone's strength as a player I would take their Standard rating (though I play few games). Blitz could be skewed by them having problems playing very rapidly, and correspondence games by them using outside help to mask their limitations.

All ratings are equally correct. They're based upon the same model.

Go with the lamb wearing the shades.

Thank you for the reminder, waffle. Yeah, I know, Chess.com ratings only apply here, not in real life. That's cool with me, and I play random folks whose ratings lie everywhere in between 1000 - close to 1700. I simply do not know anybody who plays Chess in real life, so that's the only kind of rating I'll ever achieve anyway. 

Chess.com is real life chess though

What I was trying to say is what k_kostov said very concisely.  It's simply a math formula.  All the ratings are correct for what they measure.

Sure they're all correct. But, for instance I couldn't care less if my Blitz rating would drop below 1000, but if the same was about to happen to my CC rating I'd commit suicide. 

Oh, so the question is kind of like which is my favorite rating?

I like blitz.  It's a very varied pool (beginners up to titled players) and although I think there isn't much cheating here I think blitz has less of a chance for it.  Also after viewing many profiles to see what they say their OTB rating is, I feel like I can best estimate a person's OTB by looking at their bullet (within a few hundred points IMO).

Standard and live games are closer to tournament length games.  But sometimes I see a very strong player with a low rating or a weaker player with a high rating so it's hard for me to tell from just those.

Really bullet rating? I would have thought live standard was a closer reflection of estimating OTB strength. I do not like the online games as a comparison for the reasons given by bobby. Also some people play lots of online games and move relatively quickly, some play fewer and study for longer, some use the 'analyse' function some don't, simply put there are too many variables to consider. Live standard it is you vs your opponent no excuses.

In terms of preference of which rating I prefer I prefer live standard, then blitz. I don't think the online means much for reasons I have already given, and bullet even less.

I said blitz not bullet.

I'd pick live-standard if the ratings made more sense to me and titled players played too.  I've seen some strong players with low ratings so I'm not sure what the distribution is for standard (maybe I haven't seen enough people yet).  And the pool isn't a deep i.e. titled players seem to prefer speed games when they play online.

And why the titled player things is important to me, it's easier for me to see what the ceiling is for that pool.  e.g. it's ~2400 for blitz I think. 

Because of the higher rated players I've seen with 1800-1900 standard ratings I start to wonder if the real ceiling for standard isn't around 1800-1900.

Oh yes my mistake sorry. Yes come to think of it I have noticed strong players, even titled players with relatively lower standard ratings, 1800, 1900 etc.

My own OTB rating is about 200 points below my online rating, and 600 points above my bullet rating.

I just can't motivate myself to improve on bullet, because I know it means putting a premium on moving quickly without analysis. I currently refuse to play more than one game a day because I am convinced it will give me bad habits for OTB (another reason I find the "you must rematch!" threads so amusingly wrongheaded).