The principles of the rating system are the same (200 point rating difference means 75% probablity of win by higher rated player, for example.)
However, ELO and BCF ratings are based on over-the-board (OTB) play, whereas this is a correspondence chess site, so different types of chess skills come into play and the two types of ratings are not comparable. If you do well under time pressure, your ELO rating should be higher than your rating here; if you like time to think, or find the analysis board essential, it should be the other way around.
Another factor is that the absolute level of ratings may be different. People start here with a 1200 rating. I don't know what a typical starting rating is for someone who joins a chess club at school or elsewhere.
It would be interesting to hear from some of the players here who have OTB ratings as to how RHP ratings compare.
Thanks for clarifying. The BCF over the board starting grade is 100, this is equivalent to ELO 1400 (BCFx8+600). I think the US ELO system is calculated slightly differently? The BCF grade of 100 would be a bit high for a new player (its difficult to generalise) but allows for an expected improvement during their first season. At one time juniors had 10 points added to their grade. I'm a little out of touch with the BCF grading system so I'm happy to be corrected!
I was not absolutely accurate above: it has been pointed out in another thread that ELO refers to the rating formula invented by a Dr Elo. This means that RHP uses ELO ratings, but they are based on a different kind of game to the ELO ratings calculated by BCF, USCF and other OTB chess federations.
A little confusing..
Yes, ELO refers to the system of using statictical probably for calculating rating points. Although each organization can set different starting points and different other little factors (each player gets 1 point for expirience, under 15 gets 10 extra points, etc).
It seems that at some organization, they simply refer to it as their "ELO rating". Not sure what organization it is.
I think what all these people want is to compare RHP ratings to that of their organization.
The short answer is: OTB and correspondance are two completely different styles of play. Some are better at one then the other and some are about the same at both.
One FIDE 2218 might be 1876 on RHP while another FIDE 1985 might be 2218 on RHP.
Originally posted by RolandYoungI used to play a lot on Instant Chess, which has a default time limit of only 15 minutes for the whole game! Against players rated 1300 to 1399 I won more games than I lost, but against players rated 1400 to 1499 I lost more than I won, so my rating there would be around 1400. My provisional RHP rating is slightly higher,currently 1425, as I like to take my time making a move. (For proof, see my disastrous 1 hour game against anacrobnismo.)
It would be interesting to hear from some of the players here who have OTB ratings as to how RHP ratings compare.
[/b]