OTB V RHP ratings.

I've recently started playing OTB. I'm finding that my rating OTB is nowhere near as good as my RHP rating. I certainly expected a difference for obvious reasons but the gap seems to be vast. I'm really strugling against players of 60 and 70 BCF.
Whats your feelings on how OTB and RHP ratings compare?

tbh you'll get differences in every form of chess. Internet chess usually inflates your rating by a few hundred points however with CC it shouldn't have a massive impact on your otb games depending on the way you play CC. I don't use books, databases etc because I think it's cheating, however your CC rating might be inflated if you rely on these materials too much during your play.

If you've never played much over-the-board chess then you're likely to be weak at tactics and thinking of a move quickly. I imagine that playing "live" games on the Yahoo games server or somewhere better (Yahoo is pretty dreadful) would improve both of these.

I'm surprised that you are struggling against players with an ECF grade that low. Have you tried just not making any blunder and waiting for them to leave their pieces en-prise? Unless they are a junior, someone with a grade less than 80 is very weak and will probably self-destruct if you let them.

Originally posted by power mover
I've recently started playing OTB. I'm finding that my rating OTB is nowhere near as good as my RHP rating. I certainly expected a difference for obvious reasons but the gap seems to be vast. I'm really strugling against players of 60 and 70 BCF.
Whats your feelings on how OTB and RHP ratings compare?

I don't think you can make sensible comparisons between the two systems. First of all the English Chess Federation grading system does not have a probability factor (win expectancy) in the calculation.
Secondly the games on which the ratings are based are played under much wider variant conditions on RHP than OTB. Thirdly the pool of players is quite different and RHP seems to have very few players of "very strong" bracket. I base this last comment on the fact that of 11850 players in the ECF (National) list I am around 2910th with my modest 136 grade, whereas in the RHP (International) List of 14000 or so I am in the top 200.

So I think as far as the serious chess playing world goes RHP is generally weaker (or has a larger pool of weaker players) and therefore you should not be unduly surprised if your RHP rating seems higher than your OTB standard.

THe current conversion formula for ECF into FIDE(elo) is (ECF x 5) + 1250. This means a rating of 1550 elo is equivalent to 60 ECF.

The next question is how RHP may help or hinder improvement at OTB. To my mind the key to OTB is vision. Many things aid vision, knowledge of strategic principles, pattern recognition, good recollection of opening lines, traps etc. ability to recognise weaknesses, targets. Whilst those things are important RHP too - RHP vision is aided by the ability to move pieces around whether 3D or via the Analysis Board.

I believe that the only way for RHP games to improve vision for practical OTB play is to consider the correspondence positions on a 3D board and analyse without moving the pieces as you would OTB. Book learning, tactical puzzles can only make you aware of ideas that maybe relevant to you in your games, you still have to see them for yourself!

I doubt that the improving RHP 1500+ player really has a worse understanding of chess than the average ECF 60, but the conditions of play, and means of visualising during play can be different. In any case you have only just started OTB, there is a switch to be made and it will take a few months...

There's no way that a 60/70 ECF player would be able to reach 1500 on this site.

Using the old formula, where ELO = (ECF * 6) + 800; 1500 ELO would come out as roughly 120 ECF, which I think is about right.

An adult chess player with an ECF grade of 70 is really very, very weak.

Originally posted by Fat Lady
There's no way that a 60/70 ECF player would be able to reach 1500 on this site.

Using the old formula, where ELO = (ECF * 6) + 800; 1500 ELO would come out as roughly 120 ECF, which I think is about right.

An adult chess player with an ECF grade of 70 is really very, very weak.

The old formula is in fact ECF*8 + 600 which gives 112 for 1500, and is still in use above 216 ECF or for conversion to other National Ratings.

Personally I think RHP 1500 is lower than ECF 110 due to the large pool of weaker players and that a ECF 60/70 could achieve it particularly if they were the sort of player that took time and care over their moves, compared to those playing simultaneous Blitz.

Such a player coming to OTB would struggle to begin with, whilst they speed up their thinking processes.

"Whats your feelings on how OTB and RHP ratings compare?"

RHP is a chess club isolated from the rest of the chess world.
No rating points are transferred between the two worlds.
Therefore the two rating systems can drift relative eachother.

Originally posted by Mister Meaner
The old formula is in fact ECF*8 + 600 which gives 112 for 1500, and is still in use above 216 ECF or for conversion to other National Ratings.

Personally I think RHP 1500 is lower than ECF 110 due to the large pool of weaker players and that a ECF 60/70 could achieve it particularly if they were the sort of player that took time and care over their ...[text shortened]... layer coming to OTB would struggle to begin with, whilst they speed up their thinking processes.

Whoops, my mistake, you're quite right; ELO = (ECF * 8) + 600 using the old formula.

I've played loads of 1500s on this site and generally the games are pretty tough. Recently I very nearly lost to someone rated 1549 (the game is still going on) and that wasn't because I blundered, it was just a tough game.

Mind you I don't put that much effort into the games on this site in comparison to OTB games, so perhaps someone with a ECF grade of 60/70 who spent a lot of time on their moves could read 1500... but I doubt it!

Originally posted by Fat Lady

I've played loads of 1500s on this site and generally the games are pretty tough. Recently I very nearly lost to someone rated 1549 (the game is still going on) and that wasn't because I blundered, it was just a tough game.

Some 1500 s are stronger than others, and RHP may have sub-pools within the ratings. I have found that those players who play mostly 1 n/a "feel" stronger than some of those who play slower.

Unscientific and highly subjective I know...but who knows

Originally posted by Mister Meaner
Some 1500 s are stronger than others, and RHP may have sub-pools within the ratings. I have found that those players who play mostly 1 n/a "feel" stronger than some of those who play slower.

Unscientific and highly subjective I know...but who knows

I suppose so. This 1500 player User 204609 is pretty good! He's going to really screw up the ratings as he works his way back up to 2100 again.

Originally posted by Fat Lady
If you've never played much over-the-board chess then you're likely to be weak at tactics and thinking of a move quickly. I imagine that playing "live" games on the Yahoo games server or somewhere better (Yahoo is pretty dreadful) would improve both of these.

I'm surprised that you are struggling against players with an ECF grade that low. Have you tried ...[text shortened]... one with a grade less than 80 is very weak and will probably self-destruct if you let them.

I agree in part. My personal experience is that RHP gives you ZERO experience at dealing with time pressure. I've been playing OTB for about 4 years now and it has taken me a very long time to adjust to playing with a clock. On RHP i can sit on a position for 40 minutes if it is complicated, something that has got me into trouble on numerous occasions playing with a clock.

I believe you need to adjust your style to Club chess. You have just under 3 minutes for each move (30 moves in 75 minutes) in the league i play in. I have had to train myself to play pragmatically when faced with these time controls. There is a lot to be said for finding a move that works and playing it! You can sit and analyse it for 10 minutes if you like, but unless it is SO strong that it wins on the spot, you're going to find yourself in time trouble sooner or later so it's often better to 'wing it' on occasions as time waits for no one!

I've found a lot of players in the 140/150's are no stronger than 90/100 graded players but the difference is the 140 will see a move wins a tempo, or displaces a piece and they play the move there and then! Defending against this style is perhaps not super difficult, but it takes caution and consequently it takes time also. I have a number of wins against 140/150 strength opposition but my grade is only 105bcf. In fact, it was 105 bcf last year as well!! I know the moves, i just don't choose them prudently and quickly!


power mover, don't sweat to much about your first season. I know a number of 70 bcf players who are in the 17/1800's on this site. Learn from your club mates, watch how they play during matches. Chat to someone, i'm sure you have a few guys who've been kicking around you're club for years, get tips! Match play is not just about chess, it's about mental preparation, diet, all sorts of things. Personally i always make sure i eat loads of fruit during the day of a match. When i sit at the board i have a pint of fruit juice and a pint of water with me. I find it helps me to concentrate all the way through a match, which sometimes goes on for 4 hours or more. Everyone has their own method, but it takes time to get to grips with it so take this year as a learning curve. 😉

Originally posted by Fat Lady

Using the old formula, where ELO = (ECF * 6) + 800; 1500 ELO would come out as roughly 120 ECF, which I think is about right.

I beat a kid with a grade of 60bcf in 8 moves last year, there is no way they could be considered anywhere near a 1500 elo. I disagree with a comparison of 1500-120 though. I have played a lot of 120's now and they are always stronger than 1500's here. I can beat 1500 players on RHP with my eyes shut half the time, when i face a 120 OTB the mental effort is comparable to most RHP 1800's, who i also have a lot of experience playing.

I think there is a balance to be struck here. RHP players are broken into pools. Some people only play open invites, while others never play open invites. Some specialise in banded tournaments, and thus don't ever play Clan focused members, etc...

I personally believe that the Clan system represents the strongest pool of RHP members. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the English 1500+ clan members are also Club players in the real world too.

How this all works out in a math calculation, i have no idea. I feel the discrepancy between RHP and OTB BCF grades is that people choose their opponents online. If you're grade drops a bit online, you can pick up a couple of games with a person you know you can beat. OTB games are never like that, thus a player can go an entire season without a win if they are unlucky with their opponents, which simply doesn't happen here. This is the difference we are experiencing between the two grading systems...

Originally posted by power mover
I've recently started playing OTB. I'm finding that my rating OTB is nowhere near as good as my RHP rating. I certainly expected a difference for obvious reasons but the gap seems to be vast. I'm really strugling against players of 60 and 70 BCF.
Whats your feelings on how OTB and RHP ratings compare?

My speed chess rating is in the low 1300s on Uchess, but I think it's more to do with adjusting to a different skill than it is to rating inflation on this site. But yes, it is rather shocking when the discrepancy is so large.

RHP and OTB are completely different things.

My OTB rating is 89, however against 100-125 players I have a record of 3 wins 4 draws and 2 defeats in the last 9.

On RHP I play faster than I do in OTB, don't use databases or any aids and generally just make moves. Which is why I'm struggling around 1300.

If I put effort into RHP I could easily see mee hitting 1600 or more. On one site I achieved 1826.