Originally posted by moteutsch
Do you find that ratings are accurate on this site?
The way one approaches the game is different in CC vs OTB, OTB rapid chess, vs blitz on ICC. This makes it tough to measure "overall chess ability", no matter the rating algorithm/method used. You could say that one's chess ability is the relative ability to beat others... but then the question becomes, at what game? Fast/slow? open book take home exam (like CC) or closed book timed exam like OTB? When I was on the ICC, my rating difference across the various time controls was +/- 300 pts, and furthermore the Top 10 rating lists across the different time controls was different as well, so it wasn't just me. Same pool of players, different game.
So as already mentioned, a person's rating here only indicates how good they are at CC, period (even then it only applies to RHP, not CC in general). Move to a different playing environment and that changes. time outs in CC is also an issue too but i won't get into that here.
In my humble opinion, I think OTB with standard time controls, say 90+ minutes per side, is real chess. Everything else is a variation of it. My reasoning is that only in OTB are the conditions equal. Here in CC, you have some player's who take advantage of books & databases (which is ok), while others choose not to for whatever reason. In internet blitz, dexterity (a non-chess skill requirement) is a factor so slow non-computer savvy people are disadvantaged.