CTS rating = RHP rating

Hi everyone,

Just wondering whether a CTS rating calculated using the Glicko rating system could be used to gauge somebody's RHP or FIDE ranking or can they not be compared in any way?

Cheers,

lordgledhill

CTS + 16 ~ RHP :-)

CTS 1588
RHP 1593

CTS 1365
RHP 1758

CTS 1736
RHP 2262

The correlation between the two is extremly looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooose.

Perhaps there's more to chess than just tactics.

cts 1628
rhp 1991

I fail to see how a sane person can compare a tactical lottery (read CTS) with a situation where you have several days to make a move (RHP). Chess is much more than "a winning chess move". If you want an inflated ego beat up your little bro at chess and call yourself Kasparov of da house.

Originally posted by Jie
I fail to see how a sane person can compare a tactical lottery (read CTS) with a situation where you have several days to make a move (RHP). Chess is much more than "a winning chess move". If you want an inflated ego beat up your little bro at chess and call yourself Kasparov of da house.

My word Jie.

That was a little aggressive.

Who were you responding to?

wow, how come everyone's rating on CTS is low, but they are at least 300+ on rhp? EXCEPT FOR ME THAT IS:'(

Originally posted by lordgledhill
My word Jie.

That was a little aggressive.

Who were you responding to?

To the OP. Can't the OP see Emlasker is crying because there is little correlation between CTS and RHP?

Originally posted by EmLasker
wow, how come everyone's rating on CTS is low, but they are at least 300+ on rhp? EXCEPT FOR ME THAT IS:'(

That's an idication that you are relying alot on tactics for your wins. In other words, you have alot of room for growth once you start to figure out the strategic end of the game.

Originally posted by EmLasker
wow, how come everyone's rating on CTS is low, but they are at least 300+ on rhp? EXCEPT FOR ME THAT IS:'(

a high CTS rating relative to RHP rating is most likely an indication of solving at a very low accuracy level.