Internet Chess v. over-the-board ratings

Originally posted by Ragnorak
I deserve a brilliancy prize for that analogy.

; D

it's very fitting. "the rag's law of CC vs. OTB dispute."

Originally posted by wormwood
firstly, that's not what inflation means. and secondly, you can't compare rating systems like that. otb (whatever your national organization happens to be) is apples, rhp (or ANY other rating) is oranges compared to that. 1800 apple-rating does not equal 1800 orange-rating, and there's no possible way to find out an exchange rate from apples to oranges.

and thirdly, you can't compare high jump to pole vault.

Firstly it is very obvious that you have missed my point.
Secondly when I said inflated, It means a little higher than compared to only playing "Over The Board" chess, (for reasons mentioned before). I'm quite positive that unlike you, most readers would understand that I was clearly not talking about inflation as you put it.
So technically your analogy of apples and oranges or high jump and pole vault is totally miss guided.
I suggest you read a little more carefully next time before jumping to miss guided conclusions because the only person that will look silly "at the end of the day", is you...

Originally posted by kNIGHTHEAD
I think that RHP ratings will be rather inflated compared to OTB ratings because with online system you can use the analysis feature and work out many combinations, many moves ahead and thus also forseeing potential blunder moves as well. whilst OTB chess, one has to try visualise all this in ones head while looking at all the pieces still on the board. ...[text shortened]... have heavier pressure on a player specially when it come to time pressure in my honest oppinion.

I see your point but I try to NOT use the analysis of board feature (unless I've played my move and am awaiting a reply). In addition, I tend to move quite quickly on RHP - yet, My rating is, in theory, better than otb Bcf.

OTB ratings are real, this is a fantasy land.

Originally posted by kNIGHTHEAD
Firstly it is very obvious that you have missed my point.
Secondly when I said inflated, It means a little higher than compared to only playing "Over The Board" chess, (for reasons mentioned before). I'm quite positive that unlike you, most readers would understand that I was clearly not talking about inflation as you put it.
So technically your analog ...[text shortened]... conclusions because the only person that will look silly "at the end of the day", is you...

no. you are simply wrong in all cases.

Originally posted by wormwood
no. you are simply wrong in all cases.

As you can see there are readers with objective comments and opinions. They understand what I said, unlike you. If you like I can draw pictures to help you understand.

Originally posted by kNIGHTHEAD
As you can see there are readers with objective comments and opinions. They understand what I said, unlike you. If you like I can draw pictures to help you understand.

jusuh: 1565 rhp 1987 selo, delta = rhp - selo = -422

bahus: 1846 rhp 1802 selo, delta = +44

player3: 1874 rhp 1527 selo, delta = +347
(I know this one as well, but unlike jusuh & bahus, he hasn't publically announced his selo, which is the finnish national rating, so I'm not gonna put his handle here.)


now, please explain to me how it is possible that the deltas range from -422 to +347?

I have a whole gaggle of ratings: 1422, 1563, 1660, 1786, 1802, 1967, 2047, and 2276 (may have missed one or two). Meaning only that I’ve had better results (not necessarily played better or worse) some places than others. They no way relate to each other: different sites and different modes of play results in different ratings.