10 Jan '06 19:50 10 Jan '06 19:58Originally posted by Sheerluck HolmesGo investigate sherlock. This has been discussed thousands of times on this forum.
Does anyone think there is a strong relationship between their RHP ranking and any other ranking that they have elsewhere? Likewise for your opponents; do their rankings correlate very strongly with what you might expect elsewhere? Could a RHP ranking be directly compared to say a FIDE ranking, perhaps using a conversion factor?!
Merely out of curiosity. Happy playing.
Sheerluck
10 Jan '06 20:11Originally posted by Sheerluck HolmesAsk Powershaker.......
Does anyone think there is a strong relationship between their RHP ranking and any other ranking that they have elsewhere? Likewise for your opponents; do their rankings correlate very strongly with what you might expect elsewhere? Could a RHP ranking be directly compared to say a FIDE ranking, perhaps using a conversion factor?!
Merely out of curiosity. Happy playing.
Sheerluck
10 Jan '06 21:011 editOriginally posted by Sheerluck HolmesYeah, it's been discussed many times. But, I'll give you an answer unlike the wise cracks the other responders in this thread have displayed cyberspace. From other players who have OTB ratings on here, I have discovered that RHP ratings (after 100 games) are usually within 200 points of their true OTB ratings. That's without using an opening database and outside sources. Some players have a RHP rating 200 points lower than their OTB rating. Other players - I have noted - have a RHP rating 200 points higher. The reason is very understandable. The players with 200 points lower are the players who do not play correspondence on here but only use their real knowledge and abilities... even often moving quickly without much thought (i.e. like me). The players with ratings 200 points higher usually are using opening book databases and literature (which is allowed) and therefore they have a higher rating, as in most correspondence versus standard OTB play statistics. It stands to reason that a 1500 player using an opening database and literature - and God knows what else - will have better results than a 1500 player using only his own abilities. I am an example of someone who uses no outside sources and no opening book database. I usually make all 20+ moves in 30 minutes a day. All of them! My chess computer is rated at 1700+ and I beat it every time when playing seriously with it. Plainly put, sometimes I make stupid errors I would not normally make in standard OTB play. I do not have the pleasure of having an internet connection at home like a lot of these guys. Therefore, I do not have the opportunity to think for hours on each move. I just make my move and move on. The day I do get back an internet connection at my home, I will gladly play with great thought on each move. Some people have said that I should play 21 day time outs, and use longer time banks etc... But, I do not want to play a game for one year - which is possible in a 21 day time bank. So, after close to 100 games now, my rating is 1500. People often put this rating strength down, but all along they forget that a 1500 player in the USCF is in the top 30% of all chess players. I personally think this is a great feat to play like I do in the time frames I use to make my moves and come out with a 1500 rating against players using opening databases and outside sources??? Not to mention against people who have the privilege of an internet connection at home. If I was that privileged, I could sit there in my bedroom and think all day every day on moves. But, isn't there more to life than just a game? I don't think I'm ever going to be a Bobby Fischer or a Veselin Topalov. So, sure, I do not play at my full strength on here. This is the truth and nothing but the truth. And, I am not arguing with anyone. I just know that no one on here knows the true player I am in OTB. They have no idea. This is a different playing atmosphere.
Does anyone think there is a strong relationship between their RHP ranking and any other ranking that they have elsewhere? Likewise for your opponents; do their rankings correlate very strongly with what you might expect elsewhere? Could a RHP ranking be directly compared to say a FIDE ranking, perhaps using a conversion factor?!
Merely out of curiosity. Happy playing.
Sheerluck
10 Jan '06 21:051 editOriginally posted by powershakerSheerluck - for you information, Powershaker is GM Alexei Shirov, although he doesn't like to talk about it.
Yeah, it's been discussed many times. But, I'll give you an answer unlike the wise cracks the other responders in this thread have displayed before the world. From other players who have OTB ratings on here, I have discovered that RHP ratings (after 100 games) are usually within 200 points of your OTB rating. That's without using an opening database o the true player I am in OTB. They have no idea. This is a different playing atmosphere.
10 Jan '06 21:07Originally posted by dottewellI believe I said, "I don't think I'm ever going to be a Bobby Fischer or a Veselin Topalov." š I didn't know you were unable to read. Perhaps I can refer a reading teacher to you in the states?
Sheerluck - for you information, Powershaker is GM Alexei Shirov, although he doesn't like to talk about it.
10 Jan '06 21:21 10 Jan '06 21:27Originally posted by RavelloWhat ignorance. LOL
Sheerluck,I'm also one of those playing under my real strength.
I can be easily a 1800+ player if I didn't play 40 games at a time,if I had a more time to think,if my opponents didn't use "outside sources" (whatever it means),if my cat didn't hit move for mistake,if I didn't ate pizza yesterday,if my friends didn't call me to go out at night,if I didn't get ...[text shortened]... eped well that night,if didn't find lame excuses for my rating,if,if,if...............
10 Jan '06 22:45Originally posted by powershakerMy rating on here is a good 300 points higher than my last OTB rating, and I rarely, if ever, use databases. My rating is so high here becauses ratings, in general, are inflated due to the overall lower caliber of player on here when compared to OTB.
The players with 200 points lower are the players who do not play correspondence on here but only use their real knowledge and abilities... even often moving quickly without much thought (i.e. like me). The players with ratings 200 points higher usually are using opening book databases and literature (which is allowed) and therefore they have a higher rating, as in most correspondence versus standard OTB play statistics.
10 Jan '06 23:01Originally posted by powershakerEver heard of the aphorism, "He who protests too much..."? Seriously, are you trying harder to convince everyone on this board or yourself? Someone confident in their ability shows it; they don't spend all their time simply trying to tell everyone. It's like the person that chooses not to try out of fear for failure yet they still convince themselves that they would have succeeded. It's all in the results...
11 Jan '06 00:46Originally posted by Natural ScienceWhen was the last time you played otb?
My rating on here is a good 300 points higher than my last OTB rating, and I rarely, if ever, use databases. My rating is so high here becauses ratings, in general, are inflated due to the overall lower caliber of player on here when compared to OTB.
Rankings comparison
Back to Top