Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 03 Dec '10 20:50
    Can someone tell me whether red hot pawn ratings are comparable to ELO ratings? Or are they completely different? Thanks.
  2. 03 Dec '10 21:02
    Originally posted by Dyce Willoughby
    Can someone tell me whether red hot pawn ratings are comparable to ELO ratings? Or are they completely different? Thanks.
    The Elo rating system, named after its creator Arpad Elo, (ELO stands for Electric Light Orchestra) is the rating system used on this site. It will give an indication of how likely you are to beat, or be beaten, by another player on this site. Provided you both have stable ratings that is. Many other sites and organisations use Elo rating systems but the rating system is not an absolute measure of ability so there is often little correlation between ratings here and ratings elsewhere.
  3. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    03 Dec '10 21:02
    rhp rating IS an elo rating.

    you probably mean whether rhp is comparable to fide? nope. no more than rhp is comparable to bcf. different rules, different time control, different board, different game. and even if all those things were exactly same, they still wouldn't be comparable. different player pool, different maturity of pool, and most likely different rating algorithm.
  4. Subscriber Ragwort
    Ex Duris Gloria
    03 Dec '10 21:03 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Dyce Willoughby
    Can someone tell me whether red hot pawn ratings are comparable to ELO ratings? Or are they completely different? Thanks.
    They are calculated similarly but they relate to different pools of players playing in a different format. Thus no correlations can be reliable even amongst the very few players in both pools.

    There you are - you have had it in triplicate!
  5. 03 Dec '10 21:09
    Originally posted by Ragwort
    They are calculated similarly but they relate to different pools of players playing in a different format. Thus no correlations can be reliable even amongst the very few players in both pools.

    There you are - you have had it in triplicate!
    ok thanks. yes i think i meant is rhp comparable to fide...

    and the answer seems to be no!
  6. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    04 Dec '10 03:07
    OTB Fide players are generally going to be tougher than you would think based on your experience here.

    Mileage may vary.
  7. 04 Dec '10 04:36
    Originally posted by wormwood
    rhp rating IS an elo rating.

    you probably mean whether rhp is comparable to fide? nope. no more than rhp is comparable to bcf. different rules, different time control, different board, different game. and even if all those things were exactly same, they still wouldn't be comparable. different player pool, different maturity of pool, and most likely different rating algorithm.
    I've noticed "so called good players online" are really weak when it comes to real chess games...over the board.

    You know this.
  8. 05 Dec '10 10:44
    The slight difference in game setup aside. How do people think the quality of players here at RHP compares to other sites? ie Chess.com, Gameknot, ICC.

    Is a 1400 rated player here of a better quality than a 1400 player at Chess.com?
  9. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    07 Dec '10 16:35
    Better and less likely to ramp up to 2200 on a new riding chess mower.
  10. 07 Dec '10 16:39 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by RyderDarkcrow
    The slight difference in game setup aside. How do people think the quality of players here at RHP compares to other sites? ie Chess.com, Gameknot, ICC.

    Is a 1400 rated player here of a better quality than a 1400 player at Chess.com?
    RHP players of the same rating are way, way, way, better than Chess.com players.

    1400 players over there will miss two or three one-move tactics per game, every game, guaranteed.

    One only needs look at their top player ratings to see that everything's inflated over there. We don't have a single player over 2400. They have scads of them.
  11. 07 Dec '10 16:54
    As frequently stated, the formula is simple.

    for subscribers: RHP rating + 500 = FIDE rating

    for non-subs: RHP rating - 500 = FIDE rating
  12. 07 Dec '10 17:03
    OK, how about United States Chess Federation ratings compared to RHP?

    * 2400 and above: Senior Master
    * 2200–2399: National Master
    * 2000–2199: Expert
    * 1800–1999: Class A
    * 1600–1799: Class B
    * 1400–1599: Class C
    * 1200–1399: Class D
    * 1000–1199: Class E
    * 800-999: Class F
    * 600-799: Class G
    * 400-599: Class H
    * 200-399: Class I
    * 100-200: Class J

    In general, 1000 is considered a bright beginner. In 2007, the median rating of all USCF members was 657
  13. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    07 Dec '10 17:10
    Originally posted by owlshead93TU
    OK, how about United States Chess Federation ratings compared to RHP?

    * 2400 and above: Senior Master
    * 2200–2399: National Master
    * 2000–2199: Expert
    * 1800–1999: Class A
    * 1600–1799: Class B
    * 1400–1599: Class C
    * 1200–1399: Class D
    * 1000–1199: Class E
    * 800-999: Class F
    * 600-799: Class G
    * 40 ...[text shortened]... al, 1000 is considered a bright beginner. In 2007, the median rating of all USCF members was 657


    how about apples compared to rhp.
  14. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    07 Dec '10 17:15
    The median USCF rating is skewed heavily because of the large amount of scholastic players. The average adult tournament player is probably 1500ish.
  15. 07 Dec '10 17:26 / 1 edit
    Thanks much, I like oranges and apples

    anyone know what the median (middle rating) for RHP is?