03 Jan 08
1 edit
Hello all,
As I'm fairly new here, I'm not real sure how the ratings on this site correspond with "real world" (USCF, FIDE, etc.) ratings. I don't play any rated OTB matches, therefore I don't know what my rating is, but it strikes me that RHP is a bit inflated compared to OTB. If so, is that a simply a by-product of correspondence chess? It would make perfect sense for most players on this site to be possibly playing a hundred points (maybe even more?) over their USCF ratings due to the use of databases, unlimited thought time, etc.
Am I on track here? Your thoughts?
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by xnomanxI know my rating is somewhat inflated. The cause I have identified in my case is playing many lower rated players in unbanded tournaments and clan leagues. Even the one or two point wins stack up and when I finally do meet someone closer to my ability in later rounds of a tournament , one or two losses are not enough to wipe out the gains already made. This explains why my RHP rating is inflated compared to other players on this site. However, how RHP ratings compare to "real world" ratings is a complete unknown since there is no real way to calibrate the separate systems.
Hello all,
As I'm fairly new here, I'm not real sure how the ratings on this site correspond with "real world" (USCF, FIDE, etc.) ratings. I don't play any rated OTB matches, therefore I don't know what my rating is, but it strikes me that RHP is a bit inflated compared to OTB. If so, is that a simply a by-product of correspondence chess? It would make p ...[text shortened]... to the use of databases, unlimited thought time, etc.
Am I on track here? Your thoughts?
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by xnomanxWhen I first joined RHP about three years ago, I was told that the ratings here bore little relationship to FIDE or various national ratings (USCF, ECF etc). Though I accept this is probably true, my own RHP rating is currently almost identical to my FIDE rating (and has been fairly close for some time). Maybe a player's individual strength at OTB v Correspondence will also have something to do with it.
Hello all,
As I'm fairly new here, I'm not real sure how the ratings on this site correspond with "real world" (USCF, FIDE, etc.) ratings. I don't play any rated OTB matches, therefore I don't know what my rating is, but it strikes me that RHP is a bit inflated compared to OTB. If so, is that a simply a by-product of correspondence chess? It would make p ...[text shortened]... to the use of databases, unlimited thought time, etc.
Am I on track here? Your thoughts?
03 Jan 08
I haven't played OTB in years. A friend and I were wondering if there was any correlation between our rating on this site and our performance OTB. We visited local clubs and discovered a high correlation. I crushed players less than 2000. In fact, I think we are learning here much faster than playing OTB, blitz or individual study. Our study groups have proven successful.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by mjolnirYou are only provisional - it takes time to adjust. In the real world my grade is 1885.
I am FIDE rated 1750 (I am in a low age group) but because I move quickly and don't think, I completely messed up my last five or six games with one-move idiocies. So I am 400 points lower than I should be. The same goes for one of my friends on here.
03 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by mjolnirThe conversion for lower rated ECF players (i.e. below, I think, about 2200) is 1250 + ECF X 5.
Thank you for those words of comfort. But could you put your grade in ECF? I only know mine because I converted it into FIDE...
My ECF grade has been between a low of 125 and a high of 145 these last 5 years. Since starting here I have reversed the trend and and am hoping to get it back up above 145 in the next 3 years - the trouble is OTB it takes ages as the number of games played is never high enough.
My Rapidplay ECF grade has been up as high as 165 although it dropped to about 138 last year for reasons best known to the graders.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by Dragon FireOh right. Thanks!
The conversion for lower rated ECF players (i.e. below, I think, about 2200) is 1250 + ECF X 5.
My ECF grade has been between a low of 125 and a high of 145 these last 5 years. Since starting here I have reversed the trend and and am hoping to get it back up above 145 in the next 3 years - the trouble is OTB it takes ages as the number of games played ...[text shortened]... as high as 165 although it dropped to about 138 last year for reasons best known to the graders.
03 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by xnomanxThere is something odd going on here. This thread keeps repeating, under different headings, and each time the character of the initial post is the same: a new player, still provisional, with very few finished games under his belt, makes the assertion that RHP ratings are "inflated". However, an examination of the player's game record here invariably shows that the author has no objective basis for such a statement.
Hello all,
As I'm fairly new here, I'm not real sure how the ratings on this site correspond with "real world" (USCF, FIDE, etc.) ratings. I don't play any rated OTB matches, therefore I don't know what my rating is, but it strikes me that RHP is a bit inflated compared to OTB. If so, is that a simply a by-product of correspondence chess? It would make p ...[text shortened]... to the use of databases, unlimited thought time, etc.
Am I on track here? Your thoughts?
In the case of xnomanx, his bar chart shows that of the twelve finished games here at RHP, he played against only three opponents who (at the time of the game) had ratings greater than 1200 (everybody starts with 1200 here). Of those three, xnomanx beat two, RussellR and Beatnik. However, both players *now* have ratings below xnomanx (and in the case of the provisional Beatnik, hundreds of points below), so it is difficult to see how this could support his claim that RHP ratings are "inflated". (The other opponent rated higher than 1200, FDodi, beat him, and unlike the other two, his rating is still higher than xnomanx's.)
Furthermore, in the present case, we find that xnomanx doesn't play rated OTB chess and doesn't have an OTB rating.
In light of these two facts, taken together, it's difficult to see what the basis for comparison is. He doesn't have the experience on RHP to get an impression, and on the other hand he doesn't have the OTB experience either. Puzzling. I would like to ask xnomanx: whence the impetus for this question?
Previous examination of this issue has shown that there are players with RHP ratings higher than their USCF ratings (for example) and players with RHP ratings lower than their USCF ratings. What has emerged from previous threads on the same topic is that there doesn't seem to be any significant correlation, either positive or negative. Of course, nobody has been systematic about investigating it, but one has a strong impression that a genuine random sampling of sufficient size would show no "inflation".
In my own case, my playing skill varies considerably, depending on what else is going on in my life at the moment (i.e., background conditions). I just resigned a game where my play was abominable -- or rather, at a critical point it became abominable -- and if that were typical of my games I would have to plead guilty to having an inflated rating. Fortunately it isn't: and my only defect in judgment in the game in question was my decision to play chess on a day when I could not even see my hand before my face, figuratively speaking, instead of waiting until the cloud had passed (though of course, part of the problem was that I did not realize the extent of the problem until it was too late). The rest can be blamed on what poisoned me the night before.
06 Jan 08
You cannot ever compare RHP rating with any other rating system. RHP rating are completely isolated system.
Furthermore - RHP is a Correspondance Chess site that has different properties as Over The Board chess. Some are good in blitz, som are good in CC. Ratings can't be the same.