22 Jan '09 15:10>1 edit
So 1500 USCF ~ 1248 FIDE.
Originally posted by Fat LadyI just did a quick experiment with a random, big club in the States so that I could see if any lower rated USCF players also had recent FIDE ratings.
I think the high end USCF ratings are a little inflated compared with FIDE, but it is difficult to tell for players below 2000 USCF because FIDE is very much aimed at stronger players.
Originally posted by Squelchbelchlower levels probably play less FIDE tournaments, so the USCF rating displays their progress faster.
I just did a quick experiment with a random, big club in the States so that I could see if any lower rated USCF players also had recent FIDE ratings.
I chose the Miami International Chess Academy.
Here's what I came up with (trust me I checked all the names thoroughly):
Miami International Chess Academy
Member USCF---FIDE rating
FM Martine ...[text shortened]... ps slightly inflated over the FIDE.
At lower levels the reverse would seem to be quite common.
Originally posted by wormwoodThere does seem to be a strong trend that below 2200 FIDE you can expect the USCF rating to be lower than the FIDE one.
lower levels probably play less FIDE tournaments, so the USCF rating displays their progress faster.
also, the class players probably differ from most other countries because of the huge american scholastic scene. the ratings distribution is just very different, and you can see it pretty much everywhere online as well. the low end of american scene is extremely wide. and because of that alone, a working formula is probably impossible to find.
Originally posted by Squelchbelchhow do you mean 'a strong trend'? the uscf ratings have been almost invariably higher than fide when I've come across people with both. not that I had done any real research on it though.
There does seem to be a strong trend that below 2200 FIDE you can expect the USCF rating to be lower than the FIDE one.
I'd like some objective evidence to the contrary.
Originally posted by SquelchbelchProbably the best objective data is this scatter plot of recent USCF members who also had FIDE ratings. (from Mark Glickman's site)
There does seem to be a strong trend that below 2200 FIDE you can expect the USCF rating to be lower than the FIDE one.
I'd like some objective evidence to the contrary.
Originally posted by wormwoodAnd that case be member of both organization and devote your life to catch your USCF rating with your FIDE. Now that would be a progress 😛
how do you mean 'a strong trend'? the uscf ratings have been almost invariably higher than fide when I've come across people with both. not that I had done any real research on it though.
Originally posted by wormwoodHave a look at my stats above^^
how do you mean 'a strong trend'? the uscf ratings have been almost invariably higher than fide when I've come across people with both. not that I had done any real research on it though.
Originally posted by no1marauderThe formula given in that page doesn't give any justification for applying the "old" ECF (BCF) to FIDE conversion formula when converting between ECF grades and national ratings, but 1500 USCF ~= 113 ECF sounds like the right sort of figure. I'd like to see some empirical evidence though, surely someone on this site has both a USCF rating and an ECF grade?
To answer the original question, there is a formula here to convert national ratings to BCF: http://www.englishchess.org.uk/grading/2002/how_it_works/conversion.htm
A 1500 USCF would convert to a 113 BCF.
I don't think it's meaningful to try to convert ratings lower than Expert to FIDE; how many people rated in a lower grade play in FIDE tournaments? I didn't even know you could!
Originally posted by heinzkatI am quite certain that Bobby Fischer is the only player who has ever achieved a USCF rating above 2800 (2815 if I recall correctly). Also, I seem to recall that his FIDE rating at that time was 2780.
... text shortened ...
About 30 years ago, an IM used to be rated around 3000 (!) USCF. The USCF ratings have been corrected since then, but the numbers still tend to be "high" I believe.
... text shortened ...