Fide rating and lichess rating, I will say if your lichess rating is 2000 maybe your Fide rating will be 1400-1600. but if your Fide rating is 2000 and maybe your lichess rating will be 2200-2600 I guess.
@TheKingClash said in #4:
> 2000 Fide will be around 2250 lichess blitz or 2300 Lichess rapid. Around 2000 Lichess the difference is around 300, the higher you go, the less difference in ratings, the lower you go, the more difference in ratings, until you reach 1500 Lichess which will be around 1000 FIDE, at which point, lower ratings have the same difference as 1500 Lichess difference.
I am only a 1100 player, but I have 2200 rating on lichess.
So I don’t think what u had told makes complete sense.
> 2000 Fide will be around 2250 lichess blitz or 2300 Lichess rapid. Around 2000 Lichess the difference is around 300, the higher you go, the less difference in ratings, the lower you go, the more difference in ratings, until you reach 1500 Lichess which will be around 1000 FIDE, at which point, lower ratings have the same difference as 1500 Lichess difference.
I am only a 1100 player, but I have 2200 rating on lichess.
So I don’t think what u had told makes complete sense.
I didn’t see anything about USCF rating on that article, what system does USCF use? Because I know people who have very different FIDE and USCF ratings.
Although it would be fun to speculate one’s rating as compared by other’s results, it is utter nonsense to do so...
Lemmie tell you why...
Simply...
You are you, and the other is they...
To add more confusion...
...One could, by sheer use of the acerm8 , do well in a tourney... oh, what is the acerm8? I’m glad you asked... the acerm8 is basically a cheapo, in some instances a planned long term cheapo, I know, it’s “not really chess” but it’s fun... and I get upset when I’m caught by my opponent and hung out to dry...
Yet, my point is, skill and performing are related to one’s perspective on chess, for example, I am currently deploying two openings in my play, as white, the Vienna gambit, and as black the accelerated dragon... for whatever reason, (read I’m a silly player) I want to get a specific move order and try and try to “remember’ it...
And I get into loads of trouble, ...
So, my results are not factually reflecting my skill, (btw, which is nonexistent )
Perchance my best games found on lichess, would to be played in FiDe sanctioned tournament, in succession... my elo would be ridiculously high... wait... on lichess (my rating) it is ridiculously looking like a heart monitor... ...
So, if teddy and Dax ... are rated 2650 FiDe, and I keyrush teddy and Dax’s opponents, of whom keyrushed them on a chess server, I could say I’m 2651... uhmmm no...
Let us say, Brandon, Carl and Ulysses each went into financial center and all received an equal share of 100k ...
Would that mean I would get an equal share ... had I gone into said financial center? ( for one... I do not know Brandon, Carl, nor Ulysses...) ...
Okay, still not satisfied?
Only you, yourself, can perform as you do in any event, that you participate in, if you have not participated in FiDe rated Andy’s results have no bearing on you...
Personally, I would like to have a much higher rating than I do on liChess, but... playing in the weekly classical tourney presented by our esteemed @Ivan_Gabriel, of whom everyone, has worked very hard on getting the most exciting event I have ever participated in, many thanx @ivan_Gabriel .... Off to a great start ( ninth is coming soon) )
Has shown me, that you guys are tuff as nails... and I’m just glad to be able to play chess, (btw thankyou @thibault , for having this server it has been my constant source of joy )
lichess.org/tournament/iU5Octw8
Yes, we look at rating as a source of respect, but, unlike age, where a 110 year old would get immediate admiration by many... any rating system has the same issue, that every game is in itself unique by the sheer fact of having individuals of whom are different people... have at that moment different ideas with different references on how to employ those ideas ...
Thus, making comparisons that much harder, everyone, of whom, has suffered a defeat by me, must realize that it was the nature of chess, not my GM level skill that caused this, sure, they blundered last, or made those mistakes that allowed me to throw in an acerm8.... Titled players see right through my plans, as simplistic and fanciful as they may be... there really is a proper way to compare people in their relative strengths... as there is a proper way to play chess...
A rating system is necessary to pair up players based upon potential outcomes, so to minimize the amount of points won or lost, as no one would like to lose those hundred plus points we all gained and lost from when we began our probationary stage in every game we play... the pool of players we meet based upon our rating. For me, has been satisfactory, especially on LiChess ...
As you will have noted that there are many different results of people playing FiDe and showing their respective LiChess rating a plus or minus, this shows personal performances... ie, not everyone has gotten stuck playing probationary players because they suck at chess like me, where one’s opponent is really master strength with a question mark at 1500? ...
Some players, play well against a ‘style’ of player, and may ‘get lucky’ and most of their opponents play that way... in a tournament otb, this would be leader material... others, like me, like to “wonder what this button does” not that I think my opponent “won’t see that” more like, I apparently refuse to “find” the refutation, and let my opponent do “ all the work “...
So... go ahead and get into FiDe and find yourself how well you do, and leave the speculation out, you could get lucky and get paired up with the “right” opponent at the right time, the morning opponent who ate a large breakfast and was a little sleepy, the opponent who had an itch was annoying them, an adversary, who presses too hard because they ‘deserve’ the win, and the opponent distracted ... these players ordinarily would keyrush the competition...
As far as I’m concerned playing thousands of games on lichess, I am satisfied that my rating reflects pretty much my strength give or take a couple hundred points (is unimportant ) playing a constant barrage of tuff players and getting a quarter (one out of four games won) makes me happy that I’m on the right tract for playing better. This is reference to 8th Weekly World Classicals Team Battle, on LiChess my play in general where my win loss at 50/50 (okay ... 47-1 or 2-51) shows I’m pretty accurately at my rating of 1500...
Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts on rating accountability...
@acerb8
Lemmie tell you why...
Simply...
You are you, and the other is they...
To add more confusion...
...One could, by sheer use of the acerm8 , do well in a tourney... oh, what is the acerm8? I’m glad you asked... the acerm8 is basically a cheapo, in some instances a planned long term cheapo, I know, it’s “not really chess” but it’s fun... and I get upset when I’m caught by my opponent and hung out to dry...
Yet, my point is, skill and performing are related to one’s perspective on chess, for example, I am currently deploying two openings in my play, as white, the Vienna gambit, and as black the accelerated dragon... for whatever reason, (read I’m a silly player) I want to get a specific move order and try and try to “remember’ it...
And I get into loads of trouble, ...
So, my results are not factually reflecting my skill, (btw, which is nonexistent )
Perchance my best games found on lichess, would to be played in FiDe sanctioned tournament, in succession... my elo would be ridiculously high... wait... on lichess (my rating) it is ridiculously looking like a heart monitor... ...
So, if teddy and Dax ... are rated 2650 FiDe, and I keyrush teddy and Dax’s opponents, of whom keyrushed them on a chess server, I could say I’m 2651... uhmmm no...
Let us say, Brandon, Carl and Ulysses each went into financial center and all received an equal share of 100k ...
Would that mean I would get an equal share ... had I gone into said financial center? ( for one... I do not know Brandon, Carl, nor Ulysses...) ...
Okay, still not satisfied?
Only you, yourself, can perform as you do in any event, that you participate in, if you have not participated in FiDe rated Andy’s results have no bearing on you...
Personally, I would like to have a much higher rating than I do on liChess, but... playing in the weekly classical tourney presented by our esteemed @Ivan_Gabriel, of whom everyone, has worked very hard on getting the most exciting event I have ever participated in, many thanx @ivan_Gabriel .... Off to a great start ( ninth is coming soon) )
Has shown me, that you guys are tuff as nails... and I’m just glad to be able to play chess, (btw thankyou @thibault , for having this server it has been my constant source of joy )
lichess.org/tournament/iU5Octw8
Yes, we look at rating as a source of respect, but, unlike age, where a 110 year old would get immediate admiration by many... any rating system has the same issue, that every game is in itself unique by the sheer fact of having individuals of whom are different people... have at that moment different ideas with different references on how to employ those ideas ...
Thus, making comparisons that much harder, everyone, of whom, has suffered a defeat by me, must realize that it was the nature of chess, not my GM level skill that caused this, sure, they blundered last, or made those mistakes that allowed me to throw in an acerm8.... Titled players see right through my plans, as simplistic and fanciful as they may be... there really is a proper way to compare people in their relative strengths... as there is a proper way to play chess...
A rating system is necessary to pair up players based upon potential outcomes, so to minimize the amount of points won or lost, as no one would like to lose those hundred plus points we all gained and lost from when we began our probationary stage in every game we play... the pool of players we meet based upon our rating. For me, has been satisfactory, especially on LiChess ...
As you will have noted that there are many different results of people playing FiDe and showing their respective LiChess rating a plus or minus, this shows personal performances... ie, not everyone has gotten stuck playing probationary players because they suck at chess like me, where one’s opponent is really master strength with a question mark at 1500? ...
Some players, play well against a ‘style’ of player, and may ‘get lucky’ and most of their opponents play that way... in a tournament otb, this would be leader material... others, like me, like to “wonder what this button does” not that I think my opponent “won’t see that” more like, I apparently refuse to “find” the refutation, and let my opponent do “ all the work “...
So... go ahead and get into FiDe and find yourself how well you do, and leave the speculation out, you could get lucky and get paired up with the “right” opponent at the right time, the morning opponent who ate a large breakfast and was a little sleepy, the opponent who had an itch was annoying them, an adversary, who presses too hard because they ‘deserve’ the win, and the opponent distracted ... these players ordinarily would keyrush the competition...
As far as I’m concerned playing thousands of games on lichess, I am satisfied that my rating reflects pretty much my strength give or take a couple hundred points (is unimportant ) playing a constant barrage of tuff players and getting a quarter (one out of four games won) makes me happy that I’m on the right tract for playing better. This is reference to 8th Weekly World Classicals Team Battle, on LiChess my play in general where my win loss at 50/50 (okay ... 47-1 or 2-51) shows I’m pretty accurately at my rating of 1500...
Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts on rating accountability...
@acerb8
Here's a few things maybe you didn't think about:
Online ratings have barriers in connection speed and technology availabilty - I have no idea how much this affects the rating of a player within the online pool - but compare it to the FIDE barriers and it's too different to even think.
Fide ratings have barriers in geography and socioeconomic status, as well as frequency of play inconsistencies. If you live in the right area with money and there are enough events that you can play, you have a higher rating.
Even if you could compare them - SEE THIBAULTS POST because you can't. You don't want to compare them. The inconsistencies are too high.
Online ratings have barriers in connection speed and technology availabilty - I have no idea how much this affects the rating of a player within the online pool - but compare it to the FIDE barriers and it's too different to even think.
Fide ratings have barriers in geography and socioeconomic status, as well as frequency of play inconsistencies. If you live in the right area with money and there are enough events that you can play, you have a higher rating.
Even if you could compare them - SEE THIBAULTS POST because you can't. You don't want to compare them. The inconsistencies are too high.
@Sarg0n said in #2:
> +100 - +400 is usual, the younger the more discrepancy.
You have a DSB of 2156, that means +200 difference in your level, or is there a difference between FIDE and DSB?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@Acerb8 I always consider my rating here something serious, at least more serious than chess.com and FIDE, if I want to play funny games, I often play casual games...
> +100 - +400 is usual, the younger the more discrepancy.
You have a DSB of 2156, that means +200 difference in your level, or is there a difference between FIDE and DSB?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@Acerb8 I always consider my rating here something serious, at least more serious than chess.com and FIDE, if I want to play funny games, I often play casual games...
<Comment deleted by user>
It's true. My ELO FIDE does not match the reality of lichess.org ...
Well, because I don't have ELO FIDE ...
Well, because I don't have ELO FIDE ...
@celinofj said in #16:
(Among other things
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> @Acerb8 I always consider my rating here something serious, at least more serious than chess.com and FIDE, if I want to play funny games, I often play casual games...
That’s a good bit of advise, part of my perspective is to have available a running flow of my personal performance... the “am I getting any better or is my chess mastery destined to be considered entry level chess...
Casual or rated it matters little to me, although I tend to play a bit nervous knowing my self worth measure is at stake...
The little it matters correlates to my self awareness, in that the current attitude to rating allows one to provide their thoughts on a game with the “knowing what I’m, talking about” proof being my 4000 rating...
As with all human wants and desires being unlimited, it would be cool to be rated high, to walk with the smug expression on my face, instead of the defeated look I wear. But, I get your point, I do not have to wallow in my self made misery, however, I imagine that were I to play casual when the feeling of “trying that maneuver” over takes me a casual game would do a world of good for me...
I am fortunate that my trials and tribulations in chess are understood and at sometimes have been experienced by others, not being alone works well in my psyche. I went from playing chess with anyone and feeling good about the game to being frustrated by every “a player you have played has been found to use assistance” I began to dwell what if... and chose to let this get the better of me, becoming vocal and hitting my chair, eight Saturdays, making me calm, cool and collected having begun the world team classical battle, and this negative mentality has evaporated, in the process of eight 12 hour tournaments playing knowingly far superior players based upon their statistical evidence, and again, a loss it met with “what a fun game”...
As I see it, one merely gains rating equivalencies from other measures of rating to know, for their performances, their own personal equivalency. That should bring this speculation to an end when having ‘concrete’ evidence of their own cross the board standings differential...
@acerb8
(Among other things
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> @Acerb8 I always consider my rating here something serious, at least more serious than chess.com and FIDE, if I want to play funny games, I often play casual games...
That’s a good bit of advise, part of my perspective is to have available a running flow of my personal performance... the “am I getting any better or is my chess mastery destined to be considered entry level chess...
Casual or rated it matters little to me, although I tend to play a bit nervous knowing my self worth measure is at stake...
The little it matters correlates to my self awareness, in that the current attitude to rating allows one to provide their thoughts on a game with the “knowing what I’m, talking about” proof being my 4000 rating...
As with all human wants and desires being unlimited, it would be cool to be rated high, to walk with the smug expression on my face, instead of the defeated look I wear. But, I get your point, I do not have to wallow in my self made misery, however, I imagine that were I to play casual when the feeling of “trying that maneuver” over takes me a casual game would do a world of good for me...
I am fortunate that my trials and tribulations in chess are understood and at sometimes have been experienced by others, not being alone works well in my psyche. I went from playing chess with anyone and feeling good about the game to being frustrated by every “a player you have played has been found to use assistance” I began to dwell what if... and chose to let this get the better of me, becoming vocal and hitting my chair, eight Saturdays, making me calm, cool and collected having begun the world team classical battle, and this negative mentality has evaporated, in the process of eight 12 hour tournaments playing knowingly far superior players based upon their statistical evidence, and again, a loss it met with “what a fun game”...
As I see it, one merely gains rating equivalencies from other measures of rating to know, for their performances, their own personal equivalency. That should bring this speculation to an end when having ‘concrete’ evidence of their own cross the board standings differential...
@acerb8
@celinofj said in #1:
> How much ELO difference is there between FIDE and Lichess?
>
> A 2000 ELO player from FIDE will get how much ELO in here?
>
> Thanks!
I made a website to answer this question: www.chessratingcomparison.com/
So far it has ratings from 3800 players, and uses players who would have both Lichess ratings and Fide ratings to compare the two ratings.
Generally Lichess Ratings are higher than Fide Ratings. For example, if I give the data for Lichess Classical and Fide Standard a linear equation, I will find that 2000 Lichess classical would predict a 1659, but there is also an average variation of 169 points for that equation, so keep in mind no equation would be perfect in predicting your rating.
I encourage you to check out the rest of the website, and also, add your ratings!
Edit: I do want to mention, my website might not be as accurate for higher ratings on Lichess being converted to Fide or USCF ratings. I think that's in part because most of the people who have submitted their ratings tend to be in the middle of the spectrum in terms of playing strength, and I have had fewer stronger players submit their ratings.
> How much ELO difference is there between FIDE and Lichess?
>
> A 2000 ELO player from FIDE will get how much ELO in here?
>
> Thanks!
I made a website to answer this question: www.chessratingcomparison.com/
So far it has ratings from 3800 players, and uses players who would have both Lichess ratings and Fide ratings to compare the two ratings.
Generally Lichess Ratings are higher than Fide Ratings. For example, if I give the data for Lichess Classical and Fide Standard a linear equation, I will find that 2000 Lichess classical would predict a 1659, but there is also an average variation of 169 points for that equation, so keep in mind no equation would be perfect in predicting your rating.
I encourage you to check out the rest of the website, and also, add your ratings!
Edit: I do want to mention, my website might not be as accurate for higher ratings on Lichess being converted to Fide or USCF ratings. I think that's in part because most of the people who have submitted their ratings tend to be in the middle of the spectrum in terms of playing strength, and I have had fewer stronger players submit their ratings.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.