@hisokaxhunter said in #10:
> Fide otb...you can have elo rating lichess 2000 but still noob at real otb tournament
That is true FIDE is the most accurate. But I wouldn't go that far with lichess 2000 being noob. I'm 2000 in some stuff (Chess.com is my main) I feel like 2000 is between weak intermediate and strong club player.
@GabeMiami17 said in #11:
> That is true FIDE is the most accurate. But I wouldn't go that far with lichess 2000 being noob. I'm 2000 in some stuff (Chess.com is my main) I feel like 2000 is between weak intermediate and strong club player.
I would argue FIDE is inferior to online ratings, seeing that a typical person is much more active online than OTB, so the online rating usually has more information to work with, and also that Glicko-2 has statistical properties which are preferable to ELO.
One advantage for FIDE ratings is that people usually prepare for their games or are at least in a concentrated state, whereas online games may be played at 3am while someone is distracted without any concentration, for example.
@Toscani said in #5:
> You never said if it was to rate engines or people. @Srivaths2012
> I like this rating systems.
> www.sp-cc.de/eas-ratinglist.htm
> Imagine downloading a tournament and using the tool to discover your own EAS rating.
> www.sp-cc.de/files/statistics_eas_ratinglist.txt
> EAS-Score of engines compared to humans. :))
Humans
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.