Is it suspicious when players have significantly higher ratings in longer time controls than in shorter ones? For instance, one player I just saw in the lobby had ratings in the 1500s for everything, including variants, but had a correspondence rating of almost 2100. I usually avoid games with such players; I realize that blitz chess and correspondence chess are two very different games and the time controls make a big difference, and someone can be better at one than the other, but I think a difference in rating like this is too great for that to be the most likely explanation. I am curious to hear other people's thoughts on this though.
I also get worried when they are far apart. However, it does not guarantee that they are cheating. Especially if they have only played a few games in that specific variant.
@TriChesster Yes, if their rating is provisional, then it is a different matter.
It may also be that the person is just simply slow in calculation. In my case, my classic rating is 400 points higher than my blitz rating, and I won't even try bullet. I don't cheat at classic. Instead, I find I'm usually using most of my allotted time to find moves. In blitz, I just don't find the right moves quickly enough.
It's not suspicious to me. Playing fast needs experience.
I had been losing to time out even in classical games a couple of weeks ago.
Now I'm getting used to play rapid but I simply can't play below 5 minutes. All I see is chaos and hanging pieces etc. But unlimited time is great if you're in the mood for thinking every possible move and counter move.
I had been losing to time out even in classical games a couple of weeks ago.
Now I'm getting used to play rapid but I simply can't play below 5 minutes. All I see is chaos and hanging pieces etc. But unlimited time is great if you're in the mood for thinking every possible move and counter move.
I'm terrible at fast games. Anything under 30 mins a side. Correspondence allows me to play a decent game. Plus it's simply more interesting to me.
People just have different capabilities.
People just have different capabilities.
My rating discrepancy is even worse than ekopp2000... I am currently 1628 @ 15+15.. but I struggle to stay above 1000 at 5+3. No cheating at rapid... just inexperience and terrible time management at blitz.
@ekopp2000 rating differences between pools are not even indicative. But I would say classic rating +200 = rapid rating, classic +400 = Blitz, about + then the differences on how some time limit suits the person. Lot less people play rapid and still smaller subsection plays classic so the pools live completely they own life
Speed chess isn't the same game. it caters more to tactical minds that can still see the tactics in short time controls. and it simply doesn't give you enough time to evaluate positional factors carefully. in longer time controls i personally find it a lot easier to grind my opponents down in ways that i would screw up all my good work in 1 move in a blitz game or when the time pressure sets in and i can no longer convert my advantage to something meaningful
@Chuck_Fess
I used to cheat, on a different account. I'm clean now. But I was able to cheat at bullet; a 2+1 bullet game is enough time to plug a computer's moves into Lichess. So, my bullet rating was similar to my rating in longer time controls, but I still cheated. So, I don't think there's any reason to think that a big difference between your opponent's bullet rating and his other ratings means that he is a cheater.
I used to cheat, on a different account. I'm clean now. But I was able to cheat at bullet; a 2+1 bullet game is enough time to plug a computer's moves into Lichess. So, my bullet rating was similar to my rating in longer time controls, but I still cheated. So, I don't think there's any reason to think that a big difference between your opponent's bullet rating and his other ratings means that he is a cheater.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.