15 Apr 07
7 edits
Originally posted by wormwoodFirstly it is very obvious that you have missed my point.
firstly, that's not what inflation means. and secondly, you can't compare rating systems like that. otb (whatever your national organization happens to be) is apples, rhp (or ANY other rating) is oranges compared to that. 1800 apple-rating does not equal 1800 orange-rating, and there's no possible way to find out an exchange rate from apples to oranges.
and thirdly, you can't compare high jump to pole vault.
Secondly when I said inflated, It means a little higher than compared to only playing "Over The Board" chess, (for reasons mentioned before). I'm quite positive that unlike you, most readers would understand that I was clearly not talking about inflation as you put it.
So technically your analogy of apples and oranges or high jump and pole vault is totally miss guided.
I suggest you read a little more carefully next time before jumping to miss guided conclusions because the only person that will look silly "at the end of the day", is you...
15 Apr 07
Originally posted by kNIGHTHEADI see your point but I try to NOT use the analysis of board feature (unless I've played my move and am awaiting a reply). In addition, I tend to move quite quickly on RHP - yet, My rating is, in theory, better than otb Bcf.
I think that RHP ratings will be rather inflated compared to OTB ratings because with online system you can use the analysis feature and work out many combinations, many moves ahead and thus also forseeing potential blunder moves as well. whilst OTB chess, one has to try visualise all this in ones head while looking at all the pieces still on the board. ...[text shortened]... have heavier pressure on a player specially when it come to time pressure in my honest oppinion.
15 Apr 07
Originally posted by kNIGHTHEADno. you are simply wrong in all cases.
Firstly it is very obvious that you have missed my point.
Secondly when I said inflated, It means a little higher than compared to only playing "Over The Board" chess, (for reasons mentioned before). I'm quite positive that unlike you, most readers would understand that I was clearly not talking about inflation as you put it.
So technically your analog ...[text shortened]... conclusions because the only person that will look silly "at the end of the day", is you...
15 Apr 07
Originally posted by kNIGHTHEADjusuh: 1565 rhp 1987 selo, delta = rhp - selo = -422
As you can see there are readers with objective comments and opinions. They understand what I said, unlike you. If you like I can draw pictures to help you understand.
bahus: 1846 rhp 1802 selo, delta = +44
player3: 1874 rhp 1527 selo, delta = +347
(I know this one as well, but unlike jusuh & bahus, he hasn't publically announced his selo, which is the finnish national rating, so I'm not gonna put his handle here.)
now, please explain to me how it is possible that the deltas range from -422 to +347?
16 Apr 07
I have a whole gaggle of ratings: 1422, 1563, 1660, 1786, 1802, 1967, 2047, and 2276 (may have missed one or two). Meaning only that I’ve had better results (not necessarily played better or worse) some places than others. They no way relate to each other: different sites and different modes of play results in different ratings.