I want to completely switch to lichess from another popular platform, but what holds me back is the relevance of my rating here. Previously, I could easily track my progress by rating trace, but here, I'm too much overrated, e.g. 2000+ rating for my tactics solving, while i could never cross 1700 line previously. I consider myself as ~1450 rated player but get 1850? for blitz here, so it's hard to track actual progress when you are overrated.
You are comparing your rating here to your rating elsewhere. This is not what ratings are designed to do. Your rating is only meant to be compared to other ratings within the exact same pool of players. All other comparisons are outside the scope of the rating system. That goes for here and everywhere that uses Elo/Glicko style rating systems.
it's a different rating system
#1 That comparison is meaningless, but this is one question many people want to actually have answered. What you could do is find what's the average rating for both of the sites to have a clue anyway (which again, may or may not apply to your case).
The average ratings for lichess were calculated some time ago here: gist.github.com/ornicar/2a402e46d05074f880d6
There cannot be a single equation that transposes ratings between different sites, but what we could do is a statistical investigation asking volunteers what's their fide rating and how it compares to lichess rating. Again, this isn't necessarily linear, I know people who are 1600 here and 1600 FIDE but others being 1600 here and 1300 FIDE. There are interesting statistic if you search on the internet, but keep in mind none of them will eventually apply to you in theory.
The average ratings for lichess were calculated some time ago here: gist.github.com/ornicar/2a402e46d05074f880d6
There cannot be a single equation that transposes ratings between different sites, but what we could do is a statistical investigation asking volunteers what's their fide rating and how it compares to lichess rating. Again, this isn't necessarily linear, I know people who are 1600 here and 1600 FIDE but others being 1600 here and 1300 FIDE. There are interesting statistic if you search on the internet, but keep in mind none of them will eventually apply to you in theory.
What the above said.
Also very important, your rating has not stabilised. You need to play at least 30 games in a given variant or time controls for your rating in it to be accurate. Your rating will wildly fluctuate in the first 10 games or so until it stabilises. That is how the Glicko-2 rating system works. Play 30 more games and you will see it go to a reasonable number.
Also very important, your rating has not stabilised. You need to play at least 30 games in a given variant or time controls for your rating in it to be accurate. Your rating will wildly fluctuate in the first 10 games or so until it stabilises. That is how the Glicko-2 rating system works. Play 30 more games and you will see it go to a reasonable number.
"for blitz here, so it's hard to track actual progress when you are overrated."
Yea, a sample size of 1 blitz game is not going to give you an accurate rating.
And training puzzles, well, your rating really falls down to how long you spend on them. Your progress in that area is only what you make of it.
Yea, a sample size of 1 blitz game is not going to give you an accurate rating.
And training puzzles, well, your rating really falls down to how long you spend on them. Your progress in that area is only what you make of it.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.