Tommy, Put very simply, there are far, Far to many extraneous varibles.
1) Corr. has different rules to standard, and is also played differently.
i.e
some people may spend more/less time per move in corr.
some people make better use/rely on opening books/ databases etc.
some people may perform better/worse with time pressure.
2) the rating systems is different -- when comparing FICS rating with anything, IT WOULD BE VERY FOOLISH to ignore the "RD" of the rating...
a 2000 rating @ 350 RD should not carry the same wieght as a 2000 @23.7 RD -- (the latter being far more accurate)
etc etc etc....
the only likely co-relation you will find is an obvoius one; the better they are at any one condition (blitz, corr, etc) the more likely they are to be good at another condition --- the reason being, lots of the skills of chess (i.e tactics, positional knowledge, etc) transfere over
Originally posted by ShinidokiPut even more simply - you don't know this for sure until you find out with actual figures.
Tommy, Put very simply, there are far, Far to many extraneous varibles.
1) Corr. has different rules to standard, and is also played differently.
i.e
some people may spend more/less time per move in corr.
some people make better use/rely on opening books/ databases etc.
some people may perform better/worse with time pressure.
2) the rating s ...[text shortened]... son being, lots of the skills of chess (i.e tactics, positional knowledge, etc) transfere over
Originally posted by briancronbriancron has hit the nail on the head. It really doesn't matter whether or not ratings at different sites correlate. The point is that the ratings are designed to help you find a challenging game within the scope of that particular site, and as a means of helping you to determine whether or not you are making any progress. You can run all the numbers you want (and I strongly suspect that you might be able to produce a formula that would be within 200-300 ELO points at best!), and in the end it won't make any difference. If a player wants to know how they would fair in FIDE, at playchess, ICC, FICS USCF etc., then they should go and play there to find out.
to what end?
Let's say that my 1600 rating here is equal to a 2000+ rating in the USCF.
Will I play better?
I think a general question of what is your rating in the other systems is fair and shouldn't be shat on in here like it always is... If you don't think the systems correlate then don't post your ratings.
It's all rating vanity and meanin ...[text shortened]... game with someone of your own strength. They are not intended to justify your self worth.
Oh, and TommyC, sorry to hear about your pending job search. Merry Christmas anyway!