People ask this 24/7. My answer to all this is that you cannot compare rating between two different pools of players. Ratings are only relative and meant to be compared to the pool of players you are in. Chess dot com used the ELO rating system whereas lichess uses the Gliko-2 system. Glicko-2 is rating that predicts your strength in a pool of players by using a confidence interval. I can expand if anyone wants me to. Also, If I have said anything wrong please correct me :)
bbyd is mostly right: comparing ratings across different player pools can only be done if you have enough rating data from players who are in both rating pools. So maybe if someone has rating data of a few thousand players in both pools we can do some statistical analysis.
average ratings:
chess.com-
standard 1302
blitz 1095
bullet 1144
lichess.com-
standard 1548
blitz 1492
bullet 1455
sources:
gist.github.com/ornicar/2a402e46d05074f880d6
http://www.chess.com/livechess/players?type=Bullet
chess.com-
standard 1302
blitz 1095
bullet 1144
lichess.com-
standard 1548
blitz 1492
bullet 1455
sources:
gist.github.com/ornicar/2a402e46d05074f880d6
http://www.chess.com/livechess/players?type=Bullet
But those numbers don't tell us whether players on lichess are stronger than players on other sites.
they're both large samples of the general online chess population, so I expect their averages to be about the same. So a 1548 lichess rating would roughly equivalent to a 1302 chess.com rating. but idk
Yes, lichess' glicko rating tends to be a slightly higher number than the elo of many other sources.
The main problem is that the Glicko-2 average rating will ALWAYS be roughly 1500 in any given pool of players with enough active players. So using averages helps determine nothing, really. The lichess average ratings for all pools will always be almost always within +/- 100 points of 1500.
Yep, glicko average is pretty much 1500, and elo average is basically 1200.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.