Answers.Body: <p>Puzzles are a notoriously bad estimator for ELO. (Tried myself, wild fluctuations.) You could run whole games by you through an engine (moar input =&gt; moar output) and check the accuracy of your moves. There is a <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221606300_Intrinsic_Chess_Ratings" rel="noreferrer">whole scientific paper</a> dedicated to how valid this method is.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-06-10T04:25:27.923Z
Answers.Text: Interesting paper. I disagree a bit though. I think from just one person's perspective, we can have a direct correlation between quality of moves and their approximate Elo.
Answers.UserDisplayName: abunickabhi
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-06-07T17:35:28.623Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-06-07T17:35:28.623Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Answers.Body: <p>If you have online chess ratings, you can get a very rough estimate <a href="https://chessgoals.com/rating-comparison/" rel="noreferrer">here</a>, but you should expect that a significant deviation to your real rating is possible (+-200).</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-06-07T18:43:59.697Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-06-07T18:50:29.297Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2022-06-07T18:50:29.297Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauptideal
Answers.Body: <p>Puzzles are not very good for getting a close approximation of your ELO, for a variety of reasons. The  are some websites that allow you to play games with a computer rated at a certain ELO, playing a few of these games (with the clock, and in proper match conditions) can help get a reasonable estimate of your ELO. Obviously the more games you play the better an estimate you can get. For instance if you can consistently beat a computer rated at 1300 ELO but consistently lose to a computer rated 1500 ELO, you’d know your somewhere around the 1400 mark.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-05-10T14:05:27.673Z
Answers.Text: a computer rated 1500 is likely to have lower technical skill then a person rated 1500 while also making none of the random silly errors the person sometimes makes.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ian Ringrose
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-05-10T16:00:31.240Z
Answers.Text: @IanRingrose No doubt about that. But I doubt there is a better way. If there were a chess website that verified FIDE ratings, then that could be an option, but I doubt such a website exists.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Vivaan Daga
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-06-08T08:10:50.217Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-06-09T07:47:51.780Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2022-06-09T07:47:51.780Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Vivaan Daga
Answers.Body: <p>Already posted this link as a comment, but since this question isn't closed anymore I'll leave it in an answer too:</p>
  <p>ethanlebowitz.github.io/RatingConverter/index.html</p>
  <p>Does a decent job of approximating what someone's FIDE rating would be, given their Lichess ratings. You mentioned chess.com though, so not sure if you also play on Lichess.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-06-10T08:52:00.847Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-06-10T08:52:00.847Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Body: <p>I would like to know if it's possible to get a rough idea of what my ELO is and how accurate those methods are.</p>
  <p>For example, I did one of those &quot;chess tests&quot; and the results it gave me didn't quite seem right. I did the one on ELOMeter.net, and got the following:</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>Based on your move choices, our estimate of your Elo rating is 1464,
  with a 95% confidence interval of [1302...1627].</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>That doesn't sound right. Based on how things have been going for me on chess.com, it seems very high. Believe me, I'd LIKE to be higher on the ELO scale. But the result I got from ELOMeter.net didn't seem right.</p>
  <p>If I were to look at the United States Chess Federation rankings, I'd probably rate myself roughly either a G (600–799) or an F (800-999).</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-07T16:43:31.423Z
Comments.Text: Why would you believe any test of your puzzle ability could possibly be as good a measure as your online rating (on Chess.com, Lichess, etc.)? Although they are not the same system and not on the same scale (and also not at classical controls) (and online rather than OTB), these differences pale in comparison to the difference between puzzle ability and in-game playstrength.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-07T16:58:07.570Z
Comments.Text: @MobeusZoom Thank you for the comments. Is there a way I can determine "in game" strength? I've noticed my chess rating fluctuates wildly on chess.com. I go from anywhere in the low 600's to just over 800. and with the games I play "gaining" rating seems harder, because it's just a few points at a time, based on the relative strength of the opponent. I'm just curious, mostly.
Comments.UserDisplayName: M1976
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-07T17:19:19.233Z
Comments.Text: If you're playing large numbers of games and your rating is fluctuating wildly, then your playstrength is fluctuating wildly. Elo would show this in the same way that Chess.com rating does. I'm not sure what the real question is here? Do you just want confirmation that Elometer.net is pretty much useless as anything but a curiosity/trivia measure?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-07T20:24:49.913Z
Comments.Text: @MobeusZoom I'm mainly just curious. I don't play in real tournaments and such. I just play online. I'm simply curious what my ELO/FIDE/Glicko ratings might be.
Comments.UserDisplayName: M1976
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-07T20:54:49.110Z
Comments.Text: 'I'm just curious' isn't a clear question. Please state precisely what you want to know. If you are curious what your Glicko rating might be, just look at your Chess.com rating. That doesn't satisfy you because it vacillates a lot? **Then you don't have one rating. Your rating vacillates a lot.** Are you asking the correlation between Chess.com and FIDE Elo ratings? If so, that's totally unclear from the question. The two answers you've had address completely different guesses as to what you actually want to know.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-08T03:11:04.127Z
Comments.Text: Can you share your profile with chess.com? We'll see your rating for your previous months and then let you know if it's fluctuating.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Abhyuday Vaish
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-08T18:57:21.517Z
Comments.Text: @M1976 I have slightly modified the question to try to clarify it and see if it can be reopened. Please check if that is alright with you.
Comments.UserDisplayName: lodebari
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T04:43:26.647Z
Comments.Text: In addition to the link posted by @Hauptideal, you could also check out https://ethanlebowitz.github.io/RatingConverter/index.html, assuming you play on Lichess. I'm over 2200 FIDE and it's accurate within 30 points for me.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T16:32:12.157Z
Comments.Text: @lodebari How is it clear what the question is asking? The problem was never with wording but with content. Issue is simple: **User has a Chess.com rating but claims they are not satisfied with this as a measure of their Elo. Why not? What could possibly be better?** (not a puzzle website, certainly, let alone one that tests just a handful of puzzles)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T16:34:01.453Z
Comments.Text: If the question is in fact 'How do I estimate my FIDE Elo from my Chess.com rating', this should be the explicit and only content of the question as well as the title.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T17:32:34.507Z
Comments.Text: @MobeusZoom Well, I understand things differently. The way I understand the question is like this: "The user wants to know their Elo. The user has tried a method, that does not work. Thus, is there a method that works better than that?" As I understand it, the whole thing about Elometer is an example to provide context for the question and to show the user has made their research before asking the question. I see no problem of clarity and I think the question should be reopened.
Comments.UserDisplayName: lodebari
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T17:42:47.880Z
Comments.Text: @lodebari The user has also tried another method that *does* work, namely, they have a Chess.com rating. I ask now for the third time: Why aren't they satisfied with this estimate? If the answer is that Chess.com rating is distinct from FIDE Elo, then (also repeating for the third time) this should be the explicit and only content of the question as well as the title. Your rephrasing is no more clear than the actual question.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T17:51:15.757Z
Comments.Text: @MobeusZoom I applaud your constancy to improve the question. But again, I understand things differently. What I understand is that the Elometer method, when compared to the chess.com rating, does not work. I don't see the user saying anything about being satisfied or dissatisfied with their chess.com rating. And in any case, whether they are satisfied or not, they are free to ask for other methods.
Comments.UserDisplayName: lodebari
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T17:57:14.197Z
Comments.Text: If your understanding is correct, then the question is 'Why does Elometer / puzzle ability not accurately reflect my rating' or maybe 'What methods best estimate rating without using results/outcomes'. From the question text it's entirely unclear to understand this way, and explicitly contravened by the title (which strongly suggests that the user thinks the 'true' Elo they would get from "an organization" would be poorly estimated by their Chess.com rating).
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T17:58:03.357Z
Comments.Text: @MobeusZoom In fact, when the user says "Based on how things have been going for me on chess.com, it seems very high." I understand they are implicitly acknowledging that chess.com rating works (better) than Elometer. So they seem to agree with you.
Comments.UserDisplayName: lodebari
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-09T17:58:07.207Z
Comments.Text: Let us [continue this discussion in chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/136942/discussion-between-mobeus-zoom-and-lodebari).
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-10T01:22:15.437Z
Comments.Text: @mobeus- The question is completely clear to me. I dont understand what is confusing you so much. Your assertion that "you dont have one rating" is completely false. Everyone who has a rating has an actual, objective rating that is true at that point in time. Thats indisputable. It may differ from that player's actual playing strength and that is what the question is asking.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Savage47
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-10T13:41:52.220Z
Comments.Text: @Savage47 Not that it's really relevant, since your understanding of the question is nowhere reflected in the question content or title, but I never said "you don't have one rating at a given point in time". I specifically said "your rating vacillates a lot". Now, as for the distinction between the player's rating and their actual playstrength, I *also* covered this already in my first posts: "if you're playing large numbers of games" (or, precisely, as frequency tends to infinity) the rating will estimate playstrength (insofar as one number represents it) exactly.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mobeus Zoom
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-06-10T14:01:46.097Z
Comments.Text: @M1976 What time controls are you using? An estimate of chess ability through puzzles would require some amount of tactical reflection, whereas for example bullet chess, requires fast fingers.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Grade 'Eh' Bacon
Tags: <elo><mathematics>
Title: Is it possible to estimate my ELO without joining an organization or anything?
ThreadText: # Is it possible to estimate my ELO without joining an organization or anything?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2022-06-07)
  
  I would like to know if it's possible to get a rough idea of what my ELO is and how accurate those methods are.
  
  For example, I did one of those "chess tests" and the results it gave me didn't quite seem right. I did the one on ELOMeter.net, and got the following:
  
  > Based on your move choices, our estimate of your Elo rating is 1464,
  > with a 95% confidence interval of [1302...1627].
  
  That doesn't sound right. Based on how things have been going for me on chess.com, it seems very high. Believe me, I'd LIKE to be higher on the ELO scale. But the result I got from ELOMeter.net didn't seem right.
  
  If I were to look at the United States Chess Federation rankings, I'd probably rate myself roughly either a G (600–799) or an F (800-999).
  
  **Tags:** elo, mathematics
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Why would you believe any test of your puzzle ability could possibly be as good a measure as your online rating (on Chess.com, Lichess, etc.)? Although they are not the same system and not on the same scale (and also not at classical controls) (and online rather than OTB), these differences pale in comparison to the difference between puzzle ability and in-game playstrength.  
  > **username_0**: @MobeusZoom Thank you for the comments. Is there a way I can determine "in game" strength? I've noticed my chess rating fluctuates wildly on chess.com. I go from anywhere in the low 600's to just over 800. and with the games I play "gaining" rating seems harder, because it's just a few points at a time, based on the relative strength of the opponent. I'm just curious, mostly.  
  > **username_1**: If you're playing large numbers of games and your rating is fluctuating wildly, then your playstrength is fluctuating wildly. Elo would show this in the same way that Chess.com rating does. I'm not sure what the real question is here? Do you just want confirmation that Elometer.net is pretty much useless as anything but a curiosity/trivia measure?  
  > **username_0**: @MobeusZoom I'm mainly just curious. I don't play in real tournaments and such. I just play online. I'm simply curious what my ELO/FIDE/Glicko ratings might be.  
  > **username_1**: 'I'm just curious' isn't a clear question. Please state precisely what you want to know. If you are curious what your Glicko rating might be, just look at your Chess.com rating. That doesn't satisfy you because it vacillates a lot? **Then you don't have one rating. Your rating vacillates a lot.** Are you asking the correlation between Chess.com and FIDE Elo ratings? If so, that's totally unclear from the question. The two answers you've had address completely different guesses as to what you actually want to know.  
  > **username_2**: Can you share your profile with chess.com? We'll see your rating for your previous months and then let you know if it's fluctuating.  
  > **username_3**: @username_0 I have slightly modified the question to try to clarify it and see if it can be reopened. Please check if that is alright with you.  
  > **username_4**: In addition to the link posted by @username_9, you could also check out https://ethanlebowitz.github.io/RatingConverter/index.html, assuming you play on Lichess. I'm over 2200 FIDE and it's accurate within 30 points for me.  
  > **username_1**: @username_3 How is it clear what the question is asking? The problem was never with wording but with content. Issue is simple: **User has a Chess.com rating but claims they are not satisfied with this as a measure of their Elo. Why not? What could possibly be better?** (not a puzzle website, certainly, let alone one that tests just a handful of puzzles)  
  > **username_1**: If the question is in fact 'How do I estimate my FIDE Elo from my Chess.com rating', this should be the explicit and only content of the question as well as the title.  
  > **username_3**: @MobeusZoom Well, I understand things differently. The way I understand the question is like this: "The user wants to know their Elo. The user has tried a method, that does not work. Thus, is there a method that works better than that?" As I understand it, the whole thing about Elometer is an example to provide context for the question and to show the user has made their research before asking the question. I see no problem of clarity and I think the question should be reopened.  
  > **username_1**: @username_3 The user has also tried another method that *does* work, namely, they have a Chess.com rating. I ask now for the third time: Why aren't they satisfied with this estimate? If the answer is that Chess.com rating is distinct from FIDE Elo, then (also repeating for the third time) this should be the explicit and only content of the question as well as the title. Your rephrasing is no more clear than the actual question.  
  > **username_3**: @MobeusZoom I applaud your constancy to improve the question. But again, I understand things differently. What I understand is that the Elometer method, when compared to the chess.com rating, does not work. I don't see the user saying anything about being satisfied or dissatisfied with their chess.com rating. And in any case, whether they are satisfied or not, they are free to ask for other methods.  
  > **username_1**: If your understanding is correct, then the question is 'Why does Elometer / puzzle ability not accurately reflect my rating' or maybe 'What methods best estimate rating without using results/outcomes'. From the question text it's entirely unclear to understand this way, and explicitly contravened by the title (which strongly suggests that the user thinks the 'true' Elo they would get from "an organization" would be poorly estimated by their Chess.com rating).  
  > **username_3**: @MobeusZoom In fact, when the user says "Based on how things have been going for me on chess.com, it seems very high." I understand they are implicitly acknowledging that chess.com rating works (better) than Elometer. So they seem to agree with you.  
  > **username_1**: Let us [continue this discussion in chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/136942/discussion-between-mobeus-zoom-and-username_3).  
  > **username_5**: @mobeus- The question is completely clear to me. I dont understand what is confusing you so much. Your assertion that "you dont have one rating" is completely false. Everyone who has a rating has an actual, objective rating that is true at that point in time. Thats indisputable. It may differ from that player's actual playing strength and that is what the question is asking.  
  > **username_1**: @username_5 Not that it's really relevant, since your understanding of the question is nowhere reflected in the question content or title, but I never said "you don't have one rating at a given point in time". I specifically said "your rating vacillates a lot". Now, as for the distinction between the player's rating and their actual playstrength, I *also* covered this already in my first posts: "if you're playing large numbers of games" (or, precisely, as frequency tends to infinity) the rating will estimate playstrength (insofar as one number represents it) exactly.  
  > **username_6**: @username_0 What time controls are you using? An estimate of chess ability through puzzles would require some amount of tactical reflection, whereas for example bullet chess, requires fast fingers.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 4 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_7 on 2022-06-07. Score: 13
  
  Puzzles are a notoriously bad estimator for ELO. (Tried myself, wild fluctuations.) You could run whole games by you through an engine (moar input => moar output) and check the accuracy of your moves. There is a [whole scientific paper](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221606300_Intrinsic_Chess_Ratings) dedicated to how valid this method is.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_8**: Interesting paper. I disagree a bit though. I think from just one person's perspective, we can have a direct correlation between quality of moves and their approximate Elo.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2022-06-07. Score: 7
  
  If you have online chess ratings, you can get a very rough estimate [here](https://chessgoals.com/rating-comparison/), but you should expect that a significant deviation to your real rating is possible (+-200).
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_10 on 2022-06-08. Score: 6
  
  Puzzles are not very good for getting a close approximation of your ELO, for a variety of reasons. The are some websites that allow you to play games with a computer rated at a certain ELO, playing a few of these games (with the clock, and in proper match conditions) can help get a reasonable estimate of your ELO. Obviously the more games you play the better an estimate you can get. For instance if you can consistently beat a computer rated at 1300 ELO but consistently lose to a computer rated 1500 ELO, you’d know your somewhere around the 1400 mark.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_11**: a computer rated 1500 is likely to have lower technical skill then a person rated 1500 while also making none of the random silly errors the person sometimes makes.  
  > **username_10**: @IanRingrose No doubt about that. But I doubt there is a better way. If there were a chess website that verified FIDE ratings, then that could be an option, but I doubt such a website exists.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2022-06-10. Score: 2
  
  Already posted this link as a comment, but since this question isn't closed anymore I'll leave it in an answer too:
  
  ethanlebowitz.github.io/RatingConverter/index.html
  
  Does a decent job of approximating what someone's FIDE rating would be, given their Lichess ratings. You mentioned chess.com though, so not sure if you also play on Lichess.
  
  
  ---
  
  