Discrepancy in rating between chess sites, a cheating phenomenon?

@Akbar2thegreat said in #6:
> Even if there's lot of cheating Lichess and chess.com both have great cheat detection system.
> And for ratings see the faq as there are different rating systems and everyone doesn't use same method.
> For rough comparison,
> Lichess rating + 400 = Chess.com rating

You mean "minus 400"!? Btw, I got 2311 Blitz on cc but played the last game there 'bout 1 year ago,

Same old cheating accusation by SORE LOSERS. You Overrate yourself. How long have you played chess? What books have you studied? Play in OTB tournaments to get a rReal Ratings instead of comparing Online Ratings of chess sites.

@ryan121 lol did you even care to read the first post? you've got answers to your questions there.

At the higher levels the rating difference between sites is not so huge.
Also, somehow I find cheaters on CC to be much more annoying ^^

6 of my last 20 opponents on chess.com were banned for cheating. To be a conspiracy you only need 5 or more people in on it. Doesn't that conspiracy word technically apply here? @Sarg0n

My opinion: Chess.com is full of fake bot accounts. Every second game feels like playing an engine.

@Sarg0n
Oh yeah, I mistakenly wrote wrong sign.
Lichess rating - 400 = chess.com rating

@DrHack said in #14:
>. Doesn't that conspiracy word technically apply here?
Conspiracy happens if the perpetrators co-operate towards same goal. I dont thing there was a plan to drop your rating.

Also you quite strong player. Far more likely to end up as victim. Hard to cheat constantly and be 1500

@ryan121 said in #12:
> Same old cheating accusation by SORE LOSERS. You Overrate yourself. How long have you played chess? What books have you studied? Play in OTB tournaments to get a rReal Ratings instead of comparing Online Ratings of chess sites.
I do not take losing personally, I like to study the games I lose more carefully, so I find it instructive, not damage to my ego. What I do not like is to put the effort in a game to find out later that your opponent cheated.
In Lichess I find that the natural mistakes of players here are more instructive than in chess.com, which regardless of rating, I find the learning value here much greater. Lets put it this way. In 10 games that I play at chess.com I find that one or two have instructive value when it comes to learning from my mistake, versus 6 or seven here. Because a lot of the games at CC I find a lot of computer moves that do not make sense from my opponent and there isnt much I can learn from that.
I have been playing chess for twenty years, I got my rating at USCF at about 1900 several years ago. I have played in more than 50 rated tournaments around the World. Chess books....lots. Now I am studying DEM intensely to find out how weak my endgame really was. ryan121 maybe we should play sometime and then you can see how good or bad my chess really is. If you take things so personally as to assume that I am a sore loser, you will not enjoy chess for very long, because when you lose, and everyone does, it will affect your ego too much. Check this out as reference, it happens more often than not: www.chess.com/blog/BMblogmaster/vishy-anand-loses-in-6-moves

Yes, you guys are right, the rating system is NOT the same.
But after playing more than 200 over the board opponents, you get a feel of what real and natural chess is.
Even in rapid or blitz games GMs blunder at least once in a game. Now that I am studying dvoretsky endgame manual carefully you get to see how even SUPER GMs blunder basic endgames.
I have games in chess.com that just seem absurd that 1500 rated opponents understand difficult endgames and play them perfectly.
Online chess should be instructive.
To help prepare openings.
My goal is to become a Fide Master in five years.
It is hard to get OTB play during this pandemic.
Thanks for all your comments!

You can't meaningfully compare different rating pools.

The core insight here is: chess rating systems do NOT measure playing strength! They measure relative performance against players playing in the same rating pool.

And this means that ratings are only meaningful within the rating pool they were measured in.

The question 'how much cheating is there?' is a completely separate issue. There is some cheating on all sites, but modern chess servers are really remarkably good at spotting them. I don't consider it much of an issue. (Not even at chess com.)