I went through the list of LiChess classical top 200 players and collected the FIDE ratings of LiChess classical ratings of anyone who I could verify on FIDE's website as actually having a FIDE rating:
LiChess FIDE LiChess username Name
2585 2265 ClassyPlays Thibault Dudognon [FM]
2389 1869 nikkon2006 Nikita Konstantinov
The rating system used by Lichess is called Glicko and is different from the FIDE one, called Elo system.
This post on Lichess forum gives some insights about the topic:
The most important thing in the answer, in my point of view is this last paragraph:
It's best to think of ratings as "...
I do agree that ratings seem a bit lower on lichess than on other websites, and actually I find this system much more stable. I am just over 2000 on FIDE elo and about the same on lichess (~2100 classical, ~2000 bullet). I have to say that it is the only place where I got a ranking reasonably near to my real ranking.
IMO, Lichess ratings are a little bit inflated. My rating at lichess topped at ~1750 while my FIDE rating is ~1500. In comparison , chess.com is a little bit less inflated. My Standard (30 min) there is ~1600 which is about the same for the top player I could beat at my level.
Of course it is possible! All the functions needed for the calculations are available on a scientific calculator, e.g. square root, log, value for pi, etc.
The Wikipedia page should get you started.
Mark Glickman's page on the system should take you further.
This pdf has detailed descriptions and equations for Glicko-2 - http://www.glicko.net/glicko/...
Yes it's possible. Sort of. It's one way people have compared the top players throughout history. The basic idea is that you feed the engine the position and the moves played by the players, and see how probable it is for them to play the computer's best move.
I don't know any ready-to-use program for this kind of analysis, however.
Of course, lichess is extremely inflated. Just look at Penguingim1's bullet rating; it is like 3100. In fact, it was almost 3200 at one point. Yet, in real life, Penguingim1 is only rated 2450 or so USCF (which is higher than FIDE).
There isn't really a good or direct translation, but perhaps you can estimate. I would say a rough conversion factor between ...
They are roughly the same, but different per type (speed v correspondence). This article from chess.com was really informative. I'm guessing the two sites are relatively comparable: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/fide-ratings-vs-chesscom-ratings-explored
There is unfortunately no 'good' way to convert from Glicko-2 to ELO. While a lot of people claim they have a formula, there really isn't any system that maintains the same invariants and distribution curve when converting.
That being said, there are some ways you could try and 'convert' your score. For example, you could find people on lichess who have ...
If you're interested in use (more than in development), you should give a try to rankade, our ranking system that features rankings, stats, and more.
Rankade doesn't use Elo, but its algorithm (called ree algorithm), although more complex, is similar to Elo if you play 1-on-1 matches only.
Opposite to Elo and Glicko (here's a comparison), rankade can ...
What I wanted to know was does it make a difference if you calculate
the results one by one or as one batch?
According to Professor Mark E. Glickman -
The Glicko-2 system works best when the number of games in a rating
period is moderate to large, say an average of at least 10-15 games
per player in a rating period.
Note the above link also gives ...
From my personal experience, the ratings at lichess and most other online chess websites are drastically overrated in score. I know someone who uses lichess regularly. Although I don't know his USCF rating, he has a score of about 1600 on lichess. Having played him in real life, he seems to be more around 1000-1200 player.
Also, my rating on chess.com is ...