Sometimes I get depressed as hell because I don't know what to play. I narrow it down to say two or three moves, but they all look equally plausible but they lead to different types of positions, in such a way that they're not "really" equivalent.
I bought myself a... I don't know what to call it, it's like a miniature chess set that works with magnetized pieces and that's portable like a mini book or something, anyway (it fits into a pocket). I take it to classes sometimes when I don't know what to play (with the current position set on it), and I ponder during the class.
The rules allow you to analyse a position using a second board. Something not allowed in OTB play.
I think the best way to approach the question is What is the mean and standard deviation for both rating systems. If a player is x number of stardard deviations above the norm you might guess the same for another rating system.
A flaw in the above logic is only players who a serious enough about chess to pay membership dues have a USCF rating. The average USCF player is far better than the average player with no formal tournament experiance.
