I do okay against 1400 chess com, but badly against 1200 fide

A few days ago, i played a chess tournament where i played 5 fide rated players, ranging from 1000 to 1200, and i got 2 losses, 2 draws and 1 win. even tho i am literally 1400 chess.com. is there a confidence elo that i have which for ex. is 1100 elo, so it would make sense that i got such a "bad" result and will increse as i play more tournaments?

You played fine for your rating. Different player pools will equate ratings differently. That is a fancy way of saying that chess.com and FIDE have a different caliber of chess player, so the rating numbers don't perfectly match.

I'd estimate chess.com rapid rating for most people to be about 200 rating points higher than USCF and about 200-300 points higher than FIDE rating. This is just a guideline I came up with now as obviously how high rated a player is (among other details) become a factor.

1400 chess.com rating might be around 1100 FIDE, so that actually aligns pretty well with how you performed

So i was right, Thanks for your answer.

Real chess is different from chess.com because the environment is different and even the chess set is different. You have a clock that you need to press and you have other people who will distract you. The different spatial setting will lower your strength. I have problems looking at the 3D board as opposed to the 2D board. It takes time to adjust. There are rating conversion between chess.com and FIDE. It says 1400 chess.com is approximately 1200 FIDE. Higher chess.com rating will inflate more. 2000 chess.com is probably 1700 FIDE. This is what I read from some websites.

Your rating comparisons seems about right and you are spot on with the 2D versus 3D spatial vision and the atmosphere of playing in-person different. However, 2D versus 3D only takes about a week or so to adjust I'd say and tends to only be a problem for people who play almost exclusively online, but not in-person, or people who play almost exclusively in-person, but not online.

There is also two other big factors which impact over-the-board (OTB) chess with online chess.

1) OTB tends to be much longer time controls, so online versus in-person really can feel dramatically different, but part of this can be negated if you play the same (or similar) time controls in-person as online.

2) OTB organizations like FIDE or USCF are tougher player pools than online typically is. Phrasing this another way, chess.com is the world's largest chess site and their global rankings accurately reflect global statistics as a result. Most chess players online (in the entire world) are beginners at chess, or hobbyists; your "average" player plays chess for fun/enjoyment as well as improvement. This means that the caliber of player is averaged lower because there are statistically way more beginners in the chess world than there are titled players (and that just makes logical sense). If someone is "serious enough" to pay money and join an OTB chess organization (like FIDE), then they are probably more knowledgeable with chess and better at chess (on average). This makes your average OTB player better than your average chess player in the world.

I think that's fairly standard, not least because playing OTB is completely different from playing online

https://youtu.be/EtNec4d9jeM there is a youtube video that shows the diffrence between chess.com and FIDE, and 1400 chess.com is like 1400 FIDE. I know its almost 2 years old but it cant change that much in 2 years, right?

You're 1500 FIDE and 2200 on chess.com? Really?

Chess.com is overrated. Chess.com rapid rating = FIDE rapid rating + 100

Some years ago I knew some players who were rated mid 1500s USCF who were something like 2400 on ICC. They could hold their own against titled players in blitz online, but I could beat them sometimes in a OTB game with a long time control. More recently, I knew a player who was around 1500 USCF but was 2200 on chess.com. His rating on USCF has since climbed to low 1800s but that is still a 400 point difference.

my

FIDE

584

my

chess.com

1042

I

disagree

@EvilOverMind

@11

Proof:
Assume stable ratings.
Probability of Carlsen beating you in rapid on chess.com
= probability of Carlsen beating you in rapid on FIDE.
Hence
Carlsen's Chess.com rapid rating - your chess.com rapid rating
= Carlsen's FIDE rapid rating Carlsen - your FIDE rapid rating
Hence
Your chess.com rapid rating - your FIDE rapid rating
= Carlsen's chess.com rapid rating - Carlsen's FIDE rapid rating = 100
Also
Your chess.com blitz rating - your FIDE blitz rating 
= Carlsen's chess.com blitz rating - Carlsen's FIDE blitz rating = 400

Merko kya bol

@18

"You and Carlsen live in two different universes!" ++ No. It has been conjectured that most chess players have a Morphy number of 6 or 7. Mine is 4 by the way. It is reasonable to assume that the Carlsen number is lower than the Morphy number, as Morphy is dead and Carlsen is contemporary and plays more than Morphy did. So we all have played somebody who has played somebody, who has played somebody who has played Carlsen. All players and their ratings connect. Even so the argument is transitive. If you do not accept a comparison between you and Carlsen, then accept a comparison between you and an intermediary player and then between this intermediary player and Carlsen.

"2100 rapid on chess.com is usually around 1900 blitz"
++ Rapid and blitz are different games with different ratings and requiring different skills.

"you cannot say anything about FIDE ratings of such a person"
++ FIDE has classical, rapid, and blitz ratings. Chess.com has rapid, blitz, and bullet ratings.
Chess.com blitz = FIDE blitz + 400
Chess.com rapid = FIDE rapid + 100

@20

Stabilised ratings only.
When a player has not played over the board for 4 years and has 1500 FIDE rapid rating, and has meanwhile played online and reached 2200 chess.com rapid rating then the difference is not 100.

Tell the kid to play some longer time controls and play some more OTB... From what I've seen he's got the skill of an average IM.