I suggest we add a Glicko rating to the group v group games. Why not? The avg rating can change depending on who joins, but the Glicko is based on team results, so we can filter team strength in seeks.

What do my fellow Chess.com users think

Well, this has come up before. Clearly the current system of ranking vote chess teams is inadequate. But apparently there are problems with accuracy because so few games are played.

I suggested a ladder system, where new teams enter at the bottom of the ladder, and work their way up. Currently rankings are determined purely by number of games played (I think, nobody was ever able to explain to me how the ponts are actuall allocated)

I do hope that in the next chess.com upgrade vote chess gets a lot of attention.

makes sense. the ladder is what's already going on in intergroup groups (Fast Vote chess cup, etc)

It would be nice to see ladders and tourneys moderated by site tools, so I agree. if not glicko, how about ELO?

I would like to see Vote Chess get some attention period. It is easily one of the most useful learning tools on this site if your team discusses moves.

I agree absolutely.

But it's so awkward to play, it should be far easier to see all your vote games together, whose move it is, how much time left, etc....

Yes, the separeted page where all your vote games are collected and shown in order would be very great, like the list of your online games at home page. Especially if it will be marked where are new comments and the amount of them, and some other additional info as well.

I would love a "current vote chess" list.  That's a great idea.

I actually like the ladder idea, but with some of the big teams, they play so many games, they'll never be in the right spot.

i love lamp

Erik has already considered this idea, but the problem is that there are usually very few games played over a very slow period of time. Maybe if the rating only becomes official after 20 games, like in real OTB tournament play?

what about competitions with teams of teams?