Heres a thought. Currently if you want to see the full stats of someone, you have to be a member at Platinum or above. Now I can understand that Chess.com wants you to pony up some more cash to use this awesome site, and therefore holds some of the cooler features back until you do so, however, I think that there may be a bit of middle ground here.

Think about this. Currently if you're a gold star member, you can only see your own stats, but what if, at that level, you could also see the stats of anyone who was your "Friend"? That seems like it would be a nice step between only seeing your own stats and being able to see everyone's.

What do you think?

good idea but the only problem is, that u can send a friend request to anyone on the whole site that u want to see their stats. and y did u make 2 of these forums?

mercytononeZ,

Where is the other forum? I only made one, checking under "Topics I have started" confirms this.

To answer your question, sure, you can send a friend "request" to anyone but how many people are going to accept that, just so you can see their stats?

sorry i must of misread that.

But how would your potential friend know that? If your playing him/her in a game or just talk to him, i'm sure he'll accept the request.

I guess I'm thinking along the lines that I don't necessarily want to give out more info about my game than I have too. Being able to see someone's stats is an advantage. You can deduce certain things from it. That's why being able to see it is a privilege.

If someone I was just playing casually and didn't really know asked to be my friend so they could see my stats, there's no way I'd say yes.

Some people might accept it, and you already have an advantage because anybody can see anyone's current games and games they played in the last 30 days.

Its a nice concept, although it sounds like a bit of a pain in the ass to code... it isnt that "big" of a give away, but it would really depend on if Erik and the rest of chess.com care enough to add that feature (not to downplay it, just...)

Seeing someone`s stats means little. I have a database of every game played by Bobby Fischer. If I learnt it off by heart, could I have beaten him? Not a chance. Knowing how to play with a given position is the trick. Sometimes you can be losing and accidently find a winning move. Luck comes into chess on occasions.

Lilith,

A fair point to some degree, however, you and Bobby Fischer aren't (weren't) anything next to equals. If two players of very similar strength were playing and one had better information about how the other played, I believe that would be an advantage.

That said, if I go ahead and agree with a couple comments here that seem to state that there's no real advantage gained, then it becomes just a voyeuristic thrill. If everone believes that, then maybe everyone would accept someone as a friend just so the other person could see their stats. I don't think this is true though. It would be interesting to run a poll to see how many people would actually do that. I think the numbers would be low.

I have to say I wouldn't mind if my stats were on my profile for everybody to see. When it comes down to it, it's just you and your opponent on that board, on that day, or in that game. That is the wonderful thing about chess, on some days you're a better player, than on others :-).

Could some platinum member post sally_cinnamon's stats.? I wasn't interested before - now I'm curious.    

Oh, I meant Dahan's (the originator of this topic).

Lol! Oh no! All my deepest and darkest secrets revealed! Darn you Lithium11!

Dahan wrote: Lol! Oh no! All my deepest and darkest secrets revealed! Darn you Lithium11!

If you look more closely, Dahan, you'll notice that lithium11 has inadvertantly revealed someone else's deepest and darkest secrets. Curiousity is indeed a killer of cats.

So right you are artfizz! I stand corrected. Well, they aren't as good as Lithium11's, but:

 Online Chess - Detailed Stats: Dahanhttp://static.chess.com/images/icons/member/gold.png); margin-left: 1px; background-position: 50% 50%;" title="Premium Member" href="http://www.chess.com/membership.html">

Current: 1469 Today's Rank: #8907 of 46,240 Percentile: 80.7% Glicko RD: 71 Highest: 1545 (31 Jul 2008) Lowest: 977 (27 Nov 2007) Avg. Opp.: 1392 Best Win: 1731 (AbouJalal) Worst Loss: 1162 (TonyGas)

7 Days | 30 Days | 60 Days | 90 Days | 1 Year | All Time

	Win	Lose	Draw
Avg. Opponent Rating when I...	1313	1481	1426

Total: 459 Won: 238 (52%) Lost: 203 (44%) Drawn: 18 (4%) Unrated: 20 In Progress: 10 Timeouts: 0 (0%) Winning Streak: 9 games Losing Streak: 7 games Most Frequent  Opponent: oldmetrodomehttp://static.chess.com/images/icons/member/gold.png); margin-left: 1px; background-position: 50% 50%;" title="Premium Member" href="http://www.chess.com/membership.html"> (28 games)

	Wins	Losses	Draws	Games	Moves
Total	238 (52%)	203 (44%)	18 (4%)	459	13494
White	114 (50%)	103 (45%)	10 (4%)	227 (49%)	6515.5 (48%)
Black	124 (53%)	100 (43%)	8 (3%)	232 (51%)	6978 (52%)

A few tournament wins there, Dahan. As with the stock market, the key thing to work out from that rating chart is: is your rating on the slide so is this a good time to challenge? (Need to avoid 'dead cat bounce').

lollol

Artfizz,

Heh! I'm about average right now. Looks like you could handle me. Challenge away if you wish. :)

Dahan wrote: Artfizz,  Heh! I'm about average right now. Looks like you could handle me. Challenge away if you wish. :)

On the basis of your occupation, I must recline your kind offer.

Ohhh! That's just terrible. Perhaps I should table a motion on this?