That is the entire point to ratings. To match up players with other individuals playing at the same level. Again, there are times when the rating system cannot cover all of the factors of human game play. If the novice player suddenly hits upon a combination of moves that changes the game in his or her favor, but it's a one time only situation (say, for example because the player just read some on this tactic and will soon forget it after the game), this will be reflected but may raise the player's rating prematurely. By this I mean that the player in question might play the next rated game poorly enough to loose more points that were gained in the previous game. I guess what I'm saying is that any rating system, no matter how sophisticated, will have mathematical flaws in it because it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to completely account for human flaws and emotional playing within a finite equation. Now I really don't want to play rated games. I've given myself a headache with all this finite mathematical nonsense! Oh Yuk! Ignore all the typos, English was not my major (or even minor) in school.
Chess rating system
Oh yes it does! How well you play includes how well you manage your time. Time is as much part of Chess as it is in other games. In football you could score the greatest goal in history, but if the referee blows time before it goes in it doesn't count. Similarly in Chess if you don't get your moves in within the time, you lose, and correctly so.
So basically what you're saying is:
Football is a game. Football is timed.
Chess is also a game. Therefore, chess should also be timed.
You've got me convinced.
Thqat makes no sense at all. Just because one game is timed, every other game should be timed? Nonsense! To prove something, you have to know that it is true in ALL cases, not only one. I started playing chess without a timer when I learned. If you and your opponent agree that there is no time limit, then there is no time limit! Of course, Chess.com does not allow that, but playing against people in real life and doing so with no time constraints doesn't wreck the game.
It would be nice if they could let you set the time to forever... I usually lose on time because often I'm really busy with work. (well, maybe other things besides work, too...)
But then people would just leave losing matches and you would never get the win recorded!
well, I meant for just regular old games, not matches. like sometimes my friends play me and it's just for fun, but while were busy with our more important games, we run out of time and never get to finish it.
hello everybody,
I'm new in chess.com. Isn't there a board where we can try some moves during the game without submitting them..... if i want to try 5 or 6 moves ahead what should i do?
I think you click on the "moves" tab and at the bottom you click on the analysis board.
and welcome to chess.com!
This question gets asked a lot on ratings topics, but I haven't seen it answered....if it's been asked and answered 14 times on earlier pages of this thread, sorry:
when your ratings change, is it by the amount shown when you accepted the challenge? or are ratings fluctuations DURING the game taken into account too?
see?
ILLYRA:
There is a forum focused on the question. I couldn't find it, but if someone else would kindly do so and post the link?
I don't understand your question.
Mine?
There is a forum that answers Illyra's question and I couldn't find it, but I have read it. I want someone else to find it for me so I don't have to search through 150 forums with the word "Rating" in them...
Chess is like a war.plan the battle and if your aponent is formideble,starve him out ,the time should not matter to you...
But only if you can play faster then him. If he plays faster, then he starves you out!
Mine?
There is a forum that answers Illyra's question and I couldn't find it, but I have read it. I want someone else to find it for me so I don't have to search through 150 forums with the word "Rating" in them...
baseballfan wrote:
The best place to send him is probably the FAQ section on how ratings work, that can be found here: http://support.chess.com/index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=viewarticle&kbarticleid=21
(in this topic http://www.chess.com/forum/view/help-support/ratings4)
If you really want an interesting article on the rating system read the article about Mark Glickman in the 2006 October Issue of Chess Life. It does an excellent job in explaining the system (Glicko and Glicko 2). It gives you the essential formula used for calculating ratings. The equation looks very simple. However, when you start to get into refinements, etc, you see how difficult creating a rating system really is. The article has some good information on the development, from a not to difficult mathematical standpoint.
It's not how well you play the game, it's if you win or lose! 
someone can explain about blitz games? and long games?
Oh yes it does! How well you play includes how well you manage your time. Time is as much part of Chess as it is in other games. In football you could score the greatest goal in history, but if the referee blows time before it goes in it doesn't count. Similarly in Chess if you don't get your moves in within the time, you lose, and correctly so.
I could be wrong, but I assume she's talking about blitz games. There are lots of people who are great blitz players but terrible in long games, and vice versa.
Some people continue to play others that have a much higher elo and lose more
often giving them a lower elo.
But then, presumably, they would continue to play those rated higher then them, but by the same margain, giving them back the higher rating that they lost. Great article at the beginning...though very confusing.