Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Chess rating system


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1321

    AndyClifton

    Scottrf wrote:
    AndyClifton wrote:
    Then what the hell was wafflle's joke?

    Presumably implying that the problems with the website were due to him using an outdated browser.

    Yeah, he already told me.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1322

    deadastronauts

    winnersp wrote:

    I dont know about how to calculate actual rating yet! any program available?

    No.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1323

    netzach

    Forget all about rating and just play your best-chess.

    Internet-ratings practically meaningless. Particularly on here until software-users are finally eradicated (The site IS trying!)

    GlickoRD and ELO are comparable but as stated without fair-play controls there is no point getting worked-up about it.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1324

    netzach

    :) 

    Sorry guys...

    You can do anything and be anything! Go all out for 2200 for starters!! (NM in USA). Load your PC with Rybika, Fritz & Houdini. Play cat & mouse with the site's detection-systems whilst wallowing in new-found-glory of being respected and admired high-rated player on chess.com.

    The world will be your oyster. Girls will telephone you constantly. Lucrative job-offers will fill the mail-box. Fawning-admirers will send fan-mail.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1325

    DalaiLuke

    net ... just curious, and hypothetically speaking, of course, but what kind of job offers are we talking about?  :)

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1326

    netzach

    Tax-evasion inspector.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1327

    DalaiLuke

    what luck, my specialty :)

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1328

    tchaika

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1329

    Underminer1

    [mod: no spam please]

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1330

    AndyClifton

    Yeah, and I prefer to read real comments, not canned ones.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1331

    waffllemaster

    groan

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1332

    Vyomo

    I see some problems with Elo. 

    Firstly, some countries have inflated ratings because the "1800s" aren't that good(no offence meant).

    Other countries, like India, have 1500s who could give GMs a run for their money.

    Therefore, every year, I would adjust the ratings to avoid such inflation.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1333

    fianchetto123

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1334

    pellik

    Yeah, every year we should all let Vyomo arbitrarily decide certain countries are over rated and drop the ratings of all their players.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1335

    waffllemaster

    Vyomo wrote:

    I see some problems with Elo. 

    Firstly, some countries have inflated ratings because the "1800s" aren't that good(no offence meant).

    Other countries, like India, have 1500s who could give GMs a run for their money.

    Therefore, every year, I would adjust the ratings to avoid such inflation.

    I wish there were a systematic unbiased way to adjust ratings.  Ideally something that could be applied after every tournament, or after every game even.

    If some mathematician came up with a way I'm sure there would be applications outside of chess too.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1336

    kasnaseem

    In all my time playing chess, i noticed that there are two types of ratings, one elo and one is USCF. which one is the most precise for chess ratings? 

    My chess craze

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1337

    ThrillerFan

    viswanathan wrote:
    turtle wrote: i am starting to understand the rating system, but how do you determine points during a game? are certain peices worth different points? 

    turtle, the general points system followed is as follows:

    pawn - 1pt.

    knight/bishop - 3pts.

    rook - 5pts.

    queen - 10pts.

    of course points are not everything... the position of your piece also matters.. for example you might not mind losing a bishop or rook to save a pawn on the 7th row.. and points dont have any bearing on the game result.. it is just a basic framework to help beginners understand the value of different pieces


    Incorrect - Queen is 9, not 10.

    2 Rooks vs a Queen, no extra pawn for the possessor of the Queen, all other factors equal, is better for the 2 Rooks.  Of course, other factors aren't always equal.

    I think the points system as a whole is a joke.  I've seen games, especially Bishop vs Knight, where a Knight is as strong as a Queen and a Bishop is as weak as a backwards pawn, and I've seen other games where the Bishop runs rampant like a Queen, and the Knight takes for ever to get from one place to another I'd almost rather have a pawn.  This is especially true for the Bishop pair on an open board vs the Knight pair.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1338

    Vyomo

    Agreed. The rating system is just a guideline. Players have been Queen up but mated. 

    The best example of how flawed the system is a bishop endgame pawn down. Opposite coloured bishop is WAY better than same coloured in that position.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1339

    Islandplans

    These two items have likely been posted many times but I can't read through all postings.

    1) I try often to play higher ratings so when a game comes up the higher rated player sometimes aborts.  I guess this is due to my lower rating, so my question is, why not just set one's ratings to play a desired range and not waste anyone's time?

    2)  Because of the aforementioned selected ratings range, a person's rating can be manipulated (eg play lower and pad your score).  It is a lower '+' score, but still a '+'.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1340

    landwehr

    The only accurate rating is based on OTB play.

    Ratings based on playing on the internet are, for a number of reasons, unreliable and inaccurate and not worth worrying about


Back to Top

Post your reply: