Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Chess rating system


  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1121

    Kurt_Stromer

    I feel that a lot of people have the wrong idea about ratings and it's purpose.1200 is not a bad starting point and you have to start somewhere. If you are pretty good and play someone with a say 1700 and win, then your rating will improove very quickly. It's an encouragement to do well. The more games you play, the more accurate your ratings reflect your abilities. If you start with say 1700 and keep loosing to similar rated players, then your elo will drop and level out until you can hold your own against like rated players, eg. you may play against 1400's and win some then loose some and win some again. After you've played a few hundred games, your ratings should reflect fairly accurately as to how good you are. As soon as you start a different chess format, you start from the beginning again, until you've reached your normal level. As far as cheats are concerned, ie. people who use chess engines and the like, I think chess.com has a very good way of determining this. From what I understand it has to do with percentage moves. eg. if a player of a certain rating plays consistently at their  level and all of the sudden keeps beating players rated much higher, then there is probable cause to investigate his or her games. Most players make moves with a variable percentage in strength, even world champions. A lower ranked player may make 20%, 30% and maybe the odd 40% move. A higher ranked player may make 30%,50% and maybe some 60% moves. A chess engine makes perhaps consistent 60% or 80% moves, but they do it all the time. Even the best players in the world aren't that good. I understand that chess.com kicked over a thousand people out last year for cheating in various ways. They can never play on this site again!                                                                                            I get a lot of enjoyment out of my chess, win or loose. Sure, I don't like loosing to a lower rated player, but you learn to loose OK, pick yourself up, learn from your mistakes and go on to the next game. The next game you could beat a higher rated player, it not only makes up for the loss, but also gives you a sense of achievement.   So enjoy what you do and have fun.  :D

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1122

    TenaciousE

    One other common occurrence on Chess.com is players losing due to timeout.  In many cases the culprits are strong players who over-commit and are unable to keep up with the volume of games.  This has to have some effect on the integrity of the ratings, but a smarter statistician than I will have to explain what that effect is.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1123

    Kurt_Stromer

    I haven't kept up with all the comments, but I think I saw somewhere that time management is also part of this game and it holds quite true. eg. if you play OTB's in a tourney you are given very specific time controls which equate to timeout's online. So you may have a winning position against a lower rated player, but may very well loose on time, for which your ratings then drop accordingly. This applies in particular to 'lightning' and 'super lightning' chess. Of course if you take on more games than you can handle on line, then you may timeout on some, due to other commitments in your life. The other effect that a larger volume has, is that the quality of your game may drop somewhat and I know that from my own experience. So take on, what you think you can handle and adjust the volume of your games to your time availability.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1124

    Affinity4Code

    wow, idk what to say...

    im just posting to get points lol

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1125

    suzettemy

    This is advice I am taking myself.  As I finish my games, I am putting more time into the ones I am still playing, not taking on any more games.  Once all my games are finished, I wont take on more than 3 at a time, which is comfortable for me.  I can play them with all my strength and much quicker too.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1126

    chebf123

    i like the rating system. 

    the more you play the better.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1127

    Rafchess

    chebf123 wrote:

    i like the rating system. 

    the more you play the better.


     Smileit's ok.!!!!!!

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1128

    Roeczak

    Iplayed a 1798 guy at 960 and in a totally losing position (being about 2 pieces down) he was banned from the site for cheating and I got about 155 rating pts.(althoughg I lost them later)))

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1129

    Kurt_Stromer

    That's a bit like poetic justice, maybe he was only winning because he was cheating. I have no time for cheats, he got what he deserved. Keep trying and learn from your mistakes in your games and you'll get them back in no time. I quite like Bobby Fishers' format, it's more challenging and improoves your agility.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1130

    Kurt_Stromer

    Ratings are an indicator of a players' strengh and do matter in a sense where in a tourney of different formats eg the swiss, you are more likely to be paired up with an opponent in your ratings range. This applies to online and otb matches. Also, if you find yourself paired up with someone, say 200 elo points above your own, you can expect a damned tough match, which you're more likely to loose than not. By the same token if he/she is 200 elo points  below yours, then it might not be so bad. That is not to say that you shouldn't respect them all the same, because they can still beat you. I've just played 2 matches against a higher rated player, lost the first one miserably, ie. crashed and burned, but won the second in convincing style. He may very well have underestimated me and eased off a bit. It's a win I'm proud of. So you see ratings do matter, especially when you play against people over the 2000 elo points, it's like a different league.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1131

    tumblinhiker

    ratings are kinda like the collage football rating system for example if some small collage like apilichian state beats va tech there ranking would drastically increase but techs would drastically decrease. learn the value of the pieces and as you play you will learn the better the position of the peices the more they are valued at that pituclar time. like if you had a infantry solder high on a hill and some navy seal at the foot of the clif trying to attack him the battle would kind of even out , whereas if they were on leval ground the seal would have a far better advantage of skill and power.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1132

    VietnamGotTalent

    Your account may be restricted if you do not follow our Fair Play Policy. If restricted, you will only be able to play with friends. Please do not intentionally abort/disconnect from games or make your opponents wait unnecessarily. Thank you for keeping Chess.com a fun place to enjoy chess!

    Please tell me why? i'd never lie every one in the fight

     

    Tour Mui Ne

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1133

    splodge600

    I haven't got a rating but i have played one or two online/live chess games, do i have to win them in order to get a rating or do i have to play more?

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1134

    TonyMooney

    You do have a rating. Scroll down your live and on line page and look at "current". If you run your cursor over your name above it will show your live rating.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1135

    BLS-Envoy

    I honestly have never cared for a rating and never will. The strength of a player is all in their head. One who plays well plays well, and one who does not, will lose. That's my philosophy, and I have never deterred from it. Now ratings can give you a general idea of the strength of a player, but they can never be the thing that dictates our strength. Just look at GM Walter Brown losing to a 1500 player on the Ruy Lopez Berlin Wall Fishing Pole trap. It's inituition, quickness, tactics, and strategy that win games. 

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1136

    Rafchess

    BLS-Envoy wrote:

    I honestly have never cared for a rating and never will. The strength of a player is all in their head. One who plays well plays well, and one who does not, will lose. That's my philosophy, and I have never deterred from it. Now ratings can give you a general idea of the strength of a player, but they can never be the thing that dictates our strength. Just look at GM Walter Brown losing to a 1500 player on the Ruy Lopez Berlin Wall Fishing Pole trap. It's inituition, quickness, tactics, and strategy that win games. 


     CoolCoolCool its all the good u said!!

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1137

    Kurt_Stromer

    @BLS, what you say is correct with the underlying phrase being 'that ratings do not dictate ones strengh'. They are an indicator and help greatly in tourneys when players are matched up. Having said that, there are always the mis-matches and these are the ones that have the potential to create upsets and so often do.  

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1138

    BLS-Envoy

    I did say that were indicators. 

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1139

    Kurt_Stromer

    As did I in statement # 1170!

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #1140

    BLS-Envoy

    Damn, this is a long thread. ;P


Back to Top

Post your reply: