Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Chess rating system


  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1141

    Ziggyblitz

    Rafchess wrote:

     Best moves is key to win.


    Computer analysis most often gives my games 30+% of inaccuracies, mistakes and blunders, and yet I am rated in the top 2% (turn-based).  Players rated 2200+ still make their share of mistakes.  When I am stuck for a good move, I try to avoid making a really bad move.  Making the "best moves" constantly is a pipe dream.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1142

    Violets_are_blue

    My humble goal within 3 years is to reach 1500 Elo. I don't think I will beat many players. Is it still possible to get a reasonably accurate rating?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1143

    Ziggyblitz

    Violets_are_blue wrote:

    My humble goal within 3 years is to reach 1500 Elo. I don't think I will beat many players. Is it still possible to get a reasonably accurate rating?


    I assume you mean over the board chess.  You'd need to play a large number of games (maybe 50) against a variety of opponents to achieve a reasonably accurate rating, IMHO.  According to my turn-based Glicko RD = 61, meaning there is a good degree of confidence that my playing strength is + or - 122 points, (between 1892 and 2136) and I've played about 300 games.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1144

    Violets_are_blue

    irrawang wrote:
    Violets_are_blue wrote:

    My humble goal within 3 years is to reach 1500 Elo. I don't think I will beat many players. Is it still possible to get a reasonably accurate rating?


    I assume you mean over the board chess.  You'd need to play a large number of games (maybe 50) against a variety of opponents to achieve a reasonably accurate rating, IMHO.  According to my turn-based Glicko RD = 61, meaning there is a good degree of confidence that my playing strength is + or - 122 points, (between 1892 and 2136) and I've played about 300 games.


    I will be prepared to play dozens and dozens of games. ;) Thanks.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1145

    Rafchess

    Violets_are_blue wrote:
    irrawang wrote:
    Violets_are_blue wrote:

    My humble goal within 3 years is to reach 1500 Elo. I don't think I will beat many players. Is it still possible to get a reasonably accurate rating?


    I assume you mean over the board chess.  You'd need to play a large number of games (maybe 50) against a variety of opponents to achieve a reasonably accurate rating, IMHO.  According to my turn-based Glicko RD = 61, meaning there is a good degree of confidence that my playing strength is + or - 122 points, (between 1892 and 2136) and I've played about 300 games.


    I will be prepared to play dozens and dozens of games. ;) Thanks.


     Smilefor that we wish u get thru success!!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1146

    tommcgrath

    2 get ur ratin up highr wud it b wisr 2 ply higr rated plyrs r lowr rated plyers

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1147

    tommcgrath

    oldbones wrote:

    2 get ur ratin up highr wud it b wisr 2 ply higr rated plyrs r lowr rated plyers

    sorry about hat I was in a rush what I meant to say was 

    Too get your rating up higher would it be wuser to play higher rated oppenenents or lower rated oppnenents?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1148

    tommcgrath

    haha

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1149

    shrike1

    I there a way I can have my rating manually lowered?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1150

    shrike1

    like to zero?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1151

    Ziggyblitz

    oldbones wrote:
    oldbones wrote:

    2 get ur ratin up highr wud it b wisr 2 ply higr rated plyrs r lowr rated plyers

    sorry about hat I was in a rush what I meant to say was 

    Too get your rating up higher would it be wuser to play higher rated oppenenents or lower rated oppnenents?


    Seriously, it is better to play lower rated players. However if you are really underrated then maybe the higher rated opponents would get your rating up sooner.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1152

    Ziggyblitz

    shrike1 wrote:

    like to zero?


    Begs the question...Why would you want to?  If you feel you are overrated, your rating will come down soon enough.  Sandbagging is the tried and proven method for lowering your rating.  Although I don't know how low it is possible to go, probably about 500 or so.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1153

    shrike1

    Is there a way for the moderators to manually lower my rating?

    I deserv to be around zero.....can it be made so?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1154

    Rafchess

    irrawang wrote:
    shrike1 wrote:

    like to zero?


    Begs the question...Why would you want to?  If you feel you are overrated, your rating will come down soon enough.  Sandbagging is the tried and proven method for lowering your rating.  Although I don't know how low it is possible to go, probably about 500 or so.


     Cool U go thru Erik's formula at the begining!!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1155

    marcel_712

    Hello!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1156

    Ziggyblitz

    There are only 40 players below 550.  The lowest rated member is above 250.  I'd guess most of these members are inactive.  Even if you could arrange to play these guys and managed to lose every game (they could be quicker on the resign button or just plain time out) you'd still couldn't reach a zero rating.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1157

    Rafchess

    irrawang wrote:

    There are only 40 players below 550.  The lowest rated member is above 250.  I'd guess most of these members are inactive.  Even if you could arrange to play these guys and managed to lose every game (they could be quicker on the resign button or just plain time out) you'd still couldn't reach a zero rating.


    Laughing  U got an wonderful theme point!!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1158

    Ziggyblitz

    what point was that?

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1159

    snip3z

    :( don't be hatin' on 250 raters!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #1160

    Rafchess

    irrawang wrote:

    what point was that?


     LaughingIrrawang 's point was in his proposition !!


Back to Top

Post your reply: