I won my first 16 games on the site, bringing my rating to 1866, and wasn't accused of cheating.  It takes more than winning a few games to do that, and it has very little to do with the ratings system.

they must have changed the system since your beginning. The "speed/frequency by which games were won" was mentioned to me when I questioned the issue to one of the admin folks.  That is how the rating issue came into play. No matter, it is a good site and I've dropped a few games lately - that should make the powers feel better:):).  Now, if I could just improve my Live Chess perfprmance, all would be good:):)

JC

Totally! I agree 100% and add 10% more that makes 110%! Holy shi*! This is amazing! :D

isnt queen worth 9 not 10?

i have differnet ratings in diffent games.i useually at around the 900 range but sometimes i am given a rateing of over 1000 witch is chess.com being nice. why? why do i have different ratings in my games?

i dont know anything about rating...i just wanna play chess, it's fun

dogged if I know:):)

You have a separate rating for each type of chess you play on the site.  So your regular online chess rating is separate from your Chess960 rating and your Live Bullet, Blitz and Standard ratings.

Glicko ratings system is very interesting...

I really don't care much about my rating, though I like to see it go higher.

Online chess boosts your rating up a whole lot, while live doesn't. Live chess just adds on a little at a time. 

I knew that

I cared more about my rating when it was going up... 

I'm fairly new to this ... my rating is useful because it gives me an idea of whether I'm improving my game.

I seem to have become a victim of Hastings' Law ... no matter how many I win or lose I always return to 1066. 

This might be due to the way I select whom to play against. It's currently set at -20 to +200. I can get +10 points for a good win and only lose a few if I lose. Playing better players is beneficial, of course.

Actually, the reason Kasparov is better than you is because he could beat your arse without even looking at the board! LOL!

Yeah if you ignore the fact that their rating is higher because they get better results in their chess games.

What a loser. People count on the rating system to keep them in a range of competitors in which they can be competitive. If you have any skill to speak of then why do you need "sneak attacks"? Why do you need to artificially represent your skill as being lower than it is? You're a liar.

I regret to inform that you are all wrong.  There is a direct statistical correlation between ratings and anatomy.

EVERYONE HERE THINKS POOP TASTES GOOD

Please be relevant, helpful and nice