Members of chess.com!! which is more important to you . . . . your record or your rating?
Honestly, this is a tough Q to answer for me! I always watch both of them and try to keep them up.. I agree with Azoth about ranking, it is definitely the most important to me!
but between rating and record, i guess rating is slightly more important to me..
Rating. However, it would be nice to have a good record to go along with a good ranking.
Loosing against a strong enemy is no disaster, so record says nothing about your playing strength. But one can see out of the records, if someone is a coward and plays only against much weaker opponents.
So: Only rating is important! (for me)
Personally I used to play for record, but not to get the highest win ratio but to get a healthy win-loss ratio. I am aiming for 40% wins 60% losses. Cause you enjoy your wins, but you learn from your losses.
However, when I started joining tournaments that became difficult to maintain. So now I play for average opponent.
My rating is definetely the most important to me, my goal is to reach a rating of 2700.
I would have to say record, because with a high record you get a high rating. And it makes you feel good to be undeafted. Like I have a great record of 24-4 but a pretty good rating of 1432.
right that is true
rating or record, record for me won loss is the key,
we must be all we can be,
and loss is there for all to see.
nice poem lol
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.
But how much do you know about the game - the history, the players, the rules, and more!? Take our quiz and compare your scores!
Mark all forum topics as READ