^ Click here to remove ads! ^

not your typical ratings question

Jump to forum:
 
3rd May 2008, 09:32am
#1
by timmaylivinalie
the couch Canada
Member Since: Dec 2007
Member Points: 291

as a few of you know, i've been tryin to get my rating to zero for some time with the hopes of possibly going into negative integers. well, i've been beaten to it by polgar0's new alias but i'm wondering why the ratings stop at zero? why won't i be able to get to -2500?

3rd May 2008, 09:45am
#2
by Niven42
West Lafayette, Indiana United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 261

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_rating:

"...The rating formula is:

(W-We) x 32 + Rating old = Rating new,

where W equals the number of wins and We equals the expected number of wins..."

*(Chess.com might not use 32 as it's mulitplier, and might use a slightly more complex formula)

 

So in other words, your expected number of wins is zero if your rating is zero.  It's not possible to define a loss as a negative win, so there's never a negative number in the formula.

 

Also, most rating systems (such as the FIDE/USCF standard ELO) use a rating "floor", and if your rating hits that floor, losses won't adjust your rating anymore.


3rd May 2008, 09:54am
#3
by timmaylivinalie
the couch Canada
Member Since: Dec 2007
Member Points: 291
Niven42 wrote:

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_rating:

"...The rating formula is:

(W-We) x 32 + Rating old = Rating new,

where W equals the number of wins and We equals the expected number of wins..."

*(Chess.com might not use 32 as it's mulitplier, and might use a slightly more complex formula)

 

So in other words, your expected number of wins is zero if your rating is zero.  It's not possible to define a loss as a negative win, so there's never a negative number in the formula.

 

Also, most rating systems (such as the FIDE/USCF standard ELO) use a rating "floor", and if your rating hits that floor, losses won't adjust your rating anymore.


 well that sux as do i but thanks for xplainin it.


3rd May 2008, 10:04am
#4
by WVSFielding
Sunny Sunny Weymouth England
Member Since: Jan 2008
Member Points: 139

I think you have a  valid point aboutnegative chess ratings, if your that bad shorly your rating can drop below 0, but no one in the world can be that bad, can they?

 


3rd May 2008, 10:09am
#5
by timmaylivinalie
the couch Canada
Member Since: Dec 2007
Member Points: 291
i'd personally enjoy goin below zero but i really don't think it's possible without trying to get to a rating below say 400. but i guess the people who established the ratings didn't think it was necessary to delve into the negatives...guess they never thought that retarded fish frogs would play chess or sumpin.
 

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.