8403 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I was playing an opponent with 1420 elo in blitz and i was at 1349 he won me and he got +64 elo points.... (1484).Why did his elo increased so much while if i won i would probably gat about 9 points more but not 64????Cananyone tell me why this happened?Thanks in advance:)
first, he beat you not won you.
The rating changes depend on a lot of factors. One factor is the realibity of the rating itself. Someone who plays a lot of games daily and does not have a long lapse in play has a more reliable rating that someone who plays very infrequently and only plays a small number of games. It could be that the person you were playing had very few games played so the variable resulted in such a wild change.
I guess he didn`t play many games before the one with you. You can read something about the Glicko System used by Chess.com here.
It's because his "rating deviation" (RD) value was higher. RD gets lower as you play more games in a limited amount of time. This is for users to achieve their accurate rating for their current level more quickly if they have been inactive for a while or are just starting.
Don't criticise grammar unless yours is of a higher standard.
It is not as easy to type on an iPad as it is to type on my MacBook Pro. You are correct that i did choose the wrong word. Given the fact that he has a flag from Greece, english may not be his primary language. I was just trying to point that out.
I should have said the rate at which the results will change may very well depend upon how reliable and stable is the opponent's rating.
Scottrf, I agree with your point but since I think "changes" is the plural for change "depend" is not a mistake. Or is it?
Actually I think you are right, but that both are correct. Depending would be used to refer to rating in the singular, or depend to the plural changes.
Given the fact that he has a flag from Greece, english may not be his primary language. I was just trying to point that out.
Well you had an American flag so I guessed you might have some problems with English too.
Is there a reason why you are choosing to pick on me? I dont appreciate it. In addition, it should be "might have some problems with english as well". And i do not have issues with the english language. I just type too fast for my own good at times and then i notice gramatical errors after i hit submit.
Nothing wrong with ''depend'' & post is understandable despite typo.
Who is critiscising grammar here?
Hardly picking on you, probably misunderstood the reason you corrected him and it may be genuine, just people criticising someone's mistakes usually annoys me. Anyway, this is off topic and boring, have a good day pal.
With all due respect, Scottrf: Jose made a slight typo in _one_ word, while you've been trying to correct an inexistent grammatical mistake. The sentence in question needs a predicative, doesn't it? Since when a lone gerund will make a predicative? Pray, what tense is the sentence supposed to be in?Really, you should practice what you preach. Otherwise... you put yourself up to be corrected by ESL speakers ;D
Incidentally, Scott -- you have a really impressive FIDE rating. LOL! :D Poor Kramnik, he's got his work cut out to catch you...
Gosh are we still talking ratings here or grammar.and this glecko system this site uses,is it also fides way of doing.it would be nice to do it as fide does so that we feel in tune.wouldnt you agree?
If you had read the nerd wracking article on Glicko as explained by Prof. Glickman, the creator, Glicko is way off better in assessing one's rating than the outmoded Elo Rating which was developed by Arpad Elo in 1960s.
Therefore, I suggest that we maintain the present system, Glicko Rating over the Elo Rating.
Btw, critiques should be done to correct not to criticize per se. I stand corrected.
The suggestion of "depending" is totally wrong in that sentence, and it's not the singular of "depend" - "depends" is.
The rating system "depends" on ... (singular)
Ratings depend on ... (plural)
by MojoJedi a few minutes ago
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by Elubas a few minutes ago
Chess Games n Softwares!!
by warrior2000 a few minutes ago
5/22/2013 - Good Night to the Enemy
by Battlellama 4 minutes ago
Post your best miniatures here
by Master_Valek 7 minutes ago
18 Queens and two Knights
by djbasson 8 minutes ago
by Master_Valek 18 minutes ago
The absent-minded pro chesser
by ucanthandlethetruth 18 minutes ago
Conclusions of my research
by StrategicPlay 25 minutes ago
Have you ever played chess with a bad Headache or Migraine?
by InoYamanaka 25 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com