11339 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!
That's the point! They wouldn't get adjusted at all. The rating system works best when it's allowed to work without people making artificial adjustments.
Giving people an initial rating other than "unrated" is an artificial adjustment.
The only thing I guess is that people may not really like the idea of playing against someone unrated. I mean I'm not sure I would since I don't know if I would be getting a close game. If they start with some rating, even a player who has only played 2 or 3 games I could have at least some idea of how good they were even if it wasn't that accurate.
I certainly wouldnt like it if I was say 1800 and got paired with an " unrated " that had an OTB title . I doubt anyone would . I see nothing wrong with assigning an initial rating to players that may be new to online chess but are obviously strong players who are not new to chess . An OTB IM , GM, FM etc should NOT have to start at 1200 ... thats just silly . I did start at 1200 here however .
Hmm , this is an internet chess site , i don't think there's anything wrong with unrated as well as rated or even titled players starting equally at 1200 , though that can be a pain , i think that if you're rated 2000+ in OTB you won't have a problem getting there here .
On another site, a person is unrated for one game. That's it. Compare that to the number of games a USCF expert is severely under-rated on this site due to starting at an artificial point of 1200.
I know I was subject to quite a bit of verbal abuse from my unfortunate opponents early on here. One even pointed out that the average rating of my opponents early on were under 1400, as if I were intentionally beating up on fish. The higher rated players wouldn't play someone with a low rating.
Unrated for one game sounds too short to me. It is 10 games for FIDE, IIRC.
After one event you get a provisional rating. Whether that provisional rating is displayed or not depends on the organization. Since the rating is extremely soft, many organizations don't show provisional ratings until at least four games have been played.
Fair enough, they could give you a rating and then it could indicate that it's provisional somewhere in the display. Then again, it's easy to tell if someone is "provisional" manually by seeing how many games they played.
"I know I was subject to quite a bit of verbal abuse from my unfortunate opponents early on here. One even pointed out that the average rating of my opponents early on were under 1400, as if I were intentionally beating up on fish. The higher rated players wouldn't play someone with a low rating."
Well if you had those experiences I can't argue against that, but this kind of thing seems much more likely in theory than in practice, and it certainly didn't happen in my case. As you strive to get your rating higher, average rating of opponents should even out -- if you play 500 games, those first 10 or so aren't going to be noticed.
Pffft maybe it actually would be better if ratings were assigned after 10 provisional games against random opponents rated no less than 1200 but not exceeding 1800 , but then again it could be worse LOL.
But does the provisional rating affect your opponent's rating after the match?
If I remember correctly, it doesn't..
What I Learned is this:
Titled players automatically have their rating start at 2000, and get free diamond membership.
What I Learned is this:
This is simply not true , I started at 1200 .
Really? That's not what I've heard.
He joined in 2007, so you both may be right.
Regardless of what you heard I am telling you the truth . Its possible they recently changed their policy , I don't know .
It was maybe two years ago (probably more) that they allowed at least some titled players to start out at a much higher rating--2000?
From hanging out in the cheating forum back in the day.
Not sure what the policy is currently.
11/23/2014 - Mate in 3
by Pavrey a few minutes ago
House of staughton chess sets
by Blinsk 3 minutes ago
End of Era for Vishy Anand..???
by arul_kumar 9 minutes ago
Signs you're a bad chess player
by jonathansfirstacount 10 minutes ago
Anand is being paid to throw the WCC
by NomadicKnight 12 minutes ago
Bill Cosby and Chess
by DrSpudnik 14 minutes ago
Most confusing opening for white AND black
by Sailor_Mars 14 minutes ago
EPIC ROOK SACRIFICE!!!!!!!
by tarikhk 14 minutes ago
Windows Phone 8 Beta Testers Needed
by RubiksRevenge 25 minutes ago
What is it about House of Staunton Sets
by LuftWaffles 31 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!