13771 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 like playing blitz (G/10) and just randomly pick opponents. But I have noticed that if I win against a player who is about 500-600 points lower than me I don't get a point for the win. This seems somewhat absurd - I could theoretically beat one of these players 99 times out of a hundred, but if I would lose the 100th I would get nothing for the 99 wins and lose about 14 points for the lose. It seems that this is a disincentive to play much lower rated players - as far as ratings literally nothing to gain and a lot to lose. I know I could abort these games, but again I'd rather play everyone and give these guys a chance to play me. I know, I know, I shouldn't care about ratings, but I do. It's fun to win or draw against a higher rated player and its fun to try to keep my rating at a certain level and even try to reach a new high.
... It seems that this is a disincentive to play much lower rated players - as far as ratings literally nothing to gain and a lot to lose...
ChessNetwork, currently rated 4200, now only plays unrated games since the policy of minimum one point changed.
OMG this guy is 1607/56/4 in bullet chess! 98%. Very humbling.
Thats exactly what it is and I agree with it myself, however there is a small problem imo. When I choose to play in a tournament ( especially thematic open events ) I often get paired against players so much lower rated that I dont get a point for winning but can lose a bunch if I lose. I think in tournies this should not be the case as we cannot select our opponents and thus cannot "pad" our ratings by intentionally selecting much weaker players to beat up on.......
You raise an important point. In my case I don't do that, I just play whoever I'm randomly assigned to, regardless of their rating. But I'm sure some players would try to pad their rating by only playing much lower rated players. Having said that I would have to beat one of these players approximately 14 out of 15 times just to break even (if I got a point for a win). I don't think I've lost to anyone yet 500-600 points lower than me, but I have to admit I've had some dubious positions (due to my carelessness) and some of them seem to be playing significantly better than their rating. I may just have to start aborting all of these games.
Or just put a rating filter on your seek ?
Does anyone know where is the line drawn where the higher rated gets nothing for winning ? Is it 600 points difference ? More ? Less ?
yes, even better
Submit cool games or puzzles here!
by healthybrick a few minutes ago
# of Double Attack Squares for a Queen
by waffllemaster a few minutes ago
Houdini 1.5 stockfish 4 Komodo 5 matched in bullet!
by Xilmi 3 minutes ago
Official Chess Troll of the Year!
by Soorat92 3 minutes ago
How Long to Search
by JFK-Ramsey 4 minutes ago
New group for Alekhine lovers
by puiuus 4 minutes ago
Why Russians are so good at chess.
by clms_chess 4 minutes ago
by Samsch 5 minutes ago
what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?
by Jaglavak 6 minutes ago
Chess Troll for the Year!
by EDB123 7 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 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!