10126 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!
There are some large groups which have many different teams and probably teams change who is in each team at times--how would you handle that situation?
Arpad Elo said rating chess players is like trying to measure the height of a cork bouncing up and down on the surface of a stormy ocean. Everyone's performance fluctuates from day-to-day, hour-to-hour. That is the nature of the beast. A rating is just a summary of an individual or a team's past performance, and doesn't always correlate with their actual skill or potential. If a team has trouble getting their best players to join the games, that would have an impact on their performance and thus their rating.
From one perspective it can seem ridiculous to rate vote chess teams when individual members will change from time to time. On the other hand, a VC team is not so different than in amateur and professional sports. If you consider the Miami Dolphins - how many of them are really from Miami? Is that really a reflection of Miami's ability to play football or the quality of it's citizens? Players get drafted and traded and that changes individual members and thus the performance of the team.
Ratings are an approximation. That's all they can or ever should be and yet everyone is obsessed about 'more acurate' rating systems, bringing in things like the RD factor which rewards activity.
The c.c method rewards VC teams for activity as much or more than for performance. In sports - they rank teams according to performance, regardless of which team members may have missed the most recent game.
In sports all teams play the same number of games during the season. In VC that's not the case. So I think a rating system like Elo is a better indicator than the c.c method and over time will display the team's overall performance level.
It is a rating for the team, so it doesn't matter who plays for them in any particular game. The results of the team are what matters for the rating.
"The Blindfold Simul Show with GM Gareev - Hosted by IM Rensch!"
by Mainline_Novelty a few minutes ago
Concerned about trolling, again
by FelixPlatypus a few minutes ago
Help identify HoS chess set
by sirness a few minutes ago
Should tournament players be allowed to wear Google glasses?
by topJKMonkey 3 minutes ago
como fechar um grupo aqui no chess.com ?
by malko 3 minutes ago
Make a Word
by mpcz 4 minutes ago
Improving at chess.
by blackrabbitto 5 minutes ago
Conclusions of my research
by MidnightExpress1 5 minutes ago
5/22/2013 - Good Night to the Enemy
by MatthewHaohanLi 7 minutes ago
We need more amateurs to post their annotated games.
by PedoneMedio 8 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com