# Round up of today's games!

Welcome to my blog where I give a round of chess games I have played recently.

Today wasn't the most successful day for me. I can't recall winning a single match aganist players above 1300+/- (this being a skill level I can normally handle). I didn't play well. *excuses excuses*

The first match of the day was (http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=446041441) aganist a good 1600 player, as you can see, I lost this game on time. I had a good positionial advantage and peice counting was in my favour. What I suggest you take from this is that you have to pace yourself, even if the moves are instinctive, make them within 3-5 seconds to gain a time advantage when it really matters. Although, I didn't follow this rule that time, It is something I usually stick to.

Maybe I was wrong, I did win a game aganist a 1300, it was this one (http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=446032052) I'm currently a 1200 player since I haven't played any rated games, which I will do in some time. Anyway, this game was suprising. My opponent seemed to controvert to simple mistakes and didn't play that well. He ended up losing his queen to a pin If i remember correctly. Maybe he was having a bad day.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those of you who are not familiar about the way players are rated in Chess - I've taken an extract from an article I read sometime ago :

There are two main rating systems, and each one has its merits.

**The Elo System** (used by the United States Chess Federation, FIDE, and many other online chess sites) is popular for two reason - it has been around for a long time, and it is simple. The idea is this: given two chess players of different strengths, we should be able to calculate the % chance that the better player will win the game. For example, Garry Kasparov has ~100% chance of beating my 4-year-old daughter. But he may only have a ~60% chance of beating another Grandmaster. So when playing that other Grandmaster, if he wins 6 games out of 10, his rating would stay the same. If he won 7 or more, it would go up, and 5 of less, his rating would go down. Basically, the wider the spread of the ratings, the higher percentage of games the higher rated player is expected to win. So to calculate a person's rating after playing a few games you calculate the average ratings of his opponents, and then how many games he was expected to win, and then plug it into a formula that spits out the new rating. Simple enough. Well, it turns out, that is maybe TOO simple.

**The Glicko System** (used by **Chess.com**, the Australian Chess Federation, and some other online sites) is a more modern approach that builds on some of the concepts above, but uses a more complicated formula. (This only makes sense now that we have computers that can calculate this stuff in the blink of an eye - when Elo created his system they were doing it on paper!) It is a bit trickier than the Elo system, so pay attention. With the Elo system you have to assume that everyone's rating is just as sure as everyone else's rating. So my rating is as accurate as your rating. But that is just not true. For example, if this is your first game on Chess.com and youstart at 1200, how do we really know what your rating is? We don't. But if I have played 1,000 games on this site, you would be much more sure that my current rating is accurate. So the Glicko system gives everyone not only a rating, but an "RD", called a Rating Deviation. Basically what that number means is "I AM 95% SURE YOUR RATING IS BETWEEN X and Y." (Nerd Fact: In technical terms this is called a "confidence interval".) If this if your first game on Chess.com I might say, "I am 95% sure that your rating is somewhere between 400 and 2400". Well that is a REALLY big range! And that is represented by a really big RD, or Rating Deviation. If you have played 1,000 games and your rating is currently 1600 I might say "I am 95% sure your rating is between 1550 and 1650". So you would have a low RD. As you play more games, your RD gets lower. To add one extra wrinkle in there, the more recent your games, the lower your RD. Your RD gets bigger over time (because maybe you have gotten better or worse over time - I'm just less sure of what your actual rating is if I haven't seen you play recently). Now, how does this affect ratings? Well, if you have a big RD, then your rating can move up and down more drastically because your rating is less accurate. But if you have a small RD then your rating will move up and down more slowly because your rating is more accurate. The opposite is true for your opponent! If they have a HIGH RD, then your rating will change LESS when you win or lose because their rating is less accurate. But if they have a LOW RD, then your rating will move MORE because their rating is more accurate.