Extremely inadequate pairing

See the screenshot

I won this game, but it was absolutely no fun at all.
It would have been much better if I played vs someone of my rating, even having to wait much longer. 

Teaming up also happens, but it is a secondary problem compared to the inadequate pairing. 

Another game - another unsatisfactory pairing.

And predictable boring end. - For which I got only 7 rating points. 
Waiting even 5-10 minutes for proper opponents is more rewarding than playing such games.

Why don't you adjust the ratings setting?

Or is it not working?

Click "Settings" link under "Rules" link and set the rating range. Then pray. Because the rating range does not work properly. It works for some players only and sometimes only.

isn't it only for the rating of your teammate in teams?

No, it is not for your teammate, moreover it is ignored if you invite someone. Just read the CHANGELOG: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/changelog-9-04-2017

• You asked for it you got it, You can now customize the rating range of your free-for-all and team games. How do you do it? Go to the settings below the rules link. Please note that these will be preferences and therefore the matchmaker reserves the right to be a little lax about your recommendations if it sees fit. If you invite a partner all bets are off and your recommendations are ignored.

It does not work anyway. For example, yesterday I set 1300+ range, but played with 3 (!) 1100 to 1200 players. I could understand if there were 2 1300+ players and 1 1200+ ("a little lax" mentioned by battleMind24 in CHANGELOG). But 3 players out of the range is not "a little lax", especially considering my rating.

Its a simple issue of we need more players to make both team play and individual play range play happy. They either have to stick with only one type of game until we get a lot more players or we have to deal with playing a wider range of rankings (with 2 types of games) until we get more players. 

I know people say they would wait for a long time to play in there range and I'm sure that is true but I for one don't want to wait 1/2 hour or hour for it to find 3 other players in my range. And if I did I would more than likely miss the game being off doing RL work while I was waiting and tick off the 3 that finally got a game. I know they can improve coding to make it more an individual choice and I am assuming they are working on it. But I don't see a good solution here other than lets get more people playing 4-player chess. 

I agree Ren... that's why they should make more threads on it and right as you log in have one to get the word out better, as well have chess.com mail to every member about it, how others enjoy it, maybe even a little video to introduce to those yet to know about it and where to find by their Home icon!

Well, my Teams rating is fluctuating from 1550 to 1670 now. I clicked Play and in a few seconds I was matched with 3 1100+ guys. (While I have 1300+ in the range selector.) I did not wait long. Not even 1 minute, just seconds.

You could say that perhaps those 3 guys waited too long. So, the server added me to their game. But:

1. The games at 1100+ level start quickly. There are lots of players on that level.

2. I did not wait long. Why does the server consider it as acceptable to ignore my range settings after a few seconds?

Let's imagine that 3 1100+ guys wait for a game for 3 minutes and a 1500+ player waits also for 3 minutes. In this case, if the "timeout" is 3 minutes we can gather all these 4 guys in a single game. But now the 4th player is forced to join the game after a few seconds regardless his settings. It is just wrong.

Also the rating range selector UI is wrong. There should be 2 separate selectors:

1. Teams.

2. FFA.

I have 2000+ in FFA and 1500+ in Teams. A "universal" range is just wrong.

And the range should be like in classic chess +- your current rating. (+-200, for example), so it adjusts automatically according to your current rating. Now it is wrong from any point of view.

First of all they need to fix the bugs. How can they invite more players if they charge money for the premium membership and then do not fix the bugs in premium features? It is a shame.

yup

@BabYagun Perhaps the Ratings Range selector should come up after choosing FFA or Teams Then the ratings selection would be for the respective game you are wanting to play. Maybe include a "remember my choices" option? If that is feasible...
I'm not a code type person so I don't really know what would work and what is just wishful thinking.

Bab... I think there's clearly two different issues here and both can happen at same time. I assume? (*is it true?) that staff knows about the ratings ranging not working? and I assume they are working on it to fix it? If either of these is untrue then that needs to be pushed up the list or they need to be told about it *Hope that is confirmed or happens here?

The second is going to be a long process but we do need to help get the word out. 

2stone2 those are some great ideas I hope staff sees your post on it as well. I like a 3 min introduction video maybe Martin or one of you ultra smart guys in 4-player basics can do one that is fun entertaining and informational then Eric can post it on front page.. be kind of fun to have a contest for a free premium yr membership to who can do a 3 min video on 4 player chess that is entertaining and informational maybe even have a few different categories 1. to introduce the game and basic rules 2. to give a beginner the initial basic's (friend, enemy and back stabber for example. and 3 mid level players. etc. 

@Renegade_Yoda, please read this:

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/chess-com-team-please-shed-some-light

That is why I created this topic:

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/open-source-4-player-chess

Note, that the CHANGELOG was not updated for 3 weeks: 

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/changelog-9-04-2017 

Bab.. I have read and kept up with all of those. Not sure your point? Is it that things are not happening fast enough to your satisfaction? 

You are right. It is not fast enough. But I am not the only one who feels like that.

Yes, there was a ThanksGiving holiday in the USA, but I do not think it lasts for 3 weeks: https://www.quora.com/How-many-days-off-do-Americans-get-for-Thanksgiving

There is definitely something wrong. A week ago @ignoble said: "In the meantime, we have added a new developer to the project who is coming up to speed now." But was there any bug fix after that? The 4 Player Chess project seems abandoned now.

Thanksgiving is just the beginning of the holiday season in the U.S. For many there is Christmas and then New Years Day. But between Thanksgiving and New Years there are many other Religious Holidays.

And now I am drawing a blank on the names of them Kwanzaa is one that I became aware of recently. I had never heard of it until a few years ago. I can't think of the Jewish one, with the menorah...

I'd be happy with one single 3 month long celebration myself. Celebrate all of them & have fun doing it. I don't know how long it takes to fix a bug but I've seen plenty of so called "fixes" cause all kinds of problems & everything have to be redone & everything takes even longer to get fixed. I'd just as soon wait patiently so that when they do go live with a fix, it works right and doesn't cause other problems.
I get it though, waiting sucks. Patience is not my strong suit....

I do feel your frustration Bab.. and I don't know what's going on. That said typically there's always more to the story then you or I will know. Could be someone quit, someone died, they found someone like mentioned and he/she turned out to not be that good so there looking again. The regular chess system had a major hick-up/overhaul, there all taking a much needed break for the entire month of Dec. it could go on and on... point is this is and has been expressed as a work in progress they have lives and commitments we have no idea about so IMO best to look at the game/group/site as a whole are you happy with the product they have pushed out (main chess) is it better/worse then other sites. Do you like what they do tell you (I personally find the sites I'm on they tell me nothing). If you think there overall good people without evil on their mind then trust them to do what they can when they can. If you think there bad people then ask yourself why support them and why are you here? I don't mean to come across an anyway but helpful to maybe show glimpse of the behind the scenes (not from personal knowledge on this site but from personal knowledge in the business I'm in.) I hope it helps.