Unified timeout rate.

Currently the stats on a player's profile differentiates their timeout rate depending on if it's a 960 game or a standard game. This means that a player could have a 100% timeout rate in 960 but a 0% in daily so when you retrieve that endpoint and the timeout rate, you may not get the information you want.

I was talking to chess.com and I discussed with them the idea of a unified timeout rate but they suggested that I take a sort of poll. See what people think of the current situation.

So let me know if you'd like to see a unified timeout (as well as the daily and 960 on their own) or if you think the current setup is fine. 

I'd be interested to hear the reasoning behind having separate values for Standard and Chess960? Why not amalgamate them?

Maybe TDs running a 960 event would be interested by knowing if the player has a tendency to time out in those specific games before inviting

Hello. As a regular TD (more than 1700 tournaments of both types in 13 years), I focus on timeout only in standard games. This is enough to choose on players, really. But perhaps introducing a general timeout percentage is justified. The thing is that in correspondence with support it turned out that the parameter "total number of games played" applies only to standard chess and does not take into account 960...

I meant that chess 960 is something like a "poor relative" on the site...or as they say in Russia "с боку припёка" - "on the side of the burnt"

What I consider is accidental timeouts, meaning it should be unified. If you have a separated data point, it means you consider valuable to know when a player times out on purpose only in 960 for instance rather than in classical. Otherwise why differentiate? Some people actually do timeout on purpose certain games.

I looking at this stat to know if a player is serious. Timing out in classical and 960 is the same to me. They couldn't handle their games, for whatever reason.

To me unified makes more sense.

Not sure that works? Imagine a player suddenly starts to show a high timeout rate in only one of the two types. That may be because they haven't played any games in the other one for some time, so their timeout rate for that is zero.

They join a team match and the admin checks the players' stats and it seems as if this player's timeout rate is zero, so no red flag. But then they timeout in both games!

Team admins have to examine both categories of timeouts, along with recent playing history to get a full picture of a player's behaviour. Amalgamate the two rates and we have a much clearer idea of how a player is likely to perform.