It's a very accurate measurement of strength. The only way it can go down without me playing worse is that everyone else got better, or lots of people left chess.com (because it sucks) and there was a rating deflation.
So you never considered that you were playing worse.
What….
Yeah the way it works if u have a few bad first games u go down to like 500 but if u have good ones u get to like 2000
No, don't listen to the others. It's a conspiracy by coffee companies and chess.com to ensure you drink more coffee.
Yep
There is a chart somewhere online which says over time you can lose 25% of your games against players rated 200 points below you.
There is a chart somewhere online which says over time you can lose 25% of your games against players rated 200 points below you.
That chart sounds interesting and accurate, I want to see it!
There is a chart somewhere online which says over time you can lose 25% of your games against players rated 200 points below you.
That chart sounds interesting and accurate, I want to see it!
Here's an example:
https://www.318chess.com/elo.html
There is a chart somewhere online which says over time you can lose 25% of your games against players rated 200 points below you.
That chart sounds interesting and accurate, I want to see it!
Here's an example:
Charts are just numbers. Like age and ratings. Numbers are just numbers
We all know it's really all about the coffee conspiracy.
There is a chart somewhere online which says over time you can lose 25% of your games against players rated 200 points below you.
That chart sounds interesting and accurate, I want to see it!
Here's an example:
https://www.318chess.com/elo.html
Thanks for the chart, but I'm a little surprised that there's no weird ones where their better but somehow its more likely for you to win, maybe because of your adrenaline.
Has it gotten suddenly easier to qualify for "brilliant" moves? I have played less, my rating has fallen since September and more or less stagnated on blitz for three years, but I am finding more "brilliant" moves in the game analytics. I never used to see these show up, but I come up with one in most games I've clicked analyze on the past few days.
Defender, about what are you unclear?
I’m unclear with the erections. I didn’t know that others even knew there was another definitive term for it. Also….why talking about rat eating
I think that the algorithm makes choices about who we play that are not Hobsons choice, next one up, type of thing. Also I think that it is like casinos, the house always wins. There is a thing about rats, I have heard of, that when two rats play fight, if the bigger always wins, the other won't play any more, so to keep us coming back to play, every now and then, we win a few, rating goes up. But not too much, then straight back down again. It is quite easy to watch it play out on the graph.
I highly doubt this, I've never experienced this, I'm 1800 and could probably beat you almost 100% of the time, it's not just that the algorithm "gives me easier pairings".
Edit: I've been around 1800 for a while and I'm still 1800, I've also noticed no difference in playing strengths changing, as someone who hops on to play some games every now and then I should have been able to feel this difference the most since theoretically I would have been least ready for it.
Has it gotten suddenly easier to qualify for "brilliant" moves? I have played less, my rating has fallen since September and more or less stagnated on blitz for three years, but I am finding more "brilliant" moves in the game analytics. I never used to see these show up, but I come up with one in most games I've clicked analyze on the past few days.
Brilliants are sacrifices that are good or best and can be influenced by rating.
There is a chart somewhere online which says over time you can lose 25% of your games against players rated 200 points below you.
That chart sounds interesting and accurate, I want to see it!
Here's an example:
https://www.318chess.com/elo.html
Thanks for the chart, but I'm a little surprised that there's no weird ones where their better but somehow its more likely for you to win, maybe because of your adrenaline.
My game seek is set to -400 and ∞ I was thinking maybe -25 and +200 would be better.
I was wonderig the same thing , got off to a decent start ,won 4 games in a row when I started here last week, then ws up and down, but the last few days have been dreadful overall. Then again my mind has been very preoccupied with other things that have been stressing me out like crazy ! Perhaps some of the same things that might be stressing others out here as well !
No, don't listen to the others. It's a conspiracy by coffee companies and chess.com to ensure you drink more coffee.