Thank you for agreeing.
Anyone else think the Chess Mentor rating system is way too generous?
Sort:
Seriously, though, I think this is a huge problem. Clearly, there is something wrong with the chess mentor rating system. Now the system thinks I'm some sort of chess genius when I'm not! I shouldn't be rewarded this much for being who I am!
Chess mentor is just saying "Congrats! You are now better than nearly every GM! :D" Which is NOT TRUE. The chess mentor rating system is just inaccurate and does not show your growth very well. You might think you're improving, but you're not.
Well, your other ratings say otherwise. If you're a legit 3200+, you have to be a GM for sure.
Is anyone going to do anything about this?
James1011James1011 wrote:
Is anyone going to do anything about this?
No. I think you're the only member here who cares. 
ChessMentor ratings are just meant as a way to keep rewarding you for being a good student. I honestly don't think anyone but you wants them to reflect some kind of "real" rating. I'm often wrong...
Feb 24, 2016
0
#8
If you do enough lessons any patzer can get a high mentor rating. It means nothing. The only thing that could be slightly relevant is how many lessons it takes to reach a certain rating. I reached 1900 in like 87 lessons I think. A good player could do in significantly less I'm sure.
Undoubtedly they are too generous by about 150-200 points I'd say.
What is important is what you learn, not what rating you get.
Yes, but lower rated players such as myself do harder lessons. I get rewarded, but I don't learn. I am being rewarded for nothing.
James1011James1011 wrote:
Yes, but lower rated players such as myself do harder lessons. I get rewarded, but I don't learn. I am being rewarded for nothing.
Then start with easier lessons.
And James, you know how sometimes when you have a book, especially a school book, you have to go back and read it again (or even "gasp", again and again)? Believe it or not you're allowed to do the same thing with the ChessMentor. I might even know someone who has done some of the courses over a dozen times...
Feb 24, 2016
0
#14
Leave the Chess Mentor rating alone!! It's the only place in my whole chess universe where I'll ever have a number that high associated with my name. I tell my non-chess friends that 1900 is a Class A player, and that I'm knocking on that door on Mentor. They're very impressed. 
I think it just encourages you to keep on doing the lessons. I am several hundred points over where I should be but I still enjoy going through the exercises and maybe every now and then I take something good out of it. Having said that it is getting real tough for me to make that number higher - in other words the lessons are getting harder and the points allocated smaller... Just enjoy the facility!
OK, the Chess Mentor rating system is just like a teacher who gives you a 100% regardless of how dumb you are. Since you are doing so well in that class, you are moved to the honors class, where you struggle, since you were never well in your previous class. Do you guys get it?!
James1011James1011 wrote:
OK, the Chess Mentor rating system is just like a teacher who gives you a 100% regardless of how dumb you are. Since you are doing so well in that class, you are moved to the honors class, where you struggle, since you were never well in your previous class. Do you guys get it?!
We get that you're a very stubborn young man absolutely convinced that the rest of us are wrong; yes, we get that...
Which they don't. You hit the nail on the head with that one. Chess Mentor has got to change.
Because it's misleading!
Seriously, I'm the average chess player, (below average when placed under strict time limits) but my chess mentor rating is 1904. WHAT?! You're telling me that I'm as chess smart as a person with a rating of 1904. Which is just not true! I have NEVER met anyone with a really low chess mentor rating. So, what do you guys think? Isn't the chess mentor rating system WAY too generous?