It just doesn't make ANY sense for players having such a high skill difference at low Elo.
Everyone has good days and bad days, good games and bad games. Doesn't matter the Elo. Sometimes you see a good move, and sometimes you make a dumb mistake. Happens to everyone... even your opponents...
No it's only this platform where you can see those weird algorithm games.
on other online chess sites it's random. It's not about good or bad games, it's something to force you to buy the sub. It's all about money
What ? You just play your game. The best player wins. Unless there are cheats.
The system IS NOT RANDOM.
I doubt they put that much thought into the matchmaking algorithm. Can you point to a juncture in your game history where this happened? The absence of randomness can be proven statistically.
Since the database is public, your theory is falsifiable statistically, and therefore an actual hypothesis in the scientific sense and not just an opinion.
Have you tried to support it with numbers / statistical analysis? Anything less is subjective and not persuasive.
(You could, for example, try to use BayesElo (https://www.remi-coulom.fr/Bayesian-Elo/) to show that the error on expected outcomes varies in a mean-reverting way with a long or regular period.)
(I have not done this, but since many people run this software on the cc database regularly, I bet you $50 it does not, and you're just seeing false patterns in normal outcome variation noise.)
Also if someone at CC has some algorithm that can analyze players' styles and determine outcomes of matchups ahead of time, it would be stupid to waste time and effort to use it to try and "force you to buy the sub" (how could this even possibly force you to buy a sub? I don't get it?) when they could just take it to a bookie and make bank on betting tournaments.
Tho this actually sounds like a fun thing to try and do... hmmmmm.... maybe I'll give it a go. I bet it's impossible at the highest levels of play though, since those guys and gals are already studying each others' styles and games to death to the point that it probably nets out to zero.
If you do see clusters of folks playing the same openings - which is more likely:
a) your conspiracy theory
b) they're watching the same youtube videos and/or featured chess site (possibly cc) learning material and trying out what they see
This is a serious question, so think about it and answer....
yeah.. yeah.. I don't do any mistakes only the whole unfair world plotted some calculated conspiracy against me... sure..
*Snip a rant* How can anyone defend such manipulative websites?
Jeez, I hate the manipulative moneymaking industry.
Yes but how are they making money off you in particular in your 26 days here? Defend, attack, play, leave - all up to you.
Is it fully rigged?
Whatever the reason, I like it. You do get runs of difficult players and runs of easier ones. I enjoy those aspects. Playing the harder ones is a test of whether I'm playing OK or not. I sometimes get clusters of draws too, where either player manages to force a draw in a difficult 5/5 game.
I think this might be an instance of the Gambler's Fallacy in action.
OP thinks that because they encounter streaks of certain play styles in a certain time frame, the mechanism must not be random. This is the same logic that assumes that because a roulette wheel has landed on Red five times in a row, Black is "due" to come up.
I think this might be an instance of the Gambler's Fallacy in action.
OP thinks that because they encounter streaks of certain play styles in a certain time frame, the mechanism must not be random. This is the same logic that assumes that because a roulette wheel has landed on Red five times in a row, Black is "due" to come up.
I think it's more similar to the clustering illusion. Since the rating formula works so that you stay around 50% wins and losses, your game to game results are essentially a coinflip, and random events can appear non-random to humans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion
I think it's more similar to the clustering illusion.
Thanks, that's a much better explanation.
Is this post satire? What do you expect a fair matching system to be like? One where you win all the time or lose all the time?
Is this post satire?
No, a lot of idiots think this. This topic is (unfortunately) relatively common.
Same matchmaking algorithms as in other online games like FIFA or Overwatch. You'll get a few games where people play the same openings and you'll win most of them and all of a sudden there are games in a row with weird other openings and players not blundering anything while playing super fast so you lose to them. Happens ALWAYS. It's an up and down, just enough to make you stay on the site.
Why? Well to spend more time on this bullshit site and to buy the subscription. Because the site makes you feel you'll need to study everything to win the games you're currently losing to.
The system IS NOT RANDOM. It FORCES you to either win or lose. You have to outperform always the games where chesss.com puts you into a disadvantage while you can underperform in games where you have a higher chance of winning. Simple as that. It just doesn't make ANY sense for players having such a high skill difference at low Elo.
How can anyone defend such manipulative websites?
Jeez, I hate the manipulative moneymaking industry.