i,ve lost on purpose, why? because i got lucky, very lucky, with some of my early games, and my rating become ridiculously high.i did it to get back to reality.
In my opinion, the best way to "get back to reality" is... keeping it real (i.e.: just play and not try to "trick" the rating system, which is designed to cope with lucky shots anyway).
maybe he's trying to get his % of timeouts below 10% so he can enter tournaments
Rather than an absolute floor, perhaps a decelerating elevator would be appropriate. When a player (call him Tom) resigns (or otherwise loses) a bunch of games within a short period (say, a couple of days), he has surely been playing at much the same strength against all of his opponents. Yet Tom's last opponent in the chain is treated as though they were playing against a much weaker opponent than Tom's first opponent in this chain of losses.
That does not make good sense in either chess rating or fairness terms. The rating adjustment for games already in progress should be more dependable.
I dropped my rating down a storm drain, took forever to get it cleaned up.
Do chess.com tournies have cash prizes? I could understand sandbagging motivation if there is some sort of prize, but just doing it for the sake of doing it is supremely moronic. And if there is nothing at stake, why are we wasting our time on worrying about such a person. If you are so lame that you have to purposely drop your rating to beat up on some novice fresh meat, then your pathetic exsistence is punishment enough I think. Or perhaps we could....gasp....ask the ratings criminal what his/her intent is. The profiles on chess.com have been know to be backed by actual humans that have legitimate purpose to their action. Perhaps they suffer from depression as I do and randomly right off chess and do mass resignations.
enjoy the games. rating won't matter. we are amateurs anyway (I am an amateur). I enjoy playing against 900, 1200, 2100, 2500, 2600.
I have decided to do nothing about this player. I sent him a message, but no reply (they may not speak English). Losing on purpose is equal to cheating, in that it goes against the spirit of games and competition. I find it incredibly rude, but there are plenty of honest players on this site that I will continue to enjoy playing. I like the ranking system because it helps match me with players that I am competitive with, but I also enjoy strong victories against lower ranked players, as well as being taken to school by those with higher ranks.
Anyone up for a game?
I dropped my rating down a storm drain, took forever to get it cleaned up.
Do chess.com tournies have cash prizes? I could understand sandbagging motivation if there is some sort of prize, but just doing it for the sake of doing it is supremely moronic. And if there is nothing at stake, why are we wasting our time on worrying about such a person. If you are so lame that you have to purposely drop your rating to beat up on some novice fresh meat, then your pathetic exsistence is punishment enough I think. Or perhaps we could....gasp....ask the ratings criminal what his/her intent is. The profiles on chess.com have been know to be backed by actual humans that have legitimate purpose to their action. Perhaps they suffer from depression as I do and randomly right off chess and do mass resignations.
Someone mentioned that earlier in the thread. Here, it's just skittles, so whether someone's rating is accurate or not isn't going to cause too much of a problem. It's when you have guys with Master or Grandmaster strength playing in the lower rated brackets for cash prizes in over the board tournaments where sandbagging becomes a real problem.
I'd hate to think that someone had such a pitiful life that they would resort to cheating at internet chess. I know it happens. I just think it's pathetic.
well, if someone ticks me off in real life, or offends me, i'll pull out my secret weapon and tell them i'll be reporting them to the administrators at chess.com!!! Don't mess with me peeps.....!!!!
Can someone explain to me what good it does sandbagging on this site? I can understand people doing it for ratings-related cash prizes, but we don't get that here. Ok, they could enter a lower rated tourney, to win some more games and get their rating up, but they have just lost games and sacrificed ratings points in order to do so, so what's the point?
The point, or perhaps just the reason, has more to do with ego than anything else. They win games because they are better than those they are playing against. But their lost games are simply the result of trying to lower their rating. As such they accept all credit for wins and no responsibility for the lost games. Oddly, as a result of doing this they truly believe that they are great chessplayers.
someone here has a rating of 0!!! He has like 25 wins 657 losses and 4 draws.
This topic is for the conspiracy theory types! Wheres the actual chess discussion? It's more gossip than discussion. We might as well draw a line and pick sides. It's time for a chess war. No gray area, only black and white! LAME!
Lame says the person who just dropped a bunch of games and lowered their rating.
The point, or perhaps just the reason, has more to do with ego than anything else. They win games because they are better than those they are playing against. But their lost games are simply the result of trying to lower their rating. As such they accept all credit for wins and no responsibility for the lost games. Oddly, as a result of doing this they truly believe that they are great chessplayers.
This seems a bit far fetched to me, but there are alot of egomaniacs out there especially on chess.com when they think they can only be beaten if someone is cheating. Possibly the so called "sandbagging" is simply that the person is getting burnt out on chess games and wanting to do some more study. The point of the site is fun with chess and learning to get better. Although I've noticed that many on here just want some sort of turmoil to be available for discussion. Are your games that boring? Are your lives that dull?
May be it,s a bad day , we all have them from time to time ,
so did your points go up up ,them you should be happy,,,,,,
I did just resign a few games, thats why I posted in this topic, i'm taking a break from the correspondence games..and I've not entered any tournaments as your "sandbagging" suggests of the other person. so yes, as I said, LAME! as in lucena is LAME!
I believe through participation in sanctioned OTB tournaments.
a couple of months ago two of my oldest friends died a week apart, both only in thier 40's, i had 20+ games going at the time, i still made my moves (well tried anyway) as i was trying to keep my mind off the grief i was feeling. needless to say, i lost most of them and my rating fell like an Australian 20/20 middle order (thats a cricket thing in case the Americans are confused?). The point is that by looking at my stats it may look like i was taking my rating down for some reason, when the truth was i had more important things i was dealing with. Sometimes you can draw poor conclusions if you dont know all the facts.
I think the rating floor is the way to go. There was a player here who had many games going, then lost a bunch of them on time. He lost about 1000 ratings points too. He wasn't sandbagging, but it still wasn't right for people to be playing a 900 rated player who was actually around 1900. The rating should reflect your playing strength.
Sandbagging is just plain dishonest, and if it can be proved (i.e., the player resigns a bunch of games after 5-10 moves in non-losing positions) then the player should be punished. Or the system should be designed so that sandbagging doesn't pay.
That would be hard to prove. What happens if, for example, on move 10 I do something stupid and drop a knight or bishop. That is normally a decisive advantage for the other player so should I play it out, possibly for 50 or more moves, with a high likelihood of losing anyway or just give it up and shift my focus to another game where I have a better chance of winning? There is such a thing called morale that takes a hit when you lose and for some people it can distract them from other games where they may be doing well and cause them to blunder those games, too. It is better to resign the lost games and put them out of your mind as soon as possible and refocus on your remaining games.
I also agree with the poster who said that a rating floor may not represent the current skill of the player. Our chess skills change over time. Some people get better and some go into a decline. Rating floors assume that a players chess skills always increase with time, never decrease. Just because someone has a career high of 2400, doesn't mean they will always be a 2400 player. They may even decline further than the 200 points the USCF uses. In that instance, that player may as well quit playing in rated tournaments because he will always be paired against players who are better than he is and he won't get many wins. It also does not account for streaks. We have all had winning streaks where our ratings soar for brief periods, but then they level off over time. Is it fair that someone should be forced to play someone beyond their strength because a streak pushed their floor up?