Leagues and Ratings

Confused when I see that someone rated only about 850 is in the Legends Division - how is that possible when it looks like you have to win loads of games? - newly joined, and  I got to 1100 ish already with only 300+ points, leading a Wood Division.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. All you have to do to reach the top of that twisted ladder is to grind bullet games 8 hours a day. There's no skill or fun required in that. Leagues have no bearing on how well someone plays chess, only how much time they spend playing it.

That may be one way, but this player only seems to play more rapid, than even blitz and no bullet.

Yeah, but that wasn't the question. He/she was asking how those at the top of the league system have low rankings.

The implication being that if you are winning enough of those games, you must be getting more rating points - I see what you say about bullet - anyone can win or lose that irrespective of strength, but at the slower rates ... ?  And especially as the number of promotion places reduces each Division.  Maybe I'm just a bit thick today, lol!  My chess certainly is just now!

Judging by your ratings, you know more than me, but I know what it's like just sitting in Crystal. Right now, in the top 10 of my league, only 2 get their points from rapid games. By the end, it's usually none, with several amassing around 1000 points. I don't want to imagine what people do in higher leagues, as long as they aren't cheating to do it. Then, in the words of Ted Hastings, "I'll throw the book at them, followed by the bookshelf.".

When playing in arenas, players will mostly play games in their rating range. Play enough games overall and you'll eventually get enough trophies to advance. Rating really has no impact and playing so much puts downward pressure on ratings.

When I was trying to promote during the contest, I dropped over 100 rating points in blitz and likely would have dropped farther had I kept trying to get trophies.