CaracticusPotts wrote:
In before the lock.
I've noticed you mentioned this in multiple threads. What is the purpose? I am guessing you are commenting before some moderator locks this thread, but what is the reason for that?
Sandbagging on a massive scale
Sort:
Too easy to determine who you're talking about, IE public accusation of cheating. If you remove the identifying information so I can't find them in a matter of seconds, it'd be okay.
They could have selected 2k when they started because they didn't know any better, then lost a few games with a very high k-factor to get to 1,000. if you lose to a 2k, then an 1800, then a 1600, you're gonna be dropping FAST. Their K factor would've dropped but then they could start actually winning some games and be back on the upswing.
Feb 16, 2023
0
#4
Uricon wrote:
Can someone please explain to me how a person could have a top rating of 2,00 points, but then descend to less than 1,000, and then gaine 263 points in three months? Because I don't understand that unless they are committing massive sandbagging.
Can someone please explain this to me? Hopefully someone from Chess.com.
Easy, they never were 2000. When they created their account, they chose the Expert (or maybe Advance) option which at the time had a 2000 initial rating. The early games played on the account were unrated and as soon as rated games started being played, the rating dropped to something more accurate.
The reason @CaracticusPotts mentioned the lock is that discussions of cheating or potential cheating, which includes sandbagging, isn't allowed in the general forums. One of the reasons, is to limit unfounded accusations.
Can someone please explain to me how a person could have a top rating of 2,00 points, but then descend to less than 1,000, and then gaine 263 points in three months? Because I don't understand that unless they are committing massive sandbagging.
Can someone please explain this to me? Hopefully someone from Chess.com.