True Rating Conceptualized

Alright, website and forum contributors. I have come up with a concept and if this already exists I wouldn't be surprised. We have the technology. Anyway, here goes...

Ratings here, especially at faster time controls, can be suspect. IMHO. 

So, why not have a feature on every account called something like "average actual rating". Some program can compile your games and even INDIVIDUAL MOVES and average it all together. 

I would really like to see one for me and also the same average for EVERY OPPONENT I have ever played. On this account, obviously. 

As I mentioned, we have the technology to do this. 

#1. I agree. 🙂

What is the average actual rating (c)?

This guy is an idiot. No crap we have the technology, it’s called cheat detection software. Come out of pocket for an actual membership and you’ll have more features. 

Plays mostly bullet but wants to know his true rating. Funny.

Rating is a measure of performance. Performance in chess is usually governed by our worst move not our average move.

YOu could assign a true rating based on the minimum over moves and over engine analysis rating I guess.

Gg

Interesting idea!

Are you talking about taking all of the ratings at the different time controls and averaging them into one rating? Or is the idea to look at one time control and examine the peaks and valleys to determine an average?

No the tech isn't there. Obviously the only games rated like that could be competitive games and not practice games or teaching games. But even so, people use this site for various things including experimentation, so it wouldn't work since it wouldn't actually be a true rating. And that's without the objection that an engine often can't understand moves that are made. It might be something which could help true beginners though. That's a different matter .... rating the moves of beginners in such a way might be of help to them.

I did consider mentioning this, the time control ratings, also. If a player plays many time controls averaging all those ratings together might be interesting but of course the average would be lower than the players highest rating, which is not an accident, the rating I mean, which is his best..

Your latter question is more of what I had in mind. I am probably using the word "average" contrary to what I was thinking..I am no mathematician. Probably what got me thinking along these lines is the system analysis and seeing that we play the opening at X rating, the middle at Y rating, and endgame at Z rating.So XYZ=game rating. The interesting thing is when I , or anyone, plays a highly rated 15 move phase of the game, say an 1800 in the opening, but a couple blunders or half a dozen mediocre moves makes game rating a 1100, as an example. This is obviously how an average works and not really what I was going for.

I'm sort of rambling here.

What does that mean? I’ve heard it quite a few times.

I'd argue, a rating averaged over everything is even less true than having it sliced up into different time controls. Online Chess skill is a complex layer of abilities, weaknesses, understanding, clock usage, mouse speed, tilt and so forth, not just one number.

When you look at different players, they will have very different discrepancies between the time control ratings, so it just does not do it justice to oversimplify

Some engine-based ratings instead of result-based ratings? Nah...

XYZ=rating is the best I can do for a formula.

Very gracious of you to offer

Good point 😊

The b is for buoyancy perhaps