Unrated players getting initial 2000 ratings
Sort:
Nov 27, 2020
0
#43
Why all the fuss and closing accounts over people cheating and using chess engines to get higher ratings. Who needs a chess engine, when chess. com lets you open a new account and just click on 2000 for your new rating of choice. Want an even higher rating? .......Just play some other 2000 rated beginners and you can be a 2200 or GM in no time.
Nov 27, 2020
0
#44
getting 2000 online doesnt mean a thing, plus when he will play more games his rating will be adjusted in consequence. If you see someone with less than 50 games played you have to know his rating probably doesnt represent perfectly his true skills
Nov 27, 2020
0
#45
surfsnook wrote:
That is absurd. It took me several years of hard work and struggle to reach 2000. Now you click your mouse as a beginner and get a 2000 rating. Then they play other beginners with 2000 ratings and get theirs up to 2200. I am seeing that exact scenario play out. Then they have that as their permanent highest rating achieved on their profile . We are turning beginners into masters overnight and cheapening the whole rating system.
Another problem is they show up on board #1 , 2, or 3 in an important team match, with their bogus 2000+ rating, and promptly get clobbered, resign, or time out, and our team loses 2 key points.
for years I had excited new unrated players wanting to join a team match for their new team, as an 800, and chess.com blocked them For insufficient activity. Expert 2000+ ratings were earned by tough competition, and were admired and respected.....now those ratings are handed out like children’s candy and the whole rating system becomes a farce.
Texas_Retrobruh youre not even 1600 blitz chesscom, I wouldnt say those 2000 blitz are beginners, they probably would whoop you even otb. Youre clearly not at your ancient 2000 otb rating and youre angry about it
Nov 27, 2020
0
#46
I suspect many just get their rating and sit on it.
Alternative is to play only other pretend 2000s, but that might not happen all that much unless you just keep arranging to win and lose in turn and thus stabilise your rating as the RD goes down.
BSAeagle60 wrote:
You can now choose what level you want to be rated when you first join the site. 2000 is one of those ratings if you choose that you are at the expert level. If they are not really that high they should lose that rating as soon as they play a game, unless they are just playing lower rated players and keep winnning...
Well let's say a guy who is actually rated 1500 comes, chooses expert, gets a 2000 rating and then only plays people 1400 or lower. When he does this then he will get to maintain his 2000+ rating.... this is a very easy way to keep a much higher rating than your real rating without using a chess engine. This should be fixed
mercatorproject wrote:
I suspect many just get their rating and sit on it.
Alternative is to play only other pretend 2000s, but that might not happen all that much unless you just keep arranging to win and lose in turn and thus stabilise your rating as the RD goes down.
Or u could get a 2000 rating and only play people with much lower rating than your "true" rating
Such players will change to their true rating once they start to play. Players that create 2000 rated accounts and does it for show aren't much of a problem because people will discover their profile and games, so they won't fall for the fake rating and I don't think they will get respect from anybody by doing that
Nov 27, 2020
0
#50
llama45 wrote:
I've explained several times in this topic
My word, you have had a busy month.
l started at a rating of 800 and managed to get to 2000 so what's wrong with that
Nov 28, 2020
0
#52
MENTAC wrote:
Crazy. An initial rating of 1200 worked well. I reckon we need to set a minimum number of games played now for club team matches, the value of which I could determine by setting initial rating to 2000, Glicko RD to 0.50 and playing with the number of games and a few other parameters, but that's a bit of work, and this is a hobby, a leisure past time. So I'll simply pick 10, see how that works out. Nuts.
This is indicative of the many seemingly arbitrary changes chess.com has been making in the past year or so, a practice that has become troublesome.
Agreed. We should propose this in all the team competitions we play in.
Yeah, I don't see a problem with starting players at 1200. If you are truly a 2000 player, you probably love chess, and will play many games to get to 2000.
In the meanwhile, probably best to set a threshold of min games for matches and tournaments.
why this site still decides games as abandonded when disconected by server. fix it or stay at the level of illegality!!
all of good here gets strongly shaded by that
Nov 28, 2020
0
#56
Are we making a mountain out of a molehill? If I were to join Chess.com and claim to be rated 2000, what's the probability that I would only be paired with weaker players who are also gaming the system? As far as colluding with weaker players who are also gaming the system, how would I find them, especially the ones who are much weaker than I am? That's the only way that I could be assured of consistently winning and increasing my rating.
Nov 28, 2020
0
#57
The real problem is that players with overinflated ratings cheapen the chess experience for other players in tournaments with minimum ratings or team matches. In tournaments, if there's a minimum rating of 2000, you expect to be playing players of a certain level of strength. Having games against players who are nowhere near that level means that it's two less games against an actually rewarding opponent.
Team matches have a similar effect. Players with high ratings push other players on their team down, thereby giving them more advantageous matchups. If there are players that have inflated ratings on a team, it's going to give that team an inherent advantage as all players below that player benefit from that.
The solutions here are simple. Either have players start at 1200 or 1400 maximum, and let good players work their way up (which, given how provisional it is, should not take long). Or, start all new players as Unrated, giving them a provisional rating only once they actually play a game. Unrated players would be put at the bottom of matches so that integrity is maintained above that, and they would only be eligible for tournaments without minimum ratings. That way rating is based completely on performance, not self-selection.
Nov 28, 2020
0
#59
When that new option was first put into effect when v3 was in beta testing, the vast majority of players were chosing the lower ratings. It isn't a big deal.
Chess.com needs to keep making money, mainly IMHO
Name of the game.