thats odd
Why does my "Best Win" show their rating *after* the game?
Sort:
Feb 12, 2026
0
#3
LevyRozmansHFileRook wrote:
I just beat a 1007 rated player, my highest ever win (and which took me past 1000 myself for the first time, yay)
But on my stats it shows them as "Best win: 998", which was their resulting elo *after* the game once they'd had the elo deducted
Surely at the time I played them, they were rated 1007? The elo I gained was based on that, etc - so it must make sense for that to be the rating used for the statistics?
I get that this stat doesn't really matter, but it just seems odd to me
The rating after the game is considered the more accurate strength of the opponent.
Feb 13, 2026
0
#5
LevyRozmansHFileRook wrote:
I just beat a 1007 rated player, my highest ever win (and which took me past 1000 myself for the first time, yay)
But on my stats it shows them as "Best win: 998", which was their resulting elo *after* the game once they'd had the elo deducted
Surely at the time I played them, they were rated 1007? The elo I gained was based on that, etc - so it must make sense for that to be the rating used for the statistics?
I get that this stat doesn't really matter, but it just seems odd to me
I know what you mean. Sometimes I’ll be happy about winning against a certain rating opponent, or myself gaining past a certain milestone and the rating “after” kind of gives away the game result before it happened.
This “after” is just how chess.com chooses to display it. I believe it should be the ratings at the time the game started, but it’s easy enough to see how much the rating would have been from the game “rating change” although it does feel like an extra mental step.
Feb 13, 2026
0
#6
Martin_Stahl wrote:
LevyRozmansHFileRook wrote:
I just beat a 1007 rated player, my highest ever win (and which took me past 1000 myself for the first time, yay)
But on my stats it shows them as "Best win: 998", which was their resulting elo *after* the game once they'd had the elo deducted
Surely at the time I played them, they were rated 1007? The elo I gained was based on that, etc - so it must make sense for that to be the rating used for the statistics?
I get that this stat doesn't really matter, but it just seems odd to me
The rating after the game is considered the more accurate strength of the opponent.
But they weren't that rating until after I played them...
In any other scenario we use the ratings at the start of the game
I just beat a 1007 rated player, my highest ever win (and which took me past 1000 myself for the first time, yay)
But on my stats it shows them as "Best win: 998", which was their resulting elo *after* the game once they'd had the elo deducted
Surely at the time I played them, they were rated 1007? The elo I gained was based on that, etc - so it must make sense for that to be the rating used for the statistics?
I get that this stat doesn't really matter, but it just seems odd to me