10,000 RATING Possible?

Go for it.  Although it will suck if they reset the ratings with the introduction of live chess2

this guy has a point...

The unfair advantage being used is a relatively high skill level to start with combined with the careful selection of his opponents and a bug in the chess.com Live Chess rating system that always rounds fractional rating changes up.  It's simply an exploit of a known loophole and a complete and utter waste of time in my opinion.  I'd personally rather play games where I was actually challenged and might even learn something than have a grossly artificially inflated rating.

What a boring road to the top....

Not possible in the Glicko system. But chess.com's live chess uses a "tweaked" Glicko system which allows this kind of ratings abuse.

ChessNetwork, not to advertise another site or anything... but you should try to play some 1 minute chess over at ICC to bring your ego back down to earth.  Over there, where the grandmasters play bullet chess pretty much day and night, you'd be no better than average.  Over there, Hikaru Nakamura "Smallville" is the 1 minute "god"... only he earns it by wiping the floor with his fellow Grand Master and International Master contemporaries.  On the other hand, what you have accomplished here, dominating patzers repeatedly is nothing short of pathetic.

I'm really in disbelief that you have not gotten bored with obliterating subpar opponents over here on Live, for thousands of games.  That says A LOT about your character.  You are not seeking competitive chess, you are only seeking to dominate your opponents - and gain praise and admiration from the lesser players here at chess.com.  Thus, this thread that you've started.  Yea, I know probably shouldn't have responded,  that's all you want, for all of us to talk about you and your rating.

That sure backfired, didn't it.

This is not true.  Let's think of the possible board positions after, say, four moves.

"The number of legal positions in chess is estimated to be between 10^43 and 10^50, with a game-tree complexity of approximately 10^123. The game-tree complexity of chess was first calculated by Claude Shannon as 10^120, a number known as the Shannon number. Typically an average position has thirty to forty possible moves, but there may be as few as zero (in the case of checkmate or stalemate) or as many as 218."

from wikipedia.

chess is infinite, not finite.

I think maybe you're not clear on the definition of infinite.

To expand on Grobe's statement: 10^123 is a finite number. Chess is finite.

(lets asume your real name isnt deep bleu or some kind of networked version)

I'd say its verry strange, 1 minute chess is by most not seen is a good chess.
Unless your like the polgar sisters, and had special mind training its close to impossible. What would be the chalange to play against people far below your own level?. Maybe your the best here and so get rarely beaten, as a side effect the stats cannt handle you. If it is like that why not write an article and ask for GM's here to chalange you?

But you also lost 11 times, would you mentaly be able to be at 4999 and then loose from someone and drop like a 2000pnts or so? (i especialy ask this as if you had such mental training, a lot of people who where great in mental sports where also very unbalanced in their mind, smart people and crazy people are often closely related in their minds, genius and idiots the borders between can be thin sometimes, there are enough historical examples of that.


BTW nice Avatar

 Its an outrageous affair.

Yes ChessNetwork, it is possible. I've heard that, once you will achieve 10.000 on chess.com, FIDE will make an exception for you and award you the GM title (if you don't already have it).

10-20 years from now on, when you will hopefully grow up, you will regret wasting so much time on chess.com while learning nothing.

don't cry for 10000!!

looking at the replies, your chess network is crumbling :)

yes possible very hard though

Just to show how silly it is??

Why not sign up for your sister, mom, granddad and others... and play at different computers.. Let each of them reach 4200 ELO, and then let them play each other, and voluntary loose against you.. Than you would reach 10.000 much faster. 

The whole issue is just silly! Thats my opinion anyway...

Airbus:  Because that would be cheating.  Currently it's just a disingenuous exploit of a known bug, and all-in-all, yes, kind of silly, but it's not cheating.

I think that within the context of chess.com, cheating is something that gives you an unfair advantage over your opponents.  An artificially inflated rating doesn't do this, and I'd say that the games themselves are likely above board -- this is why I say that it's not cheating.  Despite what ChessNetwork may think, the rating points don't actually have any tangible value....

Chessnetwork hasn't said that he thinks that the rating points has any tangible value.  He hasn't said he is the greatest player on the site, he hasn't hurt anyone else and is not hurting anyone elses experience here, he simply asked if it was possible to make it to a 10000 rating.

Why is it necessary to attack him for what he is doing?

if you can beat Karpov easily, than why not...

In chess.com - YES. Actually - NO without cheating.