Agreed. After both sides have played 1 move I see no reason to leave the game unrated. Just my opinion though :).
3 move games don't count WHY?
Sort:
half and half for me. As you said someone could of played a bad opening but on the other hand i disagree because your rating might be getting boosted for doing nothing really
I agree that these games should be rated, as it encourages people to play responsibly. I've noticed that this rule currently applies to games where an opening has been pre-selected, which seems rather unfair as there may have been considerable development before any moves are made.
Both sides make sense...it would seem like a solution could be to modify the rating system for games under 4 or so moves...but that may prove to be difficult. It would mean recreating the rating system currently in use. I think the way things are now are for the best. If you win under 4 moves...obviously you're playing someone that has no idea what their doing or you're playing a game with no clear winner. For my part I think of it as "well...it's not like I really earned this win so it's no big deal."
What if someone set themself up for fools mate knowing it wouldn't count and somehow exploited it next turn with a protecting developing move?
i beleave that chess is a gentlemens and ladyz game we play by the rulez put in place and not worried about rating but thats just me
I think rating should not matter at all.
I don't agree. Rating is just a number that shows how well you can play chess. A simple game won't make you better, because it's very probable that you get stucked round a number and in order to make that number higher you need to improve, and a game with 2 or 3 moves won't let you improve much, unless you don't know the fool's mate and you lose because of that
i really believe 3 move games or even 2 should count toward ratings it actually lets people play extermely bad openings then just time out cause they don't like there posistion