I'm only 1380 and I'm getting worse . . .
But maybe it's because I'm 84 years old and getting older every day . . .
Are lower rated players getting better?
Sort:
Mar 9, 2022
0
#43
RichColorado wrote:
I'm only 1380 and I'm getting worse . . .
But maybe it's because I'm 84 years old and getting older every day . . .
And more power to you! Maybe one day, when I’m 84 I’ll reach 1380.
old people can still have their moments, some even become masters near the end of their lives which is a pretty cool achievement, its not too late to improve and have a good time
Mar 9, 2022
0
#45
RichColorado wrote:
I'm only 1380 and I'm getting worse . . .
But maybe it's because I'm 84 years old and getting older every day . . .
Wrote a blog addressing learning after 50. Maybe it may offer insights. Cant do anything about slowing brain functions, though.
https://www.chess.com/blog/foobarred1
one thing I want to clarify before I reply, wdym by “new opponent” and “old opponent”? Like someone you’ve never played before, because I doubt that’s the case. I’m very confused.
You mean the opponent you just played is old opponent and the opponent you are seeking out now is new opponent?
Mar 9, 2022
0
#48
LookUnderTheBoard wrote:
InsertInterestingNameHere wrote:
one thing I want to clarify before I reply, wdym by “new opponent” and “old opponent”? Like someone you’ve never played before, because I doubt that’s the case. I’m very confused.
I mean next opponent.
You play Bob at 1500.
You lose to Bob.
Instead of playing Sam at 1800, you play Bill at 1450.
Is this really that hard to comprehend? Are you all retards?
yes
and bill is not there, (or any other people around him) thus slowing down the pairing, thus making it more annoying
you play sam to make sure that you are playing someone
and people will complain "why am i not getting pairings" if this is added
Ah I understand now. I’m still sticking to my point. Lose and win streaks should not affect matchmaking. You lost to someone? Boo-hoo. You should not be given a lower rated opponent as compensation. You lost because you played worse, simple as that, and you should not be given a worse opponent because “wahhh I’m sad that I’m losing so I want a handicap so I can get some wins.”
Plus, each time you lose, you would be matched with a lower rated opponent, raising the chances of a win. Nothing should increase the chance of a win, that should never be a factor.
“we don't want to play very difficult and then very simple”
well then, this is where the seek settings come in.
that seek setting you chose is an extreme example. The most elo you can stray from your own rating is 150+, which is an extreme difficulty. So, if you do not want this, you can set the setting to something else. For example, I have -25, +25 as mine. I’m sure no one is going to complain that their opponent is rated 25 points above them, that’s such a minuscule difference. I understand what you’re saying, but the solution is already here.
Everything you said is well and good, and it’s a fine idea, but why is it necessary. Why do we need this?
Also, I still fail to see why something should make it easier to win, as my belief is that nothing should influence how easy it is to win, including win and loss streaks.
“The seek setting doesn't do that if I simply modify the range to +25 and -25 because others aren't doing that. ”
That’s not how that works. If someone is using a -25,+25 seek setting, and another person is using a -50,+50 seek setting, they can still get matched if they are around the same rating, and for both parameters.
"Are lower rated players getting better?"
Yes. They are.
Last year I used to be 1300 blitz on this site, then I fell to 1200, then to 1100, and after a looong grind I'm finally 1300 again.
last year I used to be 1300 blitz on lichess. Now I'm 1700.
Say what you want about lower rated players. I know that I AM improving. The ratings here get more and more outphased.
Mar 9, 2022
0
#54
LookUnderTheBoard wrote:
The flow of traffic is for people to raise their rating, not lower it. So, give the players who are really higher a quicker way to move up and make it so the lower rated don't get trampled on.
you are wrong here; the rating system exists to match people close to your strength, not to raise anyone's rating. And there is a method that allows higher rated players to move up quickly - that's glicko RD. A new account will gain a hundred points or so per win and move up very fast.
“That's what I am stating. Yes, you would still get opponents that fall outside your desired settings.”
That simply isn’t true.
Mar 9, 2022
0
#56
LookUnderTheBoard wrote:
"You may not but a lot of other players would be upset if they had longer waits to get paired."
At no point in time did I state my settings have to dictate other people's settings. If they want to play bullet and get a pairing within a split second, I encourage that. It filters out those opponents I do NOT want to play.
They can have their setting and I can have my setting.
Also, did you realize this? If I play games instantly, then I am just playing while waiting for a pairing I prefer.
Your compassion for others who don't want to wait should now spill over to me. But I am sure you don't have the capacity to logically understand this.
That's just it. What you're wanting is a fundamental change to the logic of pairings as they exist and isn't something that fits with the design of filters.
So the site would have to create a completely different pairing algorithm to get what you want. If the site were to change the pairing algorithm, it would be for everyone, influenced by filters.
LookUnderTheBoard wrote:
InsertInterestingNameHere wrote:
“That's what I am stating. Yes, you would still get opponents that fall outside your desired settings.”
That simply isn’t true.
You stated otherwise in your post. Are you intentionally trying to disagree?
If player A is moving up in increments of 75 starting at 1275, and player B is moving up increments of 50 starting at 1325, yes it is possible for player A to meet/be matched with player B at 1350. Their new 75 range is now 1351 to 1425 whereas player B is still 1325-1375.
Player A is outside player B's desired settings.
“starting at 1325”
”matched with player B at 1350.”
is player B 1325 or 1350??? Which is it?
Mar 9, 2022
0
#58
LookUnderTheBoard wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:
foobarred1 wrote:
Is this different when you play on a mobile device? I notice that almost all the time,i get pair up with an opponent whose elo is less than mine, sometimes lower than the 150 limit i had set.
If you set a custom seek in the app, it should try pairing you in your chosen range, since it's the same live server process doing the pairings as far as I'm aware.
Either you don't understand math or your reading comprehension is of a kindergartener.
Before you reply again, take a step back and try to understand what I am saying.
Then, instead of replying with a macro reply of something that doesn't pertain to what I am saying and doesn't confirm what I am saying, give yourself 30 minutes to make an original reply that actually addresses what I am saying.
....
Had you read and comprehended my post, you'll see I wasn't replying to you 
Mar 9, 2022
0
#60
What I'm saying is, the site isn't going to change to multiple types of pairing algorithms. Simple as that. So if they liked the idea, they would need to change it for everyone.
My impression is that your style of pairing idea, now that you have a more detailed description, potentially could work, or something like it anyway, and probably would not impact pairing time significantly. Again, if you feel strongly about it, open a suggestion ticket.
The OP joined CC March 7th. Played 21 games as of March 9th. 11 wins and 10 losses.