Chess.com Ratings are a JOKE

Brilliant moves are now whenever you leave a piece en prise because there is another move. The quality of such a move and your rating depends on whether it is brilliant or not.

Very good points. All it would take is for the auto-game-selection to filter only within the appropriate league, i.e. if you're Wooden you play only Woodies of similar ELO rating etc. There would be no need to allow players to manually filter.

I never saw the point of the League System when it was introduced but can see it as a measure to ELO trust worthiness.  If Chess.com are doing or will do as I have suggested above, clearly this would be a very effective counter-measure against some player behaviours, i.e. you would be matched with people of a similar playing activity as well as ELO rating.   

i agree

@PawnTsunami has already comprehensively and patiently detailed how you are wrong. The 200 games was across different time controls, and some of those 4 losses were to lower rated players and therefore had a more substantial impact on his rating. The facts simply don't fit your narrative, no matter how hard you try - facts don't work that way.

I'm always amazed that Chess.com tolerates folks like @CooloutAC - I'm pretty sure that if someone spoke similary about Lichess in the Lichess forums (such as they are), they'd be summarily booted. I guess that's why even Lichess fans hang out in the Chess.com forums rather than hanging out in the Lichess ones.

After playing enough games for your rating to be accurate - which is way less than 200 and probably more like 20.

I have to admit.... I don't understand CooloutAC. Not that I've put a lot of effort into it, but it doesn't take much effort to observe that every single conversation he's involved in is an argument and he ends up telling everyone they are wrong, dishonest, in denial, and/ or they have a superiority / inferiority complex. He NEVER has what I would call a normal and friendly conversation.  It's just weird.....and abnormal. 

I agree. I have felt my rating has been accurate through all (almost) 400 of my games and when I play someone with a similar rating, it's usually a close game that could go either way.

The truth is Lichess rating is inflated and that is why people like it

At the same time you are like 800, and I understand back in the day when I was 1200 on chess.com I went to play on lichess and was happy being a 1900 there LOL and then improved and went to 2200 Classical on lichess then decided to come back and play on chess.com coz I felt like a sore loser just stopping chess.com for rating and now I am like almost 2000, what I mean is that everyone has there times and you some day may like chess.com better too. Although I have nothing against lichess I actually like it better for learning because of the study feature on it's site.

too much for me to read lol, what is your OTB uscf rating or FIDE if you have one?

Sorry if you felt like that I was just really asking I didn't mean it in such a horrible way maybe the time I said made it sound like that I am very sorry I am really just asking

Also, don't you dare call me uncompetitive, you should be shamed to say that I have spent the last 1 year playing hours a day and studying this game trying to become good at it and I still do that till today so ... 

Lol I could spend my whole life fighting with people like you and you no what, you never change! There is actually a word for that it is called "dogma". And you have dogma, so see ya later! My goal is to tell you to not get so mean about this silly conversation and tell mean things when you have no idea how much effort that one puts into it. You must have put in lots of effort too, so that is why I don't tell these weird comments to you too. See I may be "uncompetitive" in your opinion but keep that to yourself.

You just got CooloutAC sexually aroused.  

chill

and put that castiel meme away :v

Here's some food for thought. 

Many stronger rated players tell you to play stronger opponents to get better,

but many lower rated players don't like the ego beatings they can take at a higher level, even though it can help them improve.

You can do the Glicko math and say, "If I raise the opponent rating strength a couple hundred points in the settings,

I might lose a couple more every ten games but I'll gain more rating points as long as I

win at least x number of games for every ten played."

Then you don't focus so much on winning every game as long as you reach your next rating milestone. 

So maybe you need to win 8 of every 10 you play at your own rating level to raise your rating 50 points, but only 6 of every 10 against players rated 200 points higher than you to gain that same 50 in net profit.

With the former, you can stay down in that level for a long time losing games due to simple mistakes and not really make much progress.

With the latter, (playing against stronger opponents) you gain the points and the added benefit of what you learn from the experience of playing against tougher competition. 

Something to think about, no?

Sshhh!  Don't tell them all of our secrets!

PawnTsunami wrote: "Sshhh!  Don't tell them all of our secrets!"

^ (Right you are.)

Everyone just disregard my earlier post!

Happy chess everyone.