why do you care?
Chess rating system
Sort:
no
no iraniyan???
no iraniyan???
Hi, I was also curious about the rating system. I understand we start at 1200, but wondered why you go down in different amounts with losses and up with wins as in some wins seem to barely make a difference in your score or a loss can take away heaps. Does the daily puzzle and tactics trainer affect your scores also? Thanks :)
Jan 4, 2016
0
#2147
thank you Martin :)
salut a
Martin_Stahl wrote:
That isn't the whole argument. If you have never played OTB rated chess, the transition isn't always smooth and you can very well play 100 points below your normal chess ability getting used to notation, using he clock, and general nerves.
Which evens out, since a 1400 blitz rating here = 1530ish UCSF per the poll, so even with the -100 adjustment, you're back to 1400+ rating.
Jan 5, 2016
0
#2151
I suck at blitz. My chess.com blitz is about 300 points lower than my OTB regular rating. It is within 100 of my USCF Online Blitz though (part of the rating on both comes from the same pool of players, so isn't totally suprising). My Live Stadard is close to being within 100 points of my USCF regular.
Martin_Stahl wrote:
I suck at blitz. My chess.com blitz is about 300 points lower than my OTB regular rating. It is within 100 of my USCF Online Blitz though (part of the rating on both comes from the same pool of players, so isn't totally suprising). My Live Stadard is close to being within 100 points of my USCF regular.
ACcording to the 2015 Chess ratings survey on this site, you are BETTER at blitz than your Live standard rating, contrary to what you say.
Your blitz rating of 1268 would correspond to a chess.com live rating of 1590 per that survey. But your live rating is only 1490. So you're outperforming in blitz relative to your standard rating, at least per that survey.
http://www.chess.com/blog/smarterchess/chesscom-rating-comparison-2015
Jan 6, 2016
0
#2153
Well, it is possible I'm just an outlier, assuming there really is any correlation, since none of my numbers match up for any pool I'm rated in.
GreedyPawnDestroyer wrote:
Unbelievable rating deflation !!!!!!!! I am a 2200 player but I am losing to some 1700 patzers. Perhaps too many engines
Great to see ya back on chess.com!
512602now, you can't be more pathetic than this, can you? If you want to spam threads with your nonsense, do so elsewhere. (It's great that you closed your account.)
Jan 7, 2016
0
#2156
macer75 wrote:
GreedyPawnDestroyer wrote:
Unbelievable rating deflation !!!!!!!! I am a 2200 player but I am losing to some 1700 patzers. Perhaps too many engines
Great to see ya back on chess.com!
It is not however, great to see him continuing with the same accusations of cheating and the same use of profanity in Live Chess Chat that eventually resulted in the disabling of his first account after multiple warnings.
I am therefore muting this account immediately.
Jan 7, 2016
0
#2157
Although he might have meant that people use engines in their training, learn opening variations, practice tactics and review their games - and as more and more people do that, play at each respective level (such as 1700, for example) becomes stronger (as nobody's rating would rise were everybody suddenly to play better).
I'm not familiar with this guy's history, though - just looking at this specific quote.
My phone sucks and don't have a computer. But I have a nice chess board and am very good at chess. Looking for someone to play through text so I have a ongoing game forever on my chess board.
Jan 7, 2016
0
#2159
dirtyred28 wrote:
My phone sucks and don't have a computer. But I have a nice chess board and am very good at chess. Looking for someone to play through text so I have a ongoing game forever on my chess board.
Play Daily/correspondence here instead. Unless your phone just won't display the boards at all.
myn is 937