Chess rating system

It's not just the phone app but v3 as well. However, since their RD will be high, it shouldn't really have much if an impact as they will quickly drop to where they should be or rise up as the case may be.

Based on the help article,  I guess you are right. I was remembering incorrectly. However,  based on those game results, the site may have implemented someting similar to combat rating manipulation.

As Martin said, a player can quickly raise their rating if in fact they be stronger. It is only natural for all new players to want the highest rating (1800) when signing up. I agree, this needs to be changed as most are well below this in reality. 1800 is in the top 3 to 4 % for online anyway.

1 side affect is detrimental imo. I'm around 1900 and my seeks often include 1800 (online). I constantly am aborting challanges by new 1800 players. I will not play a provisional rating that is most likely in error. Everything to lose and nothing to gain. There are other reasons of course which are understood. A 1200 can reach 1800 and establish a profile and history of fair play in a short time.

Where whould I suggest chess.com should return to 1200 for all new players (unless titled)?

You can either post a topic in Site Feedback & Suggestions or open a ticket.

https://support.chess.com/customer/portal/emails/new

That said, if you face a 1800 new player, what is the max you will lose? If your RD is low enough I can't see it changing that much at all. And if they win, then their estimated rating isn't probably far off.

A better solution might be to have a filter to not get paired if a player has less than 5 games, even if their rating is in the right range.

Good idea. My original question, how much would I l lose? I think close to the same as if the player weren't provisional. At least I recall that to be the case sometime back.

Point is imo provisional players should start near the middle, not in the top 3 to 4 %. similiar to OTB new players and like it was in years past here.

I think the new policy was implemented by someone with limited knowledge regarding the issues and consequences.

I don't know about that. I'm pretty sure they understood the possibilities.

That said, if the rating change really was that large, there is likely to be a bug in that part. Or the rating change that shows in the game screen is simplified and doesn't take the RD into account.

Consequences are not limited to ratings. What of players as myself that abort the games? I don't think I'm in any way wrong or not being a sportsman by doing this. I suspect many players abort games at the 1800 level when they find the opponent is brand new.

1000's of new players join daily. They will 100% of the time select 1800 to start. They seek a game and find many players simply abort. This can not be good promotion for chess.com. It is just not the rating issue, but really more do do with a member being established as a fair player.

That is demonstrably false. I'm on mobile right now but I guarantee I can find the other ratings represented, minus the 1200 since you can't  tell which version it came from.

Ok, fom the first page of new members, some potentially skipped due to being on mobile:

• 3 have 800
• 11 have 1000
• 24 have 1200
• 1 has 1800

While I will not discount that there are a number of people who will choose the higher rating, it isn't going to be everyone and this small sample shows that 1000 is a pretty popular choice.

This thread is like 9 years old...

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/tournaments/who-will-win-the-world-chess-championship-2016

 Chess ability is inherently different than chess ratings. At chess.com It uses the "Glicko rating system." Goto www.glicko.net/ratings.systems.pdf

I have been playing on the chess.com site for many years. I had to study in order to get better. I am now reading ,Dan Hesiman's book called "The best of Novice Nook." Heres,a quote from its pages,"Even if they were born with incredible intellectual gifts, it will require about 8,000 pratice hours to realize thoes gifts." I want a higher rating but in order to earn it,it will require careful study. 

Good afternoon everyone,

I was given a chess set by my grandfather, and I believe it to be quite valuable, however because I already have access to a chess set, this is not one I will be needing to possess.

I have a link to this chessboard, both brand new retail and the one I currently own. If anyone could post their honest opinion on my chess set and or have any interest in acquiring, do let me know :)

And me why am i 1700 on every other website and here im 900? Ok i loose many time by disconnect but seriously most of 900 peoples are really good.

For example masternorm play since many years, look train hard, read books but he is rated 800 😮. Level here look really hight on blitz

I got a cake!

hi

i aha funny DrDODSAj

rating is not everything but the more you win the better rating you should get so it tells something for sure , count the wins you got in fair games and take losses for time problems away and you can get the point on how good you are and the average opponents you play against gets wrong if time problems and rating is not fair , and for sure if you get to play good names in here and count the wins of them you can also mesaure how good you are not using ratings , cuase the oponnent you win against tells more how good you are for example if you win against nakamura in here that would count more then the rating