Chess rating system
Sort:
Does this website have Blitz games?
erik wrote:
basically:
everyone starts out with a rating and a variable that determines how accurate your rating is. if you haven't played any games, then that variable is HUGE and allows your rating to swing more aggressively. but if you have played 1,000 games all very recently, then you have a low variable, so your rating will move more slowly. also, your opponent's variable matters. if they have a very loose variable, your rating will move less than if they have a tight variable.
:)
Thanks, your answer helped out alot. I know what my approximate rating should be...so when it jumped after two games I felt a little guilty, especially considering the caliber of the players I was playing at the time.
mate just play your best chess and learn from your mistakes and let the rating worry about its self. Ratings are a guide not an excact science as far as im concened so dont worry about it to much just play and have fun.....
I'm new!
erik wrote:
everyone starts at 1200. then as you play you get a new rating. it is all based on the Glicko ratings system :) check it out - it's a fun read!
I'm good at math, but that makes almost no sense at all.
erik wrote:
everyone starts at 1200. then as you play you get a new rating. it is all based on the Glicko ratings system :) check it out - it's a fun read!
From the article: "If the player is unrated, set the rating to 1500 and the RD to 350."
The average is 1500, not 1200. However, chess sites that set unrated players at 1500 tend to find themselves with grossly inflated ratings. Those that set initial ratings at 1200 more often achieve the 1500 average.
Um yah, this went over my head but I think I understand it.
Why do I have 3 in 'my points" ?
My friend won more games than me and don't have any point yet...
"my points" is unrelated to your chess rating. It is a rough measure of your participation in the non-playing aspects of the site. You have a separate chess rating that measures your playing ability.
Well when it comes to time in a sit down game with someone in front of you its alot more important then time on an online chess game. I recently lost a game where I had a 24 hours clock, not because I didnt know what my next move would be or because I sat there and stared at the screen for 24 hours, but because chess.com went down for one hour at the time I would've made my play and I didnt stay up to wait for it to come back online. The next day I left the house early and stayed out all day, by the time I got home my clock was gone. If this was a sit down game I'd understand time negatively affecting me, but in a game that I fit in between the other things in my life, time could have a serious affect in your rating when it shouldnt.
Time can be an issue even in long games, depending on the players. As for how important ratings are, they are used to determine match up's in tournaments, so you will play people around your skill level in the first few rounds. It keeps things fair; without it a strong player could get easy wins while another strong player has to fight for their wins. They would each have the same score but one would have had to work far more for their's. Hence the rating system.
AlecKeen wrote: Becca wrote: Rating has its place but its not the most important thing. Sometimes you can lose a game on time and it will seriously affect your rating this has nothing to do with how well you play.
Oh yes it does! How well you play includes how well you manage your time. Time is as much part of Chess as it is in other games. In football you could score the greatest goal in history, but if the referee blows time before it goes in it doesn't count. Similarly in Chess if you don't get your moves in within the time, you lose, and correctly so.
So basically what you're saying is:
Football is a game. Football is timed.
Chess is also a game. Therefore, chess should also be timed.
You've got me convinced.
Question: Chess.com rating = USDF rating
How does the Chess.com rating compare to the USCF rating. Right now I am at a whopping 1300 on Chess.com (impressive, I know). So what would that get me in USCF?
thehomelessguy wrote:
Question: Chess.com rating = USDF rating
How does the Chess.com rating compare to the USCF rating. Right now I am at a whopping 1300 on Chess.com (impressive, I know). So what would that get me in USCF?
I would like to know the same thing. I never played USCF rated games, and I can't believe I would end up with an around 1800 rating there too?
"Question: Chess.com rating = USDF rating"
This has already been asked and answered in another thread.
likesforests wrote:
"Question: Chess.com rating = USDF rating"
This has already been asked and answered in another thread.
thank you :)
mznor wrote:
In playing my first game on Chess.com, I received a rating of 1200, before I played. Why, and how was that arrived at?
I also want to known how was, I assume that every player should be play with the computer and then rating should be define by that game result. How do you think?
MickyBJ wrote:
Why then did I go down from 1200 (to 1361) when I beat someone who has a rating above 1200 (1089)?? Admittedly don't have time to read the article... but hoping someone knows how this works anyway!
The higher your rating the better. This isn't golf or anything. The grandmasters have ratings of like 2500.
