Chess rating system - Chess Forums - Page 49

bluecard5499

Oct 15, 2011

0

#961

ratings arent always acurate, keep that in mind. If someone doesnt play for a while then their rating will be lower (or higher) than their actuall skill

Spidey3000

Oct 16, 2011

0

#962

viswanathan wrote:

turtle wrote: i am starting to understand the rating system, but how do you determine points during a game? are certain peices worth different points?

turtle, the general points system followed is as follows:

pawn - 1pt.

knight/bishop - 3pts.

rook - 5pts.

queen - 10pts.

of course points are not everything... the position of your piece also matters.. for example you might not mind losing a bishop or rook to save a pawn on the 7th row.. and points dont have any bearing on the game result.. it is just a basic framework to help beginners understand the value of different pieces

Just adjusting this, but isnt the queen worth 9 points?

TonyMooney

Oct 16, 2011

0

#963

Somebody told me that the rook valuation of 5 points is a western idea - it's only 4 in Russia. Don't know if that's true - but it puts a different perspective on the exchange of two minor pieces for a rook and a pawn if it is.

Rafchess

Oct 16, 2011

0

#964

TonyMooney wrote:

Somebody told me that the rook valuation of 5 points is a western idea - it's only 4 in Russia. Don't know if that's true - but it puts a different perspective on the exchange of two minor pieces for a rook and a pawn if it is.

While playing with chess.com its advisable to follow the follow the principles laid there in !!

tynmar

Oct 17, 2011

0

#965

I don't particular understand the ratings. Just beaten someone with a thirteen hundred rating on blitz, I am on less than one thousand (still getting used to not running out of time....the number of times my clock has ran out with me one or two moves from checkmate is annoying...but i guess it happens to everyone) and I get an rating of +27...very disappointing....

Rafchess

Oct 17, 2011

0

#966

tynmar wrote:

I don't particular understand the ratings. Just beaten someone with a thirteen hundred rating on blitz, I am on less than one thousand (still getting used to not running out of time....the number of times my clock has ran out with me one or two moves from checkmate is annoying...but i guess it happens to everyone) and I get an rating of +27...very disappointing....

just one time playing good would not serve purpose!! pl gon playing more withmore success with highier Rating players then y'will see your ratings going more up !! Rating standard is a necessary evil without which U can not gauge .

IM Shahaliyev

Oct 19, 2011

0

#967

The first rating is about 12200. But i think it must be 1600.

Rafchess

Oct 19, 2011

0

#968

Shahaliyev wrote:

The first rating is about 12200. But i think it must be 1600.

In all cases u will have to start from a certain point!!

TonyMooney

Oct 20, 2011

0

#969

Are FIDE ratings accurate - for amateur players not the professionals?

chess700

Oct 20, 2011

0

#970

TonyMooney wrote:

Are FIDE ratings accurate - for amateur players not the professionals?

They're accurate for adults who play in Fide-rated tournaments fairly regularly.

shrike1

Oct 20, 2011

0

#971

Is there a way to manually lower my rating?

Puchiko

Oct 21, 2011

0

#972

No. Your rating is supposed to be an accurate estimate of your playing stregth, adjusting it would defeat the friggin' purpose.

jp_23

Oct 23, 2011

0

#973

viswanathan wrote:

turtle wrote: i am starting to understand the rating system, but how do you determine points during a game? are certain peices worth different points?

turtle, the general points system followed is as follows:

pawn - 1pt.

knight/bishop - 3pts.

rook - 5pts.

queen - 10pts.

of course points are not everything... the position of your piece also matters.. for example you might not mind losing a bishop or rook to save a pawn on the 7th row.. and points dont have any bearing on the game result.. it is just a basic framework to help beginners understand the value of different pieces

Isn't a queen worth 9 pts? Getting two rooks for a queen is usually a slight plus for a player who can effectively use their remaining pieces.

Rafchess

Oct 23, 2011

0

#974

jp_23 wrote:

viswanathan wrote:

turtle wrote: i am starting to understand the rating system, but how do you determine points during a game? are certain peices worth different points?

turtle, the general points system followed is as follows:

pawn - 1pt.

knight/bishop - 3pts.

rook - 5pts.

queen - 10pts.

of course points are not everything... the position of your piece also matters.. for example you might not mind losing a bishop or rook to save a pawn on the 7th row.. and points dont have any bearing on the game result.. it is just a basic framework to help beginners understand the value of different pieces

Isn't a queen worth 9 pts? Getting two rooks for a queen is usually a slight plus for a player who can effectively use their remaining pieces.

Queen= 9.

Puchiko

Oct 24, 2011

0

#975

This does differ from author to author. Nine is the most common, however Philidor, Stauton, Euwe and Evans all lean towards 10 (Wikipedia article). The value of any given piece, depends of course-as everything-on the position.

Rafchess

Oct 24, 2011

0

#976

Puchiko wrote:

This does differ from author to author. Nine is the most common, however Philidor, Stauton, Euwe and Evans all lean towards 10 (Wikipedia article). The value of any given piece, depends of course-as everything-on the position.

Thats not a fundamental problem !!

jp_23

Oct 24, 2011

0

#977

Puchiko is right in that the position overrides all material advantages and that the queen's value can vary dependant on the player. In my view, the value of a piece should be the ability for the player to use the piece to gain material, avoid getting checkmated, or to checkmate. Skill with the piece should also be taken into account. A player who dominates the game with rooks might look for ways to trade his queen for two rooks while a tactical player with extensive knowledge of how to use the minor pieces might look for ways to get 3 pieces for the queen.

Rafchess

Oct 24, 2011

0

#978

jp_23 wrote:

Puchiko is right in that the position overrides all material advantages and that the queen's value can vary dependant on the player. In my view, the value of a piece should be the ability for the player to use the piece to gain material, avoid getting checkmated, or to checkmate. Skill with the piece should also be taken into account. A player who dominates the game with rooks might look for ways to trade his queen for two rooks while a tactical player with extensive knowledge of how to use the minor pieces might look for ways to get 3 pieces for the queen.

agreeable!!!!

jp_23

Oct 24, 2011

0

#979

Rafchess wrote:

jp_23 wrote:

Puchiko is right in that the position overrides all material advantages and that the queen's value can vary dependant on the player. In my view, the value of a piece should be the ability for the player to use the piece to gain material, avoid getting checkmated, or to checkmate. Skill with the piece should also be taken into account. A player who dominates the game with rooks might look for ways to trade his queen for two rooks while a tactical player with extensive knowledge of how to use the minor pieces might look for ways to get 3 pieces for the queen.

agreeable!!!!

Oops. Forgot to mention that the defensive value of pieces is important too (both in defending checkmate and material).

2340rbd4

Oct 25, 2011

0

#980

I (1828) lost a game to somebody (1612) I lost 19 points, he only gained 11, sounds a bit unfair to both of us