Chess rating system


  • 5 years ago · Quote · #981

    suzettemy

    I hate the clock when I'm short of time, but I think it's only fair when my opponent's flag falls.  :)  

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #982

    HunterTahu

    "well actually in football you get to finish your play after the ref blows the whistle"

    True dat Nono!

    Alec is obviously more chess than football, (or does he mean soccer?)

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #983

    rt3378

    IMO do provisional ratings, then everyone would start where they belong

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #984

    Rafchess

    suzettemy wrote:

    I hate the clock when I'm short of time, but I think it's only fair when my opponent's flag falls.  :)  


     Could it be your enemy"s !!!

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #985

    bluecard5499

    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

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #986

    Spidey3000

    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?

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #987

    TonyMooney

    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.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #988

    Rafchess

    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.


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

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #989

    tynmar

    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....

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #990

    Rafchess

    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....


     Innocent 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 .

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #991

    Shahaliyev

    The first rating is about 12200. But i think it must be 1600.
  • 5 years ago · Quote · #992

    Rafchess

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

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

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #993

    TonyMooney

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

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #994

    chess700

    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.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #995

    shrike1

    Is there a way to manually lower my rating?

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #996

    Puchiko

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

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #997

    jp_23

    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.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #998

    Rafchess

    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.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #999

    Puchiko

    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.

  • 5 years ago · Quote · #1000

    Rafchess

    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.


    Cool Thats not a fundamental problem !! 


Back to Top

Post your reply: