Chess rating system

  • #981

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

  • #982
    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 !!!

  • #983

    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

  • #984
    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?

  • #985

    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.

  • #986
    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 !!

  • #987

    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....

  • #988
    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 .

  • #989
    The first rating is about 12200. But i think it must be 1600.
  • #990
    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!!

  • #991

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

  • #992
    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.

  • #993

    Is there a way to manually lower my rating?

  • #994

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

  • #995
    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.

  • #996
    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.

  • #997

    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.

  • #998
    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 !! 

  • #999

    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.

  • #1000
    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.


     Surprised agreeable!!!!

or Join

Online Now