Scottrf wrote:
AndyClifton wrote:
Then what the hell was wafflle's joke?
Presumably implying that the problems with the website were due to him using an outdated browser.
Yeah, he already told me.
Chess rating system
Sort:
winnersp wrote:
I dont know about how to calculate actual rating yet! any program available?
No.
Forget all about rating and just play your best-chess.
Internet-ratings practically meaningless. Particularly on here until software-users are finally eradicated (The site IS trying!)
GlickoRD and ELO are comparable but as stated without fair-play controls there is no point getting worked-up about it.
:)
Sorry guys...
You can do anything and be anything! Go all out for 2200 for starters!! (NM in USA). Load your PC with Rybika, Fritz & Houdini. Play cat & mouse with the site's detection-systems whilst wallowing in new-found-glory of being respected and admired high-rated player on chess.com.
The world will be your oyster. Girls will telephone you constantly. Lucrative job-offers will fill the mail-box. Fawning-admirers will send fan-mail.
Sep 24, 2012
0
#1286
net ... just curious, and hypothetically speaking, of course, but what kind of job offers are we talking about? :)
Tax-evasion inspector.
[COMMENT DELETED]
[mod: no spam please]
Yeah, and I prefer to read real comments, not canned ones.
groan
I see some problems with Elo.
Firstly, some countries have inflated ratings because the "1800s" aren't that good(no offence meant).
Other countries, like India, have 1500s who could give GMs a run for their money.
Therefore, every year, I would adjust the ratings to avoid such inflation.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Vyomo wrote:
I see some problems with Elo.
Firstly, some countries have inflated ratings because the "1800s" aren't that good(no offence meant).
Other countries, like India, have 1500s who could give GMs a run for their money.
Therefore, every year, I would adjust the ratings to avoid such inflation.
I wish there were a systematic unbiased way to adjust ratings. Ideally something that could be applied after every tournament, or after every game even.
If some mathematician came up with a way I'm sure there would be applications outside of chess too.
In all my time playing chess, i noticed that there are two types of ratings, one elo and one is USCF. which one is the most precise for chess ratings?
Oct 5, 2012
0
#1297
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
Incorrect - Queen is 9, not 10.
2 Rooks vs a Queen, no extra pawn for the possessor of the Queen, all other factors equal, is better for the 2 Rooks. Of course, other factors aren't always equal.
I think the points system as a whole is a joke. I've seen games, especially Bishop vs Knight, where a Knight is as strong as a Queen and a Bishop is as weak as a backwards pawn, and I've seen other games where the Bishop runs rampant like a Queen, and the Knight takes for ever to get from one place to another I'd almost rather have a pawn. This is especially true for the Bishop pair on an open board vs the Knight pair.
Agreed. The rating system is just a guideline. Players have been Queen up but mated.
The best example of how flawed the system is a bishop endgame pawn down. Opposite coloured bishop is WAY better than same coloured in that position.
Oct 8, 2012
0
#1299
These two items have likely been posted many times but I can't read through all postings.
1) I try often to play higher ratings so when a game comes up the higher rated player sometimes aborts. I guess this is due to my lower rating, so my question is, why not just set one's ratings to play a desired range and not waste anyone's time?
2) Because of the aforementioned selected ratings range, a person's rating can be manipulated (eg play lower and pad your score). It is a lower '+' score, but still a '+'.
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!
http://math.bu.edu/people/mg/glicko/glicko.doc/glicko.html