The only problem I see with the rating system is that the odds you get when playing against newly registered users (with 1200) when you have like 1600. Since they haven't played any games, you could easilly run into a player who's real elo is 2000. And against an opponent like that, you should get much better point "odds" - but when you loose your rating will drop like 200, and if you win it will only go up like 20... Even when he's a lot better than you. On the other hand, if that player has already played 10 games instead of 0, his chess.com rating will probably be around 2000 - and then you can play against him with good odds. Anyone get my point here?

mackandstella 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

My chess teacher has taught me a queens is worth 9

And your chess teacher is right. A queen is worth 9. That is also the value she has on chess.com

NotAGM (post #145) - I got 1545 on the 'fair ELO' link http://www.chessmaniac.com/ELORating/ELO_Chess_Rating.shtml- not bad really, given that's where my rating has tended to gravitate towards (am currently 1654, but a historic high and a little misleading - players at this level on this site are generally better than me)

The only problem I see with the rating system is that the odds you get when playing against newly registered users (with 1200) when you have like 1600. Since they haven't played any games, you could easilly run into a player who's real elo is 2000. And against an opponent like that, you should get much better point "odds" - but when you loose your rating will drop like 200, and if you win it will only go up like 20... Even when he's a lot better than you. On the other hand, if that player has already played 10 games instead of 0, his chess.com rating will probably be around 2000 - and then you can play against him with good odds. Anyone get my point here?

A necessary evil? I don't think there is any other way around this problem. You will just have to win those points back from someone else.

Yes this is about right but you have to remember that a bishop can cover more squares than a knight and you can mate with 2 bishops but not with 2 knights. Therefore a bishop is generally considered a little bit better especially if the game gets towards the end-game. If you had a situation where one side had a knight and a few pawns and the other had a bishop and the same number of pawns, the percentages would be in favour of the bishop. The better the player the better the chances of getting a draw.....the knight cannot make a mistake!

Prad, welcome. If they don't have chess tourneys locally for you, this might be your best option. Go to the tournament section and just join one. If you are a talkative person, tell your opponents and maybe you can make new friends and learn from them too.

I've only played 3 games so far on line and noted I have a rating that changes with each win/loss - but - the "today's rank" is blank - does that change after I have played so many games?

After a few games (around 10) or a certain amount of time, the ranking box fills out.

I've always wondered about this, since joining the site. For those who do have USCF/FIDE/Elo ratings, do you find that there is a significant discrepancy between those and chess.com ratings? I'm suspecting so, but without an OTB ranking of my own, I've got no way of telling.

You know what's really sad? I visited that link and understood every single bit of it. Heck, I even know how to write the Excel formulas to emulate it. That's just sad... sad, sad, sad. Man, I need a social life. ROFL.

The only problem I see with the rating system is that the odds you get when playing against newly registered users (with 1200) when you have like 1600. Since they haven't played any games, you could easilly run into a player who's real elo is 2000. And against an opponent like that, you should get much better point "odds" - but when you loose your rating will drop like 200, and if you win it will only go up like 20... Even when he's a lot better than you. On the other hand, if that player has already played 10 games instead of 0, his chess.com rating will probably be around 2000 - and then you can play against him with good odds. Anyone get my point here?

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

My chess teacher has taught me a queens is worth 9

And your chess teacher is right. A queen is worth 9. That is also the value she has on chess.com

no.the reason kasparov is better than you is because hed beat you in less than twenty moves.:P

hahahahahahaha

The only problem I see with the rating system is that the odds you get when playing against newly registered users (with 1200) when you have like 1600. Since they haven't played any games, you could easilly run into a player who's real elo is 2000. And against an opponent like that, you should get much better point "odds" - but when you loose your rating will drop like 200, and if you win it will only go up like 20... Even when he's a lot better than you. On the other hand, if that player has already played 10 games instead of 0, his chess.com rating will probably be around 2000 - and then you can play against him with good odds. Anyone get my point here?

A necessary evil? I don't think there is any other way around this problem. You will just have to win those points back from someone else.

i want to play chess in tournaments.....how it possible..... please help me

Prad, welcome. If they don't have chess tourneys locally for you, this might be your best option. Go to the tournament section and just join one. If you are a talkative person, tell your opponents and maybe you can make new friends and learn from them too.

Good luck

so if your opponents score affects oyur score?

After a few games (around 10) or a certain amount of time, the ranking box fills out.

I've always wondered about this, since joining the site. For those who do have USCF/FIDE/Elo ratings, do you find that there is a significant discrepancy between those and chess.com ratings? I'm suspecting so, but without an OTB ranking of my own, I've got no way of telling.

Thanks.

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

You know what's really sad? I visited that link and understood every single bit of it. Heck, I even know how to write the Excel formulas to emulate it. That's just sad... sad, sad, sad. Man, I need a social life. ROFL.