Chess rating system

I signed up in October and I wasn't given a 1200 rating. I started as as unrated. I know someone else who started the same way, so I don't understand why anyone would be given a 1200 r.

The way the normal USCF rating system is if you lose a player, your opponent's rating minus 400 gets factored into yours. If you win, your opponent's rating plus 400 gets factored into yours, If you draw, your opponent's rating gets factored into yours.

The site now shows unrated until you complete a number of games (it may be 5 but I would have to look that up) but you are assigened an initial rating of 1200 and that is used for your first rating calculation/change.

That is only for your first 4 games and an average is taken on those. Later games follow a different formula. I would have to look at the actual regulation (don't know it by heart) but that one is a little different than the normal rating calculation and that may stay in play until you are get an established, non-provisional rating (again, would have to look that point up to verify).

Admin, remove above comment ^

Also ratings help bolster the integrity of play.  As I'm sure this sounds silly, let me explain...

Let's say you play a casual game in a coffee shop against a far superior player.  He makes a kamikaze attack against your king, but you maintain your composure, weather the attack and win the game.  At first you feel good about your win, but then it occurs to you that he was playing sloppy, just to speed up the game.  Likely he made choices he'd never make in a game that counts.  You want him to play his best, but in a game that doesn't count for anything, there is no way you can force him to do play his best.

If you're playing a rated game, well it counts.  If someone is rated 2000 and makes a kamikaze attack in a "real" game, then you have to suppose the choice is consistent with what he'd do in any "real" game, and he got a 2000 rating by playing that way.  Perhaps he's still not playing his best, but in this case, it's fair to presume that if he did play his best he'd be rated higher than 2000.  If someone attains a 2000 rating in games that count just as much as the game you're playing (and win), then you can feel the warm glow of having beat someone playing with 2000 level skill.

If someone attains a 2000 rating in games that count, but you play them in a game that doens't count, then you never know if they were trying hard and any resulting victory is hollow.

Sorry if I got this wrong, but even if I did, it would be most likely correct for the first 25 games (provisional). I just think later on, it's because your rating probably stablizes.

Boy, that escalated quickly

True genius!

You seem to still be in Freud's "id" stage of psychosexual development.

Your oral fixation suggests you were weaned early and therefore felt deprived of certain needs of nourishment met by sucking.

In later years, it has expressed itself with your Oedipus complex (feelings for "mother" and your projection of those feelings onto others ie., "Motherf*ckers") and obsession with using the word "suck".

Your unconscious feelings of guilt and shame prompted you to confess your admission. 

But since you brought up the subject you know so well from years of intimate experience (idiocy), were you trying to act "smart" when you made the distinction between the literate vs. illiterate idiots or did that masterful stroke of redundancy just spring forth naturally? Kudos. It's very atypical. Even abnormal. Are you autistic? 

Another Reuben Fine fan!

Apparently somebody is very horny indeed.

An "ignorant fool" as opposed to the more informed brand of fool? Touche.

It is your unseemly behavior that is the issue since you have taken it upon yourself to curse the site. Do you just get a free pass to hurl obscenities without reprimand?

Did the impulse to do so bypass any normal filter most of us have for impulse control and just leap out through your fingers and onto the monitor without your knowledge?

You thought you were only blurting out curses, which is textbook social deviance, unusualness and maladaptive behavior especially given the context of  your posting (3 of the standard 6 criteria used in identifying abnormal behavior).

What you didn't know were the choice words you thought were merely used to "curse" and condemn this site and community were selected by your unconscious for the very telling reasons they were chosen.

Is that another admission? Were you just "popping up and showing yourself off" (your words not mine) with the inappropriate community conduct?

Remember, you are the one who has posted the content you have posted and you alone are responsible for the most disturbing content you posted.

Your disturbing and perverse content including the sexual terms you mentioned are the signs of a very sick individual who should seek professional help immediately before "going out more" if this going out will bring you to engage with society at large.

Your actions have betrayed more about you than you realize and they have revealed quite more to your story than my simple observations.

Most others would just allow you to continue to bumble on through life clueless. I'm simply suggesting you may think at least a second time before you post such filfth in the future if you don't wish to share more about yourself than you intend.

hi, i need some advice for openings in chess

~Lolproductions

a3.

You're welcome.

My last 5 games were won because the other player didn't play within the time limit, Online Chess with a 1 day time limit per move. My score went from 968 and 1033. I know that's not a huge score increase but I feel like it was unfailry earned. The other player didn't resign due to a page game or was chechmated. They likely just didn't didn't get back to the game in time.

I could have won the games anyway, but I that number shows that I'm a few points better than I really am... score wise anyway.

popieram