shockinn wrote:
Look who's saying this. A guy who after spending all his life on chess and still failing to get to 2000 mark. Another pathetic yankee............. you criticize somebody for having a under 2000 rating when yours isn't even 1700 so I guess that makes you just another pathetic Indian right????
Bishop 3.125pts / knight 3pts / rook/5pts queen = 9pts , for the fact that 2 rooks have higher vaule then if we had queen 10 points valued then we would be saying 2 rooks are same vaule as one queen , when you think of it like that you have to agree some what. also relative postion with the board and also time if this is a factor .. ie''' mortals ?:DX
also knights are stronger in a closed pawn game , for the fact they can jump pieces, and bishops are great for open pawn games when you can just slide all around that piece :XQ@#
Bishop 3.125pts / knight 3pts / rook/5pts queen = 9pts , for the fact that 2 rooks have higher vaule then if we had queen 10 points valued then we would be saying 2 rooks are same vaule as one queen , when you think of it like that you have to agree some what. also relative postion with the board and also time if this is a factor .. ie''' mortals ?:DX
also knights are stronger in a closed pawn game , for the fact they can jump pieces, and bishops are great for open pawn games when you can just slide all around that piece :XQ@#
Don't worry. You're counted as one of the (however many) members when cc sells ads.
My rating is 1352, but Im not listed on the members list... any help with this? really thanks guys!
menokasparov
You've been a member for less than a week. Who knows how often the stats are updated. It is interesting to see that new members now start off at 1000 instead of 1200 though. Wonder when they made that change?
Bishop 3.125pts / knight 3pts / rook/5pts queen = 9pts , for the fact that 2 rooks have higher vaule then if we had queen 10 points valued then we would be saying 2 rooks are same vaule as one queen , when you think of it like that you have to agree some what. also relative postion with the board and also time if this is a factor .. ie''' mortals ?:DX
also knights are stronger in a closed pawn game , for the fact they can jump pieces, and bishops are great for open pawn games when you can just slide all around that piece :XQ@#
two rooks more powerful than a queen is a too vague statement.
Just beat the computer (Tiger) playing black against 2000 ELO rated level. It was my king and queen plus a bunch of pawns against king, two rooks and pawns. The queen, if the board is not to clear, can be more powerful and my game proved it.
How come some people have points and others don't
hi
Some people are more equal than others
I just checked some stats and average blitz rating is 1095. I'd like to have a deeper understanding of this rating. For example, more players ( mostly amateurs ) coming to this site makes average higher or lower?
i don't like rating systems
because it benefits people who are good at chess
Chess.com is unfair! I won with a weaker player and the puntage goes up 200 points and the next match I was in front of a monster that broke my nose in 5 minutes. But Chess.com is beautiful cause you can find pawn-players(students), knight-players that jump, bishop-players fast and deadly, queen-players like snakes with that happy-queen opening, king-players, slowly but perfect.
Is there any chance it takes a few games after creating an account before one's rating settles? I ask as I won the majority of my games to around 1450 (off the top of my head) and now I'm around 1090. Since 1450 I've lost about 90% of my games. It's making me lose the will to play.
it's done on purpose to keep you on the website playing and playing and playing. If you are tired of it just delete your account and make a new one. What I know for sure is that guys I play here with a 1200 rating are way stronger than the ones I play at the club which are between the 1400-1700 range. That means that the system is projected on purpose to get you rating super low so that you feel forced to come on the site and play over and over again until you reach 1450 again - which is not possible.
The same system is used with the tactics. If you get one right you get at the very best 8 points, if you get it wrong they take away at least 9 points.
it's a disgusting system and I hope some idiot behind this website is reading what I'm writing.
I think that conservative rating is good...It prepares you for the ''big world''.
Is there any chance it takes a few games after creating an account before one's rating settles? I ask as I won the majority of my games to around 1450 (off the top of my head) and now I'm around 1090. Since 1450 I've lost about 90% of my games. It's making me lose the will to play.
Yes. When you start out, the system realizes that it doesn't know your true rating, so every game makes your rating swing a lot. This is especially true when you go on an unbroken winning streak when you start - for all the ratings system knows, you're a grandmaster. Once you have some games, and both wins and losses, under your belt, the system is more confident about your "true" rating and your rating doesn't swing as much.
Your game win percentage should settle down as long as you play people close to your current rating. If you play people above your rating, obviously you'll lose more. (But it might help you become a better player in the long run!)
Great, thanks. The point difference at the end of each match is quite small now, possibly a difference of 7 or 8.
Chess is only a game. Bid deal...
Like poker, right?