I rarely rematch when in Live. Sometime I'm looking over the game, sometime I only had time for one game, sometimes I immediately send out a new seek rather than rematch.
The site will never force rematches or penalize for not accepting them. Most of the time, a rematch decline has nothing to do with the opponent specifically.
In some cases I'll absolutely defeat the adversary positionally and strategically the entire battle, just for them to get a fortunate mate when I'm not looking. That is not reasonable. In case I'm losing rating to a clearly mediocre player, I need the capacity to win them back. I can consider commonly when I was pulverizing my rival, and than I got diverted and lost. I simply need the capacity to demonstrate my predominance over these players and get my rating to its appropriate place (most likely 2200 ish)
Rematch threads are boring. As I suggested implement a feature when before seeking a game you pre-set how many games both players will play. 2 or 6 or 10 or 12.
Once both players are paired they have to compulsorily play those no. of games. If one of the players runs away say after 5 games, when they agreed to play 10 games, they will be deemed to have lost the 5 games they ran away from and docked elo points accordingly.
Whether the opponent should get the extra points in his elo is debatable as he didn't even play those games, but docking points for whoever ran away should definitely be done.
I will be happy to play you btw, 10 games if you want, but keep in mind there is a big gap in our elos.
@scicillianmate The reason you're seeing those big jumps in rating is because when I created this account I had a starting rating of 1000, and I had never played on here for a long time except for a few games here and there. That explains the long flat lines you see in the beginning of the graph. Only recently have I started playing on here more often, so the big jumps. This should've been quite easy to infer from my rating graph but you don't seem very bright.
And about the average rating of my opponents, I play a lot in Chess.com's arenas where the average rating of players seem to be about 1500-1600.
@JayeshSinhaChess It isn't exactly fun beating someone 10-0, you're probably better off playing someone your own size.
@AnuJoseph - scared already? Run along now.
@AnuJoseph - scared already? Run along now.
Huh? The internet has raised you well.
To be honest with you some players are involved in tournaments and national team matches which have to take precedent over rematches, but saying that I'm always up for a rematch in daily play as I don't play live that much, but only if I'm not involved in in Team England or Team United Kingdom matches
...
Once both players are paired they have to compulsorily play those no. of games. If one of the players runs away say after 5 games, when they agreed to play 10 games, they will be deemed to have lost the 5 games they ran away from and docked elo points accordingly.
Whether the opponent should get the extra points in his elo is debatable as he didn't even play those games, but docking points for whoever ran away should definitely be done.
...
That defeats the purpose of the rating system. If you dock points from the person that steps out on a match, then their rating becomes artificially lowered and depending on how much lower the system puts them, could make later pairings made lopsided.
@Martin although I strongly disagree with OP and his original post, I think the argument that deducting points for games committed to and not played spoils the rating system is a bit thin. Already, people whine about the fact that they lose points if they make just one move and resign. That too artificially lowers their rating, but, IMO, so what, they lost. They committed to play when they made that first move, whereas in an agreed to match, the commitment is just one move earlier. You don't play, you forfeit and lose points, just like in an OTB tournament. The biggest drawback I see is that it would create an "autosandbag" option where you could sign up for a 100 game match and then forfeit them all, driving your rating to the bottom, so some safeguards are needed. The best thing about allow match challenges, beside the fact that some people seem to want them is that it should put an end to all these stupid rematch threads. Except it won't because the' ops of these threads are mostly trolls anyway
I saw that numerous here never acknowledge rematch. Clearly they are anxious I will smash them once more. My recommendation is to influence individuals to acknowledge rematches or consequently acknowledge a misfortune to the adversary that asked for it.
I need some legitimate match with somebody for 10 or 20 amusements. In any case, nobody acknowledges a rematch. Particularly the ones who win and flee instantly. It is safe to say that they fear keeping the futile win and not allowing me to even out or what is happening?
Along these lines we can truly demonstrate who is the better player and not exactly who got a fortunate checkmate.