Wow,never really thought about it.dont really like fide,in favour of kasparov.he stands for change,more chess dvlpment in 3rd world,more rated tournaments.but anyways,not really conversant with the rating systems,so yeah.but hey,how in your opinion do u think the rating here chess.com correlate with fides rating.can you compare,if possible?
Does FIDE ELO really evaluate a player?
Sort:
I dont know. I cant compare chess.com to fide as i dont know the mathematic formula for the rating gains and losses here. Maybe if the points were nicely tabulated somewhere, i would be able to see the pros and cons. I dont know what would be the perfect rating system, i am not a mathematician to come up with a solid rating system.. fair to all players.
Who else thinks that the current rating system doesnt really evaluate the strength of a player?
and who thinks that the rating system needs some improvement?
You would wanna think twice before you play a rated tournament and get your rating for the 1st time because once you get it and the rating is 200 points below your expectation (maybe because you played bad in some tournament) then you may have to spend years and several successful tournaments just to meet your expectations.
I know some will say forget about the rating just play chess, but where is fun in that when you are unlikely to win any prize, championship or tournament that you play. Gaining ELO points is one way of motivating a player as it also can contribute to getting a title and serves as your overall evaluation of your performance.
When i played my first rated tournament i had a poor performance rating as the tournament was filled with players 1700-1900 and unfortunately one or two managed to beat me and draw with me as a result of my poor performance, but the 2nd tournament i played i managed to get a performance rating of around 2100, but anyway...to sum it up i ended up with a 1962 rating and i feel i am stuck with this rating because i need to perform high in several tournaments just to get to the desired rating, so to think about it given the fact that i can only play a rated tournament when i am free, i will be spending years just to get above 2100 (which i believe is my real strength)
Lately, i saw a player with 1713 beat several players with 2000-2250 and he got only a 88 point increase to his ELO so that means he has to play like he did for at least the next 4 tournaments just to have a rating of 2100. I am sure you all can think of some players who play better than their rating suggests.
This may be happening due to the fact that FIDE used to only recognize players above 2000, but then they introduced 1800,then 1600 or 1400 and now 1200.
Just imagine getting 1600 rating, but in 3 years you will be playing like 2150 but your rating is still below 1950
The current system simply doesnt keep up with your real strength, and therefore i think it needs adjustment.