I disagree. Let players lose and gain points through fair play. Thanks!
drop their ratings
Sort:
Why would you want players to not have an accurate rating?
It is ridiculous,the notion to drop someones rating,simply because they havent played for a while.This is chess-not a car lot,where it devalues as soon as it leaves the car lot.Why you hatin?
Doesnt fide drop your rating if u inactive?
No, it remains the same
Oh..but my frend went to the olympiad 4 years past.and in 4years he neva played a rated tournament,his rating plumetted..
So he told me..in anycase i think its a wonderful idea!
So that means if I have FIDE 2400 and I don't play for 10 years, I will have to work my way back up from Class C?
Not buyin it
Yeah,i think u shud buy it mate.it hurts me wen i c sum1 inactive 4 a year and they got higher points than me.
It hurts more if you think you're playing a 1400 who s actually 2100, but mis-rated(?) because of inactivity.
Rating is the only clue we have of a person's strength, why on earth would you want to mess with that and present false information to his opponents? Makes no sense.
If am 2100 and play no chess in a year.am i stil 2100.rily.no!
Changu, those who are inactive and do not want to play will suffer the consequences of their laziness or lack of interest for this wonderful game. Perhaps when they get defeated by lower rated players who are more eager to learn the game, they will come to realize that being inactive is their downfall to oblivion. I still disagree with your rather insensible proposal.
Oct 19, 2012
0
#14
@OP: If ratings are dropped for inactivity, any adjustment would be arbitrary, and not based on actual skill. Even if a player temporarily quit chess and was totally inactive, we cannot know precisely how much the rating should drop due to rust.
Also, what about players who become inactive in tournaments for a time, but continue to play casually and practice? Should their ratings drop? Clearly not, because they are not getting rusty.
There is something in the idea. It would be good if the rating was a measure of current strength rather than, in some cases, just a historical figure reflecting the strength of the player 20 years before.
On the FIDE site you can find any number of ratings for people who have not played a FIDE rated game for ten or twenty years. I can see that it would be difficult to devise a formula that revised rating to allow for inactivity. Perhaps an alternative is to just put the word "inactive" after the rating when no qualifying game has been played for a year or more.
Wow thanks 4 the input..we need a formula on droping points
A few thoughts...
You could study while you are gone, so your rating could be higher and should go up.
Rust doesn't take off more than a few hundred points, even if you could prove a player isn't playing.
The rating is mathematically derrived, and not a measure of strength, but preformance. So it doesn't make sense to artificially alter it, especially based on a change in strength argument.
Some systems take absences into account with and RD term which makes a long time inactive player gain and lose points quickly (as if they're new again) so it can adjust up or down accordingly.
while we're screwing up the rating system, how about we give +100 points to every person who's been active each year? Maybe chess com could hand out daily prizes where a few active members are gifted +500 rating points.
Hell, why dont we just ban everyone who isnt active?
i think perhaps by 50 points if inactive for 6months then 100points if for a year and so on..what do you all think