how to fix a broken rating system on chess.com
Sort:
OutPostGibraltar
Jul 5, 2024
0
#1
Chess.com can improve the rating system by reconsidering how it assigns points for wins and losses. At present, it takes into account the opponent's rating, your rating, and uses a formula to determine a plus/minus score. Instead of using the opponent's current rating, it should use the rating at which the opponent played during that specific game. This change would make the system fairer and could help address many of the smurfing and cheating issues that are affecting the community.
Jul 6, 2024
0
#2
Your point about intentional blunders is thought-provoking and worth considering. The basic idea is that if you play a game at a higher rating than your current rating, you should lose fewer points. Similarly, if you play a subpar game but still manage to win, your rating should increase, but not as much as in the current system. The exact algorithms would require debate but should use all the information available when determining a rating adjustment per player. I feel the rating adjustment does not need to be inversely similar between players. One player could be awarded +10 while the other gets -3. It's flawed to think that the chess.com rating system needs to be the same as FIDE's. Online chess has more information available to it than FIDE, and it seems impractical not to use it when determining rating adjustment. The resulting rating system would more accurately reflect the players' abilities.
Nothing broken, nothing to fix.
The Glicko-2 rating system excels at measuring playing strength and converges fast.
Jul 6, 2024
0
#4
Finally a post that has not (to this point) deteriorated to name calling. Post #1 brings up a lucid point, as well as the subsequent post. Including #5 which is short, but I have to say I agree 100%. But I have the following to add to the conversation. When I am up material I simplify the position by sacking the extra material to get a winning endgame (something everyone has done repeatedly). This removes any possibility of a swindler but may prolonged the game, but also decreases my analysis rating, under the proposed adjustment I would receive a smaller increase in rating yes I may win in 20 moves instead of 10 but a win is a win. With over 50y of play I simply cannot change the style of play. Like everyone else I would like to have a higher rating (apparently anyone website has much higher ratings, at least at the lower and middle range) but this raises the following, which rating analysis do you use? Does not one engine rate a game at 96% while another 96.1%.