Cheaters aside, I see respectable GMs doing “rating climb” videos sometimes, like The Sensei. They climb from 1200’s, 1300’s, 1400’s… etc, and stream the content for educational purposes/social media content. Now I know Naroditsky is not 1300 or even 2200. But that 1300 guy playing against him must be thinking wtf????? And those are real points he loses. Going from 1350 to 1342 may not mean anything to the strong players taking those points away, but they may mean a lot to those lower-rated players who end up having a bad day.
Lower Rated Players Are Better
Sort:
maybe they are trying to troll you to make you think that they are very weak so report and block them
imagine an 800 secretly beating a 2000 beacuse of hiding skills
I don’t think you have to look for conspiracy theories to explain this kind of observation. People play with different motivations and in different playing conditions. A higher rated player may not give their full effort against a lower-rated player. We see this all the time in sports, where teams “play down to the level of their competition.” Also, higher-rated players may be experimenting with new openings and so use less familiar lines against lower-rated competition.
There also a thing where you sometimes underestimate your opponent when they are lower elo therefore you play worse
ewionxfkajdfqwa wrote:
Bro I played a 1200 and 1000 cheating in a tournament.
It happens tho I'm talking about the random pool
Also 1200s compared to 1500s see slot better than you think lol
Plenty of sandbaggers and cheaters in tournaments I see at least 1 pretty consistently but most of them don't
blitz2009 wrote:
maybe OP just sucks
Also I got back to 2300 
I sorta bullied my opponents
Oct 10, 2024
0
#31
This is something I've wondered myself, and rather than jumping to the conclusion of cheating, this is what I've come up with: living in the digital age, information is just a click away at our finger tips, and is even free thanks to the like of YouTube and various masters that post content. There was once a major paywall where if you wanted to learn, you had to invest into books and coaches to truly improve. Since it's no longer necessary, with the tools of today, and a shrunken paywall, the skill gap closes.
Oct 11, 2024
0
#32
You can literally do a search for sales of CC accounts and it becomes immediately obvious looking at that "market" why and how exactly the phenominon that OP is describing here occurs. You can also verify it with statistics. It's not a "maybe". As long as people are buying and selling accounts, "boosting", and the site is not doing much, if anything, to effectrively crack down on that, you will be getting garbage games that are random, uninstructive, non-sporting, and just generally having a miserable experience if you are stuck playing on this level. It's not about "cheating" per se, it's about the way the entire human system (including things like clubs and schools), and its incentives, especially in the context of technology / information systems, are producing nonsense bad garbage outcomes, as per usual.
Oct 11, 2024
0
#33
nathan1589 wrote:
Some times, ppl make alts.
Yeah, they might want to check the site terms of service / fair play rules. And the site may want to start enforcing them. But they probably don't.
Oct 11, 2024
0
#34
Oct 11, 2024
0
#36
You say you analyzed 1000 games. If you analyzed 50 games an hour it'd take you 20 hours to analyze 1000 games. So about a game per minute, with few breaks. Whether you could keep this pace would depend on what you were analyzing exactly... But I just don't believe you actually sat there and did all that work. If you did - how did you track the results? Do you have a table of stats you collected during this prolonged analysis? Can you post the data here...?
Analysis isn't straightforward, either - it's not a matter of just looking at the reported rating at the end of the game, because that doesn't take into account the positions complexity.
It is statistically impossible for your claim to be true on a broad population scale... the very way the elo system works makes it impossible. Even the claim that people make alts and are trolling the lower levels doesn't work - because those trolls don't all disappear when you climb 200 elo points. The other thing is there aren't actually enough players rated 1700-2300 to flood the low elo player pool with alts. You're talking about 2% of players who are in that range, and they are not all on alts all the time.
It could be possible you're in some troll player pool. Obviously you'd have to have done something to get in that pool... But even this doesn't explain your claim, because you'd be in the troll pool for all your games, not just the lower rated ones.
Even if I thought there were some cheaters on this site... I would not care. Because I care about improving.
Now, my opinion is, based on the data this site has published, that the cheating rates are far, far lower than complainers who are bad at chess try to claim. For starters... even if your claims were true - and you have provided no evidence to substantiate them... you'd still be bad at chess. The reason you are low elo is not because people are cheating. But you seem to suggest this is the reason, hence why you make posts about it to complain and other people join in...
If you want to get better at chess then focus on improving the areas you're bad at. Improve and you will climb in elo, I guarantee it.
Oct 11, 2024
0
#37
I got 2 things 1. Sometimes people might be having a bad day in chess, maybe theyve lost lots of elo points and their day is turning around 2. Don't stress out over your elo rating, have fun, and improve
Oct 11, 2024
0
#38
ibrust wrote:
The other thing is there aren't actually enough players rated 1700-2300 to flood the low elo player pool with alts. You're talking about 2% of players who are in that range, and they are not all on alts all the time.
It's not alts. People buy and sell burner accounts to transfer elo around. It's a real thing. The accounts just go dormant or inactive or get banned. You can also buy "play my account for me up to rating <x>", which is a creeping target since many people do this just to escape the "elo hell". (You can compare percentile charts / distribution of nominal elo in different sites / leagues and see how those change over time and draw your own conclusions here.)
Oct 11, 2024
0
#39
tmartincentrisinfocom wrote:
Whether I’m playing blitz or rapid, the lower rated players I play are better. Not slightly better, significantly better, specifically on Sundays. This defies logic. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact. I’ve evaluated over a thousand of my games and lower rated players make fewer mistakes and blunders and more great or brilliant plays. They play at a higher accuracy and are more likely to make 10 top engine moves in a row. Level of play also correlates to the day of week. I win more games than I lose 5 days a week, Wednesday’s I lose slightly more. I lose Sundays, as in every Sunday, bar none. I became curious about this 2 years ago because my rating would climb during the week then plunge on Sunday. It was difficult to track because I was improving and improved play skewed any analysis. Now that my play has plateaued, my opponent’s rating is constant. This pattern is undeniable. Can anybody explain this? I’m reasonably certain I know the answer.
wheres that alapin sicilian guy that claimed the alapin refuted the sicilian because this must be him
Honestly I think that the engine will rate your accuracy better depending on your Rating. for example as a 1500 rated player a lot of my games show 70 percent accuracy maybe 80 percent but, with my most recent game I got 90 percent accuracy playing on my friends account at 1100 rating but, if we plugged the same moves into my 1500 rated account i can gurantee they would not say I got a 90 percent accuracy.
An 800 who's average opponent is 1200 is going to be better than an 800 who's average opponent rating is 400. So the good people could only play peiple better than them while the bad person may run from anyone ranked higher.