I think it refers to blitz. You are rated 656 in blitz now.
A week ago you were rated above 1000.
sandbagging? really?
Sort:
It's a rapid tournament... I'm 823. I've hardly played blitz and I joined only 25 days ago... it started me at 1200. My rating is down because alas, yes, I'm not a 1200 player.
Nov 13, 2022
0
#4
CranberryYoYos wrote:
Their account is also relatively new (less than a month). How can chess.com justify jacking up a person's rating with hundreds of points, and then punish the player for not playing at that level?
Chess.com, why not just give the winner 10 points, and then when they lose 5 points? That way you won't get skewed ratings. I am sick and tired of playing people with wonky ratings because you decide to initially inflate their rating when they join. Now you are punishing your actions on the player and not taking responsibility yourself for it.
Because that's not how ratings work- here or anywhere.
The initial ratings are based on the player's own assessment of their strength. They quickly adjust.
Nov 13, 2022
0
#5
SFLovett wrote:
It's a rapid tournament... I'm 823. I've hardly played blitz and I joined only 25 days ago... it started me at 1200. My rating is down because alas, yes, I'm not a 1200 player.
You have played 139 games of blitz and were mostly playing blitz tournaments until yesterday.
I don't know the mechanics of a tournament restriction but evidently it applies to all types of tournaments.
Nov 13, 2022
0
#6
CranberryYoYos wrote:
Their account is also relatively new (less than a month). How can chess.com justify jacking up a person's rating with hundreds of points, and then punish the player for not playing at that level?
Chess.com, why not just give the winner 10 points, and then when they lose remove 5 points? That way you won't get skewed ratings. I am sick and tired of playing people with wonky ratings because you decide to initially inflate their rating when they join. Now you are punishing your actions on the player and not taking responsibility yourself for it.
The rating system is a tested and widely used statistical method to converge a rating quickly towards an accurate level for a pool, and show recent performance.
Players choose their level when creating an account and the rating system will handle getting it to a more correct value and has mechanisms to prevent an incorrect value from impacting established ratings too much.
The only thing I can come up with is the fact that I won seven straight today, 10/0 rapid games, but is that really so unusual? Anyway, tournaments are slightly more fun, and sometimes I get to play much higher rated players (much more fun)... oh well, I've had lots of free time lately and I've enjoyed this place. I can still play. But this is annoying... and ridiculous, imo.
Nov 13, 2022
0
#8
TheNameofNames wrote:
Someone reported you for sandbagging because they checked your profile after a loss lol
That doesn't cause the issue being seen.
TheNameofNames wrote:
Someone reported you for sandbagging because they checked your profile after a loss lol
Hmmm... I did get a message from someone a couple of days ago, playing in a daily chess tournament. She had blundered in one of our two games, and would likely have lost. She said, "I noticed right away that you weren't playing like a beginner. I just want you to know that I think you're unfair." I told her I wasn't a cheat. Then I resigned both our games and blocked her. 
Nov 13, 2022
0
#10
CranberryYoYos wrote:
TheNameofNames wrote:
perhaps they should offer some kind of rating reset.
Just don't give so many points to begin with. I would be happy to earn my stripes, 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss. Get 10 more wins than losses, you go up 100 points. This makes more sense than jacking up the rating from 1 game 200 points. The current formula only makes sense with 2000+ players who are that good and need to get out of the "swamp land of players".
If someone is 1400 strength and starts with a 400, the Glicko rating system sill quickly get that player up the the 1400 strength within a small number of games.
If someone instead says they're great at chess and starts with 1600 but are really close to 1000, it will get them down quickly to the right rating.
The rating system is well vetted, used by a lot of sites and games, and is mathematically sound
Nov 13, 2022
0
#11
Martin_Stahl wrote:
CranberryYoYos wrote:
TheNameofNames wrote:
perhaps they should offer some kind of rating reset.
Just don't give so many points to begin with. I would be happy to earn my stripes, 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss. Get 10 more wins than losses, you go up 100 points. This makes more sense than jacking up the rating from 1 game 200 points. The current formula only makes sense with 2000+ players who are that good and need to get out of the "swamp land of players".
If someone is 1400 strength and starts with a 400, the Glicko rating system sill quickly get that player up the the 1400 strength within a small number of games.
If someone instead says they're great at chess and starts with 1600 but are really close to 1000, it will get them down quickly to the right rating.
The rating system is well vetted, used by a lot of sites and games, and is mathematically sound
Agreed. The more you play the more accurate your rating is likely to be.
Didn’t even know this was a thing lmao
Nov 13, 2022
0
#13
CranberryYoYos wrote:
TheNameofNames wrote:
perhaps they should offer some kind of rating reset.
Just don't give so many points to begin with. I would be happy to earn my stripes, 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss. Get 10 more wins than losses, you go up 100 points. This makes more sense than jacking up the rating from 1 game 200 points. The current formula only makes sense with 2000+ players who are that good and need to get out of the "swamp land of players".
The problem with your system is that you can pwn a bunch of n00bs and get a very high rating, making rating meaningless.
With the Glecko system, how much you increase and decrease depends on both your opponent's rating and how many other opponents you have faced.
Pwning n00bs doesn't change your rating, because they should be at n00b ratings. The only way to gain ratings is to pwn competent people. And how competent they are is reflected in their ratings.
Obviously, there are ways to cheat ratings, but for most part, if you just play games, ratings do what they are intended to do, find opponents that are fair for you.
Nov 13, 2022
0
#14
The rating system is very sound, just as Martin says. Someone likely reported you, like already stated, and upon review, chess.com for some reason agreed that you were sandbagging. The system isn't perfect and errors happen. Ride it out and keep playing.
Nov 13, 2022
0
#15
This might be a false positive. 656 seems like an expected Blitz rating for and 807 rated rapid player.
This is ridiculous. I have no idea what they mean... my rating is up from what it was, not down, and now I can't play in tournaments?
.