Also, as someone else pointed out, when the #1 rated standard player has a losing record, something's gone wrong.
Thoughts on the Standard Rating Boost
Sort:
And my two cents. This already makes 0.04$! 
Yeah, I have a 2500 rating. I recently became a NM. Before I became NM, I was about 1300. After NM, I became 2000. And then, now 2500. Its a little wierd.
Yep, I agree you can't fix it like that and that after a while it will go back to the way it was.
That said, that's just my armchair analysis. I think they did it because it didn't look good. But as you said people just didn't play enough.
Oct 25, 2014
0
#6
Titus369 wrote:
Yeah, I have a 2500 rating. I recently became a NM. Before I became NM, I was about 1300. After NM, I became 2000. And then, now 2500. Its a little wierd.
NICE!
in a completely different level, i think i should get +200 and i got +300. as a result: i was 1600 and became 1900. had a scheduled game against another 1600 (that somehow came as a 1700 and something) and i started by losing quite a lot of points :D
i think there is a lot of crazyness going on right now with the boost, but maybe after 6 months all will be fine (if people play standart)
I played someone this morning whose standard rating was 1000 points more than his blitz rating.
I have the notion that the boost catered to the demands of a very, very small portion of the chess.com live-game population. For the rest of us, it's made our ratings silly ... mine isn't silly yet (I was not boosted) but it will be after enough games against boosted players.
biggest problem is, not a lot of people play standart, and even less play standart serioulsly.
personally i had many 30min games that were quicker than blitz (also my fault), i can only do it properly with scheduled games in dhlc or slow live chess association.
adding to that, i still think the ratings change too much after a game (losing 20 points in a game, really?) so the whole thing doesn't make a lot of sense.
not wanting to be so negative, as i said..wait 6 months and i guess it will be ok
Coming from left field, websites get sold on hits, I notied the high activity on the day after the annoucement here. Following on from 5 freebies on tatics trainer -Players are being soften up for a radical change,
My 13 years on eBay has made the I Claudius dictum as uttered by Herod "Trust no one" the internet's basic thrust. lol.
so what? dictatorship is coming? i don't understand what you mean ;)
of course chess.com strategy is: having more payed members. i don't even have a credit card to pay for it, but i could never complain, i have quite a lot of stuff for free
I hate this, my friend gained like 500 points and I only gained a damn 200. :(
If this was supposed to bring Live-Rating closer to OTB, it was a failure!
My OTB rating is only 1224. My Live-Rating was 1304. I thought it was fine since I conisdered my OTB to be slightly underrated due to recent improvement in my play not reflected there yet.
But now my Live-Rating is 1461 which is about 200 points hower than I think it should be.
When I woke up, my live standard rating was 2771. Either I had won a bunch of games in my sleep or some hacker had been quite kind to me. However, as you all know, it was due to chess.com boosting the standard ratings of all actve players. I don't know what qualified me as active, as I pretty much never play standard, but hey, I'll take it.
Staff members have said that this was to make standard ratings closer to OTB ratings/someone's true strength. I've never noticed any larger disparity between people's standard ratings and OTB ratings than someone's blitz and OTB ratings, but I can imagine this is true, seeing how few people play standard. I mean, before this update, the highest rated standard player was around 2300. In this respect, chess.com's move makes sense.
However, not everyone that was supposed to be "boosted" had the rating they were supposed to. As one person commented, they could gain many rating points off of everyone's inflated rating, and then rightfully ask for their rating update. If not everyone's rating changed the way it was supposed to, then everything can become unbalanced. In my opinion, everyone pretty much has inflated ratings because of chess.com' efforts to make live standard ratings similar to blitz and bullet. However, this will never happen, simply because not as many players like to play standard. Soon (a month, a year?), those who play standard will have ratings near where they are supposed to, while those who don't will have a 150-500 point inflated rating. I think that with ELO ratings, since they are a measure of how you do relative to your competition, you cannot fix everything with a magical boost.
That's just my two cents. Do you agree with me? Post below!