Tired of sandbagging players

By the way, some may be offended by your religious reference.  Attacking the person and not the argument is an abusive ad hominum and not your style.  You wanted examples.  I can find you a dozen more if you would like.

Sco

weakatbullet,

even if there are some sandbaggers, their numbers would be negligible. And if they keep winning, they will not stay at that rating. So, this is a non-issue.

+1.... this place needs a like button lol.

Sco64 wrote:

Jesus Christ you are a moron.

OP - "Many of you understand what I am describing.  I think that there are solutions to this problem."

When I first started playing rated games on here (3 day/move), I started at 1200 by default. But, I have been playing chess for much longer than that. So, my rating on here shot up from 1200 to where it is now in only a few games. Does that mean that I was "sandbagging?" No. It means that my playing strength was not accurately reflected by the default 1200 level. And with my few games, my current rating probably isn't accurate either.

The same is true for others. I have won games against 1700 players and lost games against 1400 players. I don't think anyone was "sandbagging." My biggest concern is, when I defeat a ~1700, whether my opponent was playing at his true strength.

All good and relevant points for this discussion.  You shouldn't be tied to your only win against a very strong opponent.  Tied to your average high score is more appropriate.  Yes, not the volatile initial score but after a dozen games.  The computer has you figured out by that point. [No naming and shaming  Mod.]

I just finished playing a 1800 level bullet player that is posing as a 1200 level player.  The pairing system at this site is not working well.

Was his max rating 1800 exactly? Because if it was, then it could be because that was his default rating wen he created his account.

The mods will not allow me to mention the name of a specific player.  If you search my game history, you will see this for yourself.  I think his top rating is 1780s?

I am guessing there are a few reasons why players do this.  Maybe they are tired of getting beat at their own level, so go play weaker opponents.  Maybe they are preparing for a tournament.  Maybe they want to try out a new opening.  Whatever the reason, intentionally dropping one's score is against the rules.

Maybe it's none of those. Maybe some people just play a lot of games and eventually get beat by a weaker opponent. After this happens enough, the rating drops enough that it all evens out. I would look at it this way, ignore the rating and play the game and opponent. If he is "rated" 150 points below you and you two win the same amount of games, then you are equal players, regardless of what his rating is or your rating is.

If you truly think someone is sandbagging you can report it as mentioned in post #5.

That said, without looking at somone's whole game history, you can't make any real judgement on the issue. A player could play a bunch of games against someone they are better than and get a rating boost based on that. Then when they play regular games, their rating can fall back to the level it normally would be at.

In looking at the player you think was doing that, they peaked at a higher rating, stopped playing for a long time and when they started back up, dropped down to their current level, the same level they were at before they peaked and pretty much the level of their average opponent.

"In looking at the player you think was doing that, they peaked at a higher rating, stopped playing for a long time and when they started back up, dropped down to their current level, the same level they were at before they peaked and pretty much the level of their average opponent."

This is exactly what happened to me.  At one point, my bullet score was much higher than my current score.  I Think this is a valid point for bullet but less so for other game modes.  The player we are discussing is a 1900 level player in other modes.  Either there was some abuse to get that high score or there is some abuse to get the current score.  Either way, I play a game and get destroyed and know to check the rating.  Sure enough, the score tells the story.  

All the site would need to do is to include the player's top earned score as a weighted part of the pairing algorithm and the problem would be solved.  Don't like you high score, start a new account.  Cheated to get it?  Start a new account.  Tired of playing at your own level?  Start a new account.  

England managers are the biggest sandbaggers, they keep resigning without seeing the games through!

A 600 point variation with a player that has that many games is a red flag.

If it were an impossible problem to solve, then I would write it off as the cost of playing chess here at chess.com.  This problem can be solved.  It is a simple math problem.

Wow, 2000 rated player weighing in on my post.  Thank you for your opinion 1523.

I was having a tough time playing this guy who was rated 1700; he was super fast and playing like a GM. In the end i lost. SO i thought I'd look at this ratings.

hahahha  must have played naka i guess

anyway id be happier if i could somehow avoid having to play them

[I haven't used any names. This is not name and shame, just trying to bring to attention a problem that is bothering some users here. THanks]

The chess world is full of super smart people.  There is an easy solution.  I am not sure why they would not attend to this issue.  For a while I thought it might be tied to the fact that I am not a paying member.  Why would they listen to what I think?  Maybe this is has been taken care of among paying players.