are you sure
?
Bug in statistics?
Sort:
jerry2468 wrote:
are you sure
?
Best win, I assumed, meant against highest ranked player I won against. But perhaps it means where I gained maximum ranking points ?
Jun 9, 2009
0
#4
it is the highest rated player you have beaten...BUT remember, that its the players rating AFTER they lost to you, not BEFORE, that may be what you are missing mate.
gumpty wrote:
it is the highest rated player you have beaten...BUT remember, that its the players rating AFTER they lost to you, not BEFORE, that may be what you are missing mate.
I think the ratings shown in the results are AFTER the game was over. If that is the case, statistics has a bug.
Skand wrote:
gumpty wrote:
it is the highest rated player you have beaten...BUT remember, that its the players rating AFTER they lost to you, not BEFORE, that may be what you are missing mate.
I think the ratings shown in the results are AFTER the game was over. If that is the case, statistics has a bug.
No, its not a bug. We use your opponenet's rating after the game for that stat because the later rating is more accurate.
Baseballfan wrote:
Skand wrote:
gumpty wrote:
it is the highest rated player you have beaten...BUT remember, that its the players rating AFTER they lost to you, not BEFORE, that may be what you are missing mate.
I think the ratings shown in the results are AFTER the game was over. If that is the case, statistics has a bug.
No, its not a bug. We use your opponenet's rating after the game for that stat because the later rating is more accurate.
Then can you explain:
Perhaps it didn't count because it was only five moves? It was rated, so that's not it.
Or perhaps the computer couldn't bear looking at the game =)
Ahhh, true, I didn't notice that!
Scarblac wrote:
Perhaps it didn't count because it was only five moves? It was rated, so that's not it.
Or perhaps the computer couldn't bear looking at the game =)
If this is the reason (the short length of the game, not the computer's aversion) I can understand why it wouldn't count, however the fact that both players' ratings change seems to indicate that it did. In any case, surely a game that ended in checkmate should be an exception to any rule regarding whether a game is counted based on its duration.
I'm with the OP -- something seems like its not right.
I guess chess.com is a bit shy of admitting that they are mated
Skand wrote:
I guess chess.com is a bit shy of admitting that they are mated
I am sure that will be happy to look into it and fix it at some point in time. Can't expect everything to run 100% smoothly all the time, they do a pretty good job of things really!
Suggo wrote:
Skand wrote:
I guess chess.com is a bit shy of admitting that they are mated
I am sure that will be happy to look into it and fix it at some point in time. Can't expect everything to run 100% smoothly all the time, they do a pretty good job of things really!
I would say they do excellent job of running the site. But the last comment from staff seemed to say that there is no bug...
My statistics are not updating
cclynes wrote:
My statistics are not updating
Are you sure? Because I noticed a change in your rating after every game. Which part of your statistics is not being updated ?
My best win is not against Gaurav_B, but system continues to show that...