I was going to ppst the same problem, my rating is now 1587 even though before it had never been over 1499. I haven't played live standard chess for a long time either.
Live chess standard rating increased from 1772 to 2075 for no reason.
Sort:
There's a post on the live chess board about this, apparently it is some hare-brained scheme to satisfy some members who think having a higher rating makes them better at chess rather than the other way round.
This has been discussed many times. I don't know why chess.com has not even announced such a big change while you get notifications/messages for far less important things.
It was announced three days ago. Evidently, you were not listening.
hello community!
today we will be "boosting" the standard ratings for all active standard players in live chess.
for multiple reasons, many of which we've narrowed down and some of which we can't even explain, the standard ratings in live chess are WAY too low.
on average, people's ratings are hundreds of points lower than their actual "over the board" strength. even our titled players are often unable to break over 2000 given that the pool of players (because everyone starts at 1200) is simply so low.
a scientific evaluation by our staff of our system has suggested to us that the best, most efficient way to fix this is "problem" to simply "inflate" (don't worry, we aren't printing money here 
) all ratings by an amount that we deem most reasonable for each rating class:
+150 for <1600
+200 for 1600-1700
+300 for 1700-1800
+400 for 1800+
and
+500 for titled players
We are fully aware that some players currently rated lower than 1600 will claim he/she is worth more than a 150 point boost 
-- and in some cases, they may be right!
-- and in some cases, they may be right!Likewise, we are also aware that boosting some titled players by 500 may be putting them at a rating 200-300 points higher than they should be.
But on average, this is what we came up with. And for those of you who feel you aren't getting enough and that some higher rated players are getting too much, well then you will have fun taking their "over-rated" points away from them as you climb the ladder, won't you !
!enjoy and have fun!
staff
To see the post above and 12 pages of comments at this point, visit:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/livechess/standard-ratings-boost?
It may have escaped your attention "notmtwain" but most members don't use the forums, let alone the fringe "live chess" subforum. The communication of this has been as bad as the idea itself.
A post on the forum isn't really announced. Especially when it's after they've made the change. The vast majority of users don't read the forums. There should have been a message when you log into live chess.
Oct 24, 2014
0
#8
small_potato wrote:
It may have escaped your attention "notmtwain" but most members don't use the forums, let alone the fringe "live chess" subforum. The communication of this has been as bad as the idea itself.
I also got notification in the weekly e-mail updates. So, unless people have those turned off or sent to spam, they should be able to see that. Of course, that was after the fact but happened on the 22nd.
small_potato wrote:
It may have escaped your attention "notmtwain" but most members don't use the forums, let alone the fringe "live chess" subforum. The communication of this has been as bad as the idea itself.
You haven't played a standard rated game since April. Exactly how has this change affected you?
Scottrf wrote:
A post on the forum isn't really announced. Especially when it's after they've made the change. The vast majority of users don't read the forums. There should have been a message when you log into live chess.
Are you concerned that it will make your rating inaccurate?
It appears that you only play against the Computer2-MEDIUM, with occasional games against the other computers. Stats says you have played 927 games out of 1392 total standard games with Computer2-MEDIUM. Exactly how has this change affected your games?
Games Vs Computer2-MEDIUM
Games Vs.All opponentsSpecific opponent Submit
|
Won: 79 %Lost: 18 %Drawn: 3 %
|
It looks like you have been pursuing a strategy of maximizing your standard rating by only playing the computer. I think that strategy will still work for you, since the computer also got a ratings bump.
Oct 24, 2014
0
#11
Titled +500?
Titled already start at 2000, and GM at 2200 Standard, so adding 500 can give you the amazingly Overated 2700
notmtwain wrote:
It looks like you have been pursuing a strategy of maximizing your standard rating by only playing the computer. I think that strategy will still work for you, since the computer also got a ratings bump.
I'm not only concerned about the impact on me. My rating isn't accurate anyway. Nothing to do with trying to increase my rating though, I like the instant replies.
notmtwain wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
A post on the forum isn't really announced. Especially when it's after they've made the change. The vast majority of users don't read the forums. There should have been a message when you log into live chess.
It appears that you only play against the Computer2-MEDIUM
Which is completely irrelevant to his point.
Yeah and this time I was complaining about the communication.
A pop up message when you first log into live chess seems sensible.
It was an ad hominem because there's no way to dispute my actual point. A forum post is completely unsuitable communication for such a change.
Scottrf wrote:
Yeah and this time I was complaining about the communication.
A pop up message when you first log into live chess seems sensible.
It was an ad hominem because there's no way to dispute my actual point. A forum post is completely unsuitable communication for such a change.
Yes, they should be better communicators but the complaints about not enough notice are the same thing- a way to distract from the topic at hand- the sudden ratings adjustment in live standard ratings.
You don't address about whether or not they should have made the change. Your only point was that they should be better communicators.
My posts may have come out ad hominem and for that I apologize but they come from an attempt to understand why people get so defensive about their ratings and to get you to address whether or not these ratings changes make sense. This is extensively addressed in the other thread.
notmtwain wrote:
You don't talk about whether or not they should have made the change. Your only point was that they should be better communicators.
I have in multiple other threads.
1. It's the wrong goal. Ratings aren't supposed to match across rating pools.
2. It's badly implemented and means that the ratings no longer are accurate compared to the results people achieved.
3. Boosting titled players with established ratings higher than the rest of the pool is just wrong and shows that whoever decided it just doesn't understand how these rating systems work. If they have the same results as another player they should have the same rating. It doesn't matter what they do OTB.
Oct 24, 2014
0
#17
i think the k values were reset so ratings are variable anyway for players who play standard. if they don't play standard, their standard rating is no big deal anyway. plus if you are playing in mindgames rd 2, the ratings and titles are not worth anything just results... in that tournament i'd much rather play a titled player than a player with a 1400 blitz rating i have trouble playing those guys...
Oct 24, 2014
0
#18
Why not just increase everyone's rating by the same? This makes absolutely no sense, and is a terrible idea. If someone is 1599 they get their rating increased by 150 and if someone is 1600 they get 200 points? Who's to say that someone who is 1700 on chess.com is actually an expert level player, and players below them aren't above their chess.com level by the same ratio? Giving free points is fine if its distributed evenly, but giving class A players on chess.com 300 points?? For what? Maybe everyone should have just received 150 points or so, to make ratings closer to OTB. Now everyone who was 1600 or higher is probably overrated.
Oct 24, 2014
0
#19
And making an 1800 player into a 2200 is a joke, most 1800 players on livechess aren't master level players, you kidding me?
Oct 24, 2014
0
#20
alexm2310 wrote:
I don't have an otb rating yet, but I'm certain it's not going to be 1800+ like my standard rating now is. This idea seems like a complete waste of time, and is probably taking people further away from an accurate standard rating.
as a GM, you should have gone up +500?
Today , I was surprised to see my Live-Chess Standard rating as 2075. It was 1772 after my last game and today it showed as 2075. Is it some kind of bug?