Average opponent rating

whogeeyao

Hello all,

As a basic member, I don't see all the fancy stats that the premiums see. Nonetheless, I would like to inquire on how the average opponent for live chess is calculated? More specifically, do the opponent's rating get factored in when a game is unrated? I noticed that unrated games counts in the total game section, but are they part of the average opponent calculation?

thank you

JubilationTCornpone

I am not sure what you are asking here?  Do you mean how is the average rating of all players at the site determined?  How is your next opponent determined?  Something else?

Either way, I don't see how unrated games could be counted.  The average rating of all players at the site is simply that, an average of all ratings.  Since ratings aren't affected by unrated games, this calculation also would not be.  On the other hand, your next opponent is also determined by your and his/her rating, which is not affected by unrated games.  So, no, unrated games don't affect anything, assuming I understood your question.

kleelof

I recently asked the same question.

Apparently, it only includes rated games and only for the past 90 days.

And, a little hint for you: If you want to know someones REAL rating, look at their average opponent ratings.

I say this because you can find people who are rated 1800 or 1900, but their average opponent rating is 1400 or 1500. THIS would be their real rating. 

Chessman265

Ha- Hikaru's opp rating is 2400s. Lol

MrDamonSmith

Looking at the average opponents rating is only half the equation. Your win % against that average tells your level. Carlsens average opponent is around 2740ish but that doesn't mean thats his playing level. 

kleelof

Sorry. I meant at Chess.com. Not in the real world.

kleelof

The difference being that for someone like Carlsen, there is a very small pool of qualified players.

At Chess.com, many people intentionally set their range of opponent ratings very low so they can win more games.

AlCzervik
kleelof wrote:

I recently asked the same question.

Apparently, it only includes rated games and only for the past 90 days.

And, a little hint for you: If you want to know someones REAL rating, look at their average opponent ratings.

I say this because you can find people who are rated 1800 or 1900, but their average opponent rating is 1400 or 1500. THIS would be their real rating. 

This could be used as a rule of thumb, but it's not definitive.

For example, my rating has fluctuated between about 1480-1600 over the last year. In that time, I have played in tournaments where I am the lowest rated, and I have also joined friends tournaments where I'm the highest rated. 

The avg. opponent only goes back 90 days. At any given point over the last year, my avg. opponents rating could be 100 points higher or lower than my rating.

kleelof
AlCzervik wrote:
kleelof wrote:

I recently asked the same question.

Apparently, it only includes rated games and only for the past 90 days.

And, a little hint for you: If you want to know someones REAL rating, look at their average opponent ratings.

I say this because you can find people who are rated 1800 or 1900, but their average opponent rating is 1400 or 1500. THIS would be their real rating. 

This could be used as a rule of thumb, but it's not definitive.

For example, my rating has fluctuated between about 1480-1600 over the last year. In that time, I have played in tournaments where I am the lowest rated, and I have also joined friends tournaments where I'm the highest rated. 

The avg. opponent only goes back 90 days. At any given point over the last year, my avg. opponents rating could be 100 points higher or lower than my rating.

Good point. 

I think if the person has a rating that is within 100 points or so of their average opponent rating, then you can pretty much consider it accurate enough.

If their rating is 200+ points or more higher than their avg. opponent rating, then there is a pretty good chance they are just playing lower rated opponents to boost their ratings.

If you see that their avg. opponent rating is lower than yours. You should play them. If you actually lose, you won't lose much. If you win, you will get lotst of extra points.Laughing

whogeeyao
kleelof wrote:

I recently asked the same question.

Apparently, it only includes rated games and only for the past 90 days.

And, a little hint for you: If you want to know someones REAL rating, look at their average opponent ratings.

I say this because you can find people who are rated 1800 or 1900, but their average opponent rating is 1400 or 1500. THIS would be their real rating. 

kleeof and company,

thanks for answering my thread, unanswered for 17 months! let's just say it was a pleasant surprise.Cool

the 90-day thing kinda explains why some people have their avg oppenent rating as "N/A"

 

thanks again!

kleelof

I would think it just registers NA until they have played some/enough people.

I'd say Good Luck. But looking at your rating, you don't seem to need it.

ruelasker

Interesting points similar to discussions I have heard on tiebreaks. I've mostly heard of people looking to play higher rated players to make their rating go up. To play weaker rated players for the same thing would need some consistency as loosing a game is more costly.

Sir_Kenshah

This is my first post. Well, a test. 

xknightwarriorx

I keep playing blitz chess and I make one blunder and the other guy wins just from a tiny slip up even though it doesn't match their ratings. I think a lot of these players are using chess machines and cheating in the games? I already received extra points from encountering cheats but I think it's happening again 

catmaster0
xknightwarriorx wrote:

I keep playing blitz chess and I make one blunder and the other guy wins just from a tiny slip up even though it doesn't match their ratings. I think a lot of these players are using chess machines and cheating in the games? I already received extra points from encountering cheats but I think it's happening again 

It's blitz, you people are likely making plenty of mistakes. Anyways, this thread is from 2014 and the only reason it even has a recent post was the random post from Kenshah. Not sure what you are looking for here. 

xknightwarriorx

I logged in one day and had an extra 100 points added to my rating with a message, you have been compensated for unfair play (cheat by other players), so yeah it was confirmed that it happened.

catmaster0
xknightwarriorx wrote:

I logged in one day and had an extra 100 points added to my rating with a message, you have been compensated for unfair play (cheat by other players), so yeah it was confirmed that it happened.

All that says, assuming what you say is true and that was the reason prior, was that it has happened before. This isn't really the thread for if you think it is happening again. I find accusations of cheating often hyped, but who knows, it happens somewhere, I am not the one who determines whether this is one of them or not, and this isn't the thread to get the attention of those that do.

xknightwarriorx

Well I did notice when I tried the 1 minute bullet games, I seem to win that a lot easier because it's like they don't have time to use the chess machine lol, you can just tell the difference when they are improvising verses when there is something fishy.  I'm not saying everyone does it or even if it's common, but I have my doubts that every single game I faced was a honest one.

xknightwarriorx

yes I know it may not be the thread for that I just clicked on blitz chess instead of creating a new thread so I thought I better note this while here, When I verse the bots on here I easily win past 1500 ratings, So by that standard it doesn't add up when playing to that level.