If you don't like chess.com you can leave... Also, Chess.com cannot make everyone happy. I side against having rated games against computers... Why do you care that much for your rating also? Do you play for fun? Or for the rating?
Gee ,nice to have a non paying member telling me to leave chess.com. If you did not understand my post I can not help you.
If you don't like chess.com you can leave... Also, Chess.com cannot make everyone happy. I side against having rated games against computers... Why do you care that much for your rating also? Do you play for fun? Or for the rating?
Gee ,nice to have a non paying member telling me to leave chess.com. If you did not understand my post I can not help you.
You certainly have the right to state your preferences.
Your 6,000+ games against Computer1-easy dwarfs the totals of Macer75. How often did the computer repeat moves all the way to a lost position? How long did it usually go before varying?
I wonder what the record for most rated games against those computers is?
If you don't like chess.com you can leave... Also, Chess.com cannot make everyone happy. I side against having rated games against computers... Why do you care that much for your rating also? Do you play for fun? Or for the rating?
I don't hate chess.com. I just hate that they removed this feature and the way they did it.
Why does anyone care about ratings? They care for the same reasons everyone else cares about such things like this in chess and other sports. It is a way of measuring progress.
Playing the game of chess is still "fun" without ratings, but more fun with them.
Here is an idea for chess.com: Why not just make a separate rating for computer play? Combine it with the puzzle rating or make it separate. You have ratings right now for blitz, bullet, classical, etc. So why not just add one more rating system for computer-vs-human play. I would be very happy with that. In fact, it might even make me want to subscribe again.
I guess that was harsh... Oh well.... BUT THAT COMPUTER RATING IDEA SOUNDS AMAZING
If you don't like chess.com you can leave... Also, Chess.com cannot make everyone happy. I side against having rated games against computers... Why do you care that much for your rating also? Do you play for fun? Or for the rating?
Gee ,nice to have a non paying member telling me to leave chess.com. If you did not understand my post I can not help you.
You certainly have the right to state your preferences.
Your 6,000+ games against Computer1-easy dwarfs the totals of Macer75. How often did the computer repeat moves all the way to a lost position? How long did it usually go before varying?
I wonder what the record for most rated games against those computers is?
2 questions.
1 Is that the way you would talk to my face ?
2Why do you care what I like?
It would be nice if people would read the thread before making comments. Please read my last post.
If you don't like chess.com you can leave... Also, Chess.com cannot make everyone happy. I side against having rated games against computers... Why do you care that much for your rating also? Do you play for fun? Or for the rating?
Gee ,nice to have a non paying member telling me to leave chess.com. If you did not understand my post I can not help you.
You certainly have the right to state your preferences.
Your 6,000+ games against Computer1-easy dwarfs the totals of Macer75. How often did the computer repeat moves all the way to a lost position? How long did it usually go before varying?
I wonder what the record for most rated games against those computers is?
2 questions.
1 Is that the way you would talk to my face ?
2Why do you care what I like?
Yes, I would ask those questions to your face because I am curious if you learned anything and I can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that.
I don't particularly care what you like. You are entitled to your opinion.
Again, I was curious if you have learned anything.
Yes I have. thanks for asking. my post was mostly for TameLava. As my internet has gotten slower
I began playing mostly 15/10 games. It gives me time for terrible lag and lost connections. I try different ideas that I would probably not play in a normal rated game. Playing a unrated game with a computer is like f***ing with a rubber.
I know, I feel like a child now... Why would I tell someone to just leave, if they are just wishing something could be changed? So stupid...
lol..Thats ok. big of you to say tho
Erik was quoted explaining the decision in another thread: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/suggestions/bring-back-rated-games-against-computers
PhD_in_everything wrote:
This was erik's explanation:
This is the real reason. It makes sense from a maths / ratings purity perspective, and I don't just mean people like macer playing tons of games against the easy one.
If they were really that adamant about it, they would rid this site of cheaters and not allow them to come back.
I am also frustrated by no longer being able to play a rated game against the Chess.com engine. It is a fairer game to play an engine, than many of the players here.
I thought computers were programmed and their play wld be consistent. Instead, there are sometimes stupid moves, other times I am crushed. I wld like to still have rated games available to try and understand why and avoid heavy defeats if possible.The references to engines leave me baffled but then I am computer illiterate , oh dear........