Standard Ratings Boost

I'd rather have the points in something more useful. Like beer or pizza.

Yes kleelof, exactly 

Yeah a*hole geezer troll, I have enough money to buy u a decorated gold plated coffin.

Not necessarily because they didn't apply it to everyone. And they lowered a load of peoples ratings.

And also because they raised titled players by more than others. This is definitely bad.

If a titled player scores the same results as another player, and had the same rating (deservedly), they will now be at least 100 rating points higher. Absolutely stupid.

I can see why you might want to change their initial ratings, but adjusting their established rating is just another misunderstanding of chess rating systems, by a chess website. Inexplicable.

Thanks staff, for now including me within the ratings boost.

The biggest problem I see is that now people will refuse to play any games to keep their 2500+, or even 2700+ rating

Experts became FMs and IMs

Masters became Super GMs

GMs became Engines

Perhaps they should boost everyones ratings 2000 points. Then they can advertise having the strongest players in the world!!

It looks like the site's computers (easy, medium, hard, Impossible) didn't get a ratings boost. Why is that?

A standard ratings boost means your playing better than you actually do. It does't make any sense. It

My standard rating on chess.com is just above 1300. My United States chess federation (USCF) rating is A little over 1100 and my Chessworld.com rating is over 2000 !! Ratings are a product of a data base. The more players in the data base the more accurate your rating will be.Boosting ratings will only serve to boost a chess players ego.

Oh, yes. I know ALL about ego.

Nice, kleelof! My cat can definitely relate.

I didn't get the boost and I'm glad.  I have a real OTB tournament rating, I know my real strength.  The rating here is not a real rating.  Sure, your rating can indicate how you're trending and hopefully pair you with similar strength players, but it offers little more.

Real chess players already know their real strength.  You want to give the ratings here any actual meaning?  For starters, stop the rating padders here (those sad souls who exclusively play computer easy/medium and opponents rated 500 points lower than them).  Remove the horrific computer opponents; make all games rated, so people don't selectively choose who their rating is affected by; make it so people cannot pad against people rated way lower than they are.  Otherwise, ratings here cannot be taken slightly seriously no matter how you adjust them.

Is there any change to new users' starting rating? Because if there isn't, sooner or later the ratings will deflate again.

Oh NO, give me back my previous rating, I love lower rating to push me learn more and more

You could just take it that your new rating is now the new low.

What can you do BlackChrysler57?  I guess that fake, padded rating means something to some people, which is honestly really sad.  I look, for instance, at my bullet and blitz ratings here, which are MUCH lower than my real life tournament rating.  But this is mostly cuz I suck at bullet and blitz, and the low ratings accurately reflect this lol

Steve_bute's point is a good one, but overstated. The initial rating a person gets should be "UNRATED". That's how the Glicko system was designed to work! The first real (provisional) rating a player gets should be based on his results after a few (usually four) games. This site artificially lowers most players' ratings by giving them a starting rating of 1200.

However, that alone won't cause ratings to revert.

he he eh ehim 1747 now

You yam what you yam and dat's all that you yam.