What do you think of people who inflate their rating by playing only patzers?

They kinda make me laugh personally...

You cannot inflate your rating by playing only patzers. [this is my understanding]

Then your understanding isn't very deep, my friend...

Same as cheaters, sandbaggers etc.. I dont care.. It is perhaps one game out of 100 here on chess.com so what do you care? If you play a game and learn from it, then thats fine. Who cares if it was a computer, a master on a for-fun-account or anything in between? Play the board not the player!

Yeah, that Carlsen dude is such a cheater. He only plays people rated lower than himself.

Anyone who tries to raise their ratings by playing only opponents rated lower than themselves will not gain much either in ratings or in skill.

By playing only patzers, your rating will improve somewhat, but you will never actually improve, so your rating will eventually stall. Plus, lose a game and your rating drops a bunch.

The rating system works so that the number of points you gain from beating somebody is, in theory, directly proportional to your chances of beating that person.

If you're playing enough games perfect rating won't change no matter who are you playing unless your playing strength changed

If you play only people rated 500 points lower than you, you should win 99.2% of the time... That's a lot of games...

If you play only players rated 500 points lower than you, how many points per game will you gain?

That is what ponz (and others) are talking about. You can't keep gaining rating points by "lemmiwinking". At some point, your rating will stabilize.

if they only play patzers, then when they play someone with their "rating" then they will even out, e.g. tournamtents. Plus, it will show up on their page that their average opponant's rating is 500 below their actual rating. Furthermore, if they do get upsetted it will eventually even out by time outs, sandbaggers, or a true upset. So bottom line, people who only play patzers will most likely still have an accurate rating, and if not then they will lose tournament games or often lose to people of their own rating.

Playing 500 rated I'll get 0 points for win

Or the other way around. I am with ponz on this one.

I play a friend who is rated 2000, and I am about 1350. When he beats me as he invariably does he gains 1 ranking point.

There's a difference between improving your rating and improving your game.  If you care about the former and not the latter then you're kind of missing the point of improving altogether.  Let them have their artificially inflated ratings.

Those who think they can raise their rating by only playing patzers, really do not understand the math.  Players get tired and can make a mistake against anybody and lose a game even against a "patzer".  In the long run, you gain nothing playing against "patzers" This is the math.

On a practical basis it is really a stupid thing to do as you hurt your chess playing abilities if you only play "patzers" and what do you gain?

I'm around 2050, my pal ranges from 1550-1650.

So, what should I do? not play him?

Of course not, this site provides a platform for chess, and that is what is happening. We've played 94 games.

The tally:

Won    82 = 82 x 1 = +82

Lost     7 = 7 x -14 = -98

Drawn  5 = 5 x -6  = -30

Net loss for me = 46 ratings points over 94 games.

Hmm...

Your rating can be inflated, but only to a point.  And yes, every game puts all of those gains at risk, but to say that it's not possible at all to inflate your rating by doing this is just plain incorrect.