Rating Points (chess) unusual ideal

Winning points (ideal).. __a) winning against higher rated opponents... Max rating pts. for winning.. the way it already is.. good. __b) losing against lower rated opponents... Less or lest amount of pts.. (by way of your opponent's points of losing against you, not, what chess.com calculate as loss points against you when losing to lesser rated opponents) - (•the amount of points that lower rated opponent loses) for losing. Why this way? Well, the real reason is (b). _(A) is to reward wins. _(B) is to minimize ratings points loss due to opponents with very low ratings that caused a maximum points loss whenever competing in a open tournament or the opponent is new, but, has good chess skills... (could be near expert or better). •Such an opponent's rating adjustments have not been fully implemented to his or her proper higher rating yet, and they are allowed to compete with seasoned rated members! ••Therefore, winning should be rewarded because it's earned while losing should not be punishment each time we have to face a lower rated opponent.. (with good skills) and lose... •••The point, minimum point lost help to keep our ratings near our skill level without being accused of being a "sandbagger" or we looking like one if we are playing chess _1) in a rush... •looking sloppy _2) playing chess while high (intoxicated, etc.) •looking sloppy _3) so bored after work... we playing tired and sleepy (•looking sloppy) _4) an opponent has a computer making all the super moves on the chess board... •looking sloppy _5) Eating, talking (phone.. etc.), lack of site vacation (rushing), too many site games to play (400 games more or less)-(not for example... for real), etc. _6) How about playing "Live 960 Chess" and we rushing to win, lose or draw with 10 minute games down to 2 minutes or less... (the draw or winning position can simply lose when time runs out). •Not just looking sloppy, but, we again have too lose great amount of points when playing against lower rated opponents. •Chess.com administrators are worrying about Sandbagging (just to get a trophy), but, they do not understand that we are worrying about learning to play better and also losing rating points more so, than, getting trophies at a lower rating. ••••So, we are getting frustrated enough when we lose a chess game to similar rated opponent, and, we are getting angry with ourselves when we also lose to a greatly skilled unseasoned opponent (rating not fully implemented) with a very low rating... Yes / No?! •Add in the other hindering stuff (sleepy, etc.) and we make mistakes and become upset at the world. °°••This is a normal human reaction / behavior whenever we lose a lot of rating points, or, are accused of "Sandbagging" by higher rated administrators of a chess site or a real "on site" chess tournament. •We all gain by concentrating on winning, rather than, getting frustrated by losing points from loses because some of us are actually learning how to compete with higher rated opponents! °• Can lesser rated chess players just learn without the guilt and great points lost punishment? We losing a lot of rating points because we do not have a lot of tournaments to compete in that have a non open tournament rating scale. Such as, 1600 - 1800 or 1700> type of tournaments to join that keep our lose points to a minimum when we lose. I / we understand the present ratings system for new members is necessary, but, the open tournaments are a wrecking ball of our ratings. Being accused of being a Sandbagger is for some Kids on the site. •Everybody not a chess master when first joining. •Everybody not going anywhere near Champion of the world, so, how about a more (less frustrating) enjoyable chess (learning) experience!? _Good Luck!_ Oh yeah, about __c) the draw game... (C) It stays the same rating points that it is now. •Draws are not winning, so, real points have to be earned! Ok, what about __d) the abandoned chess games.. (D) Clearly not a game, so, points are not points. Nor should they be allowed to advance to next round simply because of ties also they did not compete.. [not playing any games or not finishing their games / just time outs]. I apologize for writing a book about points lost. We pay to learn and earn our rating points more so than just getting a Sandbagging trophy. •It's only natural that we must choose a lesser rated tournament when we all get the beat-down in higher rated tournaments that we are not yet ready for!? So, kicking members off the site for Sandbagging is good and bad!? Considering adjustments for such not so important... Yes / No?! •Chess is already frustrating enough! 

Introduce a rating floor to minimize frustration from occasional losses. This can prevent skilled players from dropping too low due to a few bad games.

Maybe you have an ideal also. Still, how to create it for understanding it's main role? In an open tournament, how can such be applied - which may be the most difficult task to minimum floor if I understand you correctly?! Perhaps we would have to stay out of such tournaments because of the low rated opponents.