ELO System/Ads

Sort:
Avatar of SunsetDude49

In my opinion the ELO system is broken and the ads are bad. I am probably not the first nor will I be the last to post about the ELO system and/or the ads. The ELO system never really gives you plenty of points. As an example, sometimes I might win against someone who is 100 or so ELO points above me and gain only 20 ELO points. Like how does that make any sense? And If I lose to someone who is a 100 or so ELO points below me I lose like 70 ELO points. Now the Ads are something else entirely. Like when Im playing on the mobile app ads will pop up guaranteed. Even when the app is on and Im not doing anything then BOOM there's an ad. Like come on Chess.com can't you please not have ads and fix the ELO system?

Avatar of justbefair

Skip to main content

How do ratings work on Chess.com?

Learn how the Glicko system works, including rating deviation and what factors influence your rating changes after each game!

Updated over a week ago

Table of contents

Ratings on Chess.com

Rating change factors

Glicko system

Ratings on Chess.com

Every player on Chess.com has a rating designed to measure their skill level and match them against opponents of similar ability.

You may have noticed that your rating doesn’t always change by the same amount after a win or loss. What causes this variation?

Chess.com game over modal showing rating increase

Chess.com game over modal showing rating increase

A few factors can affect how much your rating changes after you play a game. These factors include:

  1. The difference in rating between you and your opponent.

  2. How confident we are of your rating.

  3. How confident we are of your opponent’s rating.

Rating change factors

Factor

Details

Difference in rating

If you win against someone with a much higher rating, your rating will increase more than if you win against someone with a similar or lower rating. Similarly, if you lose against someone with a lower rating, your rating will decrease more than if you lose to someone with a higher rating.

Confidence in your rating

Our confidence in your rating affects how much your rating changes. High confidence in your rating means smaller changes, while low confidence can result in bigger changes.

Confidence in your opponent's rating

Just like our confidence in your rating, our confidence in your opponent's rating also influences rating changes. If we are less confident in their rating, the changes to your rating could be more significant.

Number one is straightforward: the greater the rating disparity between you and your opponent, the larger the potential rating change. Winning against a higher-rated opponent results in a bigger increase, while losing to a lower-rated opponent results in a bigger decrease.

Numbers two and three are more complex but crucial. Confidence in the ratings is a significant reason for substantial changes in your rating after a game.

📰 Check out this article to learn more about how ratings work: Chess Ratings - How They Work


Glicko system

Chess.com uses the Glicko rating system, which includes a measure called ‘rating deviation’ (RD) to indicate our confidence in your rating. If you’re new and haven't played any games, the system is unsure of your 'real' rating, so your rating will fluctuate significantly during your first few games.

If you haven't played in a while, your RD will increase, causing your rating to change more dramatically after your next game. This happens because we can't determine whether you've been practicing elsewhere or haven't played at all.

The same applies to your opponents. If you lose to someone with a much lower rating but a high RD (they haven’t played in a long time), your rating won’t change much since their rating may not be accurate.

💡 As players improve and reach higher levels on Chess.com, the rating changes after each game become smaller.


Related Articles

How do I start a game on Chess.com?

What is good etiquette on Chess.com?

How can I disable the rating range on Chess.com?

Did this answer your question?

😞😐😃

Avatar of MrChatty

You can throw money at chess.com and see no ads

Avatar of Martin_Stahl
MrChatty wrote:

You can throw money at chess.com and see no ads


There's even a low cost plan just for that.

http://www.chess.com/no-ads

Avatar of Chessiosaurus

The elo system is completely broken at the low levels and has been since 2020 when they allowed new users to start at insanely low ratings and it has dragged everyone else down - it's not even some sort of secret conspiracy theory either, anybody can look at the ratings distribution and see that the average rating on the site is now around 300elo when the whole rating system was built around the idea of the average elo being 1200

Avatar of MrChatty
Chessiosaurus wrote:

it has dragged everyone else down

I think I should be 600 in blitz, not 1600

Avatar of justbefair
Chessiosaurus wrote:

The elo system is completely broken at the low levels and has been since 2020 when they allowed new users to start at insanely low ratings and it has dragged everyone else down - it's not even some sort of secret conspiracy theory either, anybody can look at the ratings distribution and see that the average rating on the site is now around 300elo when the whole rating system was built around the idea of the average elo being 1200


It doesn't matter if the average is 300 or 1300. What matters is whether or not the ratings system helps people get matches against players of similar strength.

Ratings are not measuring something absolute, like temperature, where you want 100 to be the temperature where water boils. You don't want that to shift from year to year .

Avatar of Chessiosaurus
justbefair wrote:
Chessiosaurus wrote:

The elo system is completely broken at the low levels and has been since 2020 when they allowed new users to start at insanely low ratings and it has dragged everyone else down - it's not even some sort of secret conspiracy theory either, anybody can look at the ratings distribution and see that the average rating on the site is now around 300elo when the whole rating system was built around the idea of the average elo being 1200

It doesn't matter if the average is 300 or 1300. What matters is whether or not the ratings system helps people get matches against players of similar strength.

Ratings are not measuring something absolute, like temperature, where you want 100 to be the temperature where water boils. You don't want that to shift from year to year .

Your answer actually perfectly supports my point, you don't want a system where people who used to be 1100-1200 have now been dragged down to 600-700 and players that would have been 1800-2000 trapped around 1000 because they are all playing each other and preventing anyone from escaping the pit of despair. Right now we exist in a weird hybrid where the top 1% are getting stronger and stronger and the bottom are getting lower and lower

Avatar of HeckinSprout

Chess.com doesn't use elo. Don't want to see ads? Time to pay up - servers are expensive.

Avatar of MrChatty
Chessiosaurus wrote:

Your answer actually perfectly supports my point

Your point is an attempt to consider the relative rating as the absolute one, these 600-700-1000-1100-1200-1800-2000 etc numbers is not something that belongs solely to a player. Statements like "This player should have N points" are meaningless without specifying where and when the rating is calculated.

Are there systems with absolute ratings that could be applied to chess? I dont know. Relative ratings work fine as long as we dont expect them working as something absolute