Suggestion: Different Stats

Hello. I had an idea. What if chess.com somehow provided stats which accurately measure how good you are? Instead of just using the Elo system to show your stats, and alternative way of displaying them could be given.

This new way would account for the strength or your opponents, your accuracy, how other people at your rating are doing, how often you win, and how strong your other ratings are.

Of course, we would still have the Elo system which would give your official rating, but a different rating would be nice just to get a better look at how good you are.

sounds exhausting

lol

You could play bots to see how good you are-- the bots have a certain strength, and you can measure your abilities against it. Maybe chess.com could have a badge on your profile showing the highest bot you can win against (bots referring to the chess engine instead of the characters). If this were to happen, the badge would reflect the highest engine level you won against under no time controls (so you can't win by flagging) and in the challenge mode-- no takebacks or hints, just chess.

Sounds like you don't know anything about statistics... 

Statistics are hard. Math is hard. School is hard. Everything is hard all the time. 

Are you talking to me or @Nennerb?

Honestly idk

To you.

I don't see why you said I don't know anything about statistics? My post is utilizing more statistics to provide a better rating

How exactly? The rating system does an excellent job right now. You have played more than enough games for us to know your ratings in those pools are very accurate. How exactly do you want to improve on that?

I am not changing the rating system. I am proposing another one which measures how good you are using other factors besides looking at the games you have played

Interesting idea.

Did you see the game Ding Liren: World Chess Championship Challenger 2023? check it out http://fumacrom.com/6Q1K
 

WAT IF THEY MADE AN AVERAGE RATING STAT. ITS LIKE IT COMBINES YOUR ALL OF YOUR RATING (EXCEPT FOR VARIANT) AND YOU KNOW. JUST LIKE AVERAGE. LIKE AVERAGE RATING FOR ALL OF RATING COMBINED. TAT WILL BE COOL!!!!!!

I beat a 2000 bot in challenge mode, with no time controls and I'm only 1180

The bots are overrated so it won't give an accurate rating and people can cheat against bots (using engines)

Yes, the bots here https://www.chess.com/play/computer probably have exaggerated ratings. However, the old Chess.com bots (like Komodo10) have more accurate ratings.

To play against Komodo10, you have to go to live chess -> custom challenge -> random -> enter "komodo10" in the username box, and you can play against them like a normal player (one who plays insanely fast though). I think there are other levels of Komodo, like Komodo6 and Komodo21, but I haven't checked. 

In regards to cheating, this would only apply to a separate rating from rapid, blitz, and bullet. If someone had a high rating against computers (like 2200) but consistently lose against 1500s in live chess, they would be reported and have their computer rating changed/disabled/listed the player as a cheater.

but I'm not a cheater tho. I'm 1180 rated but I didn't cheat in my game even though I won against a 2200 bot so how do u know the person is a cheater? (Link to my win https://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/i-just-defeated-li-and-im-only-1148-rated-59808096)

That's one of the character bots. As I've said, those are probably overrated and have exaggerated ratings. I'm talking about the old, og chess.com bots like Komodo.