Color Allocation

That's the thing. While you may have be due color in a tourney, your opponent may have had more blacks, as a percentage, overall historically and was due white to try and balance things.  Single matches are not tourneys and wouldn't be expected to follow tourney rules in those matters.

From a player perspective, it seems odd since you are playing a discrete set of games. From perspective of the algorithm, trying to get one player closer to balance likely takes precedence. I would guess rating doesn't come into the equation, though it might if both players have the same percentages.

As an added thought, since both sites are live, I would almost guarantee the paring algorithm is the exact same since one of the players could be on v2 and one on v3. In fact, the Live server process on the back-end likely is just whatever the newer version is.

good point.  I would still like to understand the color allocation rules chess.com is using.  As-is, we're speculating and for all we know a problem might exist because we don't know how it should be working.

You don't need to respond to that - but I would float the issue up to your direct reports and see if we can't get something in writting on that hyperlink you referred me back to.

i don't understand the original poster's question

is he unhappy that he had to play several blacks in a row.

if you are playing black, then that means that white is in zugzwang

The issue isn't so much the number of times I had to play the same color, but the lack of alternation between colors.  chess.com apparently does not make any attempt to prevent long sequences of same-color assignments.  When compared to USCF and FIDE pairing rules, which most tournament directors are familiar with, chess.com could implement changes to their color assignment logic to improve color alternation and avoid long sequences of same-color assignments.

do you not like playing black ?

I prefer to play both sides once in awhile.  😀

Bumping this topic as a reminder.  This needs to be fixed.

Similar to USCF tournament rules, when both players are due the same color, the higher rated player needs to alternate. That simple tie-break rule change will help prevent long sequences of same color assignments.

As posted before, strings of individual games are not tournaments and don't need to follow tourney rules. Though, even the tourneys here have had instances of 3 of the same color in a row (not sure if that has been changed or not) which probably should be fixed.

I would be suprised if there are many strings of more than 3 of the same color, in the same rating pools, over the long haul.

Edit: for curiosity sake, I looked at the last couple of pages of your Live games and it seems like the site isn't doing too bad; sure, they are not alternating every game, but even in tourneys, alteration is only one of the criteria and the site has to look at both players. I missed one game in the group and may have made a few mistakes (it's kind of hard to count while scrolling). I have bolded the times  you got 3 or more of a color in a row:

WBWBWWBWBW
BBWBBWWBWW
BWBBBWBWWW
BWWBBWBWBBB
WWBWBBWBWW
BWBWBWBWBB
WBWBWBWBWB
WBWBWBWBBB
WBWBWWWBBW
WBBB WWWWBB

i like playing both sides

The colors you get for each game that is non tournament is completely random against an opponent you have never played before.  Which means you can for sure get streaks of one color or another that same as if you flipped a coin 50,000 times you would find instances where there were a lot of heads in a row. 

Against someone you have played before, you will get the opposite color you got last time. 

Thanks JD.  It's good to finally get a definitive answer on how color alternation works.  I do on occasion get long streaks of same color.  It seems to have gotten better since I made my OP.

It seems to me, on the random pairings, a simple count, adding one for each White played and subtracting one for each black played would give a good indication of who is due which color.  When both are due the same color, using the higher rated player alternates rule as tie break would prevent the long streaks of same color play.  

In tournaments not really. Say you start round 1 as W then 2&3 as Black. 4th as W again and 5&6 as black. 
it will not even out. The rules should take note of the total # of games played in a specific color as compared to the number of rounds played so far.

The tournaments don't track color allocation unless something recently changed and it's handled the same as regular seeks. However, if you mostly play tournaments, you will still trend to 50/50

As an addendum, things have changed in almost 6 years since the last post in the topic.

porque no me calificaron en el triunfo que tuve sobre Fernandorock13 tendrían que revisar la app que me parece funciona mal