points
Sort:
I just won two games in a row against players with the rating of less than 100 points. In one case I got only 4 additional points and in the other only 3 ( ? ). Until today, it would have been 7 and 6 respectively. Would someone be kind and explain this? Thanks!
Zzlatko wrote:
I just won two games in a row against players with the rating of less than 100 points. In one case I got only 4 additional points and in the other only 3 ( ? ). Until today, it would have been 7 and 6 respectively. Would someone be kind and explain this? Thanks!
Sounds like they revised the system. You are not the only person who has noticed.
They haven't made any announcements that I have seen.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/why-has-the-elo-rating-system-changed
This is so people of my playing strength can actually maintain our strengths longer and not have to be badly bruised when weaker players defeat us. I actually like the idea.
Six threads now on this.
Why don't you get together with the other five threads on this?
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/suggestions/points-2
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/why-has-the-elo-rating-system-changed
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/4-points-for-a-win
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/why-am-i9-getting-only-4-rating-points-after-beating-a-player-in-similar-rating-range
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/wsup-with-this-4-point-ish-i-suck-every-point-counts
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/not-many-elos
The 6th is mine...sorry.
newengland7 wrote:
The 6th is mine...sorry.
No that's good. Maybe somebody on the staff will notice and explain.
Meanwhile, let's read up on how ratings work on chess.com.
https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-ratings---how-they-work
It would be nice if somebody on staff would explain the reason for the change. The new system makes it difficult to improve your rating, but on the other hand the slide down isn't as fast. Can't decide if I'm for or against.
It's a shame that there isn't an agreed upon algorithm for determining an online rating. At Lichess.org you start at 1500 and you gain around 10 or 11 points for the same range that you now gain around 4-5 points here.
justme2000 wrote:
It would be nice if somebody on staff would explain the reason for the change. The new system makes it difficult to improve your rating, but on the other hand the slide down isn't as fast. Can't decide if I'm for or against.
It's a shame that there isn't an agreed upon algorithm for determining an online rating. At Lichess.org you start at 1500 and you gain around 10 or 11 points for the same range that you now gain around 4-5 points here.
It's bug. CEO Erik said this morning it would be fixed with 24 hours.
Sep 28, 2018
0
#9
Thank You for working on this!! Our players will really appreciate it! 
Sep 28, 2018
0
#10
The ratings info from post 6 is really interesting: https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-ratings---how-they-work
However, I think it missed stating something clearly that was implied by the article. When you play a stronger player and win, your rating will increase more than when you win versus a lower rated player. If you are rated well above 1,000 and defeat someone around 100, I wouldn't expect you to earn any rating increase. Where's the challenge? Now, had he won, he would have received a boat load of points. Awhile ago I was challenged by someone rated well below me. Who he was and why he challenged me, I don't know. Anyway, we played and even not playing a good game I won, which should have been expected given the ratings difference. I did not get a single point for the win, but that really didn't surprise me.
"Serious" chess requires ratings to keep competitions competitive and for standings. I wish we could do away with ratings for recreational chess; however, since some players take them much too seriously at our levels (in my opinion). However, I understand the need for ratings to keep games and tournaments reasonably close. No one wants to play against an opponent that is either much too strong, or much too weak. And the only way to determine that is by ratings.