1 edit
Originally posted by skeeterIt can't be to bad to go by, it had both ways to spell color in it.
Websters "New World" edition is not the authority. Websters "New International" ( Third edition ) is, and "colour" just gets the byline that I posted above.
End of story.
You want to argue semantics then I'll show you my Ph.D ( Enlish Lit.) if you show me yours. Ok ??
Otherwise, pull your head in.
skeeter
I am not going to go looking for you, I will stick with my Webster's New World Dictionary anyways.
Perhaps, a chess site isn't the place for you to be throwing around your PH.D's, most could care less about them. I don't!
EDIT: For the LULZ 😛
Originally posted by Very RustyFair enough. No hard feelings.
It can't be to bad to go by, it had both ways to spell color in it.
I am not going to go looking for you, I will stick with my Webster's New World Dictionary anyways.
Perhaps, a chess site isn't the place for you to be throwing around your PH.D's, most could care less about them. I don't!
EDIT: For the LULZ 😛
skeeter
Originally posted by Very RustyS'ok, but you'll not get the rises that I usually post. Can't afford to now. It's no fun being suspended and, suprisingly it's not that hard to behave. Red and I had a lot of fun with that 'idiotalterego' but Flash sorted him out. Some parts were funny but the profanity was OTT.
LOL...I was joking about your PH.D good for you!!
I couldn't resist tugging on your chains just a little.
Admin will need to sort the 'work around' regarding the filters otherwise someone else will try it.
skeeter
Originally posted by skeeterI am sure there are many here who could and don't. It would be a pain in the butt though if others come in and continue to do that.
S'ok, but you'll not get the rises that I usually post. Can't afford to now. It's no fun being suspended and, suprisingly it's not that hard to behave. Red and I had a lot of fun with that 'idiotalterego' but Flash sorted him out. Some parts were funny but the profanity was OTT.
Admin will need to sort the 'work around' regarding the filters otherwise someone else will try it.
skeeter
That may have been someone who was a member here with an axe to grind, we never know, or a member doing it just because they can.
I am sure Admins will see what they can do regarding the filters. Reminds me of the hackers who use to hit the Chat rooms.
In all honesty, posts about spelling aren't relevant here.
I agree with trumbull2400, stats will only become meaningful when they read:
With the white pieces [xx% wins, yy% draws, zz% losses]
With the black pieces [aa% wins, bb% draws, cc% losses]
and any incorporation of average rating of opponents whether it be a standard mean
With the white pieces [xx% wins mean opponent rating 1200, yy% draws mean opponent rating 1200, zz% losses mean opponent rating 1200]
or % difference between player and opponent would also be very useful
With the white pieces [xx% wins mean opponent rating -20%, yy% draws mean opponent rating +10%, zz% losses mean opponent rating +30%]
Originally posted by Very RustySorry, should have posted.
Russ...How would games that were won by time out drop from 810 to 744 ??
The stats now ignore all games which started as rated, but ended unrated due to the lack of moves.
This text was added to the notes :
"Games completed in less than 3 moves are not rated and therefore excluded from these stats. "
1 edit
Originally posted by RussThank You, It also makes good logic, even to me. 😉
Sorry, should have posted.
The stats now ignore all games which started as rated, but ended unrated due to the lack of moves.
This text was added to the notes :
"Games completed in less than 3 moves are not rated and therefore excluded from these stats. "
I like the new stats. 🙂 Not looking for brownie points this time!
Originally posted by jayaitchRuss has commented on another thread that i is your opponents rating at the time the game completes but before the adjusment is made for the game result.
What does opponents' average rating relate to? Current ratings, ratings at the time a game was completed, or something else?
Originally posted by RussIf these games are tournament games, Or Clan Challenges shouldn't they count as rated regardless of amount of moves?
Sorry, should have posted.
The stats now ignore all games which started as rated, but ended unrated due to the lack of moves.
This text was added to the notes :
"Games completed in less than 3 moves are not rated and therefore excluded from these stats. "