Originally posted by admwcan't be messing up the ratings like that... someone would play for 100 points per game playing 1000 rated people and be rated 2100 when they are done.
Here's an idea but I don't know how to explain it very well so here it goes. How about if you play a chess match and both players can gamble a chosen amount of rating. Example a match between 2 people, doesn't matter about the rating, and there is a gamble of 50 rating points. The winner of the match will get 50 points added onto his/her rating and the opponent - loser - will lose 50 points from his/her rating. How about that?
Originally posted by cesarakgI suppose that there could be limits to how much rating could be gambled and you have the choice to play who you want, you won't have to play someone who's about 5000 points on rating higher than you, anyway. So what do you think, anyone?
The rating is a number related to a probability of winning. If your rating is 2000 and my is 1300, then there's some probability that, if I'm silly enought to play with you, that you will crush me. In some sense, the rating is a measure of the "chess strength" of the player. The higher rating, the stronger at chess a player is.
Enabling people to "g ...[text shortened]... do not deserve, that are not justified by you "chess strength".
Sorry for the "engrish".
Originally posted by admwSorry 500 points, so how about it?
I suppose that there could be limits to how much rating could be gambled and you have the choice to play who you want, you won't have to play someone who's about 5000 points on rating higher than you, anyway. So what do you think, anyone?
Originally posted by admw(chirp) (chirp) (chirp)
Sorry 500 points, so how about it?
Originally posted by Natural ScienceIt was just an idea.
(chirp) (chirp) (chirp)
Oh sorry, I was distracted by the sound of the crickets chirping.
Anyway, the problem with this idea, other than the fact that it tampers with a ratings system that is based on a very specific mathematical formula, is that it really does nothing to actually improve your level of play. When you make the suggestion ...[text shortened]... ing the number next to their name get bigger than they do about actually improving their play.
Originally posted by admwTake it easy. He is right. The rating system is conceived as a means to an end, and the objective of it is to give to the chess player some idea of their chess strenght.
It was just an idea.
Originally posted by cesarakgItens?
Take it easy. He is right. The rating system is conceived as a means to an end, and the objective of it is to give to the chess player some idea of their chess strenght.
On the other side, I know about a chess site that has "virtual gifts" that can be given (earned?). Maybe this can be done: a set of virtual gifts (subscribers get new itens every month ...[text shortened]... complete 10, 50, 100, 250, 500, 750, 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500 -- and so on -- games in the site).