Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. Donation ChessNut
    Lightly Salted...
    22 Jan '03 15:04
    Does it take into account the number of games you have played? It seems to fluctuate a great deal with wins and losses and I think with the USCF ratings, once you get a bunch of games under your belt the fluctuation slows down.

    Just curious...
  2. 22 Jan '03 15:08
    No it just takes into account yours and your opponent's current ratings. So, in an indirect way it takes into account the games you've played, but is really heavily weighted towards recent form, as it should be, don't you think?

    Joe
  3. 22 Jan '03 15:11 / 1 edit
    To see how the ratings are calculated...

    click "help me!" --> click "popup help files" ---> click "FAQ" ---> click no.9

    ๐Ÿ™‚

    Edit: Forgot to add that if you're anything like me then your next step is to return to this forum and ask for someone clever to explain it to you!
  4. Donation ChessNut
    Lightly Salted...
    22 Jan '03 15:15
    Originally posted by kyngj
    No it just takes into account yours and your opponent's current ratings. So, in an indirect way it takes into account the games you've played, but is really heavily weighted towards recent form, as it should be, don't you think?

    Joe
    Not really. So for example: Someone rated 2200 plays a newbie who happens to be a GM and loses. Under the current formula his rating may drop say to around 1800 (for arguments sake). Does that seem right?

    Even the best people have a bad day but does it make sense to penalize someone who consistently beats players rated say 1600 and has a rating of 1600 and has played 200 games to get their rating, but loses to a newbie and has their rating dropped dramatically?

    I'm not sure how much fluctuation is allowed and I couldn't find anything in the help menus so I thought I'd get a discussion going. I'm not here for the rating. I just want to learn and have fun. I was just noticing what I thought was big jumps and drops. What do ya'll think? ๐Ÿ™‚
  5. 22 Jan '03 15:28
    True, you raise a good point. But the converse situation might also apply. If, for example, rating is based on the last 50 games played, plus the rating of your current opponent, (as is something like the case in Bridge), then you can have players who have not played well for a long time with a falsely high rating...

    There is a simple fix for the problem of losing hundreds of points against newbies, and many of the top players follow this, by not accepting games against new players. Indeed, it has often been suggested here that players should start with a provisional rating until they've played say their first 30 games or so... in that case their opponents would not lose points but their prov. rating would change by what they would have gained until they go "live". I think this would be a decent fix to the issue
  6. Donation Rhymester
    and RedHotTed
    22 Jan '03 15:40
    The way the ratings are calculated takes into account 'win expectancy' (calculated by comparing the two players' ratings) and for players under 2000 the maximum number of rating points that they could lose in one go is 32.

    Rhymester
  7. 22 Jan '03 16:44
    Howdy all..
    Ok what does it mean when you see the STAR without Wings?
    And why are there different colors, with and without wings?

    I am hooked on this site, I have signed up about 4 people I have gotten into this...

    Doug
  8. 22 Jan '03 17:48
    Originally posted by Walkafire
    Howdy all..
    Ok what does it mean when you see the STAR without Wings?
    And why are there different colors, with and without wings?

    I am hooked on this site, I have signed up about 4 people I have gotten into this...

    Doug
    OK, without wings = joined before the subscription system came in, ie, life members
    with wings = yearly subscribers
    The colours denote the number of moves you have made, with red for above 50000, and some other gradations in between,

    hope this helps!

    Joe
  9. Donation ChessNut
    Lightly Salted...
    22 Jan '03 18:42
    Originally posted by kyngj
    [b]True, you raise a good point. But the converse situation might also apply. If, for example, rating is based on the last 50 games played, plus the rating of your current opponent, (as is something like the case in Bridge), then you can have players who have not played well for a long time with a falsely high rating...
    Actually what I was thinking was a sort of weighted average rating. In the case you bring up it would also limit the 'jump' a player would get either way as long as they have played a fair number of games.

    However, I do like the provisional idea a great deal. I think it is a fair way to get people 'rated' without penalizing current players. Sometimes I think a lot of people are afraid to accept Open Invites from someone rated 1200 because I see them sitting out there for a while. Maybe this would remove that fear.
  10. 22 Jan '03 18:57 / 3 edits
    when last i looked my standard rating was about 1250-1300. i would love to have the rating i have here ๐Ÿ˜›.

    I generally look at the amount of games people have played before accepting/making challenges. If they have never lost a game I generally wont play em ๐Ÿ˜•
  11. Donation ChessNut
    Lightly Salted...
    22 Jan '03 19:03
    Originally posted by rossroe
    when last i looked my standard rating was about 1250-1300. i would love to have the rating i have here ๐Ÿ˜›
    My USCF Rating is 1141. So I agree! ๐Ÿ˜€