25 Mar 10
1 edit
Originally posted by MontyMooseMeans you can lose lots of points by starting a game with a player who has the same rating as you but during the game his rating nosedives through timeouts.You are then playing a much lower rated player but who has same playing strength as you,so you are then risking lots of points if you lose to gain few if any should you win.The alternative is to lock the ratings at the start of the game for each individual game.Then whatever happens to your opponent's rating it doesn't affect you.
finished
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by jb70No, the opponent's rating could have been lowered at the start of the game by timeouts but have risen to their true strength by the end of the game. The fact that the post-rating is used is one of the main differences between RHP and other sites.
Means you can lose lots of points by starting a game with a player who has the same rating as you but during the game his rating nosedives through timeouts.You are then playing a much lower rated player but who has same playing strength as you,so you are then risking lots of points if you lose to gain few if any should you win.The alternative is to lock the rat ...[text shortened]... or each individual game.Then whatever happens to your opponent's rating it doesn't affect you.
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by zozozozoSorry,thats what I meant
No, after the checkmate/completion. How do you expect the computer to know that you will be checkmated the next move?
Read this: FAQ.
26 Mar 10
2 edits
Originally posted by randolphA player could tank all their games, become an 1100 player and start 300 games he or she knows they could win.
No, the opponent's rating could have been lowered at the start of the game by timeouts but have risen to their true strength by the end of the game. The fact that the post-rating is used is one of the main differences between RHP and other sites.
Next thing you know they are rated 3400, being awarded the points an 1100 player would get while the rating keeps rocketing up... losing only the points an 1100 player would lose to higher rated players.
I'm surprised there are sites that use the start rating... are you sure?
P-
27 Mar 10
Originally posted by PhlabibitI was kind of going by http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?subject=Pegged_rating&threadid=124163
A player could tank all their games, become an 1100 player and start 300 games he or she knows they could win.
Next thing you know they are rated 3400, being awarded the points an 1100 player would get while the rating keeps rocketing up... losing only the points an 1100 player would lose to higher rated players.
I'm surprised there are sites that use the start rating... are you sure?
P-
29 Mar 10
Originally posted by randolphSee the 8th post of that thread, very similar to my view of 'start vs. end' rating.
I was kind of going by http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?subject=Pegged_rating&threadid=124163
Blitz chess, I see them using either. I used to play 2 or 3 games at a time at Yahoo chess on separate windows... but here play is a LOT different. You can't base it on the start or there would be mass inflation and destruction of the rating system as we know it and any given rating number wouldn't mean a thing.
P-