Creating vs selecting open invites

I am curious to know how people approach open invites vs making one of their own. My general approach is that if my rating is higher than the current open invites, I make one of my own and let others decide if they want a game.

I just feel a little funny about accepting the invite created by a player whose rating is currently lower than mine- sort of an informal rule of chess etiquette for me.

And I do make an exception if I see an open invite created by a lower-rated player that has sat for some time without anyone accepting it- I may accept, and send them a message with the first move that I did it because the invite was sitting there for a while, and that they can delete it if they wish due to the rating disparity, and no hard feelings.

Any thoughts?

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
I am curious to know how people approach open invites vs making one of their own. My general approach is that if my rating is higher than the current open invites, I make one of my own and let others decide if they want a game.

I just feel a little funny about accepting the invite created by a player whose rating is currently lower than mine- sort o ...[text shortened]... y can delete it if they wish due to the rating disparity, and no hard feelings.

Any thoughts?

I don't think it's bad etiquette to accept an open invite against a lower rated player.

If they haven't put restrictions on who can accept it, it's my assumption that they don't care if it's a 900 or a 2000 who accepts, they're just looking for a game.

If they put restrictions on who can accept then I assume anyone who falls within the range is who they'd like to play - especially if they're looking for a higher rated player to play against.

Often, I hope a higher rated player will accept my invite.

I create my own and hope for an equal match, I will play anyone stronger than myself but if a weaker player accepts the game I will delete it and try again.
I will play a weaker player with 100 points of my rating though.

Edit: Although I did play weaker opponents at the start just to get some games going.

Originally posted by Tactics and Endgames
I create my own and hope for an equal match, I will play anyone stronger than myself but if a weaker player accepts the game I will delete it and try again.
I will play a weaker player with 100 points of my rating though.

Edit: Although I did play weaker opponents at the start just to get some games going.

If you delete games from lower-rated players, why don't you put a rating restriction in when you create the invite? It seems like it would save both you and the other player some time and effort.

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
If you delete games from lower-rated players, why don't you put a rating restriction in when you create the invite? It seems like it would save both you and the other player some time and effort.

It won't let me, I guess because I am still provisional?

Originally posted by Tactics and Endgames
It won't let me, I guess because I am still provisional?

Yeah, 20 games and you'll have the option when you create a game

I accepted an open invite a couple weeks ago from somebody I'd never played before who was several hundred points lower than me. The guy scolded me for taking the game, saying that obviously the only reason I took it was that I was looking for a cheap way to boost my rating. I pointed out to him that if I won our game, I'd gain a single point and if I lost to him, he'd gain 31 points. Not exactly a brilliant strategy for boosting my rating and the real reason I'd taken it was he'd set short time controls and I wanted a quick game. He didn't delete the game, just chose not to move in it, so I deleted it after about an hour.

People...

Originally posted by sbacat
I accepted an open invite a couple weeks ago from somebody I'd never played before who was several hundred points lower than me. The guy scolded me for taking the game, saying that obviously the only reason I took it was that I was looking for a cheap way to boost my rating. I pointed out to him that if I won our game, I'd gain a single point and if I lost to the game, just chose not to move in it, so I deleted it after about an hour.

People...

Thanks for the post- I have wondered if people would react like that, which is why I tend to just create an invite and let someone accept if they like.

My theorem is developing thus:

#1: For players who are focused on rating/grade, the lower-rated player should be happy to have his/her game accepted by a higher-rated player, as they have much to gain and little to lose.

#2: For players who are focused on getting better, see #1.

#3: For players who are focused purely on winning (and we all want to win, but the priority may not be the same for all of us in any one game), they would NOT want a higher-rated player accepting the invite, as a higher rating generally means a lower win probability.

I am curious to know what others think, hence the thread!

Paul Leggett: Average opponent rating 1450ish, Hmm interesting.
It seems you like it when low rated opponents accept your games eh?

I wish I was 1900 like you 😉

3 edits...that was exhausting, 😞

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
Thanks for the post- I have wondered if people would react like that, which is why I tend to just create an invite and let someone accept if they like.

My theorem is developing thus:

#1: For players who are focused on rating/grade, the lower-rated player should be happy to have his/her game accepted by a higher-rated player, as they have much to ...[text shortened]... ally means a lower win probability.

I am curious to know what others think, hence the thread!

At my level, it feels as though the difference between a 1300 player and a 1500-1600 player is only one or two relatively minor mistakes. When I look for open invites, I first look for short time controls (I get bored with games that drag on) and for players with ratings a couple hundred below mine. It's not that I'm looking for quick points because I'm risking far more than I could hope to gain, but to me, the added risk of losing a chunk of rating points gives the challenge a bit more zip. I find that non-subs who are only playing 6 games can focus on those games to a larger degree (or at least it feels like that's what's happening) and I've taken some hits to my ratings when one of these non-subs puts me in my place!

Most players seem grateful for the game. And particularly grateful when they walk away with 25+ points out of the encounter. 😉

Originally posted by Tactics and Endgames
Paul Leggett: Average opponent rating 1450ish, Hmm interesting.
It seems you like it when low rated opponents accept your games eh?

I wish I was 1900 like you 😉

3 edits...that was exhausting, 😞

I am indifferent, pretty much, in that I will play anyone, and there are far more lower rated than higher rated players. I also have two friends here in the 1400-1500 range (Niculae and Bralen), and we have played an ungodly number of games.

I think Bralen is about to scalp me in both of our current games, and my 1900 rating will be short-lived 😞

Originally posted by sbacat
At my level, it feels as though the difference between a 1300 player and a 1500-1600 player is only one or two relatively minor mistakes. When I look for open invites, I first look for short time controls (I get bored with games that drag on) and for players with ratings a couple hundred below mine. It's not that I'm looking for quick points because I'm riski ...[text shortened]... me. And particularly grateful when they walk away with 25+ points out of the encounter. 😉

My friend Niculae from Romania is 400 points lower than me, give or take, and while I have won the majority of games, I bet in the "ratings sweepstakes", he has scalped me for 100-200 points or so.

The pattern is that I win a couple of positional games or games where he gives me pieces, and then he takes me out with some wild sacrificial attack, and I get blown off the board.

When he uncorks one of his attacks, I almost have to buy a new graphics card for my computer just to see the board!

If I had been funny about ratings, we would never have played, and I would not enjoy the site the way I do now. It's the people, not the ratings.

Paul

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
If I had been funny about ratings, we would never have played, and I would not enjoy the site the way I do now. It's the people, not the ratings.

Paul

Exactly so. I just today finished a 1-day ladder game against an opponent a couple hundred points lower. He clearly outplayed me in the middlegame and it was only my endgame skills that won the day. I commented to a friend later in another game that chess has so many different phases within the game, each of which requires a different skillset. Amazing stuff and I do think that getting surprised by a lower rated player can help your game overall by (hopefully) sharpening your vision for the next one!

Hiccup. Sorry!