1. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    08 Feb '09 23:33
    There are also those few cheaters who suck up alot of points, only to be banned, then having those points taken out of the system.
  2. home
    Joined
    23 Oct '06
    Moves
    32450
    09 Feb '09 05:57
    Originally posted by Eladar
    There are also those few cheaters who suck up alot of points, only to be banned, then having those points taken out of the system.
    That is correct. And therefore the over all rating does not increase more.
  3. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    09 Feb '09 10:39
    Originally posted by dsmfire
    That is correct. And therefore the over all rating does not increase more.
    That would depend on whether or not there are more points taken out by cheaters than there are points added by sub 1200 players who quit playing.
  4. home
    Joined
    23 Oct '06
    Moves
    32450
    10 Feb '09 17:30
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    That would depend on whether or not there are more points taken out by cheaters than there are points added by sub 1200 players who quit playing.
    That is also an essential point. But one also have to consider that it continously comes in 1200 points. Many of these "new" points stays in the rhp rating pool, and are not taken out by banned players, or inactive players.
  5. Standard memberHindstein
    Finish Him!!!
    Chess Club HQ
    Joined
    15 Jun '05
    Moves
    18704
    11 Feb '09 01:13
    Originally posted by dsmfire
    Is it possible that a rate, say 1700, gives a lower rank now than say one year ago. I believe that I have noticed just that, and it could be due to the RHP overall rating tends to increase. Does it?
    I think that the K value in the rating calculation has a bearing on rating inflation.

    Please correct me if I am wrong, but if a low rated player like me wins against a 2200 rated player, I stand to win a maximum of 32 points, but doesn't the 2200 player only lose a maximum of 16 points as the k value is lower?

    This means that more points are won than is lost....

    .. or am I just confused?
  6. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Quarantined World
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    87415
    11 Feb '09 02:37
    I remember this debate on RHP from about 4 years ago. Once my rating stabilized at 1800ish it stopped changing much. There is no ratings inflation. There are a number of mechanisms which could allow it, but they also allow ratings deflation. On average it balances out. Ratings are only important in so far as they allow you to find opponents about your level - stop obsessing about them.
  7. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    11 Feb '09 03:29
    You've got to remember that the rating points are averaged out among all players. Any creep of points brought in at the low level gets sucked up by higher players. Any bloating would work its way to the top, leaving the rest of us pretty much where we would be.

    The value of the rating is based on the quality of the pool of players you are going against. Sub 1200 players do not determine the quality of pool that I play against.
  8. Joined
    29 Nov '08
    Moves
    9272
    11 Feb '09 09:121 edit
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    I remember this debate on RHP from about 4 years ago. Once my rating stabilized at 1800ish it stopped changing much. There is no ratings inflation. There are a number of mechanisms which could allow it, but they also allow ratings deflation. On average it balances out. Ratings are only important in so far as they allow you to find opponents about your level - stop obsessing about them.
    Good point. I cannot agree more.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree