Hi,
I dont know if people are doing this or not. I hope not. Well here goes. I see some people have crazy amounts of games going on. Like a 100. I wonder what is going on there. What if they only actively play the games they are winning. So these games will finish quick, and will affect their ratings. Then they might start a new game. The games that are not going to well they move as infrequently as they can. Therefore these games take a longer time to finish. Eventually all games finish, even the loosing ones, but the time it takes to loose one game might be enough time to win ten games.
What do you guys think. Is this a real problem, or does it all equal out in the end.
/Petke
Originally posted by Patrik KahariI think you'll find that the ratings inflation thing is more likely in non-subs who play a lot of 1/na games and win their games by timeout.
Hi,
I dont know if people are doing this or not. I hope not. Well here goes. I see some people have crazy amounts of games going on. Like a 100. I wonder what is going on there. What if they only actively play the games they are winning. So these games will finish quick, and will affect their ratings. Then they might start a new game. The games that ...[text shortened]...
What do you guys think. Is this a real problem, or does it all equal out in the end.
/Petke
Although i found that my score fluctuated more when i played a lot of games (60), it didn't rise or fall to any great degree. If you think this is a problem, then maybe you should not play players who play this many games.