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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    26 Jun '16 01:20 / 2 edits
    I am posting this here because I am most likely to get a quality answer on this forum.

    From reading the FAQ, it appears that the site uses the formula similar to (if not exact) to what the US Chess Federation used prior to 2012 or so.

    In the USCF system, it was roughly plus/minus 16 points for evenly rated opponents, and roughly +/minus 4 for every 100 points of rating, to a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 32.

    In any event, a person always received 1 rating point for a win, even if they were rated over 400 points more than their opponent.

    Is that true here? I have seen nothing to indicate contrary, but a "negative" is not sufficient proof that it is the case. Thanks ahead of time!
  2. Subscriber Ragwort
    Ex Duris Gloria
    26 Jun '16 05:16
    Originally posted by Paul Leggett
    I am posting this here because I am most likely to get a quality answer on this forum.

    From reading the FAQ, it appears that the site uses the formula similar to (if not exact) to what the US Chess Federation used prior to 2012 or so.

    In the USCF system, it was roughly plus/minus 16 points for evenly rated opponents, and roughly +/minus 4 for ever ...[text shortened]... e contrary, but a "negative" is not sufficient proof that it is the case. Thanks ahead of time!
    Hi Paul. As one who plays open tournaments here against all ratings I can report that you get nothing for a win over an opponent rated about 600 points or more below. Between about 400 and 600 the result of the formula rounds up to 1 point. It's still the full 32 if you lose though. Against the top rated players the formula changes for them. If one of them throws a rook for example and resigns then they lose 16 but you gain 32. I guess this can contribute to rating inflation across the site over time. Against P rated players you only gain half the number of points which amounts to 1 point or less if you are more than 200 above.
  3. Donation mwmiller
    RHP Member No.16
    26 Jun '16 11:05
    Maybe this chart will be of some help. It has been floating around here for ages and I don't know who originally came up with it.

    RATING CHART

    Key

    H - Higher rated player wins that number of points.
    D - Draw, higher player loses that number, lower player gains that number.
    L - Lower rated player wins that number of points.

    Difference _____ H -- D -- L
    0-10 __________ 16 - 0 - 16
    11-32 _________ 15 - 1 - 17
    33-54 _________ 14 - 2 - 18
    55-77 _________ 13 - 3 - 19
    78-100 ________ 12 - 4 - 20
    101-124 _______ 11 - 5 - 21
    125-149 _______ 10 - 6 - 22
    150-176 _______ 9 - 7 - 23
    177-205 _______ 8 - 8 - 24
    206-237 _______ 7 - 9 - 25
    238-273 _______ 6 - 10 - 26
    274-314 _______ 5 - 11 - 27
    315-364 _______ 4 - 12 - 28
    365-428 _______ 3 - 13 - 29
    429-523 _______ 2 - 14 - 30
    524-719 _______ 1 - 15 - 31
    720+ _________ 0 - 16 - 32
  4. 26 Jun '16 11:51
    Once your rating is over 2100 the K value changes to 24 instead of 32. Which means the most you can win/lose from a game is 24 points. Instead of the 720+ number in the above post it becomes 668+ instead.
  5. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    26 Jun '16 15:03
    Originally posted by Ragwort
    Hi Paul. As one who plays open tournaments here against all ratings I can report that you get nothing for a win over an opponent rated about 600 points or more below. Between about 400 and 600 the result of the formula rounds up to 1 point. It's still the full 32 if you lose though. Against the top rated players the formula changes for them. If one of them t ...[text shortened]... gain half the number of points which amounts to 1 point or less if you are more than 200 above.
    Thanks to everyone who posted. Since this incarnation is not zero-sum, it is definitely different compared to the pre-2012 USCF formula.

    I have not paid all that much attention to it until recently, but I have noticed that players seem to get really hung up about other people's ratings. I haven't cared about ratings much at all, except to note that my own rating tends to inflate when I play casual games against lower-rated players and real-world friends whom I play on the site, but then deflates in tournaments and clan games.

    My rating would get more "real" if my real-world friends would stop playing on their phones and actually put a little work into the games, but I have sort of given up on the crusade.