rating category

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
I don't know if it is wise to have the blue and green players next to each other in the classifications- that has caused problems in the past.

It wouldn't be appropriate for me to elucidate further on the socio-political, economic and religious context of their differences, but I will just say that they have a colorful history.

We should also avoi ...[text shortened]... e ratings chart- Let's just say that they also have a very checkered past, and leave it at that.

ok....
I have another idea for the segregation of players:

The Go system.

So a beginner has 50 kyu

as he or she has better skills in go, the kyu goes to 1.

a class A player is more or less 5 to 1 kyu of game power.

Next is the master level:

so after 1 kyu... start 1 Dan, 2 dan... etc....

at 7 dan the player is a Pro....

he can make money from go...

and is considered 1 Dan again... but this time is 1 Dan PRO.....

there are 9 Dan in each category.

I think I am a 30 kyu chess player in this system
and caissad4 could be a 5 kyu player

Magnus Carlsen will be the 9 Dan Pro...

etc etc

Originally posted by Schlecter
ok....
I have another idea for the segregation of players:

The Go system.

So a beginner has 50 kyu

as he or she has better skills in go, the kyu goes to 1.

a class A player is more or less 5 to 1 kyu of game power.

Next is the master level:

so after 1 kyu... start 1 Dan, 2 dan... etc....

at 7 dan the player is a Pro....

he can make ...[text shortened]... stem
and caissad4 could be a 5 kyu player

Magnus Carlsen will be the 9 Dan Pro...

etc etc

Hmmmm. Seems very black and white!

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
I don't know if it is wise to have the blue and green players next to each other in the classifications- that has caused problems in the past.

It wouldn't be appropriate for me to elucidate further on the socio-political, economic and religious context of their differences, but I will just say that they have a colorful history.

Not to worry, though. Modern chess uses rooks, not chariots.

Rating = 0 : Beginner
Rating > 0 : Master

Congrats everyone.

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
Hmmmm. Seems very black and white!

ok.

My LAST idea.... a rating like BOX or UFC:

You just say how many games you won, lost, draw and no contest.....

that's all.

for example: a 10-0-1, means: 10 wins, 0-losses, 1 draw.
in this case my rating is: 144-187-54

There is a website of chess that implements this type of ratings: itsyourturn.com and every one there is happy with this system.

Let's try here!!

Originally posted by Schlecter
ok....
I have another idea for the segregation of players:

The Go system.

So a beginner has 50 kyu

as he or she has better skills in go, the kyu goes to 1.

a class A player is more or less 5 to 1 kyu of game power.

Next is the master level:

so after 1 kyu... start 1 Dan, 2 dan... etc....

at 7 dan the player is a Pro....

he can make ...[text shortened]... stem
and caissad4 could be a 5 kyu player

Magnus Carlsen will be the 9 Dan Pro...

etc etc

Yeah great idea
Don't mess with me, I'm a 1st degree black belt in Chess 😕

Originally posted by ChessPraxis
Yeah great idea
Don't mess with me, I'm a 1st degree black belt in Chess 😕

I'm part of the Johnny Carson School of Chess...Sansabelt!

Originally posted by King Tiger
Player? And deserves respect???

Ulf T was rated 1400ish less than 2 years ago. I think we all can surmise how this progress was made. Again, very 'surprised' this would slip an apparent master's notice...

It's obvious how Ulf T has progressed. In all likelihood he's been coached by the same IM responsible for Roadstar's meteoric rise from obscurity. Both profiles look very similar, so good coaching has to be the key, right?

Originally posted by Schlecter
ok.

My LAST idea.... a rating like BOX or UFC:

You just say how many games you won, lost, draw and no contest.....

that's all.

for example: a 10-0-1, means: 10 wins, 0-losses, 1 draw.
in this case my rating is: 144-187-54

There is a website of chess that implements this type of ratings: itsyourturn.com and every one there is happy with this system.

Let's try here!!

Yes very good idea..a step in the right direction. But then a person might challenge only players with a big number of losses.

Originally posted by Larkie
It's obvious how Ulf T has progressed. In all likelihood he's been coached by the same IM responsible for Roadstar's meteoric rise from obscurity. Both profiles look very similar, so good coaching has to be the key, right?

I've read a post that claims everyone on page 1 & 2 are computer cheaters.

Originally posted by woadman
I've read a post that claims everyone on page 1 & 2 are computer cheaters.

Have you? Well don't believe everything you read. Yes there are engine users proliferating the upper echelons here but there are a great many very good and very honest players too.

Originally posted by woadman
I've read a post that claims everyone on page 1 & 2 are computer cheaters.

Almost anytime such a blanket statement is made, it's liable to miss a foot or a hand.

I have had some good games with 2200+ rated players, I believe that most if not all play legitimately. Playing a 2200 rated player compared to a 2300, the difference is enormous. There's a huge spike in skill gap. To get a 2300 rating you have to be able to a least get draws against engines (or else pick your matches very carefully). A 2400 rated player has to be able to beat engines with some consistency.

There are 21 players between 2325-2399 and there are only 18 players between 2225-2299.

It doesn't make sense. If you were to make a graph of Total population vs. Population above X rating you would see a slope indicating that there's a loss of population the higher the rating gets. Until you got to the 2300's, that's where the engine use starts.

I'm not saying all 2300+ are engine users, but statistically there should be less of them.

Originally posted by KnightStalker47
I have had some good games with 2200+ rated players, I believe that most if not all play legitimately. Playing a 2200 rated player compared to a 2300, the difference is enormous. There's a huge spike in skill gap. To get a 2300 rating you have to be able to a least get draws against engines (or else pick your matches very carefully). A 2400 rated pla ...[text shortened]... s.

I'm not saying all 2300+ are engine users, but statistically there should be less of them.

Say you have just started a game versus a 2300 or 2400 rated player that is a suspected engine user. You have the Black pieces..obviously you can't win with tactics...so you pick a defense known to be draw-ish..maybe the Petroff's. Is it possible to force a draw ?

Originally posted by woadman
Say you have just started a game versus a 2300 or 2400 rated player that is a suspected engine user. You have the Black pieces..obviously you can't win with tactics...so you pick a defense known to be draw-ish..maybe the Petroff's. Is it possible to force a draw ?

The thing is, those engines are rated some of them around 3500 FIDE performance rating. So a 2400 player would not stand a chance under almost ANY opening because of the tactical sharpness of those engines, especially when they are matched with a modern multi-core CPU, some of them 8 or more CPU's under one roof and 3+ gigahertz speeds and 24 gigs of ram or more and maybe solid state drives which are like ten times faster than a traditional hard drive so they put out some serious computing power, way past what 20 years ago was considered super fast, now is commonplace at the amateur level if they want to do that. The original Cray 'supercomputer' could barely put out 200 megaflops and people paid millions for that, now you can get that out of a cell phone. So the big boys are now approaching EXAflop speeds with their 10,000 plus parallel CPU racks that takes a city's worth of electricity and a small dam of water to cool🙂 If they were loaded with chess software, which as far as I know, they haven't been so far, but if they were, those super computers would run rings around the Deep Blue job that defeated Kasparov back in the day, where just a few weeks before that match, he said 'no computer will EVER beat me'. Little egg on the face there🙂 I think that comp put out about 200 million positions per second, and you can get that out of a tablet now🙂

So the gist of that is, use whatever frigging opening you want, up against the modern engines with some good CPU horsepower behind it, maybe a SSD and 24 gigs of ram, NO human can win a series of games. Maybe a draw or two but in say, a ten game match, no contest and that would include Magnus Carlsen or any of the other 2800+ crowd.