Is it possible that the rating Ironman31 has achieved is pretty much as high as the ratings go. I havent saw a significant change in his rating since he has reached this high point. If anything his rating has ceased to change. Will the higher ratings ever get up to the 2700s or even the 2800s like most of the top ten players in the world.
Just wondering.
Originally posted by Blitz00Ironman gains very few points (one or zero) per win now. Unless of course it's a win over a top 10 player.
Is it possible that the rating Ironman31 has achieved is pretty much as high as the ratings go. I havent saw a significant change in his rating since he has reached this high point. If anything his rating has ceased to change. Will the higher ratings ever get up to the 2700s or even the 2800s like most of the top ten players in the world.
Just wondering.
I think slowly the ratings distribution will lengthen at the top but I have no clue how long it will take.
So its pretty much safe to say that the ratings have reached their max right at this point. It will probly take years for the ratings to get that high. Unless everyone suddenly turns master and everyone is rated 2000 or up. Which mind you probly isnt going to happen. Is it just more or is Ironmans rating actually going down? I guess its from playing people weaker than him correct? or maybe from draws?
Originally posted by Blitz00It would be pretty hard to get everyone up to 2000 if everyone starts on 1200, as where points are picked up, points must also be lost.
So its pretty much safe to say that the ratings have reached their max right at this point. It will probly take years for the ratings to get that high. Unless everyone suddenly turns master and everyone is rated 2000 or up. Which mind you probly isnt going to happen.
If everyone started with a provisional of 1800, then all the gardes would probably be skewed upwards (by my logic, as there would be more grading points kicking around for everyone to play for)... leading to the top players having higher grades.
As I have already said, everyone starts at 1200 provisionally, isn't it much higher in the FIDE list? (1800 last time I checked)
Really FIDE starts the provisional rating at 1800? Thats pretty cool. I agree with you about having a higher starting provisional rating but, it is kind of too late for it now. I dont think it would be fair to the people that have been here for every new person that comes along to get a rating of 1800 automatically. Still though good idea. Maybe the ratings formula could be changed to help this out in some way.
Is there any support for the idea of biasing the ratings formula so that you get more points for a win with Black over a player than you would for a win with White over that same player? And a draw with Black would raise you up more if your opponent were higher rated, or drop you less if your opponent were lower rated. I would think the biasing formula would have to grant more points in favor of Black when playing a high-rated player than when playing a low-rated player, since the tempo disadvantage means more against a high-rated player.
If there is any interest in this scheme, I am willing to devise some sort of formula to implement it.
Originally posted by Paul DiracI think the current system works fine. I don't think the black/white difference is really apparent except at the top levels on this site.
Is there any support for the idea of biasing the ratings formula so that you get more points for a win with Black over a player than you would for a win with White over that same player? And a draw with Black would raise you up more if your opponent were higher rated, or drop you less if your opponent were lower rated. I would think the biasing formula wo ...[text shortened]... ere is any interest in this scheme, I am willing to devise some sort of formula to implement it.
Suppose you have two players. One beats the other more often than not, and ends up with a rating of 1300, while the other has a rating of 1100. The 1100 guy gets discouraged and quits. However, someone else joins up, and has a rating of 1200.
100 points just got created among the active chess population.
Every time someone joines, 1200 points get added into the mix. So over time the top ratings will increase I think.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIf someone quits with a rating of 1300 doesnt that mean we have just lost 1300? When someone joins and starts with a rating of 1200 right after the other person quits we still are losing a hundred points that can no longer be used right?
Suppose you have two players. One beats the other more often than not, and ends up with a rating of 1300, while the other has a rating of 1100. The 1100 guy gets discouraged and quits. However, someone else joins up, and has a rating of 1200.
100 points just got created among the active chess population.
Every time someone joines, 1200 points get added into the mix. So over time the top ratings will increase I think.
Originally posted by Blitz00How often do people quit with a rating above 1200? Most often they leave and resign all their games in progress (or they get timed out) most likely dropping them well below 1200.
If someone quits with a rating of 1300 doesnt that mean we have just lost 1300? When someone joins and starts with a rating of 1200 right after the other person quits we still are losing a hundred points that can no longer be used right?