15 Mar 07
Some don't give a **** about their rating. And some do and take the rating very seriously.
I hate to be playing people hwho has a skill 300 points above their rating. When I lose, I lose a lot of rating points. If I win, I only get a few points when I really am worth a lot more.
By delibirately skewing the rating system is not fair to people who see their own rating seriously.
15 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasI agree. I usually move rapidly (I hate seeing games waiting for me to move), but when I'm facing someone like that I usually make a point of waiting for their rating to recover, even if it means eating into my timebank. You can't always blame the players, unfortunately (their rating usually drops as a result of timeouts, and there are always strong OTB players with a ridiculously low provisional rating), but you get the occasional sandbagger who gives the whole system a bad name.
I hate to be playing people hwho has a skill 300 points above their rating. When I lose, I lose a lot of rating points. If I win, I only get a few points when I really am worth a lot more.
.
15 Mar 07
Originally posted by Restless SoulI disagree. While I think that I could beat any 1800 on a good day, I'm simply not consistent enough to regularily do it, therefor I deserve a 1600ish rating.
Maybe at master lvl, but at club lvl ratings arn't that accurate...even still, people let a silly number that means nothing go to their heads
15 Mar 07
Originally posted by FabianFnasI don't know the rating of Morphy, Lasker or Capablanca, but that doesn't stop me appreciating their skill. I can easily tell that they could play positions much better than I can.
Because it is the only measure one can compare ones skill with others...
Instead of players putting their pride in a 4 digit value, it may help them better if they considered what they would have to put in a hypothetical "My Best Games" book.