Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Site Ideas Forum

Site Ideas Forum

  1. 02 Oct '07 03:19 / 2 edits
    I think we should switch to an ELO Rating System

    Nevermind,

    I don't know if that is possible
  2. Standard member Daemon Sin
    I'm A Mighty Pirate™
    02 Oct '07 20:09
    Originally posted by Drew L
    I think we should switch to an ELO Rating System

    Nevermind,

    I don't know if that is possible
    You mean have Roy Wood watch our games and rate them?
  3. Standard member Daemon Sin
    I'm A Mighty Pirate™
    03 Oct '07 10:46 / 1 edit
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Damn it, Smaug. At least my ELO pun had a bit of class and subtly to it.
  4. Subscriber invigorate
    Only 1 F in Uckfield
    03 Oct '07 10:57 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Drew L
    I think we should switch to an ELO Rating System

    Nevermind,

    I don't know if that is possible
    Mines more like ODBYE rating!
  5. Standard member Drax946
    The Chess Clan
    06 Oct '07 17:28
    Originally posted by Drew L
    I think we should switch to an ELO Rating System

    Nevermind,

    I don't know if that is possible
    If you look at the FAQ under the Help menu you will see a question about rating calculation. If you are familiar with the formulas developed by Dr. Elo you may get a pleasant surprise.

    Many federations and organizations may use the formulas, but their systems will be different due to each system's non-interaction. So a player may have a US Chess correspondence rating of say 1400 and a Red Hot Pawn rating of 1700 because the two systems don't interact/exchange data.

    On the other hand, E.L.O. did rock back in the day.
  6. Subscriber coquette
    Already mated
    06 Oct '07 21:26
    the ratings of USCF and other systems correlate nicely. the reason that they may not seem like they do is that at any given time each active players' ratings vary. my rating may be 1600 one day and 1300 on a different day, but my average rating is fairly steady and is quite close to my uscf rating.
  7. 06 Oct '07 22:11
    Originally posted by coquette
    the ratings of USCF and other systems correlate nicely. the reason that they may not seem like they do is that at any given time each active players' ratings vary. my rating may be 1600 one day and 1300 on a different day, but my average rating is fairly steady and is quite close to my uscf rating.
    You can't compare USCF or FIDE ratings with RHP ratings - even if the two systems being compared use exactly the same formula for ratings calculation, there are different active populations and therefore different distributions of ratings points.

    The rating system is a statistical performance model - It can only provide a measure within the population that provides the base data.

    You can't take a rating from RHP and say it equals or is greater or less than anything other than another RHP rating.
    You'd need a large number of people who participate in both systems to be able to start comparing ratings between one system and another - and even then it would be pretty meaningless.

    You may find that your ratings go hand in hand - but you can't generalise and hold that as an assertion that holds true for two systems.
  8. Subscriber coquette
    Already mated
    07 Oct '07 04:51
    that's an ecological fallacy