I just had a thought. Maybe it's a good one, maybe not. I know in a chess game, it's fairly easy to keep a numerical score based on the piece value. (e.g. If I'm up a pawn and a knight in a particular game, you could say that I'm ahead by 4 points) At the moment, I have a lot of games going. Some of these games I'm winning, and some I'm losing. Anyway, I was thinking it might be kind of cool to know my "estimated true rating". In other words, if I resigned all the games I'm losing at the moment and my opponent resigned all the games I'm winning at the moment, what would my rating be?
I think the formula would be fairly simple. Take all the games I'm winning and (assuming I win all of them) add up the estimated ratings gains (A). Then take all the games I'm losing and do the same (B). Then A-B="Estimated True Rating".
Would anyone else find this statistic helpful or interesting?
Originally posted by rbmorrisI wonder what the load on the server would be to do this calculation every time someone displays their 'My Games' page?
I just had a thought. Maybe it's a good one, maybe not. I know in a chess game, it's fairly easy to keep a numerical score based on the piece value. (e.g. If I'm up a pawn and a knight in a particular game, you could say that I'm ahead by 4 points) At the moment, I have a lot of games going. Some of these games I'm winning, and some I'm losing. Anyway ...[text shortened]... d True Rating".
Would anyone else find this statistic helpful or interesting?
Or would this be trivial?
Originally posted by HindsteinRight. It wouldn't be perfect. But it would be the best guess at the time. The more games you're playing, the more accurate it would probably be from a statistical standpoint.
A good idea, but I suppose that a material advantage doesn't always mean that you are winning the game - sacrificing a minor piece for a postional advantage is commonplace....
Yes, I could win a game by sac'ing a piece. Then again, so could one of my opponents.
Originally posted by rbmorrisSorry, I don't see the use.
Right. It wouldn't be perfect. But it would be the best guess at the time. The more games you're playing, the more accurate it would probably be from a statistical standpoint.
Yes, I could win a game by sac'ing a piece. Then again, so could one of my opponents.
D
I keep track of my games by having a list with a "+", a "-" or a "=" if I'm up, down or equal in material respectively. This mean that I with a glance can decide if I have more plus-games, then my rating will raise, if I have more minus-games, then my rating will go down.
However, I've lost a lot of plus-games due to various reasons, but also won minus-games by opponents blunders. In average, this method works, but I cannot make any true prognosis of my future ratings.
I don't think Russ and his staff should put a lot of energy of this idea. He has enough to do on his list anyway.
Originally posted by rbmorrisAlternatively, it could allow you to enter predictions yourself for each game, or a subset of your games. If there are 5 you know you'll win and 3 you expect to lose, you could mark them as such and request an estimated rating. Also, of course, you could mark games you expect to draw as draws.
I just had a thought. Maybe it's a good one, maybe not. I know in a chess game, it's fairly easy to keep a numerical score based on the piece value. (e.g. If I'm up a pawn and a knight in a particular game, you could say that I'm ahead by 4 points) At the moment, I have a lot of games going. Some of these games I'm winning, and some I'm losing. Anyway ...[text shortened]... d True Rating".
Would anyone else find this statistic helpful or interesting?
You would not want to automatically count "even" games as draws becuase that would give you lots of points if you're in the first few moves against much better players. But there are some "even" games you could reasonably guess will turn out to be draws.
Originally posted by XanthosNZOn a page with 15 posts I have to click on 15 profiles (to see each contributors rating) just to follow the conversation. This is a great waste of time and an un-necessary load on the servers. Rather than
Why is that vital?
Name: z00t
Joined : 13 Apr '06
Moves : 1587
Location: Blank
I would prefer to have
Name: z00t
Joined : 13 Apr '06
Rating : 1587
Then errors like those in Thread 51788 would not manifest, and I would not have to click on 15 profiles every time I click on a thread. I could also avoid threads by the numerous forum-only members who have been "hanging around" a wee bit lately.
Kapish?
Originally posted by z00tWhy do you NEED to know what someone's chess rating is "follow the conversation". Just may be of interest in the 'chess only' forum, but anywhere else it is completely irrelevant.
On a page with 15 posts I have to click on 15 profiles (to see each contributors rating) just to follow the conversation. This is a great waste of time and an un-necessary load on the servers. Rather than
Name: z00t
Joined : 13 Apr '06
Moves : 1587
Location: Blank
I would prefer to have
Name: z00t
Joined : 13 Apr '06
Rating : 1587
Then errors ...[text shortened]... the numerous forum-only members who have been "hanging around" a wee bit lately.
Kapish?
Do you believe only high rated chess players are worthy of listening to?