22 Nov '09 01:55>
i'd like to see somewhere the highest rated player someone has beaten and the lowest rated person they've lost to. would help when setting up clan challenges and looking at graphs i think.
Originally posted by trev33I really think having played over 6000 games that the graph is a very good indicator of the players playing strenght...If you go from front to finish you will see where the rating is the biggest percentage of the time. I find it to be quite accurate.
i'd like to see somewhere the highest rated player someone has beaten and the lowest rated person they've lost to. would help when setting up clan challenges and looking at graphs i think.
Originally posted by Very Rustynot everyone has played over 6000 games.
I really think having played over 6000 games that the graph is a very good indicator of the players playing strenght...If you go from front to finish you will see where the rating is the biggest percentage of the time. I find it to be quite accurate.
Originally posted by Very Rustyyou've almost made more move this month than i'm made with this account 😵 we'll have to get a rematch of our games sometime.
You don't need that many to judge where a person is. Hell I have lost more games than many on this site have played...lol..
Originally posted by trev33If we go for that it should eclude wins on time. I have a 2000+ on my list which in no way reflects my strength.
i'd like to see somewhere the highest rated player someone has beaten and the lowest rated person they've lost to. would help when setting up clan challenges and looking at graphs i think.
Originally posted by trev33As Ponderable pointed out the stat idea doesnt really say anything.
but some people get quite high rating by only beating up on low rank opponents, i'd like a stat that shows that.
Originally posted by trev33I have only made 3883..WOW...that is a lot of moves isn't it!
you've almost made more move this month than i'm made with this account 😵 we'll have to get a rematch of our games sometime.
but some people get quite high rating by only beating up on low rank opponents, i'd like a stat that shows that.
Originally posted by PonderableThe thing about excluding wins on time is that in lost positions players will just let their time run out. This happens more than you would think. It is surprising how bad of a sport chess players can be.
If we go for that it should eclude wins on time. I have a 2000+ on my list which in no way reflects my strength.
And as some would point out sandbaggers coming back can also heavily distort matters I think I lost to a 700 somewhere.
So if you know I won against a 2000 and lost to a 700 what will you learn? That I am a sandbagger?