1. Joined
    21 Dec '06
    Moves
    3169
    09 Mar '07 08:52
    1) Make possibility to set rating limits available for provisional players too.

    There were few threads on this topic in Help forum. Existing limitation is quite annoying. People start using game name to ask for certain opponent's rating. It is not clear why this limitation actually exists.

    2) When rating limits are set this should not limit the game to non-provisional players only.

    3) Adding a check box "Exclude provisional players". This one should be available for non-provisional players only and checked by default.
  2. Joined
    22 Aug '05
    Moves
    26450
    09 Mar '07 17:071 edit
    If this was changed loads more games would get deleted so I would vote for the system to stay how it is. { Not that I'd get a vote of course.🙁 }
    Also it doesn't take long to play 20 games does it?
  3. Joined
    21 Dec '06
    Moves
    3169
    09 Mar '07 18:481 edit
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    If this was changed loads more games would get deleted...
    Why? Could you elaborate please?
  4. Joined
    22 Aug '05
    Moves
    26450
    09 Mar '07 22:01
    They would still make games called "such and such rating only" or similar.

    Can I ask why it bothers you when you are not a provisional?
  5. Joined
    14 Feb '07
    Moves
    1422
    09 Mar '07 22:591 edit
    I think it will lead to far less games being deleted:
    Thread 64546
  6. Joined
    22 Aug '05
    Moves
    26450
    10 Mar '07 01:081 edit
    Originally posted by tiggeronvrb
    I think it will lead to far less games being deleted:
    Thread 64546
    The problem people have is that the provo is possibly a much higher class player than his 1200 rating indicates and so we stand to lose more points than we should for being beaten by what is in fact a better player.
    If there was a default setting to not play provos MAYBE it would work...
  7. Joined
    21 Dec '06
    Moves
    3169
    10 Mar '07 07:47
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    Can I ask why it bothers you when you are not a provisional?
    I was provisional not a long time ago and still remember how annoying the lack of rating limits was.
    The change will make RHP more attractive for those who just joined us.
    I think my proposal is more logical then existing system. Why setting rating limits should be implicitly bundled with exclusion of provisionals? I suggest to add a check box for the latter.
    As for myself I try not be obsessed with rating points, just enjoying and learning the game. Out of my 3 games in progress one is with p1200.
  8. Standard memberXanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    p^2.sin(phi)
    Joined
    06 Sep '04
    Moves
    25076
    11 Mar '07 14:25
    Originally posted by iru
    I was provisional not a long time ago and still remember how annoying the lack of rating limits was.
    The change will make RHP more attractive for those who just joined us.
    I think my proposal is more logical then existing system. Why setting rating limits should be implicitly bundled with exclusion of provisionals? I suggest to add a check box for the latter ...[text shortened]... ng points, just enjoying and learning the game. Out of my 3 games in progress one is with p1200.
    The provisional rating system is open for abuse if the opponents can be chosen (you can beat 1800 players to earn a 2200 rating or just lose to 2000 players to earn a 1600 rating), the inability for provisional players to set rating limits on open invites helps control this (it still happens sometimes).
  9. Joined
    14 Feb '07
    Moves
    1422
    11 Mar '07 15:58
    Noone is forced to accept any open invitaion. If a provisional (or anyone else) has ridiculous rating limits then just ignore them.

    There could be a limit for provisional players (or anyone) that:
    1. Their own rating must be within the rating range OR
    2. Range lower limit is not more than 100 points above their rating and upper range is not more than 200 points above their rating for example.

    Both of these would be far more acceptable than current system I think.
  10. Joined
    22 Aug '05
    Moves
    26450
    11 Mar '07 21:09
    I think the current system works well.
  11. Standard memberMrJohn
    A Chess Friend :-)
    Texas :-)
    Joined
    20 Nov '06
    Moves
    718
    31 Mar '07 20:30
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    I think the current system works well.
    I agree. :-)

    The best way to find a new game, I think, is to ask an opponent whom you've enjoyed playing to recommend a new opponent for you. Unless you like to play very large numbers of games concurrently, there's really no need to issue open invites after you've played a couple of games here, it seems to me. :-)

    Thx! :-)
Back to Top