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

Site Ideas Forum

  1. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    14 May '14 11:20
    The suggestion has been brought forward numerous times, so my proposals are the following and I ask everybody to post and state their opinion:

    * Please introduce permanent rating floors at 100 below highest non-provisional rating.

    * If you are unsure how the general public wil react, please please introduce a community vote.
  2. Standard member Copope
    Duck
    15 May '14 00:02
    Is there not a rating floor at 200 below highest?
  3. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    15 May '14 04:51
    Originally posted by Copope
    Is there not a rating floor at 200 below highest?
    No. It is 100 below highest, but the current rating is factored in. And it is the highest rating in the last 365 days.
  4. 15 May '14 05:20
    I assume this is for tournaments
    If so I agree with the idea although it should be 200 below highest rating
    I once had a purple patch and some how got up to 1500 but couldn't live with this as a permanent rating
  5. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    15 May '14 06:31
    A rating floor does not let the actual rating go down below a certain point. It does not matter if you lose 100 games. That's kind of the point. Usually when people lose 100 games in one day, they have decided to take a break from online chess, and the mass timeouts ensue. That does not represent a decrease in chess skill, so the damage to the rating should be limited. Otherwise the player returns with a rating that is several hundred points lower than what it should be, and that is no fun for anyone who has to play him.
  6. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    15 May '14 06:34
    Originally posted by Ponderable
    The suggestion has been brought forward numerous times, so my proposals are the following and I ask everybody to post and state their opinion:

    * Please introduce permanent rating floors at 100 below highest non-provisional rating.

    * If you are unsure how the general public wil react, please please introduce a community vote.
    I recommend that the floor not go in until the player has maintained a certain rating level over several games. Don't want to establish a high floor for a player who had temporary winning streak rather than a real improvement in playing ability.
  7. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    15 May '14 14:25
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    I recommend that the floor not go in until the player has maintained a certain rating level over several games. Don't want to establish a high floor for a player who had temporary winning streak rather than a real improvement in playing ability.
    good point. Suggest a formula please.
  8. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    15 May '14 21:18
    Originally posted by Ponderable
    good point. Suggest a formula please.
    Take the last 20 games on the rating graph (not counting provisionally rated games). Round the lowest point in the graph down to the nearest hundred. See the floor 100 points below that.

    Example: a player's lowest rating over the last 20 games is 1650. Round that down to 1600; set a floor at 1500.
  9. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    19 May '14 14:44
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    Take the last 20 games on the rating graph (not counting provisionally rated games). Round the lowest point in the graph down to the nearest hundred. See the floor 100 points below that.

    Example: a player's lowest rating over the last 20 games is 1650. Round that down to 1600; set a floor at 1500.
    You probably mean:

    take the maximum point at the graph, take the 20 ratings preceeding that...

    But then I shoould try to get a new maximum rating with a very steep ascent if I was to sand bag...
  10. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    19 May '14 16:10
    Originally posted by Ponderable
    You probably mean:

    take the maximum point at the graph, take the 20 ratings preceeding that...

    But then I shoould try to get a new maximum rating with a very steep ascent if I was to sand bag...
    No, that's not what I mean. It is not based on a maximum rating at all.
  11. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    20 May '14 14:33
    But if I read your suggestion is says the floor is ONLY the 20 most recent games...and that is a much weaker rating floor concept than the one which is in place.
  12. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    20 May '14 17:11
    Originally posted by Ponderable
    But if I read your suggestion is says the floor is ONLY the 20 most recent games...and that is a much weaker rating floor concept than the one which is in place.
    SETTING the floor is based on the last 20 games. Once the floor is set, it is permanent.
  13. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    30 Jun '14 12:13
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    SETTING the floor is based on the last 20 games. Once the floor is set, it is permanent.
    So you mean if the last 20 games give a higher floor it will be adjusted accordingly?

    That would mean (programming wise) that the system has to do the calculation after each and every finished game (twice in fact).
  14. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    30 Jun '14 18:25 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Ponderable
    So you mean if the last 20 games give a higher floor it will be adjusted accordingly?

    That would mean (programming wise) that the system has to do the calculation after each and every finished game (twice in fact).
    Yes, it would, but that's OK. It's not a difficult calculation.
  15. 02 Jul '14 06:31
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    SETTING the floor is based on the last 20 games. Once the floor is set, it is permanent.
    I do not agree that it should be permanent it could reduce but at slow rate.As I have already said I once had a purple patch that got me up to 1500 but I could not live with that rating .I would have to leave the site
    If the reason is for a floor is for tournaments it would be much better to have all tournaments as banded then if you exceed the rating that you applied for then you would go up to the next band .no brainer