Points make prizes

I think you should win or lose points according to both players ratings at the START of the game, not the end...

ie if you take on a 1600 plus rater...but at
checkmate he/she has dropped a few hundred due to losing other games, you don't get the relevant credit for taking up the challenge!!... i know it can work the other way..but never seems to with me !
This system also encourages people to be tactical with the timebanks...ie delaying wins or loses at timepoints most beneficial to their rating.
Hope this makes sense

Originally posted by RichyH
I think you should win or lose points according to both players ratings at the START of the game, not the end...

ie if you take on a 1600 plus rater...but at
checkmate he/she has dropped a few hundred due to losing other games, you don't get the relevant credit for taking up the challenge!!... i know it can work the other way..but never seems to with m ...[text shortened]... .ie delaying wins or loses at timepoints most beneficial to their rating.
Hope this makes sense

What if someone joined the site and you started a game with them when they were rated 1250. They then turned out to be a 2000 rated player by the time you finish your game (slowpoke).

Either way has it's disadvantages.

Originally posted by RichyH
This system also encourages people to be tactical with the timebanks...ie delaying wins or loses at timepoints most beneficial to their rating.

And this would be a good thing because...?

D

Originally posted by Ragnorak
And this would be a good thing because...?

D

thats my point, it isn't a good thing.

its fine because if they drop a few hundred points you should beat them easier because they obviously arent as good as their rating suggested. Timing wins or losses is a problem though...