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

Site Ideas Forum

  1. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    25 Jan '14 06:01
    Can it please be based on average rating of last 90 days at least for paying members. Oveously my entry rating is not really my skill level. It got that high from playing a lot of low rated players and winning. It gets sooooo mundane having to play the same people over in over again and lossing. The feeling of that is like getting fired from a job.
  2. 25 Jan '14 07:03
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    Can it please be based on average rating of last 90 days at least for paying members. Oveously my entry rating is not really my skill level. It got that high from playing a lot of low rated players and winning. It gets sooooo mundane having to play the same people over in over again and lossing. The feeling of that is like getting fired from a job.
    You obviously haven't read the posts on this before
    Where people lose games to get a lower rating to win tournaments
  3. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    25 Jan '14 14:46 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by padger
    You obviously haven't read the posts on this before
    Where people lose games to get a lower rating to win tournaments
    Well I guess I'll wait a year tell my rating goes down for tournaments. And only play in open invite games and move at the last minute possible each game so my rating doesn't go up.
  4. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    04 Feb '14 20:14 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    Can it please be based on average rating of last 90 days at least for paying members. Oveously my entry rating is not really my skill level. It got that high from playing a lot of low rated players and winning. It gets sooooo mundane having to play the same people over in over again and lossing. The feeling of that is like getting fired from a job.
    Would be nice if there was no floor. Tournaments would fill up faster and you could play in more tournaments. And I could be in more then one of the Hardcore Tournaments going on right know.
  5. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    05 Feb '14 17:07
    I like the current method. It prevents sandbagging (except not really clan sandbagging, which is another thing) and at the same time, for those who can't be on the site for a month and lose a lot of games to timeout (it's happened to me several times), it gives a method to get your rating back more quickly, if you can play in tourneys higher than your new low rating.
  6. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    06 Feb '14 16:38
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    I like the current method. It prevents sandbagging (except not really clan sandbagging, which is another thing) and at the same time, for those who can't be on the site for a month and lose a lot of games to timeout (it's happened to me several times), it gives a method to get your rating back more quickly, if you can play in tourneys higher than your new low rating.
    And the higher rated players just LOVE having an underrated 1400 player in the tourney! They all get to pony up a bunch of their rating points to help that player get back to their real strength.
  7. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    07 Feb '14 00:51 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    And the higher rated players just LOVE having an underrated 1400 player in the tourney! They all get to pony up a bunch of their rating points to help that player get back to their real strength.
    So there is a flaw in the matrix? Could you imagine a 2,200 player that was gone a month comes back at 1,100 and enters a 1800+ and wins all the games. I bet $ that hasn't happened before?
  8. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    07 Feb '14 23:05 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    So there is a flaw in the matrix? Could you imagine a 2,200 player that was gone a month comes back at 1,100 and enters a 1800+ and wins all the games. I bet $ that hasn't happened before?
    There have been 1800 players who went down to 1000 and came back and won U1400 tournaments.

    There is a way to fix it, although with a collateral cost. Watch as the mere mention of this idea summons a certain odious poster as reliably as Michael Keaton to the call of "Beetlejuice".

    RATING FLOORS.

  9. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    08 Feb '14 01:49 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    There have been 1800 players who went down to 1000 and came back and won U1400 tournaments.

    There is a way to fix it, although with a collateral cost. Watch as the mere mention of this idea summons a certain odious poster as reliably as Michael Keaton to the call of "Beetlejuice".

    [b]RATING FLOORS.


    [/b]
    What is the worst sportsmanship that of what you Mentioned or going into an 1800+ tournament where you're at 1100 and you beat everybody? I do like the rating floor for tournaments and for non-tournament. My Chess instructor his floor is 2200.
  10. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    09 Feb '14 01:14
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    What is the worst sportsmanship that of what you Mentioned or going into an 1800+ tournament where you're at 1100 and you beat everybody? I do like the rating floor for tournaments and for non-tournament. My Chess instructor his floor is 2200.
    I'd say playing down when you are underrated is worse than playing up. It's not fair to any of the opponents rating-wise, but at least the games are more interesting when the underrated faces players of his/her own strength.