Many people already decry the accuracy of ratings. If you introduced player choice as to whether or not to include a game, the ratings would get just that little bit less accurate.
Declining positive ratings adjustments?
Sort:
notmtwain wrote:
Yes, but this is why I'd limit it to only games that didn't end in a checkmate, resignation, or agreed draw, and similarly would only allow users to decline positive adjustments. I don't think that sort of decision would make the rating less accurate - I think it would do the opposite.
Many people already decry the accuracy of ratings. If you introduced player choice as to whether or not to include a game, the ratings would get just that little bit less accurate.
You can kind of do at least part of this already. Uncheck this box in your online chess settings and your timed out games just stay in limbo.
Auto-Win on Time:
Automatically claim victory when time runs out!
Do you really get so many timed out games that it would effect your rating that much?
I've played nearly as many games as you and have only ever had 1 person time out.
Also, out of curiosity; I noticed your avg. opponent rating is more than 200 points above your rating. How did you manage that? When I play, I set my ratings range to about -50 to about +500, but I still usually just get people within 50 points of my rating.
Someone on another thread was wanting to know how to get much higher rated players as well.
Jul 13, 2014
0
#6
If you've been winning, the the positivly-adjusted rating DOES reflect your actual strength.
But no, chess.com won't offer such an option. There are too many cheaters out there, who would use that to keep thier rating down, to slip under the rating csps of tournaments and such.
And once ratings become inaccurate, rating caps become useless. And everybody gets screwed.
kleelof wrote:
Do you really get so many timed out games that it would effect your rating that much?
I've played nearly as many games as you and have only ever had 1 person time out.
Also, out of curiosity; I noticed your avg. opponent rating is more than 200 points above your rating. How did you manage that? When I play, I set my ratings range to about -50 to about +500, but I still usually just get people within 50 points of my rating.
Someone on another thread was wanting to know how to get much higher rated players as well.
It's possible that I just had an unlucky spell, but yes I had a long string of timeouts - I was nearly at 1600 as a result, which I'm afraid doesn't really reflect my abilities!
In terms of finding higher-ranked players, I suppose there are two things that caused that. Firstly, I always check the open seeks to see if there's someone with a higher rank looking for a match. Secondly, I've acidentally ended up in a few rather unbalanced tournaments - my last one had six games against people ranging from 1800+ to 2100+. I didn't win, but I think I learned a few things...
Having said all of that, I'll now struggle to find matches against higher ranked players from this moment onwards. ;-)
I should also say - thanks for the replies! It hadn't occurred to me that someone might cheat to have a lower score - what a waste of time.
Jul 14, 2014
0
#10
Your rating might get a boost from opponents timing out, however if you can't manage to play at that level your rating will drop down to its true level.
Hello,
I think I already know the answer to this one but I'll ask just in case - is there any way to decline positive ratings adjustments? I'd rather my rating reflect where I actually am as a player; whenever I lose because a player has just timed out or because their account is deleted, I'd rather not get the points boost. That said, I guess it'd have to be optional - sometimes a timeout is because the other player has basically lost. Still, I like the idea.
Any thoughts?