.... You get a bigger bump up if you beat a 900 ELO than if you beat a 500 ELO etc... That's all fairly self evident but I was wondering if the ELO calculation takes in to account the manner of win/loss?
So for example:
Scenario 1 - a 1000 ELO player loses to an 800 ELO player in the space of say 12-15 moves.
Scenario 2 - The same 1000 ELO player loses to the same 800 ELO player but this time it's an extremely close game all the way to the end
Would the ELO ratings go up/down to the same degree in both scenarios or does how well/poorly you played also factor in to it?
Both scenarios would result in the same rating change. The quality and length of the game have no impact.
Chess.com uses the Glicko rating system. In short, there are only three factors for adjusting rating:
- Win/Loss or Draw
- Rating difference between the two players
- The "uncertainty" for each player. (The fewer games a player has played recently, the more uncertainty = larger rating gain/loss for that player. The more games a player has played recently, smaller uncertainty = less rating gain/loss for that player.)
I'm not particularly interested in the minutiae of how ELO is calculated, I just have a general question about it.
It obviously goes up/down if you win/lose
and it goes up/down by more/less depending on the level of you're opponent. You get a bigger bump up if you beat a 900 ELO than if you beat a 500 ELO etc... That's all fairly self evident but I was wondering if the ELO calculation takes in to account the manner of win/loss?
So for example:
Scenario 1 - a 1000 ELO player loses to an 800 ELO player in the space of say 12-15 moves.
Scenario 2 - The same 1000 ELO player loses to the same 800 ELO player but this time it's an extremely close game all the way to the end
Would the ELO ratings go up/down to the same degree in both scenarios or does how well/poorly you played also factor in to it?