I guess that the actual rating is more important. When someone plays a much higher rankend player, then his average opponent number (AO) will increase very much, whereas his ratting will barely drop. Of course the opposing players rating will increase by just a few points and his AO will drop sharply. So it's much easier to 'manipulate' your AO then your actual ratting (you'll have to play people with the same, or higher rating than you and score points, to improve your rating).
Avr. opponent vs. rating
Sort:
When I started playing on this site my rating was lower than it is now. I had more trouble with some opponents than I do now. So my average opponent and winning percentage may be less acurate than my actual rating here.
Of course my rating can be suddenly inflated, so I guess average and winning percentage combined does count. But so does best win etc.
I'd rather stick to rating
well i have about 100 games, my average opp. is 1460 (which i think cant be right, dont have the full games arhive to chek it out). I just finished a game with a +2000 opponent and my avr. opp. rised for 5 points.
shacka wrote:
well i have about 100 games, my average opp. is 1460 (which i think cant be right, dont have the full games arhive to chek it out). I just finished a game with a +2000 opponent and my avr. opp. rised for 5 points.
(2000 - 1460) / 100 = 5.4. No problem.
To the OP, rating is an accurate reflection of a player's strength whatever opposition he has played against.
Average opponent stats would be skewed due to players with unknown stengths starting off with a 1200 rating. If they are really better than that, their early opponents average opponent rating would be artificially lowered. And vice versa.
first you look at the opponents rating, then at how many games he played, then at the average opponent and at the win loss persentage (if you can do that without premium).
if the person loses alot, and has an average ratin, but has a very high opponent aaverage it meens he is very good, but just not quite well as his opponents, it's important to see how many games the player has played, becuase when starting at chess.com the rating jumps and drops very high with every game untill it settles down.
you play weak oppenents then (I don't have much room either, ave 1420 and my rating 1433.) I think a good way to look is to see average opponent and the win percent if the AO is lower than the players rating and a high win % maybe their rating is inflated. Also the reverse is true, if you have a high losing % and the AO is significantly higher than the actual rating, then the player is stronger than the rating reflects.
What do you feel has more weight - the rating of a player or his average opponents.
Extra question, has anyone detected a mistake in the calcuation of his average opponents.