Unrated Games

In my own opinion, unrated games should count towards a player's win-loss-draw percentage, as well as their "Highest Rated Win" section in their stats.

Just because points were not involved doesn't mean that the match never occurred.

My two cents.

Correct!

I don't think so. I play alot of unrated games as welcome games to newcomers on chess.com, and most of them don't grasp they have 3 days to make a move. So they play like one move thinking it's real time chess, and when I don't make a move within a certain amount of time they give up and forget about the game. Then I end up winning on time after I make a move and they fail to make a move in 3 days. So now I have a ton of games where I've "won" after one or two moves, and those aren't real games.

I see two lines of thought in this discussion.  One is that even though the game is unrated it should still count as a win even though it doesn't change your rating.  I agree.  The second individual says many games don't have the requirement of the necessary three moves, that there is only one move on each side.  I would say that once the three moves occurs this should be counted as a win.

Right JediMaster!

If you count unrated games in the win/loss/draw record, then you discourage people from experimenting with new openings, different play styles, different opponents, etc. Unrated games can be great for trying new things without worrying about statistics changing, so keep it the way it is.

 How so? If it doesn't take away from their rating, then it wouldn't hit them too hard in the confidence department I'd imagine.

They can experiment whatever they want but their rating will not be affected.  If they are afraid about their statistics going down,  then they should not play chess at all.  Top players want to protect their ratings that is why there is an option to play unrated games against weak or average players but to deny a weak player the credit he or she deserves for beating a strong player just because the strong player is "experimenting" is not fair!

One's rating AND record both should reflect one's skill. If you count unrated games in the record, then the record could be misleading. If I have 1 win and 100 losses, but have a 2800 rating, then the record does not 'match' the rating. You do not consider exhibition games in baseball when determining who goes to the playoffs, do you? Practice is practice, and should not be counted in the same statistics as real games. I think a separate record for unrated games would be a good idea, which they do on the Free Internet Chess Server.

A separate record for unrated games would be a good idea and I think there should be a limit for the number of unrated games a player is allowed.  If a player is only playing unrated games for a month or two without playing a rated game then there must be a deduction to his rating because it is unfair for players who are active that that particular player's rating is unchanged even though he or she have not played a rated game for quite a while now.  Is there a particular number of rated games one should play in a given period in order to maintain his or her rating?

 One could make the argument that unrated games provide more insight as to the true nature of one's playing ability. I tend to notice people actually playing better in unrated games more often than not, probably because they are much more relaxed during the match - free from the fear of a damaged rating. Players become more willing to step outside of their shell and explore new openings and tactics they might otherwise be too leerly to employ in a rated match.

Tremendously true Tijaro.There is no such a player who doesnt bother ratings at all.But i would like to say that there must be ,perhaps,a diagram of showing wins and loss of the player's unrated games,so the misleading of the opponents,as simmonsw said,to be avoided.

I would imagine that when a diagram of win-loss-draw stats pertaining to rated games is compared side-by-side with one of unrated games, there would be a not-so-insignificant difference between the two.

Would be an interesting experiment.

Hey Z,

  What if you are a new player to chess? Or haven't played in many years or never played in any chess clubs of any kind? By losing all rated games, your ratings keep dropping to the point where you don't want to play anymore. How does that help with a new players confidence? I should know I'm one of those people. I do play rated games every now and then. But i usally get beat when i do. Thatnks for the tread "Z"

I play a lot of un rated games when i,m sick,headache,etc.If i win or lose it doesn,t show what my true abilty is only my ability on the day.

What's the point of having unrated games if it's going to reflect the rating of your opponent in your stats ie(highest rated win)  Or show up in your win/loss/draw stats.  The reason why people play unrated games is so that the games won't be recorded.  It's like asking FIDE to count that game you played at grandma's house in your win/loss/draw stats.     

You can't have your cake and eat it too.  If you want your games represented in your stats, then play rated games.

the advantage of unrated games is that it can cut down on cheaters playing you. They are the ones who cheat for the higher ratings, so they will not play unrated games. 

The reason people play unrated games..

1. so its not rated..

2. so it doesnt count as anything..

so if you want it to count play rated games.

yes thats right