GameKnot Forum
[ mod this thread ] << - < - > - >>
| From | Message |
| olympio 7/18/2003 09:00:39 [ report this post ] |
 Subject: Unrated games at GameknotMessage: I am against this implementation. I agree that people who are several hundred points above someone else should gain nothing for winning, but the loser should gain the max points for winning. If you implement unrated gamees. people will be challenging others to unrated games.. who will in turn refuse as they wish to play only rated games. That creates tension. Especially if a friend is the one asking to play. This is a very bad idea. |
| silverwolfwsc 7/18/2003 09:34:25 [ report this post ] | i disagree Message: this would give you the opportunity to play rated games still. Nothing would change that. However, now you would have the ability to play someone above your level, and have it be more of an instructional game, than a match. Also, it would give you the opportunity to try new things, without worrying about whether you win or lose. In addition to this change, i would be in favor of being able to take back moves (or series' of moves) so that new variations could be explored. This would have to be agreed upon by both parties of course, but it would be the same as offering a draw. You request to go back to move 6, and it waits for your opponent to confirm. |
| chuckventimiglia 7/18/2003 10:13:02 [ report this post ] | I am all for an unrated.... Message: system where no one gains or loses. If a system is implemented whereby the lower rated gains points and the higher rated gains nothing then this would be more unfair. As far as the GK system as is, I have seen much posted about how "unfair" it is. How a very much higher rated gains +1 whole point for winning a match against an individual whose rating is >400 points less. I have played for many years in the US Chess Federation Golden Knights tourneys. The first round of these tourneys are "open" for all ratings. My USCF rating is somewhere around 2200. I recently completed a match in Rd 1 of that tourney against a player rated about 1400. By the US Chess Federation rating system I gained +2 and he lost +2. I guess we need to change their system as well. Chuck |
| lexherman 7/18/2003 10:55:32 [ report this post ] | May be.... Message: Some top players might be very pleased with the possibilty of unrated games. Some of them play 30 up to 70! games with players more then 400 points below their rating. As this is done ofcourse to give the lesser player an opportunity to learn, or be able to play with a top player....i think in a way they find it embarrising to gain all those points this way... |
| chuckventimiglia 7/18/2003 11:11:17 [ report this post ] | I agree with you..... Message: lexherman I am responding to the post above saying that the lower rated should receive max points and the higher rated none. I think there should be a true unrated system where no one receives or loses points. I would be more than happy to play anyone in an unrated environment. I have played quite a few lower rated and would like to continue. I would like it better if it were unrated. Chuck |
| bogg 7/18/2003 11:59:22 [ report this post ] | chuck Message: ? Do you remember when the USCF put the current rating system into place for correspondence play? Way back when you used to win 0 points and lose 100 for losing to someone significantly weaker than yourself, I think the limit was 400. The USCF is predominately tournament play so no one gets to pick their opponents. I thought that was the reason they made the change, many high rated players were complaining about having to play low rated players in the early rounds and having to risk 100 rating points against their opponent's 0. This always seemed fair, if annoying, to me because it accurately represented the probability of winning. I don't think anyone is saying that anything is unfair just inaccurate. IMO to say that a system applied equally to everyone is unfair would be silly. I guess if you think of the GK 'rating' system as a point race, like the American Contract Bridge Leauge, then it is a little unfair as paying members have an advantage in that they can play more games. I am certainly not interested in playing a 100 board simul against weak opponents but a paying member can get a lot of points that way. |
| chuckventimiglia 7/18/2003 12:58:27 [ report this post ] | Yes, but I would like to.... Message: see an unrated system for GK. A system where you can play someone and no points are gained or lost. That would just be a game by "mutual aggreement" for whatever reason. I put the comment concerning USCF only as an argument that GK should get in line with other orgs. If unrated games were offered then many more higher rated would play lower rated. I think the rating system for GK is not all that bad, sure changes can be made but that can be said for any org. Personally, I would like to see a "provisional system" for the first 20 games. Yes, it would be better if a FIDE or ELO system were implemented but if it stayed the way it is I would not be all that upset. As for me, my avg. rating for opponents is over 2000 but I do play some lower rated if asked. I would play more if unrated games were offered. When I played you I lost 16 points. If a "provisional system" were implemented like US Chess Federation your rating would not be 1200 and I would not have lost 16 points. I am no expert about implementation of rating systems and probably Mike is not either. When I joined GK I came in knowing full well about the features and the rating system etc. Overall I liked it despite some of it's faults. I joined GK. Can improvements be made, of course. I see them being made almost everyday. I would like to see Unrated Games offered and I would like to see a "provisional system" for new members. In time, I think we might see all of that plus. I am now going back into my cave. :-] Chuck |
| hell-on-wheels 7/19/2003 09:57:09 [ report this post ] | Chuck Message: Out of your cave (besides you don't want to share quarters with the bats.). The FIDE system was developed by Elo, but was designed to be used for entire tournaments before computers. The ICCF does use the Elo system. In the ICCF way of applying Elo is to rate a 7-man tournament after the tournament is finished. That is 21 games in a round-robin. The FIDE usually plays swiss tournaments, although many of the invitatioinals are Round Robin. But the rating is done after the tourney is finished. But the CCLA and USCF postal use simpler systems, in which the games are rated singly after they are finished. Most of the GK "tournaments" are not true tournaments, but a collection of match games. That seems to satisfy most players. Jerry PS, I am available to help in this situation. |
Post a reply to this message: |