|
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
For the same set of ratings rules, I completely agree. Doesn't the official chess rating assume an average of 1500? Which is really just an arbitrary middle point. They could have selected any middle point, but all rated players will always average 1500 since for every rating point gain, someone loses the same point.
Perhaps you are right, perhaps the way provisional ratings are done adds some amount to the average. Since established ratings can't go down, but can go up, whenever an established player beats a provisional one, some unbalanced points are added to the pool. Perhaps this is the where the claimed bulk of the 200 point differential lies. Maybe, on average, a provisional player loses to established players an average of 200 rating points per 25 games. And this will vary according to how well a community is built and how well players mix. Interesting, I need to think on this more.
Still, I don't feel this system is wrong. And as Miguel points out, this system is the widely accepted (nigh-official) way to rate correspondence chess players. Moreover, and as you've already agreed with, any rating is only valid amongst the specific group of players it rates. Perhaps it'd be better if we just started with a 5000 rating just adjusted it from there to drill home the fact that the rating is only valid on this site, and that any rating on any other site is just as specific to that site as this one is to here.
Something else I thought of: My guess is that if the highest players on this site are an average of 200 points higher than their official OTB ratings, the lowest ranked people will be 200 points lower.
--p
|
|
|
Pestilence makes a good point about the absence of middle ground. It is possible that correspondence sites could have the same average and median ratings as OTB organizations, yet have a completely different standard deviation.
Does anyone have any data on this point?
|
|
|
At RHP, my ELO is a petite 1600 while here at QA it is around 2237  , that's a difference of 637 rating points  . The probable reason for my low rating at RHP is that more than 90% of my opponents in my initial 20 games at RHP were preety much lower-rated than me at the time of play, which drastically affected my provisional rating even when I had +1 score against all of 'em. But in reality, my actual ELO should be 2000 or slightly more (according to me, because only I can judge myself better than anyone else  ).
|
|
|
well, in the USCF my rating is around 1700. Gambitshark stomped me into the ground, so i don't wish to speculate his rating. Anyway, my first opponent to beat here was only like a 1200, so now I am having to drag my rating up. It has been climbing steadly though.
|
| Previous 1 2 3 4 5 |
|
|
|
