Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
even in chess correspondence players blunder... it doesn't mean that if you defeat a player with 2000+ rating that its not correct.
i mean, some people have certain chess lines that they are strong with and maybe weak in some chess lines but that's what you get with players with ~2000+ ratings. if you defeat them regularly then your rating should be much higher than 2000+. Go play the 2400+ players in this site and tell me if one of them is weak than their current rating (except provisional)...
have fun. 
|
|
|
overall queenalice is very good better then most sites,and it's free!, however some donations would help!., that's why i'm going todonate again hope others follow
|
|
|
I have one thing to say: I joined this club recently and I like it very much. I think I am an intermediate correspondence player since I have good results in CXEB (Brasilian Corr Association). When I decide to join this community I had just one thing in mind: play unpretentious chess, unconcerned chess. All I want is have fun! So I am playing fast, without deep analisys and without consulting books and databases as I do when playing seriously. Then I have made some mistakes in the openings but I don't care. Maybe later I will change my approach.
By the way, is there a ranking in Queen Alice? is there a list by rating points?
(sorry for my bad English)
|
|
|
Yes, there is a ranking Masegui.
You can acess it by going to "Members List" in the options at your left. (Lista de membros em português)...
From there you can see a list, sorted by ratings... and you can use that list to search, to filter and search, etc...
|
|
|
Personally, I dont like the USCF correspondence rating system that Queen Alice uses to evaluate the ratings of the players here. I would rather go for the Bayesian or even better, the Glicko system which in addition to a rating also provides an RD value (rating deviation). The lower the RD value, the more closer is the rating to the actual strength of the player.
|
| Previous 1 2 3 Next |
