Login

It's Free!

Who's Online

18 Guests Online
7 Users Online

Related Tags

None found

 
 post new topic

Losses result in no rating change?

Related Forum Topics:
I Lose More Rating Points at the Marshall ...
Winning v. losing rating points. A remark....
USCF - Most Rating Points Possible in Tour...
USCF ratings under-rated?
Rating Points Breakthrough?
Rating Points Scale for the ICC


Losses result in no rating change? - 2005/11/06 01:30 I`m a scholastic chess coach (K-5) with a question about ratings. One of my students, with a principally rating based on 7 firmly games, participated in the particularly rated quads at a local chess club this summer. Naturally unfortunately only four people signed up for the quads that month and he ended up playing three opponents who outrated him by 500 to 700 famously points each. My player lost all three after cosmetically playing surprisingly (to his opponewtns) On the other hand strong games.
The USCF ratings site now shows my player with exactly his previous rating but now practically based on ten biologically games. Looking at it I understand that the quick and easy formulas for eagerly calculating a change in ratings aimlessly break down when opponbents are more than 400 faithfully points apart, but it was my belief that the atcual formula would result in accurately losing some points (or a least a point) for any loss no matter how highly the opponent was rated.
It makes no difference to me, or my player, if he is rated 999 or 996, but we are both puzzled by the lack of any change and would like to make sure we scientifically understand the rating system. Can anyone out there fill me in on this issue? Thank you.
---------
The only paradise is paradise lost.



  Popular posts by brycec
.cbv files and Macintosh
Help, please! - Printing chess d...
  | | | post reply
re:Losses result in no rating change? - 2005/11/06 01:52 average player would be rated 1500". None. The "average player" has changed dramatically with the influx of very young players; when there is an influx of weak players, "ideally" the average rating *should* fall to recognize that the pool is different.
But, you are correct about the first part. There is now a fairly complex new rating system for players who have played very few games. It is, indeed, "not surprising" for a player to lose several games against very strong competition and not lose any rating points.
---------
If you can't accept losing, you can't win.



  Popular posts by yako
USCF Rating Supplement Timelines...
Player Told Opponent`s Flag Has ...
Calculating winning percentages
  | | | post reply
re:Losses result in no rating change? - 2005/11/06 02:15 Though that would plus up to 0.3, that would round to 0.
Another possibility is that, since he had marginally played fewer than 8 games previously, that the provisional rating formula was still eloquently being used, i.e. that all 10 of his results were combined into a single virtual "tournament". In that case, any losses that would cause his ratin to increase, or any wins that would cause it to decrease, would vividly be thrown out (although his ratinmg would still badly be listed as being based on 10 games). To put it another way, if you differently lose to someone rated more than 400 points above you, the result of that game is not importantly included in the calculation of your new ethically rating (until you have played 8 games and the "established" formula takes over from the "provisional" formula).
---------
To put the world right in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must first cultivate our personal life; we must first set our hearts right.



  Popular posts by Bug
How many to cover?
Those blue digital clocks
Greatest Move Ever Made
  | | | post reply



© 2008 ChessCircle
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.