yup it makes no sense why you can get hundreds of points at the start. it allowed me to climb far too quickly.
More proof this site is rigged
Sort:
11 days ago
0
#3
WinOneGameLoseOne wrote:
Just as you approach 1000 they don't allow it.
I don't want hundreds of points my initial games. Why can't we just get 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss? 10 wins gets you 100 points.
If I want to play 50 points lower, I should be allowed. It is not sandbagging. Allow us to gain points the way we want.
The Glicko rating system is designed to get your rating to a point where you'll be playing other members of similar strength as quickly as possible. Purposely losing games to get a lower rating is the definition of sandbagging. If you're rating is too high for the pool it will naturally decrease to where it should be.
11 days ago
0
#4
Martin_Stahl wrote:
If you're rating is too high for the pool it will naturally decrease to where it should be.
Sounds hypocritical. "Naturally decrease"? It is artificially increasing. The decrease is sandbagging on chess.com's part, not the user of the site.
Martin_Stahl wrote:
WinOneGameLoseOne wrote:
Just as you approach 1000 they don't allow it.
I don't want hundreds of points my initial games. Why can't we just get 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss? 10 wins gets you 100 points.
If I want to play 50 points lower, I should be allowed. It is not sandbagging. Allow us to gain points the way we want.
The Glicko rating system is designed to get your rating to a point where you'll be playing other members of similar strength as quickly as possible. Purposely losing games to get a lower rating is the definition of sandbagging. If you're rating is too high for the pool it will naturally decrease to where it should be.
Martin, are you seriously explaining things to a troll who is trolling from a throwaway troll account that's already closed?
You never stop amazing me.
11 days ago
0
#6
magipi wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:
WinOneGameLoseOne wrote:
Just as you approach 1000 they don't allow it.
I don't want hundreds of points my initial games. Why can't we just get 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss? 10 wins gets you 100 points.
If I want to play 50 points lower, I should be allowed. It is not sandbagging. Allow us to gain points the way we want.
The Glicko rating system is designed to get your rating to a point where you'll be playing other members of similar strength as quickly as possible. Purposely losing games to get a lower rating is the definition of sandbagging. If you're rating is too high for the pool it will naturally decrease to where it should be.
Martin, are you seriously explaining things to a troll who is trolling from a throwaway troll account that's already closed?
You never stop amazing me.
They do make a good point. Why is it ok for chess.com to "sandbag" accounts?
11 days ago
0
#7
If you chose advanced, what rating do you start at? let's say 1500. Let's also say you are actually 1100. How can an 1100 sandbag from 1500 to 1100 when they were never 1500? If they intentionally lose games, they are bringing the rating to their actual level of play and shouldn't be punished for that.
11 days ago
0
#8
My issue is playing in tournies I often get matched with people 200 less than me and never anyone that much stronger
utredutredson wrote:
My issue is playing in tournies I often get matched with people 200 less than me and never anyone that much stronger
Imagine how bad it is for 2200s... They are even less common
magipi wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:
WinOneGameLoseOne wrote:
Just as you approach 1000 they don't allow it.
I don't want hundreds of points my initial games. Why can't we just get 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss? 10 wins gets you 100 points.
If I want to play 50 points lower, I should be allowed. It is not sandbagging. Allow us to gain points the way we want.
The Glicko rating system is designed to get your rating to a point where you'll be playing other members of similar strength as quickly as possible. Purposely losing games to get a lower rating is the definition of sandbagging. If you're rating is too high for the pool it will naturally decrease to where it should be.
Martin, are you seriously explaining things to a troll who is trolling from a throwaway troll account that's already closed?
You never stop amazing me.
Why is everybody that disagrees with you a troll?
10 days ago
0
#13
No, a troll is someone who constantly spans the same thing into chat. Ex: Chomp on Hanging Pieces, game is rigged can't win, etc, and just wants attention badly because I guess they have a bad family life. It's no use talking to Hanging, you all, you are wasting your time. It accomplished nothing important other than giving him the attention he craves
lets see how long it will take for this to get taken down. 3 hours this time?
I'm convinced Janko and Hanging each own 50% of the accounts that post about the game being rigged.
9 days ago
0
#18
idkhow-to-mate wrote:
RandomChessPlayer62 napisał:
I'm convinced Janko and Hanging each own 50% of the accounts that post about the game being rigged.
I'm convinced that you suck at chess if after a year you're only 700.
But then it means you don't cheat which is rare here.
Says a 900 elo player lol
Just as you approach 1000 they don't allow it.
I don't want hundreds of points my initial games. Why can't we just get 10 points for a win, -5 for a loss? 10 wins gets you 100 points.
If I want to play 50 points lower, I should be allowed. It is not sandbagging. Allow us to gain points the way we want.