Forget the absolute number and only use your relative history. It's useful if you do that.
For that matter, same goes for all the rest of the ratings here. They're only of relative value - to suggest where you stack up among peers here.
Forget the absolute number and only use your relative history. It's useful if you do that.
For that matter, same goes for all the rest of the ratings here. They're only of relative value - to suggest where you stack up among peers here.
I've seen some other posts on this, but my chess mentor rating is way higher than my actual ability. One of the reasons I subscribed to chess mentor is for its "adaptive" nature...but how can it adapt to my level of play when it erroneously rates me? It is almost impossible for the rating to go down significantly, even when I make wrong moves or ask for multiple hints.
I think Mentor has improved my game some (I finally beat the computer on easy level yesterday after MANY losses) but it would be nice if the ratings system for that was more precise.