Are you mad at the website? Or perhaps the Glicko system??
More proof this site is rigged
Sort:
3 days ago
0
#23
Yeah, you also lose fewer points when you lose to one of those players, so it's not like you get penalized that much for playing them.
3 days ago
0
#24
The website can't help if you get paired with someone higher than you. Just because you can't put up with it doesn't mean you should publicly attack the website. It's not just you that deals with this, but everyone. And does everyone go out all mad, raging out? NO! Learn to let it go! If we can put up with this 'evidence' without even noticing, or really caring about it, then why can't you?
How else is it meant to work - the site gives you a perfect rating before you play any matches based on magic intuition?
3 days ago
0
#26
Two closed accounts in the same small thread. You have to admit, that’s pretty good.
2 days ago
0
#27
scorpionsensei wrote:
That is because of the reason the deviation is there. They may be 1400, but they signed up as 1000. They aren't sure of exactly how good they are, and so they win. That's why the deviation is there, so that players who don't have an accurate rating can get to their actual rating quicker.
Many 2000 players can stampede and lower ratings. Do your research.
2 days ago
0
#28
scorpionsensei wrote:
Are you mad at the website? Or perhaps the Glicko system??
I am mad at the fact no one evaluates this at a 1500+ formula. If you learn a second language, you will know things others at your level doesn't. That doesn't mean you are an imbecile. It means you are making progress.
Chess.com wants turn this into a stampede attack, allow ALL higher levels to kill others below.
2 days ago
0
#29
NoemiS05 wrote:
How else is it meant to work - the site gives you a perfect rating before you play any matches based on magic intuition?
This is how you could do it. Play a few games, then reward more. If YOU play a game and win, you get 1 point. If you win again you get 2 points.
Don't jack up their ratings GLICKO SSHHllTT style.
2 days ago
0
#30
Wits-end wrote:
Two closed accounts in the same small thread. You have to admit, that’s pretty good.
Expect more closed accounts.
2 days ago
0
#31
TheGoodMovesAreHard wrote:
Wits-end wrote:
Two closed accounts in the same small thread. You have to admit, that’s pretty good.
Expect more closed accounts.
Okay Amazing Kreskin. Three.
NewYearsGambit wrote:
How can you beat 1300+ players who have a history going back 2-3 years with 1,000+ games, but then you play a bunch of 2024 accounts and you LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE when they are rated only 800-1000?
Because you're facing experienced players who are doing the same thing you're doing: creating new accounts at lower levels.
A smurf complaining about losing to other smurfs. Oh, the irony ...
2 days ago
0
#33
I might be wrong here, but I feel there are certain levels that are "hard" to get through. I watched a 1600 and 1700 play a game, and it seemed pretty low-level in some scenarios to me, but sometimes there are 800s or 900s playing a completely solid game with no major mistakes or blunders
hi
any one want to play with me
2 days ago
0
#36
I looked at a game that some 1000's played once, and one player did not appear to know how to mate with the king and rook. It makes me think I am really losing too many of my games to bad time management. That, and the fact that when I win it's usually with very little time left to my opponent's 5 minutes.
2 days ago
0
#37
mike_ox6942 wrote…
thats only when you first join after like 5 games you only gain 1-8 rating per game
Bro I would kill to have +1-8 rating per game I play
thats only when you first join after like 5 games you only gain 1-8 rating per game
Bro I would kill to have +1-8 rating per game I play
ashvasan wrote:
mike_ox6942 wrote…
thats only when you first join after like 5 games you only gain 1-8 rating per game
Bro I would kill to have +1-8 rating per game I play
thats only when you first join after like 5 games you only gain 1-8 rating per game
Bro I would kill to have +1-8 rating per game I play
i mean if theres a large difference in rating it can range slightly but around 1-8 per win / loss at the intermediate (1000) level idk about 2000 elo
2 days ago
0
#39
What's rigged here is the puzzles. The ratings are way off, and the target time to solve them is ridiculously low if you're not just guessing.
When your account is new, or you haven't played in a long time, your rating deviation is higher and you gain and lose points faster. That only happens for a short time, though, and then your rating settles into slower loss and gain.
That has nothing to do with your opponent. You aren't putting things together. Let me remove your blindspot.
TILT THEORY REFUTED
Yes, YOU initially gain many and lose many points. Yes, YOU then gain and lose less.
Now, what happens when a NEW USER, not you, plays against you after the rating points become ~10 per game?
That NEW USER will then get a rating spike in points, regardless how low your rating is.
If your brain can wrap around that where the opponent gets 50 points, you lose 10, then what happens when it "tilts"?
YOU aren't tilting. You are getting stampeded over by higher rated players. A 2000 player could get 50 while you lose 10. Then another 2000 player could get 50 while you lose another 10.
This is not tilting. This is not you playing worse. This is not you having a bad day. This is fallacious pairings. You are constantly playing against better players. How can you beat 1300+ players who have a history going back 2-3 years with 1,000+ games, but then you play a bunch of 2024 accounts and you LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE when they are rated only 800-1000?
How in the world can that happen? Use your brain guys. Think it out. Do the math.
That is because of the reason the deviation is there. They may be 1400, but they signed up as 1000. They aren't sure of exactly how good they are, and so they win. That's why the deviation is there, so that players who don't have an accurate rating can get to their actual rating quicker.