Playing Team Matches

I agree that unless something is put in place this is going to keep happening ...

When I joined chess.com after not playing at all for 15 years I was of course given a rating of 1200. I entered a tournament and was aware of the psychological advantage I had. Topped the group with 18/18 and probably wrecked (temp) the rating of a few competitors. I felt like a charlatan. Is there a way to solve this. I don't know, it all balances out in the end. I am now wary of low rated players who have only played a few games. My advice - treat every opposition as if it is a grandmaster and play the board not what you imagine the man/woman to be. I am thinking of playing OTB again and the siuation initially would be the same. Same problem - no easy solution

---

In tournaments the TD can put the settings so that only players with x amount of games played can join the tournament. This isn't available for team matches yet this thing still happens ...

---

 

---

 Perhaps in some groups they do this - I wonder whether you know they do it or you think they do it. I mean it really would take a lot of time and effort to track the 1200 players who are not really 1200 and then make them play in a match of your choice.

Personally, in heart of heart I do not like to play a 1200 level player - although I know it is a sign of weakness as a person. I have tried reminding myself of days when I was excited just to find a chess player and play for the sheer pleasure of it. Winning and losing used to be very important but not as much as just playing. I am trying to be once again the same person - and have stopped accepting draw offers as a step towards that.

I may be wrong but I feel that both, effects on team matches by time-outs and the 1200 issues, are bloated out of proportion for the simple reason that all teams face it and it evens out more or less. If they can be reduced through technology, then by all means do it - but if it's not done, it's not a big deal.

What I would like to see first is that when a player's account is closed, he should be automatically removed from all the groups he was member of and team matches he was playing in (without the team losing points) and registered to play in.

I am playing a member of your team right now who has 4 games going and no intention of raising his rating up while he has a live chess rating of close to 2000 ...

This new setting would stop this it would force the player individually to play 5 rated game before the system would allow him / her to even join

I agree the solution is not easy. Perhaps a new member could place himself/herself in a probable raiing zone - beginner, still learning, average club player, strong club player, county player and all the dizzy heights above. The dishonest would say beginner but that would be easily spotted. And to place yourself too high would be asking for several severe beatings and all you would be doing would be donating you rating points to grateful recipients. The scale would require some thought - beginner 950 t0 1275, club player 1600-1900 and so on. Just an idea. Select the mean average of the scale and place new members there.

I must admit that I'm quilty. I have mainly played exclusively in team matches from the time I was 1200. I actually asked one team admin if this is considered unethical since my real strength is probably bit higher but he said that it's not a problem since I've got to start somewhere anyway and besides the site ratings work in such a way that the rating of a new player changes very quickly whereas the ratings of those playing against him change only very little.

Where do you think that new members should start to play if not in the team mathces? I mean the only way to get a realistic rating is to play rated games against the pool of players who already have an accurate rating.

Also, 5 games is not really enough to give an accurate estimate of ones rating either.

---

 Presumably it was addressed to me and by your team, "Team India" is meant - hence I am responsing to this - though I have not seen this match-up. My two points are as below:

1. Your team related: It will be at some disadvantage in this paqrticular match-up. However, it is quite possible that there is also a reverse match-up where our team's 1400 is playing against your team's pseudo 1200 player. Statistically speaking, it should even out over a number of matches.

2. Your own Rating related: Correct me if I am wrong, if this person has played just 4 games, his/her beating you will have similar effect on your points like if his/her rating had reached 2100 after playing 25 games.

The team i'm playing for are new and inexperienced with team matches so they wouldn't be aware this happens. I'll tell you now though that any player with 0 rated games have and will get removed from my teams side till we have an idea of what their true rating is. I stand to lose 10 points if I lose to this 1200 which is very likely considering his live rating is up near 2000. Like i've said some people don't mind playing 1200 rated players but a lot do. You say "they have to start somewhere" yes they do but why does that have to be against some poor unsuspecting 1200 who would rather play someone their rating than a wolf in sheeps clothing?

Hmmmm..how do they do it in live otb tournaments..I seem to recall an Unrated class, a <1200 class, < 1600 class and so on..when someone without a rating walks in they are thrown into the unrated class, play a bunch of games and then establish a rating..dont ask me how they come up with the rating, I'm a physicist not a statistics person.

another site I used to play on indicated new player rating was preliminary and after 20 games became official, so td's could filter eliglible players..I think what we need is more beginner tournaments. and opportunities for beginners..maybe they exist, I just haven't run across any...

We have tried to address several issues related to new 1200 players by creating a tournament as below. There will always be one open tournament of this nature waiting to be started as soon as 5 players join it:

indias-welcome-to-new-online-players-tournament-004

Other groups may like to point their new 1200 players towards this tournament if they feel it is a good idea.

Yes another site I regularly play on don't give you a rating till 5 games are completed and won't allow you to join a team till a certain amount of moves had been made (think it's 250) that way you can't just join a team immediately and jump into team games

A tournament is a great idea yes

I think we are all agreed it is a problem and the minimum games is an idea. Although the first 5 players could essentially and possibly be sacrificial lambs against the wrong/right player. The idea of a probable level and the minimum games in tandem would perhaps, and only perhaps be the right step. If the players performed at their level in the first 5 games no one would lose out.

I agree with you Donna, I haven't had that problem, as I'm 1600 coming on 1700, however as you go down the ratings you will find this. i totally agree. Putting a limit of >1201 helps, but then this stops 1100's etc joining. It's a tough one to get around unless chess.com does something about it!

The "unrated" problem is a hard one.  The way the US Chess Federation used to handle it (I think, remembering back to the 70's) was to keep a player's rating as provisional for 20 games.  The initial "real" rating was based on a kind of average of opponent's ratings weighted by the results.  The opponent's ratings would not be updated for these games at all until either the provisional status ended or some number of months passed.

The minimum number of games to enter a team match should be a setting so that it can vary match by match.

1 example here is a team match I played about a year ago ... the player started off with 1200 rating before the match (he had been a member of chess.com for a number of months before the match). Between the start of the match and the end of our games he had gone from 1200 to over 1800 with just 3 games completed.

In that same match the teams super admin stated to one of my team mates "you were lucky to have won them games he is a GM back in our country" wtf???  As it happens the games had timed out because the guy was at a otb tournament and couldn't get online in time.

It wouldn't kill them to play a bunch of games before they started joining in with team games would it?

by peterwaffles
Fortress of Solitude Panama

I think that a 1900 OTB disguised as a 1200 who laughs at a real 1200 for losing a game is a big turd and has no honor at all. I think "chess karma" will catch up to that attitude pretty quick. I would totally council the defeated 1200 player into realizing that, much like in the outside world, people with limited skills like to take advantage on the less experieced to boost their egos. There is absolutely no growth in this behaiviour and it actually causes a false sense of superiority that usually slaps you right back in the face when tested in even conditions. Id like to see that 1900 SOB OTB play a 2600 master and see if he dares to even giggle. Stupid bullies. Theyre everywhere. Thats why i work hard on my game, not on my rating.

Peter, I am totally agree with you. For my part I don't place too much on the rating system here, I am a reasonably strong OTB player with experience in corres as well. I left www.chess.com for personal reasons and timed out on 600 games and went all the way to 1400+ rating. At the moment, I am back and enjoying the game, climbing through the ranks,I nearly went astray when I came across a 1200+ player who damn near kicked the crap out of me...concerntrate on the game my friend, and as fischer advises, learn from your loses, not your wins. I have always disliked bullies.