|
|
|
Topic: The Great Rating Bubble of 2005-2006!
| |
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
Inflation rages on! Now we have more than 11 pages of 2000+ members out of a total of 23 pages. We have 40+ Auto-Elite events and only about 15 Auto-Beginner.
I hope Miguel does not become something like poor Ben Bernanke at the Federal Reserve, running the paper money printing press at full speed just to keep the masses happy. That way, he keeps consumers thinking they have more $ in their pockets even though each dollar buys less and less and less. But it should not be that way with our rating points.
What should we do? Perhaps we should introduce some deflation here by removing the protection established players have when playing unrated or provisionally-rated players. Another problem is that players, when quitting chess in disgust at their own performance, tend to leave at a lower rating than when they came in, thus adding points to the system. Me? I'm on the Gold Standard, because my rating has slid ever lower while all around me are soaring... 
|
|
|
I agree. This issue needs to be addressed. Maybe whack 400 points from everybody and do away with the protection for high rated players. I have a real goal of hitting 2000 USCF OTB. Very difficult. If online ratings were even close to actual, they would mean something. As it is they mean next to nothing. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
All this talk of ratings is overrated.Those who are stronger than average will have ratings above average and the same for players below.It doesn't mater much weather average rating is 1500 or 2000.It's just a method to compare two players and still does that even though the numbers aren't in line with FIDE.Maybe ratings should be a hidden variable in the system.That way people would concentrate on playing rather than what their rating is doing.
|
|
|
Why not just do away with ratings altogether? But then we would have no way to track our progress. It seems to me the higher rated players are the ones that argue the most to leave things the way it is. (highly inflated) 2300 sounds much better than the more realistic 1500.
|
|
|
I love correspondence chess. It is a good tool for learning openings. But it does not even come close to actually playing OTB Tournaments. One 2500+ player wrote in one of these forums about the database that he uses. It makes me wonder does he ever actually play his own moves? Get through the middlegame with the database and then use a tablebase for the endgames. Then you have other players kissing his tush because he is so great. Your actual USCF or FIDE standard rating is the only one that actually means anything.
I use MCO-14, and a few opening specific books for reference. Most games are out of book by move 10. At that point I use the game as a way to sharpen tactical skills. Despite my handle, I despise the French Defense.
I am a USCF Class B OTB player (High class C in quick time controls). I dont play official correspondence chess because of the rampant use of computer engines. I can play Fritz without the middle man.
And think, people pay money to play official correspondence chess and still cheat, imagine what goes on when it is free.
popcorn is the only highly rated player I have seen wanting this issue addressed. I applaud you popcorn.
|
|
|
Thanks for your kind words, Winnawer! That said, I DO feel that some kind of rating system is necessary, if only to help one find better opposition quickly. The way it is now, it might be misleading to many players: if I, for example, really played at 2400+ strength I would have fm or IM after my name. Players might be tempted to believe that they really are that strength OTB as well and will be disappointed to find it isn't so.
As for computer aid, if it is a stronger opponent than any available human, I'll put up with it, because it can only make me a better player. But I won't use that kind of help: how many times have we all heard teenagers say that they are very "skilled" at computer games! Rubbish! They're skilled at operating a machine...that's all! I only refer to books or online databases for help in openings. To use any kind of machine help otherwise would simply be more practice keypunching... I love chess and I enjoy this site. Real chess, that which we learn from experience, is a great skill we can carry anywhere and use against any opponent, without worrying about power outages! 
|
| 1 2 3 Next |
|
|
|
