5 ms·
The ratings system in chess is what makes it easy to get a competitive game. You just have to play a handful of games in order to get a rating (whether in real
by calvins 12y ago
The ratings system in chess is what makes it easy to get a competitive game.
You just have to play a handful of games in order to get a rating (whether in real-life tournaments or online), and then you know that playing somebody with a rating within 100 points of your own rating will usually result in a good game where both sides have chances to win and neither will consistently steamroll the other.
- baddox 12y agoIs the ratings system really that useful even at lower levels? Is there not a lot of non-transitivity, where three players would consistently beat the next like A>B>C>A?
- dmurray 12y agoNot at all. I'd say it's practically impossible if you need each of those relationships to be a 70%+ favourite.
- calvins 12y agoYes, I agree with dmurray that it shouldn't happen consistently. I haven't seen it, and I've found the ratings system to work really well in practice. I'm roughly an intermediate level player, so can't speak to lower levels in particular, but I've never heard anybody complain about not being able to find competitive games against others with comparable ratings. The only times that happens as far as I know are when the rating really doesn't reflect the current skill, which can happen over the board with juniors that are improving so quickly that their rating hasn't caught up yet, or people who haven't yet played enough games for the rating to be accurate (e.g., a brand new account on a site that starts with a rating of 1200, which is solved by not playing people who haven't played enough games yet).