ELO

Interesting idea. Never thought of that one.

Would only work with honest players of course. But a good idea.

The player that timedout will always lose the points of course

So why give the timed out player the option?

I would like think that I play a fair, reasoable and challenging gme against most players on this site !
But what I (and others have found) is that if a stronger player who wins through on his first few games, any LOE points awarded for a win are bias in his favour.
If I loose 3, 4, 5 , 6, (not uncommon) or go on to lose 7 , 8, 9 or 10 games on the trot against an opponent, but then I decide to concentrate and i manage to win, the award of LOE points will be fully against me !

The points awarded actually say to me, dont bother challenging back. As I will only gain + 4 or so for an eventual win against a player who has beaten me 10 times or more, .... but that player will have already gained hundreds if not a 1000 points by beating me the 4 or 6 times bfore.

I then have to ask who is the better player, he will be higher in the table because he beat me so many times, but surely if on game 11, I eventually manage beat him, the points awarded should reflect the superb win and the courrage it took to play him yet again ?

Its a question and not a statement, but my view is shared by many, can we review and balance out (equalise) the point scoring system, for this very annoying situation ?
white_pawn

The object of playing chess is to concentrate on the firsy game, not on game 11.
To be fair, if I play a new member (1200) and loose I go down the pan on points, thats happened
5 times on the bounce, over 55 points down!!. That's just the way things are, for you and me alike.
What am I supposed to do, not play a newcomer and risk the drop or play , win , and get 1pt ? In your case my avice would be not to play these players so many times.

Then watch out for Zoki, Styfe, Mozzart and ME !!!!!!!!!

The ELO system is calculated from the offical ELO rating system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system

Remember when a player is in his/her provisonal rating (First 15 games) that score will be an average and worked out different to an established player.

Guys i am NEW to chess and this website what is ELO? please help.[font#08088A][/font]

Click onto the link in Andy's message immediately above yours and the ELO (a persons name given to the calculation of your points awarded for each game) is fully explained
Regards white-pawn

I recently pursuaded a pal to join this site which he did as Doiricuais ( an ancient Gaelic
freedom fighter apparently).

Still on 1200 and with his white 'P' in place he accepted a challenge from 1687 player Donah.
Donah timed out on his fifth move - and my mate promptly got docked 156 points as a result.
Not surprisingly he's askimg me for an explanation and I haven't got one.

It seems a bit harsh but he is a ginger so perhaps that has something to do with it.

Fair enough, I suppose but does anyone have an alternative theory?

I recently pursuaded a pal to join this site which he did as Doiricuais ( an ancient Gaelic
freedom fighter apparently).

Still on 1200 and with his white 'P' in place he accepted a challenge from 1687 player Donah.
Donah timed out on his fifth move - and my mate promptly got docked 156 points as a result.
Not surprisingly he's askimg me for an explanation and I haven't got one.

It seems a bit harsh but he is a ginger so perhaps that has something to do with it.

Fair enough, I suppose but does anyone have an alternative theory?

1200 to 1687 is a big elo difference, meaning that if the lower rated player wins he will get many points (and if it's the higher he will only get a few) meaning Elo predicts a win for the higher one and so he won't have a big "reward". Also, the P on your friends elo means it's provisional, and so his variability is higher to let him stablish a more accurate elo faster (by giving him more for a win and taking also more for a loss during his P period). In a few games he won't have that P anymore and his elo will change normally.

Can not the P players be issued 0 for a loss, 1 for a draw and 3 for a win, with the same calculation used for the challenger, once the P status ends (15 games) then award an average ELO. This topic will never die because it is so contraversal. What do you masters think ?
white_pawn

It's ok and normal as it is. It makes some strange numbers sometimes because the number of players is not big enough, but it works pretty much the same as FIDE's Elo.