The suggestion has been brought forward numerous times, so my proposals are the following and I ask everybody to post and state their opinion:
* Please introduce permanent rating floors at 100 below highest non-provisional rating.
* If you are unsure how the general public wil react, please please introduce a community vote.
A rating floor does not let the actual rating go down below a certain point. It does not matter if you lose 100 games. That's kind of the point. Usually when people lose 100 games in one day, they have decided to take a break from online chess, and the mass timeouts ensue. That does not represent a decrease in chess skill, so the damage to the rating should be limited. Otherwise the player returns with a rating that is several hundred points lower than what it should be, and that is no fun for anyone who has to play him.
Originally posted by PonderableI recommend that the floor not go in until the player has maintained a certain rating level over several games. Don't want to establish a high floor for a player who had temporary winning streak rather than a real improvement in playing ability.
The suggestion has been brought forward numerous times, so my proposals are the following and I ask everybody to post and state their opinion:
* Please introduce permanent rating floors at 100 below highest non-provisional rating.
* If you are unsure how the general public wil react, please please introduce a community vote.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemgood point. Suggest a formula please.
I recommend that the floor not go in until the player has maintained a certain rating level over several games. Don't want to establish a high floor for a player who had temporary winning streak rather than a real improvement in playing ability.
Originally posted by PonderableTake the last 20 games on the rating graph (not counting provisionally rated games). Round the lowest point in the graph down to the nearest hundred. See the floor 100 points below that.
good point. Suggest a formula please.
Example: a player's lowest rating over the last 20 games is 1650. Round that down to 1600; set a floor at 1500.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemYou probably mean:
Take the last 20 games on the rating graph (not counting provisionally rated games). Round the lowest point in the graph down to the nearest hundred. See the floor 100 points below that.
Example: a player's lowest rating over the last 20 games is 1650. Round that down to 1600; set a floor at 1500.
take the maximum point at the graph, take the 20 ratings preceeding that...
But then I shoould try to get a new maximum rating with a very steep ascent if I was to sand bag...
Originally posted by PonderableNo, that's not what I mean. It is not based on a maximum rating at all.
You probably mean:
take the maximum point at the graph, take the 20 ratings preceeding that...
But then I shoould try to get a new maximum rating with a very steep ascent if I was to sand bag...
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemSo you mean if the last 20 games give a higher floor it will be adjusted accordingly?
SETTING the floor is based on the last 20 games. Once the floor is set, it is permanent.
That would mean (programming wise) that the system has to do the calculation after each and every finished game (twice in fact).
Originally posted by PonderableYes, it would, but that's OK. It's not a difficult calculation.
So you mean if the last 20 games give a higher floor it will be adjusted accordingly?
That would mean (programming wise) that the system has to do the calculation after each and every finished game (twice in fact).
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemI do not agree that it should be permanent it could reduce but at slow rate.As I have already said I once had a purple patch that got me up to 1500 but I could not live with that rating .I would have to leave the site
SETTING the floor is based on the last 20 games. Once the floor is set, it is permanent.
If the reason is for a floor is for tournaments it would be much better to have all tournaments as banded then if you exceed the rating that you applied for then you would go up to the next band .no brainer