- Joined
- 25 Jul 07
- Moves
- 27921
Originally posted by adramforall.. and clan leagues. I had a 800 ish point spread between highest and lowest rated opponents in clan leagues games.
This is all down to them entering open tournaments.
Tournament 7687 for instance has some 500 point differential in ratings!
Currently 1360
My Highest Rating 1469 1469 1523
My Average Rating 1349 1329 1301
My Lowest Rating 1239 1176 1049
My Opponent Avg. Rating 1328 1346 1308
I can only speak for myself, but the gap between my current average rating (2270) and my opponents' (1870) is indeed explained by entry to open tournaments. In my case, I entered many in Nov & Dec 08 when I first joined and my rating hadn't yet settled at its appropriate level. Subsequent rounds of some of those tourneys continue where I'm meeting players rated 500-800 below me in these later rounds.
If I played principally clan challenges, my opponents' average would be much higher. But since I like playing themed tourneys & clan leagues too, that means lower-ranked opponents, often much lower-ranked. Moreover, I've played one 'season' in clan leagues 1/14 & 3/7; that's roughly 10% of all my games to far. The division one's team is in, and the quality of opposition therein, significantly influences the rating of the opponents one meets.
I've looked at most of the top 30 players. Few have opponents' averages at 2000+; most are in the 1850-1930 region. It's nigh impossible, unless one is highly selective, to get the average above 2000 and at the same time enjoy a full range of tourneys.
Not sure where Jonathan's 'research' is leading though.
Originally posted by atticus2Well it's not research just an idle inquisitiveness ... to be honest I'm surprised I got so many responses.
Not sure where Jonathan's 'research' is leading though.
Possibly part of my motivation for asking - although I'd not thought this through before I started - was thinking about whether I wanted to play more games (against relatively weaker opposition) or fewer games against stronger opposition. Maybe the question asked gives me a hint at what others like to do in this regard ... although I'm still unsure whether to enter more tournaments or stick with what I've got.
Originally posted by JonathanB of LondonI've played systematically mostly higher rated players since breaking 1600, and taken the highest rated banded tournaments I've been qualified at the time. it's made a great impact on my improvement, although the workload has also been overbearing at times. which happens because I simply need to put in much more hours than the better players, to overcome my personal weaknesses. it's a great motivator, but also quite exhausting mentally, a constant battle against burnout. it has also forced me to move first from 3/14 to 7/14, and then also to decrease my gameload from 50+ down to 10.
Well it's not research just an idle inquisitiveness ... to be honest I'm surprised I got so many responses.
Possibly part of my motivation for asking - although I'd not thought this through before I started - was thinking about whether I wanted to play more games (against relatively weaker opposition) or fewer games against stronger opposition ...[text shortened]... .. although I'm still unsure whether to enter more tournaments or stick with what I've got.
the average rating of my current opponents seems to be 2118, and that's quite typical for the last three years. the average of finished games simply lags behind because I'm steadily improving.
Originally posted by JonathanB of LondonJust have a look at many of the finished open tournaments and you will see how detrimental these can be on average opponents ratings.
Sure but these are [b]average opponents' ratings ... so many of their opponents will have been rated much more than 'hundreds' of points less.
I'd thought that many of the top players would have played only the other top players ... but it seems not. Unless it so happens that there are many who do only play other 2000+ but I just haven't looked at them yet. Very possible. I've not done an indepth study on this.[/b]
For instance Tournament 6628
Was won by Adrian Waldock currently rated at 2153.
His 14 opponents in the first round show ratings between 1911 and 629. The average rating being a mere 1264.
In the final matchup his opponent was rated at 1907, bringing the average rating up to 1307.
Average opponent rating are meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
Originally posted by adramforallWell not really ... it shows (in your example) that the fellow played a lot of games against (relatively) weak opposition.
Average opponent rating are meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
The chap a few posts earlier in the thread's average rating showed he was playing fewer games against (relatively) stronger opposition.
I would agree if you meant average opponent ratings don't mean anything in terms of how strong the player is ... but then I never thought it did.
I guess in the end it comes down how selective a player is.
I have to say that most players don't care what the average rating is, they want to play tournaments.
If you are a bit more selective then obviously you perhaps have a higher average rating then others.
I mean if a player rated i.e. 2000+ is happy gaining 1 or 2 rating points by winning against someone rated 1300 - 1500 then that is up to him/her!!!
The reason my average opponents' rating is lower than my rating is because it's harder to get games against 1700+ players. I put up 4 open invites this morning: 2 limited to 1500+ and 2 limited to 1700+. People accepted the two 1500 games very quickly while it took a couple of hours for the first 1700 game to be accepted and the other one is still there.