Originally posted by cadwahIs this padding, selective pairing, rating manipulation, multiple accounts or all of the above?
Oh my! 😲
-User 285560
-User 285550
Is this reverse padding or one of the above?
-User 356012
I can see why the likes of Xanthos when not hiding in the help/site ideas forum are attracted to bashing the same opponent. I cannot see why "normal" people cannot play others non-selectively. The guy who thinks rating is being taken "too seriously" should have spoken in the defence of the "rating manipulation" official. Is that why the examples above want to reach 3000 Elo or someone wants to be awarded the master title dubiously?
Originally posted by z00tWhat does a player using multiple accounts and manipulating results to achieve a high rating have to do with two people playing multiple games against one another?
Is this padding, selective pairing, rating manipulation, multiple accounts or all of the above?
-User 285560
-User 285550
Is this reverse padding or one of the above?
-User 356012
I can see why the likes of Xanthos when not hiding in the help/site ideas forum are attracted to bashing the same opponent. I cannot see why "normal" pe ...[text shortened]... above want to reach 3000 Elo or someone wants to be awarded the master title dubiously?
Kiddies, please !
Cadwah's right - the rating system on RHP is just a convenience to provide a rough guide on the other party's status, it really isn't important, if I come up against an inappropriately-rated opponent I put him on my ignore list and forget about him.
This thread just goes around in the same circle over and over again to no purpose.
Originally posted by z00tBashing bad ideas... it's not his fault the same users come up with the same bad ideas over and over.
Is this padding, selective pairing, rating manipulation, multiple accounts or all of the above?
-User 285560
-User 285550
Is this reverse padding or one of the above?
-User 356012
I can see why the likes of Xanthos when not hiding in the help/site ideas forum are attracted to bashing the same opponent. I cannot see why "normal" pe ...[text shortened]... above want to reach 3000 Elo or someone wants to be awarded the master title dubiously?
P-
Originally posted by MissOleumErm....isn't that a contradiction? If the rating isn't important, how can you be paired up with an inappropriately-rated opponent?
it really isn't important, if I come up against an inappropriately-rated opponent I put him on my ignore list and forget about him.
Putting that person on the ignore list also seems a little harsh. 🙂
Originally posted by lauseyTouching door knobs doesn't bother me at all. I just open all doors with my foot.
Erm....isn't that a contradiction? If the rating isn't important, how can you be paired up with an inappropriately-rated opponent?
Putting that person on the ignore list also seems a little harsh. 🙂
P-
The problem with the some people with no experience on larger sites is that they think the site has 150 people like when they joined. Times are a changing.
If mathematics is any defence don't you think that the disgraced USCF official couldn't have gotten Kavanagh QC to argue like a headless chicken. His a$$ was on the line.
Originally posted by z00tYou did read what the official was accused of doing, didn't you? Please tell me you did. And you do know that he voluntarily resigned? Please tell me you did.
The problem with the some people [b]with no experience on larger sites is that they think the site has 150 people like when they joined. Times are a changing.
If mathematics is any defence don't you think that the disgraced USCF official couldn't have gotten Kavanagh QC to argue like a headless chicken. His a$$ was on the line.[/b]
Originally posted by z00twith no experience on larger sites
The problem with the some people [b]with no experience on larger sites is that they think the site has 150 people like when they joined. Times are a changing.
If mathematics is any defence don't you think that the disgraced USCF official couldn't have gotten Kavanagh QC to argue like a headless chicken. His a$$ was on the line.[/b]
This is wrong...
think the site has 150 people
This makes no point...
like when they joined
And this is wrong again.
Times are a changing
This needs a hyphen, but in my experience is generally true.
How does this affect you? Really. You have threads in different forums and you bring it up in the middle of threads started by others as well. I don't understand your obsession with whom other people play on a recreational chess site. Does my rating have any impact at all on the sort of man you are or the sort of husband/father/friend/lover/son/brother/employee/citizen/neighbour you are? If I chose to play all six of my games against the same person at the same time, would this cause the demise of all the remaining bees or decide who wins the Eurovision Song Contest or bring back Polio? It's a game. It's like "Whose Line Is It Anyway" -- The points don't matter. They add a little something, but they don't matter.
The post that was quoted here has been removedIt's easy enough to see that your arguments are silly, even for someone who's quite new to the site (also, he may have played on a different site before and thus not be new to internet chess). One of your silly arguments is about the number of players. If there are more players, the behaviour of two people will have less effect on the general rating distribution on the site, if I am not totally mistaken.