Check out Janggi (Korean Chess), our featured variant for December, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Jan 8, 2006 02:42 PM UTC:
The idea of retro-active ratings is a displeasing 'after-the-fact' concept
to me.  The reason has to do with coffee-house style care free games versus
tournament rated games.  When I played chess at the Edgewater Park
Invitational, for example, I only lost 1 game, I drew against a 2000 USCF
rated player and only lost to a 2300 USCF rated player.  The 6 games
involved 10 hours of playing.  Now, I also play at a coffee-shop.  Wild
fun games with just 15 minutes on the clock.  These are not rated and we
can try bold ideas that we would likely avoid in a rated game.  By
comparison it as as if someone comes up and says, 'Hey, we've just rated
your coffee-house games and fudged them into your USCF rating.'  In regard
to the 1500+ rating I saw by my name here, by comparison: Best USCF was
1943, Rating in MSN real-time play broke above 2000, rating against Chess
computers reached 2110.  Current Gothic Chess is about 1975.
In regard to Chess Variants I would like to see the following system,
which seems fair:  All players start at 1600 (or 1500 if preferred). Rated
games do not begin until New games are started, say to go in effect Jan.
15th (or some other date).  In-progress games which may have been for fun
or simply experimental, do not count.  As example: When I played a
fun-game of Maxima with Roberto, he gave me lessons during the game.  Very
helpful lessons.  Would that have happened in a rated game?

Edit Form

Comment on the page Game Courier Ratings

Conduct Guidelines
This is a Chess variants website, not a general forum.
Please limit your comments to Chess variants or the operation of this site.
Keep this website a safe space for Chess variant hobbyists of all stripes.
Because we want people to feel comfortable here no matter what their political or religious beliefs might be, we ask you to avoid discussing politics, religion, or other controversial subjects here. No matter how passionately you feel about any of these subjects, just take it someplace else.
Avoid Inflammatory Comments
If you are feeling anger, keep it to yourself until you calm down. Avoid insulting, blaming, or attacking someone you are angry with. Focus criticisms on ideas rather than people, and understand that criticisms of your ideas are not personal attacks and do not justify an inflammatory response.
Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.