I like the breakdown by speed and board size, but there doesn’t seem to be any relationship between the ratings? My overall rating is higher than any of the specific ratings, and my highest specific rating is in blitz 13x13 which I barely play and don’t really recall being any good at. I guess it’s just having a hard time giving a rating there because there are so few games? But it feels like all of these are on different scales, which makes it hard to interpret them.
I have a friend in my list who has played almost 300 ranked games and his rating is listed as N. I’m wondering how that could be as I assume that means there isn’t enough data to produce a rating for that person yet?
This is true, they are on different scales. This is also the reason why there are no ranks associated with the broken out ratings. To be honest it’s an open question as to whether we should keep the breakouts or not, at this point they are strictly informational.
I’m all for strictly informational, I’m just not sure what information I’m supposed to get out of them.
Edit: I guess if, say, you’re getting stronger at correspondence but stagnating in blitz it’ll show you that. It would help a lot if you could assign even some informal kyu ranks to those for comparison purposes, though.
Hello, thanks for any improvement and the time you spend into this.
I’m a bit worrying, if someone is going to lose, he can ran out of time and the game is canceled, according to your rule: Correspondence games between two players that rank difference of more than 2 and end in a timeout will no longer be rated.
Yeah, it doesn’t even have to be abuse. I’m not sure, but I suspect I time out more in positions where I’m losing, just because I tend to play faster in easy positions. I have no intent to abuse the system, but if the timeouts are not distributed evenly, it will skew the results.