Rank display wierdness (perceived)

I know that it’s still a work in progress, but here’s some up to the moment feedback on how rank display is working.

None of this is a “big problem” but it is a “non ideal” or “disorienting” experience

Yesterday an opponent of mine accepted a correspondence game. I noticed that he was 18k (I am 19k) and that was good.

I said “Hi” to him, and a couple of hours later he said “Hi” to me. In the chat log, his rating shows as 19k.

This morning he is 20k.


All of that is OK: he played some games and came out down for a moment: no problem.

However, I did think “whoa, I thought he was 18k”. On the game page there is no evidence that he was. So I went to look at his graph…

… and when I look at his graph, to get a sense of what was going on, there is no sign of this at all!

In fact, there is nowhere on his graph recently where he is above 20k (19.2 is the highest - this is still “20k”):

Nor in his game history:

So … I know that this is because the game history only shows the current rank, and the graph only shows one point per day (but which point?).

The net result is that you can’t really see what’s going on, and it all is a bit wierd.

Either or both of

  • Show a point for each game on the graph
  • Show the ranking at the time of the game, not the current ranking, in the history

Would solve this.



Given the 3 annulled games near the bottom, you can see he beat a 14k and a 16k back to back. This would have temporarily shot him up to 18k presumably. Despite the rank displaying per game estimations it still processes in batches. Meaning his wins were grouped together with his 4 consecutive ranked losses, maintaining his 20k standing. It’s just all smoothed out rather than being really jagged.

1 Like

Yes - I appreciate how it gets that way. That’s why I wrote “percieved wierdness”.

IE you have to intimately understand how the display works in order for it to make sense, otherwise it seems wierd … even though it’s all explainable.

As opposed to… it being obvious what happened - which would be the case if one or other or both of the suggestions above were implemented

I think, in regards to your first point, it’d be really good to have a toggle between x per game and x per time unit.
As for your second option, I struggle to think of a reason why this wasn’t how they coded it from the very beginning…