That's how you defeat a 2000 rated player

Bullet is not chess. They pre-moved or almost pre-moved g6 because did not expect bullshit like Qf3. That is all the mystery of those "surprizing" wins.

bullet is chess, but, is only play for fun, I liked to do that mate, but it's not so fun anymore to me.

The large upsets are very rare. The winners should get more points. It's much harder to defeat a 2000 once than a 1400 twice. Plus, these high rated people get to top by repeatedly beating beginners. Those who succeed in surviving against the high rated players deserve to be generously rewarded with lots of rating points, like +300 to the winner and -300 to the loser. This should encourage the 2000s to play similarly rated opponents.

The goal of rating system is to reflect the real strength of player, not to make fake ratings in order to encourage something.
If one plays with opps like 300 points weaker, he gets like +2 points from each game, while if he loses he gets -18. There is statistically only 90% chance to win with that difference in strength (not 100%!). So winning 9 games and loosing 1 he just keeps his own rating on the same level. The system is fair.

p.s. Or you want 300 points for accidental fool's mate? :)

The proposal would lead to a super-inflation, not very hard to foresee. People, people.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.