Adding Rapid and Slow rating categories. - Please vote !

@EvilChess Not everyone agrees with this. Im fine with one split as i already said in #25. Then you can finally play 45 45 games and get a nice rating ;-)

But i do not support more splits. It makes things too complex. Add ten of these changes to lichess and it becomes another wikipedia whose internals no one really understands.

Let Lichess be simple and fun.

shut up @linnemann, my temper getting hot

@idh82bu , keep cool. Patience will maximize our possibilities.

@Linnemann I respect your opinion and I'm fine in getting just one split, by now, because this is already a large positive step forward. So I'm thankful for that support and I'm pretty sure it will make lots of people happy.

haha, is this a political agenda, lol

get a life @idh82bu

A proof that long games have a place on the internet is ChessTempo.com . They use 0-3m-15m-60m-24h for bullet/blitz/rapid/long. From the player statistics page, you can easily check that 10% of it's games are in the Long range (60m-24h):

http://chesstempo.com/online-players.html

Active players (RD < 145):
1687 in Long range (60+)
5047 in Rapid range (15-60m)
5663 in Blitz range (3-15m)
4336 in Bullet range (0-3m)

Very active players (RD < 60):
365 in Long range (60+)
955 in Rapid range (15-60m)
1073 in Blitz range (3-15m)
943 in Bullet range (0-3m)

Given the fact that Long games take about 4 times longer than Rapid, 20 times longer than Blitz and 60 times longer than Bullet, the math gives an estimate that the actual amount of time spent in Long games 51% !!

pm = "player minutes"

1687 x 60 = 101220 pm (*)
5047 x 15 = 75705 pm
5663 x 3 = 16989 pm
4336 x 1 = 4336 pm
Total: 198250 pm (*)

(*) 101220 pm / 198250 pm = 51% of player minutes spent on Long games

For extra votes: http://www.strawpoll.me/11093155

#55 next time I play u I will use engine

@idh82bu #55 no i just prevented that by blocking you. Luck for you, now you wont get marked as cheater.

I see there is a lot of enthusiasm here... But back to the topic...

Here is the thing, we need to implement the a little update in Glicko2 rating calculations, so that rating deviation (RD) increases over time. So if you become inactive for a long period, then play a game, your rating will change in bigger steps (until RD gets small again).

With that done, the split can be implemented by cloning our ratings for both ranges and applying appropriate RDs, which was the clever suggestion of one developer. Those who have never played a rated game in one of the ranges, could either get the maximum RD and be initialized with either the current rating or 1500.

The problem is that no one has taken initiative to develop this yet. I have not yet developed in Scala. Might start soon, but the Classical split will probably require some DB changes, which would not have access to implement by myself.

For extra votes: http://www.strawpoll.me/11093155

Ι αgree with the idea.