I lost full points against a player with a low provisional ("?") rating whose real rating (in other TCs) is 500 above mine. From now on I will abort every single game against someone with a ? and everyone should do the same. Fix this BS.
Lichess has a feature to hide all ratings on the site that might suit you, it can be found under the Display menu in the settings. I leave it on all the time to avoid worrying about things like this.
Let's hope you never want to play Blitz again!
@Casual3141 said in #1:
> I lost full points against a player with a low provisional ("?") rating whose real rating (in other TCs) is 500 above mine. From now on I will abort every single game against someone with a ? and everyone should do the same. Fix this BS.
How could a player get rid of provisional ratings if everyone were aborting games against them? I guess that everyone (including you) had provisional ratings at the very beginning.
> I lost full points against a player with a low provisional ("?") rating whose real rating (in other TCs) is 500 above mine. From now on I will abort every single game against someone with a ? and everyone should do the same. Fix this BS.
How could a player get rid of provisional ratings if everyone were aborting games against them? I guess that everyone (including you) had provisional ratings at the very beginning.
@KindFighter said in #4:
> How could a player get rid of provisional ratings if everyone were aborting games against them? I guess that everyone (including you) had provisional ratings at the very beginning.
Are the people replying here honestly this bad at reading comprehension? The issue is not that provisional ratings exist, the issue is that it is treated like a real rating even when it's hundreds of points off of it.
As it stands, a 1500 who loses to a 2200 would still drop ~6 points because that 2200 will only be evaluated properly after a few games. Ratings can be corrected after the fact when cheating is detected. Ratings COULD also be corrected depending on where those provisionally rated players end up once their rating is honed in. As it stands now, players who are in the "starting area" get screwed - rather often.
> How could a player get rid of provisional ratings if everyone were aborting games against them? I guess that everyone (including you) had provisional ratings at the very beginning.
Are the people replying here honestly this bad at reading comprehension? The issue is not that provisional ratings exist, the issue is that it is treated like a real rating even when it's hundreds of points off of it.
As it stands, a 1500 who loses to a 2200 would still drop ~6 points because that 2200 will only be evaluated properly after a few games. Ratings can be corrected after the fact when cheating is detected. Ratings COULD also be corrected depending on where those provisionally rated players end up once their rating is honed in. As it stands now, players who are in the "starting area" get screwed - rather often.
@Casual3141 said in #5:
> The issue is not that provisional ratings exist, the issue is that it is treated like a real rating even when it's hundreds of points off of it.
First, that's kind of the point of "provisional" that you don't know if it's hundreds of points off (and if it is, in which direction). Second, this is why it is *not* treated the same. The higher your opponent's rating deviation is, the lower the change of your rating is going to be. Therefore losing to a completely new user with RD of 250 won't cost you nearly as much as losing someone with RD of 110 (where the dreadful question mark disappears) or even 45 (which is the RD floor on lichess). (And such player's rating is updated by much larger steps so that their rating converges to the "right" value faster.)
BtW, isn't it funny that I don't see anyone complaining about playing someone with provisional rating of 1500 whose actual strength should be 800 while people complain about the opposite all the time? 1500 being the median, I would expect that it should happen about as often. :-)
> The issue is not that provisional ratings exist, the issue is that it is treated like a real rating even when it's hundreds of points off of it.
First, that's kind of the point of "provisional" that you don't know if it's hundreds of points off (and if it is, in which direction). Second, this is why it is *not* treated the same. The higher your opponent's rating deviation is, the lower the change of your rating is going to be. Therefore losing to a completely new user with RD of 250 won't cost you nearly as much as losing someone with RD of 110 (where the dreadful question mark disappears) or even 45 (which is the RD floor on lichess). (And such player's rating is updated by much larger steps so that their rating converges to the "right" value faster.)
BtW, isn't it funny that I don't see anyone complaining about playing someone with provisional rating of 1500 whose actual strength should be 800 while people complain about the opposite all the time? 1500 being the median, I would expect that it should happen about as often. :-)
@Casual3141 said in #5:
> The issue is not that provisional ratings exist, the issue is that it is treated like a real rating even when it's hundreds of points off of it.
Their not. Players with high rating deviation (which includes players with provisional rating) have smaller effect on their opponent's ratings than players with low rating deviation. Read up on Glicko 2 here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glicko_rating_system.
> The issue is not that provisional ratings exist, the issue is that it is treated like a real rating even when it's hundreds of points off of it.
Their not. Players with high rating deviation (which includes players with provisional rating) have smaller effect on their opponent's ratings than players with low rating deviation. Read up on Glicko 2 here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glicko_rating_system.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.