lichess.org
Donate

I played another perfect game!

@OnlyBetterNoBlitz Rating is not a measurement of strength, it is a measurement of performance. Accuracy is a description of strength, an evaluation of a player's understanding and ability is a better indicator of strength. You can evaluate any legal chess position, it doesn't matter if your opponent is rated 100, 3000 or if you're playing yourself. I think the more you understand about chess and the better your insights the less you need to care about "Result based analysis". That's why sports have two sets of casters, the shoutcasters who talk about hype and the "dumbed down" layman's information vs the color casters who actually talk about what's going on.
@AIdanbestieaMin Did you read the thread? I am currently spamming LoL Solo queue and won't have the time or apm to play until i'm done (Hopefully tonight!) This is my alt tab for queue . pre game lobby and load screens
actually #292 rating is performance when you dont play against people way below your rating. your rating is 1800 yet you have no opponent above 1400.
@AIdanbestieaMin Doesn't matter, it's a statistically sound formula. The player who wins X% of their games against 3000 to get 1800 and the player who wins X% of their games against 700 to get 1800 are the same rating. Just math
@AIdanbestieaMin This also goes back to my earlier point, where I reminded people that I am not concerned with talking about or qualifying my own strength. This is instead a concern brought about by others. I asked them what i'm about to ask you, why is it to my advantage to go about proving or qualifying things? People call me out for so many things and then complained when I didn't defend myself or find cause to care. Do you see any indicators why I really should? I'm all ears (:

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.