lichess.org
Donate

Rating difference between two chess sites

@DrHack said in #20:
> I think they used to start at 1200. I've had people reporting to me that they were forced to start at a 400 rating recently, which is crushing the average rating on the site. I googled average ratings and found some old threads with screen shots of CDC average rating at 1200 several years ago when people were added to the system at 1200.
>
> So yeah, I think you might be out dated on the 1200 number. Not attacking you bro, just tying to get the right information out there. CDC's rating system is getting wrecked this year and what was true yesterday might not be true tomorrow over there.

Sure, maybe people can't choose to start at 1200 anymore, but that would be a fairly recent change. I think the problem CDC has been trying to solve is people joining, losing 10 games in a row on the site and then quitting. But I think the algorithm that decides rating change needs a value for the unrated player, so there is some bias to a number for people who play more than a few games. In any case, the _old_ starting difference still appears to hold for a while at least, for let's say >1100 and <2000 CDC rating.
Yeah, that's the part we don't know because we haven't seen it yet. The whole upper end of the system might just stay where it is because experience of the higher rated players wins out and keeps them where they are over the newer players. Or.. maybe some of the new players might start to progress into the game rapidly and reach the next pool of players - the 2 pools collide and the points get sucked out in a downward spiral of doom while everyone wonders why they just lost 500 points in 6 months for no reason... We will see how it goes.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.