Search "user:Trump-Fraud"

"You keep stating "over-rated or under-rated"... relative to what? Ratings are a measure of past performance, not of skill or ability." huh? what else? over-rated/under-rated per a theoretical value o…

i am not addressing prediction as i am relying on standard methods for that. i hope you did read my prose well.

Simply, put once a rating is well established, the fluctuations per game would decrease. Instead of seeing 5 to 11 points+ you might be seeing under a point (through truncation while retaining a hidde…

Being this site uses the Glicko system and ratings still are not stable, what does that say about Glickman's attempt at applying math to ratings? It should be so obvious. If not, then the brainwashing…

Regardless of possessing a PhD degree which may make the masses feel comfy in some sort of notion of expertise, some choose not to be part of the system to garnish the ego-satisfying societal bunk. I'…

When clocks were first introduced to chess, there was no internet. For face-to-face play, notwithstanding an obvious physical handicap, a person could swiftly make a move without the added problem of …

that's a mighty opinion with no alternative for a debate. why make something sound so factual?

here's a simple process at the top of my head: Make the K-factor go from 16/24/32 or whatever is currently used to taper down to 4/8 upon the total number of games played (I say by about 40 games you …

basically seeing junk moves to capitalize on connection to win on time i think is something inadequately addressed. when a player is way ahead, i say give a win, or say, 3/4 of the amount of points wo…

I read the statements and though a little unnecessary words were injected in the first portion and not addressing directly in the second portion (basically a deflection but in a nice way), it's still …