I have just read the FAQ and I would like to suggest that this rule is somewhat unfair. For example if I was an 1800 and I was playing a 2000 and he best me 3-2 in a 3 pointer, my rating would not be affected by the fact that I aactually managed to take two points off him. This is somewhat unfair, especially since FIDE factor in the results of all games, even where they are part of sets such as the last FIDE World Championship.

Perhaps this could be changed so that each subgame is counted for your rating or maybe there could be a facility where you choose whether the results of sub-games or the overall score will be used in rating calculations.

Counting subgames would be better for lower rated players as they would be rewarded for all of their play against high graded players. Otherwise, there is little point in anyone playing a series game against anyone who is 200pts above them or more as there is little chance of them winning overall.

You say the system is unfair to the lower rated player, But if you were indeed rewarded for winning 2 out of the 5 games then this would be unfair to the higher rated player as this could mean that even though the higher rated player has won the match they could take a drop in their rating.
The BKR state that a winning players rating will not drop.
I think the easiest solution would be to play only single games or alternativley, Make sure you win the match..
:D

It all depends on the ratings gap. What if the reslt overall and the results of the individual games was taken into account?

According to the way ratings work only a 500pt gap should ensure wins all the time so surely over a larger number of games the effect would subside.
Big ratings will usually win one offs but smaller ratings can pull off small shocks.

I agree,the winner's rating should not drop,why should it,the player earned it.If you are willing to play,you are willing to lose.losers should not whine about it..learn from it...have a positive atitude = do better the next game.isn't that what life is all about?nitzche said"whatever doesn't kill me,just makes me stronger".remember,its just a game,and we are all mature enough to know that & deal with it(I hope).

As I have alreasdy said, any drop would only be affected by the number of games. For instance, if there was only a 100pt gap and the higher rated player lost one game from five there would be no drop (or a negligeable one at best) but if there was a 500pt gap and the lower rated player managed to take one game from five, they should be rewarded for their achievment. In the real world high rated players have to keep their guard up all the time, so why not here?
Surely if there is a 500pt gap and thew lower player runs it very close this should be reflected with a ratings change.

Jondownie, I agree with you, to a certain extent. I think players should still have the OPTION of creating a match with the current rules. But, I would also like to be able to do the following:

invite a player to a 2 game match, one of each color. Both games count for all purposes.
Pente and Keryo pente are usually played in pairs, so this is just a shortcut for having to send two separate invites--- Also, thep layer, under the current system, can decline the invite for the game where he is black, and accept the one where he is white.

Fencer, I think this would be a valuable addition ot the site, it is one of the few areas where I feel the site is lacking, because just about everything else here is great. Of course, I think priority should be given to enabling 2 game sets as an option for tournaments as well.

Dmitri: Yes, I think that IYT has this feature (two games). I can do it.
About tournaments - it is already done ;-)

"Dmitri: Yes, I think that IYT has this feature (two games). I can do it.
About tournaments - it is already done ;-)"

Awesome! You continue to amaze me with the efficiency with which you get things done. I think soem great tournaments will be held here in the future.

I think that the option should be there where the players should be able to choose whether only the overall score counts, whether each game counts or whether both count towards ratings.

I think the only time where I would say it was unfair for the higher player not to lose ratings points for losing single matches in a series is with tiemouts but with the vacation feature here I would think that would be unlikely to happen.

Also, there is the danger that high rated players would only play series if the current rules are in place as they know they will proably win overall against lower rated players, making it harder for players to gain ratings points.

Also in the real world, players accept that ratings tend to balance out over a longer period of time with good results balancing bad. As the site on the ratings system says, if you have earned your rating over a greater number of games, the occasional loss should not affect you.