Board for everybody who is interested in BrainKing itself, its structure, features and future.
If you experience connection or speed problems with BrainKing, please visit Host Tracker and check "BrainKing.com" accessibility from various sites around the world. It may answer whether an issue is caused by BrainKing itself or your local network (or ISP provider).
List of discussion boards
You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Knight.
From time to time on here, I've noticed that people complain about their rating(s), the rating system, or one thing or another having to do with ratings. What a waste of time and energy! Ratings are cuious and interesting by nature; they are also a very inexact science no matter what formula is used. It has always been this way, and probably always will be. If those yammering about ratings would spend half that time studying and improving their play, their ratings would improve dramatically! So, why worry? Look up your rating if it makes you feel good, acknowledge it, then resolve to do something about it, or just forget it!
As for extremely high numbers of games per member, I suppose that is Fencer's province alone. Some of my opponents (even friends) fit this category, and I don't especially like waiting days for a response in a game, but as long as they make their time control, I cannot complain, although I have a tough time understanding how anybody can handle several hundred games simultaneously. There has to be a certain comfortable level of peak performance beyond which play diminishes.
There will always be a small number of people (in proportion) who are impatient with what the site offers, and when and how it offers it, and even if they could be placated at present they would find something else to get anxious about, so let them be on their merry way and concentrate on the resolute majority.
Pioneer54, I partially agree with what you said, mostly in regard to the high number of games. But, just because people can improve their ratings by studying does NOT mean that a possibly flawed ratings system should not be changed. I am not saying that the rating system is definitely flawed, because maybe it isn't, but I think it could and should be improved. The fact that people can study and improve their ratings is no reason to have a weak rating system.
ALso, although it is hardly relevant, I dare say that my ratings in the 4 games I play (in which I am the top rated player) have not suffered any as a result of my spending 5 minutes complaining about the ratings system.
So, what would be a suggestion (or plurality thereof) to improve upon the rating system we have? There is no such thing as a perfect one, but if there are flaws, they could be thrashed over, perhaps even rectified.
I just don't think that a lot of time should be spent on it by the players. I mean, I am much more concerned with won-loss records than any rating, which is at best only a rough guide as to how good (or not) a player is. In contrast, numbers of games won and lost are factual, and although they do not necessarily address the strength (or weakness) of opposition, they are still unequivocal.
However, ratings are always fallible, no matter how good the system used. I purport that in most rating systems, about one-third of the players are overrated, about one-third underrated, and about one-third rated fairly close to where they should be. The variance in rating systems won't change that. The only thing which will make rating systems better is longevity; that is, a lot of the players in a certain game type playing a lot of games against the others in that group.
I think a good suggestion would be to examine the rating system Dweebo uses at Dweebo's Stone games. The formula is similar, but would not have some of the odd results obtained with the current brain King formula.
Well, I would just like to point out that I am in the top 20 of three games and the top 30 of another. DmitriKing is the top rated player in four games. It's not that I haven't been able to do well here but I think it is a difficult system to sustain competition if no one can figure out its consequences.