Here is how I understand the upcomming BKR recalculations & graphs.

First is to go back to game #1, and go through all the game for all the players and recalculate the BKR for each and every game. So if at any time your BKR was messed up because of time outs, or other miscalculations - this should fix them.

How I understand the graph - it is more of a statistics type of thing, something like what LittleGolem.net has - if you seen their ratings. So if you go and look at my graph for Backgammon, you might see me start at 1300, maybe grow to around 1800 in Dec 2003, maybe a big drop back down to 1400 in a few month, etc..., etc... So you will also be able to hopefully quickly see what your "high" rating was in your past for a certain game, and "low" rating was.

Again, I have not seen it - so this is just how I understand this current project.

WHICH brings me to a question I asked awhile back, but never got an answer.

Why are ratings calculated with the rating at the time the game ends, and not the ratings when the game was first started?

before on-line turn based sites, ratings were almost always the same when a person started and completed a game, so there was never a question.

But with turn based sites, the ratings can be drasticly different from when you start a game and end a game. (I can not tell you how many Froglet games I have started with player rated 1300+, and by the time it ends - maybe they resigned many many games - my rating is calculated with their new 400 BKR, which I feel if really unfair.

Maybe I'm not thinking correctly, but wouldn't it be beter if ratings were calculated with the ratings that each player started with, rather then end it?

So for example, lets say I have a rating of 2000, and my opponent has a rating of 1000. We play a game, by the time the game is over, both our ratings are completly different.

I believe the ratings should be calculated with the original 2000, and 1000 ratings - and then add/subtract the results onto our current ratings.