i tried to join the yahoo brainking grop and my embership is still pending. Why?

Scientists have managed to train rats to play chess by implanting microships in their brain that interface with a new chess program called Brutus. It looks like one of the would get a provisional rating of around 1200.

See www.chessbase.com and then go to the story on Brutus for details.

i know the feeling. I have a slot free, wanna game of chess?

We couldn't ask fr a better mod. Now... what sorts of favours can you get us???

That is fine by me Harley.

did Harley beocme admin?

which boad people should post on is a matter about the site. So this is the right place.

to pretty much be revolving around pente. It seemed to be about game etiquette in pente.

Please move this to the pente board. This is about the site in general. There is a board for pente issues, thisis not it. Why do you think there is a pente board? why can't this discussion be carried on there??

really belongs o the pente board. Not here. There is a reason pente has its own board.

POT KETTLE BLACK.

Let's get back to chess

POT KETTLE BLACK.

Let's get back to chess

Maybe count me in depending.

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.

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.

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 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.

that only the overall score ie, wheter I win or lose the match overall will be used for ratings calculation? Or does each match from part of the calculation itself.

Also, if the answer is that only the overall socre counts, wouldn't it just be wiser for players to play individual games first to build up a rating and then longer series?

In OTB chess each game is factored in individially to the ratings.

Does that mean it doesn't count for ratings until then?

The top two show the menssage I received to show my opponent resigned and the second two are the game archives.

http://brainking.com/game/ReadMessage?mi=128811

http://brainking.com/game/ReadMessage?mi=129459

http://brainking.com/game/ArchivedGame?g=52908

http://brainking.com/game/ArchivedGame?g=47761

I havbe won two chess games. Actually I won them both on the same day, but only one appears in my total results. Is there a reason for this? The two results were about 5 hours apart.