chessmec: I haven't figure out if the rating is worth much. I know I can't play Chess as good as you guys, but I have beaten Mely twice in Gothic Chess. Him and I are now playing Janus Chess in a tournament. Maybe the games are different enough that I have a chance against strong Chess players in them? Though I have the feeling that Ed Trice will have his way with us in the tournament, I shall try to win every game.
These ratings seem kind of bogus to me. I can win 20 games of Dark Chess in a row and not go up but a couple of points. I lose a game and I drop 16 or more. Supposedly this is because one gets less points from defeating lower rated players and more points from defeating higher rated players and penalized more for losing to lower rated players.

I've seen that if a new person on this site plays high rated people and wins, he'll start off with a high rating. It is curious that Ed Trice doesn't have a 2700 or even a 2600 rating in Gothic Chess. He's won over a hundred games without a loss. How is it that Mely can have a 2700 rating in regular Chess with a record of 33 and 1? I take it he has played high rated players and won the games. As for Ed, there weren't any high rated players at the beginning and he started against lower rated players. This kind of system seems to need a way to fix this, but it isn't really broken if one considers comparing the ratings inside their own game and not against other games with different people. So a number 1 at 2308 is comparable to 1 at 2700. To use mine and Mely's rating of two different games. Still, I've lost nearly one hundred points over the last three months with a winning record and am still the top rated player in Dark Chess. I'm confused about this, but that is the way it is.