The independent home for discussions on the English Chess scene.
https://www.ecforum.org.uk/
It's an intrinsic feature of the Glicko method that the uncertainty about the reliability increases with absence and presumed lack of practice. That might even be true, but it's a flawed assumption when the rating system does not have a monopoly on a player's chess activity.MJMcCready wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:04 amIt strikes me as somewhat dubious that the score goes up the longer you are away from the game, based on the account that you are training or studying.
The number goes up to indicate increasing unreliability in your rating. It causes a bigger change in rating when you do play again after a long gap. Its effect is like having a standard Elo rating system and gradually increasing the k factor the longer you go without playing any games.MJMcCready wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:04 amIt strikes me as somewhat dubious that the score goes up the longer you are away from the game, based on the account that you are training or studying. If we were all professional players, I can understand that. Like many I can go many weeks without playing a single game and letting chess enter my thoughts at any point.
That is indeed what Glicko does.MJMcCready wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:41 amok, well I assumed that the longer you go without playing the rustier you become. If I don't play for a few months, I'm generally very off-form.
If they increase the K factor, you drop more points when you lose. It's a flawed idea when the rating system doesn't have a monopoly on play because you equally gain more points when you win. So someone playing exclusively on lichess for a few months and then returning to chess.com could obtain a higher rating for the same performances than someone continuously on chess.com.MJMcCready wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:13 amBut as stated, I usually worsen if I don't play regularly. I don't see how absence from the board should increase k-factor, shouldn't it limit it?
Yes it seems so. Bit strange.Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:41 amIf they increase the K factor, you drop more points when you lose. It's a flawed idea when the rating system doesn't have a monopoly on play because you equally gain more points when you win. So someone playing exclusively on lichess for a few months and then returning to chess.com could obtain a higher rating for the same performances than someone continuously on chess.com.MJMcCready wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:13 amBut as stated, I usually worsen if I don't play regularly. I don't see how absence from the board should increase k-factor, shouldn't it limit it?
Not really, Roger. The k factor reduces smoothing. If you actually have not changed in ability then your rating might become more jittery for a while but there should not be any trend present either upwards or downwards.Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:41 amIf they increase the K factor, you drop more points when you lose. It's a flawed idea when the rating system doesn't have a monopoly on play because you equally gain more points when you win. So someone playing exclusively on lichess for a few months and then returning to chess.com could obtain a higher rating for the same performances than someone continuously on chess.com.MJMcCready wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:13 amBut as stated, I usually worsen if I don't play regularly. I don't see how absence from the board should increase k-factor, shouldn't it limit it?
Jittery = incorrect rating. My point. It may not matter on chess.com, but would if applied to a national rating system because of tournaments with rating restrictions or rating qualifications.Michael Farthing wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:56 amIf you actually have not changed in ability then your rating might become more jittery for a while but there should not be any trend present either upwards or downwards.