hidden skill rating

[DimebagDerek]

Also they have official world titles matches and candidate matches to ensure them playing for those spots. I don't think something like that should be involved here, just an example of how they cannot coast by and be called best once they get there. For the most part the system does just go by their rating and people can achieve it and not play again and hold those spots. And others would just have to like it and keep playing until the average rating increases enough they can get enough points to eclipse them, or go on a dominating win streak and beat it. Just seems like a lot of work to beat someone who no longer wants to play and risk their precious points. There should be Hall of Fames for amazing players. They deserve recognition for their achievements, but if you don't actively play in a competitive league, you shouldn't be rated the best. I think the current system just rewards coasting by on good play, rather than promoting it.

---

(11-06-2013 09:19 AM).Memories. Wrote:  

(11-06-2013 09:16 AM)TheGoldenGriffin Wrote:  

(11-06-2013 09:08 AM).Memories. Wrote:  

(11-06-2013 09:03 AM)Cor13:4 Wrote:  Chess for example, uses the Elo rating system and people's Elo scores never degrade.

There has been a lot of issues with this, though, that lead to players not playing just to protect their rating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_...27s_rating

You mean like if they're satisfied with their high rating and they don't want it to drop so they'll not play as much so it won't change?

Exactly. (Disclaimer, I don't play chess, so I don't know a ton about it.)

Say I play a Grandmaster and win mostly by luck (I understand this is hard in chess). My ELO goes way up. So, now I have a higher ELO than I should. Therefore, I stop playing so that I maintain that high ELO to enter tournaments, brag, or whatever.

Something like this happens with draws a lot. The GM is ranked much higher, but the IM is a very amazing player and finds a repetitious draw. The GM loses a decent amount of hard earned and hard to get points, while the IM gains a good boost to his rating. Now what happens? The IM plays less inspired chess, because draws are as good as wins, and the GM plays less games against lower ranked people at lower level tournaments because he risks too much to gain very little. It just seems to defeat the idea of competition and evolving play.