View Single Post
Old 07-24-2007, 07:32 PM   #35
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,997

I don't mind a little sandbagging because I would rather play good players than bad players, even if it hurts my win-loss record. But I'm also all about an accurate rating system so that I can get a better measure of my own progress. What boggles my mind is the fact that a self-rated player can easily get disqualified but a computer-rated player is unlikely to get disqualified. If two people have the exact same results against a set of opponents (theoretically), why should one get disqualified but not the other? Both players regardless of being self or computer rated are both two strong to play at that level. Is the logic behind this that its impossible to go from say a computer-determined 3.0 to a solid 3.5 within less than a year? I would guess alot of lessons, drills, and determination could easily cause that much improvement.
raiden031 is offline   Reply With Quote