|
|
Post by radioarno on Feb 11, 2013 20:40:24 GMT -5
I've been thinking that players who have many more wins than losses are more careful players. then I realized that you could have many more wins than losses if you only play weaker players. What do people think? Does a high ratio of wins to losses mean its a stronger player, or does it mean they playweaker players. there are some players I've played who have many more losses than wins, and yet they are strong players. What do poeple on here (who read this board) think of the significnace of the win loss draw ratio. thanks. Arno (radioarno)
|
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Feb 12, 2013 16:24:12 GMT -5
What I like to do is check out the other players page and see what games he/she is playing. Who are they playing? How many games are they playing? What are the strengths of the other players? I like to go to the win/loss and see who they have beaten or lost to to get a feel for the player. Anyone in the 2300 and up range I like to check out to see if that rating is for real or like you said maybe they are playing less skilled players. My experience at Stan's is most are not but there are some who are and it's all about numbers and who can blame a person for wanting to win. :0) I hope this helps you. :0)
Joe
|
|
|
|
Post by radioarno on Feb 17, 2013 14:41:37 GMT -5
thanks Joe, very helpful and useful. Thanks ketchuplover.
|
|
Comet
Full Member
Bright Blessings
Posts: 237
|
Post by Comet on Mar 30, 2013 14:53:49 GMT -5
Anybody with a high win/loss ratio may be said to be beating weaker opponents, at least according to the metric that the opponents lose more than win. But a grandmaster may be playing many experts, and I would not call an expert a "weak" player.
Since the win/loss ratio shows only the percentage of games won, and not the reason, then one cannot deduce much about the player's carefulness. A fairly strong, but occasionally careless player may have a similar win/loss ration to a weaker, but more careful player. Carelessness presents opportunities to one's opponent, and the opponent may or may not observe or know how to take advantage of the position. I've played international masters, for fun, who, to keep the games a bit more interesting, play dubious lines, knowing that when I start getting a better position, that they can then apply their wider knowledge and regain control of the situation. So an observer, who doesn't know the personalities and histories involved, may attribute the intermediate positions of a game to the higher-rated player's "carelessness", whereas the motivation of that player is just to have more fun, rather than relentlessly crushing me.
As chess is a game, there is more to it than just winning--many people play games for FUN, especially when no money or other side-bets are involved. Winning IS fun, but much of the joy of the game can be found in the moves and positions prior to the final result.
High losses mean that one is playing stronger opponents, certainly, unless there is ratings manipulation involved.
My current statistics on Stan's Netchess: 1410-1014-0141
|
|
