lichess.org
Donate

Bullet rating

I love that lichess supports many different variations and time controls and rates them accordingly (unlike back in the day when there was only 1 rating and no chess variations :D)

However what strikes me as odd is that all variations are dominated by bullet players, mostly 1+0. I think it would make more sense if all game variations below 4 mins would count torwards your bullet rating regardless of game type. This would actually help the best 960, horde, atomic and other players to place in the top ranks of thier respective discipline, rather than giving the top spots to strong bullet players who use their speed rather than strategy. Best regards
So you'd like to discriminate against some people's strengths in favour of other people's, and suggest that fast automatically equates to tactically unaware?
it would make even less sense if someone got 2200+ bullet by playing atomic while that person is actually 1400 classical blitz
Regardless of the time control, atomic is still atomic. If this were to take place, I could be a very good bullet played by only playing atomic 1+0. This idea doesn't really make sense to me. Seems very unfair.
"However what strikes me as odd is that all variations are dominated by bullet players, mostly 1+0."

why?
#1 In fairness to lichess, no other site has done anything to address this issue, either. When I play 1+0 Atomic my rating goes over 2000, but at slower time controls it goes below 1800; so I'm redistributing lots of rating points and polluting the ratings distribution.

#5 In theory that makes sense: bullet, blitz, and classical ratings for each variant. Players who have used other servers might be bewildered by there being so many ratings, but since such a division works well for normal chess I imagine it would work equally well for variant chess.
I would also appreciate the idea.
To support Putinnumerouno I can give a specific example- I don't like bullet at all, also I have just a real shitty mouse for playing bullet. I lose almost every bullet game on time rather on the position (even against "stronger" opponents).
What strikes me is that there is the player (marta...?) who has his 2500 in every variation. Having in King of the Hill, chess960 and 3check the top 10 ranking I can't play against him. Not because I'm afraid, but because he plays only bullet or 0+1. I don't want to say it's not chess anymore, it is still an achievement to keep up with this time, but to understand strategically a completely new position I would like to have at least 3 min on my clock.
Also another (bigger) problem is that most of the other players I play against are also some sort of "time players". E.g. I play often chess 960 with 2+0 or 1+1 (either as me or "ToLazyToGetAName") and I do overplay my opponents mostly in chess (how I think chess has to work, not because I think I'm the best player around), whereas they stick to playing fast. Having lost in chess matter against me, they stop playing and go for another oponent or even less time. Why? Not because I'm to 'strong' for them, but rather because against other same "time players" they are more likely to get a higher rating and thus "become better", just like the player (marta...?) does. So the focus shifts from beeing good to beeing fast and win as fast as possible.
And to make it clear, I don't say I'm better than (marta...?) with a more standard time control, it is well possible he will still beat the shit out of me. He uses the fast time control because he mostly get ~2000 guys he wants to beat fast because he only gets +1 point anyway. That is in my opinion the reason he only focuses on playing 1+0, there is only on rating ladder. With more diversity he can still chose his prefered ladder (e.g. beeing the bullet king of everything), or to show he is the best in everything. The own players will get more appreciated (since a well playing player on this site won't be compared with a bullet player without knowledge) and the spectators can also see more of the strategical chess instead of bullet.
But at the same time I do understand that we don't have that many players on lichess to make this work, so it is a very nice suggestion, but I understand if it can't be done.
I agree with a lot of what you said. I think when you watch GMs/IMs and even FMs playing bullet, they play actively with the goal in mind always being to consolidate and grow on their position. Many players here certainly play bullet just because they can win by moving pieces quickly and avoiding any threats.

I see why it'd be annoying for 1+0 or 0+1 players to be at the top of every variant list, especially horde, or KOTH, but I can't really see an obvious way to fix it other than the variant listings to get 3 categories - bullet, blitz and classical, and for that to be reflected in the variant top10 lists. I think that'd made your page far too cluttered. In my opinion, it's already a bit cluttered in that respect.

As to Marta Singer, he's obviously a pretty decent player who enjoys beating patzers (respective to him) in an attempt to be the #1 player at everything except blitz and classical. I would say to ignore him; he is usually outside the Glicko +-110 to give him a certain rating so he isn't usually on the top 10 lists. When he does play people near his rating, he usually loses.
This problem does stem from the fact that much fewer people actively play variants, but I do agree that having bullet, blitz, and classical all mixed into one rating leads to imprecision. A solution to the resultant overly cluttered players page (as mentioned above) is to divide it into 4 tabs.

One for all standard chess, tournament winners, activity, etc.
The other three can be bullet, blitz, and classical for all variants with their respective top ten lists. On your mouseover profile only the highest in whatever chosen field will be displayed however going to that players profile can show all three ratings for any variant. This of course would have problems of its own though.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.