3.4 How Can I Get a Rating?

Play!

The correct answer needs some explanation. Rating is no more and no less than the expected playing strength. The rating can only be measured relative to another player. In other words: There is no way to judge the absolute strength of a single player. But who is the first player to compare with? How can we define the first rated player?

Basically the choice is arbitrary. But the player with the most games has the chance of being a reasonable pivot for many other players. This system started the rating with the first player, who had done more than 36 games. Again the number 36 is arbitrary. It has been chosen to get a reasonable rating (See section 2.5.2 How Precise is my Rating?.). Wim Sikteoeboen initialized the rating.

The next step is to find a player of almost equal strength. The reason is simple: If the second player is much worse than the first one and loses all games against the rated player, his rating cannot be calculated. The only thing that can be said, is that he is much worse than the rated player. For the same reason, he must not win all games against the rated player. The second player was Wim Snelleman.

Having two rated players, selecting the third player is easier, because he must not lose/win all games against both players. The growing group of rated players is like an avalanche.

But there is one exception. There are some players, who have never won a game against any rated player. Unluckily there is no way to estimate a rating for a player, who has never won a game against any rated player. These players are labeled `unrated' in the rating table.