#Hey folks, quick thought on the King of the Hill leaderboard—curious if others have noticed this too

12 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

delicate owl
#

The top 10 feels kinda frozen lately. A lot of the players up there are clearly strong, no shade at all—but many of them got their spot through provisional rating boosts, then stopped playing once they landed a trophy. The current #1 has only played 60 games total. That’s wild for a leaderboard that’s supposed to reflect ongoing excellence.

It’s not nearly as messy as what we see on Chess.com’s variant boards (which are a whole other story), but it’s still a problem. The hill’s meant to be climbed, not camped on.

Some ideas that might help:

Cap the impact of provisional games so early wins don’t inflate ratings too fast.

Highlight active streaks or recent performance alongside peak rating.

Maybe even a seasonal reset or rotating leaderboard to keep things fresh.

Would love to hear what others think. I’m not trying to call anyone out—just want the hill to feel alive again. Right now it’s more like a museum of past climbs.

junior cave
#

Lichess ratings are designed to get the player to their true rating quickly

#

Decreasing the impact of provisional games changes that

#

Likewise, inactivity can remove players from the leaderboard, I believe. Once the rating deviation increases past a certain point the player is ineligible for leaderboards until their rating goes down

delicate owl
# junior cave Lichess ratings are designed to get the player to their true rating quickly

Totally fair points—and yeah, Lichess does a great job overall with rating transparency and getting players to their true level fast. The provisional system is efficient for most variants, especially where volume of play is high. But King of the Hill’s a bit of an edge case.

Because it’s niche and slower-paced, a few high-rated wins early on can launch someone into the top 10 with very few games played. And if they stop there, their RD (rating deviation) might stay low enough to keep them eligible for the leaderboard for a long time—especially if they don’t play other variants. So while RD can eventually disqualify inactive players, it’s not always fast or consistent in this context.

The concern isn’t about punishing strong players—it’s about making sure the leaderboard reflects ongoing competition, not just a snapshot of early success. Maybe a tweak like soft-capping provisional point gains or accelerating RD increase for inactivity in niche variants could help without breaking the rating philosophy.

Appreciate the nuance you brought in—this kind of convo’s exactly what keeps the hill alive.

junior cave
#

The provisional rating change is capped at 700 iirc

delicate owl
#

another day, another new top ten player with less than 60 games

uncut goblet
delicate owl
#

First of all, you're blocked, lets get that out of the way. Secondly the average opponent I play is well above 2300 in standard chess, its never a walk in the park. And many of these players cant reach 2100. Finally, if I wanted to make a second account, cherry pick, and use provision points it would be very easy to reach top ten. But it would be a hollow journey, I much rather earn it through hard work.

uncut goblet
#

lmao

#

i cant

north igloo