Score on Lichess.org

I'm glad you think it's perfect as even Professor Glickman himself doesn't:

"As the assumptions underlying the rating system are continually questioned and tested, changes in the rating algorithm can reflect our understanding of the frequency players win chess games and how players' abilities improve over time."

Clarkey, take a look at the bottom of page 36 of Glickman's paper "A Comprehensive Guide to Chess Ratings." I'm not going to get into a whole argument with you, but chess ratings are not simply cold statistics. Psychology and incentives play a large role, whether you want them to or not. A successful rating system might also be one that motivates players to keep playing rather than quitting. Glickman describes the USCF system as rewarding positive but not punishing poor results -- just the opposite of the example I gave earlier.

@chess240 No system can factor in "psychology and incentives". Glicko-2 is as good as we can get.

@chess240

What you are describing is not a rating system, and I'm quite confident that you are misinterpreting what Mark is trying to say.

Your first quote has absolutely nothing to do with rewards, incentives, psychology - it relates none to the topic at hand. He is talking about how the rating system measures ability, and how it makes assumptions regarding how ability/performance is measured and it's contributing factors; how our models could be improved.

Yes, the rating system is free to be tweaked and improved to more accurately seed players in terms of relative skill. But punishments/incentives are no concern for what is a statistical system intended to be used for measurement (and nothing else). It is not there to pat you on the back and say "well done, you won!"

And Glickman's quote on page 36 is no apology for the rating system, but for the fault of the chess player, "I've hit 2100, I've achieved what I want to achieve. I see no reason to potentially lose this rating so I'll hang my coat and never play again"

Yes, this is a problem which I and many others are guilty of. But Glicko does actually try and compensate for this by increasing the RD of a rating relative to inactivity. (the method by which RD is increased is one of the things Mark is alluding to in your quote)

What you seem to want is gamification, "+50xp Achievement Unlocked!"

A constant reward system simply for being active and involved. But this sort of a system is useless in measuring relative skill.

Achievements have been something we've wanted to add for a long time and I hope to see one day (I think we've been discussing it for at least a couple of years now), but this is no replacement for Glicko.

@Clarkey Please don't implement achievements. Invariably there will be one or more achievements I'll never be able to get. It will haunt me day after day, slowing driving me insane.

It is based on probabilities but compared to Elo there are some adjustments. It has nothing to do with incentives, psychology or alternative facts though. Just plain applied mathematics with all the statistical parameters, less voodoo than some people think.

Everywhere the same: people wanna lose only a few points when playing against stronger opponents - but when they play weaker out of a sudden they wanna be rewarded unduly.

Thank you for your good comments.
I personally would prefer a clear score system - like soccer - Bundesliga as an example. Bayern München is No 1 - Darmstadt has the place 18 (last).
Playing rules of liches - Bayern vs Darmstadt (assumed: Bayern wins) would not earn (the linear) 3 points because the difference is to high between both teams. Not fair in my opinion.

I am now downsized around 1550 -and I hope to find a Genius about 2000 and more and check out what I will earn (-->assumed that I will win).

Keep in mind:
As a starter you get so incredible much points (Look on my statistic on blitz) --> three wins are 1750 and more. later it is so annoying.

If you want scores like in a league, play in the tournaments. Ratings have nothing to do with that idea.

@Reini Your profile shows your overall win/loss/draw records. If you click on each variant (i.e., Classical, Blitz, etc.) you can see your record limited to the variant.

Another option is asking if anyone wants to have a match. Say, for example, 8 games with a 7+0 time control. Lichess keeps track of your wins/losses/draws against every opponent you face. When you go back and review a game click on the Crosstable and you will see your "points" with that player.

I would advise against 'achievements'. I've played fps games that have this for incentive, and if you want to get more cheaters to play then this is the way to do it. :P