Separate ratings for chess960 bullet and other chess960

This has been brought up by others before but as that is now inactive (archived) it is time to readress this issue.

With chess960 fast becoming the chess of choice unless one gets paid otherwise, it is crucial to address the issue of bulleters taking over the leaderboards. Also, why did one have to excel at 3+2 berserk arena to qualify for 960 World Championship, an event which was held at a serious time limit?

This has been brought up several times in the past with no reaction from Lichess.

Nonetheless, I support this motion. This, and quick-play, are the two most needed things to improve the chess960 playing experience.

Regarding the World Champ Arena, to be fair all the strong players with any remote chance of qualifying had no trouble going through it if they took it seriously. Consider that the big qualifying arenas had top 500 going through, and I got #861/1819 in the second one with a Chess960 rating in the 1600s.

@themiddleway said in #1:
> This has been brought up by others before but as that is now inactive (archived) it is time to readress this issue.
>
> With chess960 fast becoming the chess of choice unless one gets paid otherwise, it is crucial to address the issue of bulleters taking over the leaderboards. Also, why did one have to excel at 3+2 berserk arena to qualify for 960 World Championship, an event which was held at a serious time limit?

why is 960 more important over other variants? Why not do that for all variants then? Ah, right, that gets cumbersome.

My better take is to finally ban rated hyper for variants.

Players who only play hyper often get ridiculed and partially exiled from the variants community. I think that's punishment enough.

At the end of the day, I always recommend that you focus on your own improvement as opposed to the glamorous ratings of hyper losers who don't know crap about how the variant works.

@dreadpresence said in #4:
> Players who only play hyper often get ridiculed and partially exiled from the variants community. I think that's punishment enough.
>
> At the end of the day, I always recommend that you focus on your own improvement as opposed to the glamorous ratings of hyper losers who don't know crap about how the variant works.
Pretty ironic coming from someone who plays only hyper variants ngl

@bijiy said in #5:
> Pretty ironic coming from someone who plays only hyper variants ngl

Correction: I play no variants. And I've played my fair share of longer time controls, especially three check, horde, and atomic. I also seem to remember you consistently challenging me to faster time controls than I wanted in 3+, which is what makes this accusation even more hilarious :P

@dreadpresence said in #6:
> Correction: I play no variants. And I've played my fair share of longer time controls, especially three check, horde, and atomic. I also seem to remember you consistently challenging me to faster time controls than I wanted in 3+, which is what makes this accusation even more hilarious :P

First of all I dont remember who u are i challenge a lot of random people
second of all while u did play variants u played almost all hyper from what i see from ur recent games
also what ru smoking kid u dont even have horde and atomic ratings

@bijiy said in #7:
> First of all I dont remember who u are i challenge a lot of random people
> second of all while u did play variants u played almost all hyper from what i see from ur recent games
> also what ru smoking kid u dont even have horde and atomic ratings

Sir, I've been on this site for over 6 years. I have a variants account which is now inactive, in addition to another account which I played a lot of variants on. Personally, I view 960 as just more fun standard, and since I mainly play hyperbullet standard chess, I play hyperbullet 960. As for 3+, I've played quite a lot of 3 + 0 tournaments and participated in the 3+ WC (which I founded). I truly do love the game, and have spent a lot of time on theory and longer time controls. And from what I can see from you, you are guilty of this sin that you are randomly accusing me of committing. Either take it to DMs or leave me alone, thanks.

@Cedur216 said in #3:
> why is 960 more important over other variants? Why not do that for all variants then? Ah, right, that gets cumbersome.
>
> My better take is to finally ban rated hyper for variants.

Although bullet certainly requires skill, I think bullet ratings should be separate for all variants. I guess an issue might be critical mass to have enough players overall, but I think it should be fine.

@Cedur216 said in #3:
> why is 960 more important over other variants? Why not do that for all variants then? Ah, right, that gets cumbersome.
>
> My better take is to finally ban rated hyper for variants.

Chess960 isn't just another variant that's meant to be played casually (though it can be). It's meant to be an improvement on, and a replacement for, classical chess.