4NCL

[Stewart Reuben]

I have thought about that, but never mentioned it. You've jogged my memory. Actually you need 1 point, not 0.5. With the latter, a player with 0 against rated opponents, playing against a rated opponent in the last round, would often be gifted a draw.

[Stewart Reuben]

This is the response I got from Nick Faulks, secretary of the QC.
'A player will not be able to obtain an initial FIDE rating through a league such as the 4NCL. The QC discussed this, and my dissident view
found no favour whatsoever. This is presumably the purpose of the rule that the first result must be of at least three games, I cannot think
of another.'

Actually the reason is historical. 3 games was chosen when there were few, if any of these new-fangled international leagues. Counting one, or perhaps two games of a new player would very likely saddle him with a poor start.

[Roger de Coverly]

Actually the reason is historical. 3 games was chosen when there were few, if any of these new-fangled international leagues. Counting one, or perhaps two games of a new player would very likely saddle him with a poor start.

That's not my memory of history. It used to be 5 games when the rating limit was 2000, You could achieve this by playing in a nine round tournament if you got the right pairings or a season's worth of 4NCL with the right opponents. Many players gained ratings during the 1990s via the 4NCL and this contributed to the popularity and expansion of the League. It was only with the proposed reductions of the rating threshold below 2000 and the extension of rating to five round tournaments, that a standard of 3 games was introduced.

The 4NCL started in 1993, so it's not exactly new, even if a latecomer by some European standards.

So thanks to FIDE, one of the points of recommending participation in the 4NCL has been removed, at least until a player has managed 1/3 against rated players in a weekender.