As a captain I also have to check eligibility every month now because of the 80 point rule.Christopher Kreuzer wrote:David has a very valid point here. I'm finding the incremental updates from 4NCL weekends a bit pointless:David Sedgwick wrote: When I had a new FIDE Rating once every six months, I was interested in it.
Now I have three FIDE Ratings, each of which is likely to change every month if I play in a relevant event, I have little or no interest in them. My memory is not good enough to cope - and what's the point of being interested in something which you can't remember.
http://ratings.fide.com/individual_calc ... -02-01&t=0
http://ratings.fide.com/individual_calc ... -03-01&t=0
Does anyone else agree that unless you play a full tournament, having your rating updated monthly after one or two games feels a bit too much like updating for the sake of updating?
January 2014 Grades
-
- Posts: 1954
- Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
Accuracy for accuracies sake you mean?!Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Does anyone else agree that unless you play a full tournament, having your rating updated monthly after one or two games feels a bit too much like updating for the sake of updating?
-
- Posts: 3053
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: January 2014 Grades
They don't use the FIDE grades people were originally registered with in September? That would be the sane response to this sort of incremental update
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: January 2014 Grades
To paraphrase what you said in another thread about a different subject:Sean Hewitt wrote:Accuracy for accuracies sake you mean?!Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Does anyone else agree that unless you play a full tournament, having your rating updated monthly after one or two games feels a bit too much like updating for the sake of updating?
It may be accurate, but that does not mean that it is sensible or satisfactory. In my opinion, it is neither.
-
- Posts: 8479
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
I've only just found this thread, because I assumed it was about ECF grades, in which I have no interest. However, I see that it has moved on to FIDE ratings.David Sedgwick wrote:To paraphrase what you said in another thread about a different subject:Sean Hewitt wrote:Accuracy for accuracies sake you mean?!Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Does anyone else agree that unless you play a full tournament, having your rating updated monthly after one or two games feels a bit too much like updating for the sake of updating?
It may be accurate, but that does not mean that it is sensible or satisfactory. In my opinion, it is neither.
There seems to be a feeling that the move to monthly lists was spurious. I have some sympathy for this, since while I want ratings to be the best estimator of playing strength that we can produce, it does in general seem unlikely that if a player's rating goes up by 30 points during the course of a month, that is because he has become a better player during that period. On the other hand, by the way FIDE ratings are calculated, the latest monthly rating is a ( slightly ) better estimate of current playing strength than the latest quarterly rating.
I think the impetus for monthly lists came mostly from a desire for more excitement, as represented by the federations.
A point on which I do feel strongly is the reporting of interim results from long events such as the 4NCL. If you're going to have monthly lists, it seems daft for games played in November to come into the calculations the following June.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 21350
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
NickFaulks wrote: A point on which I do feel strongly is the reporting of interim results from long events such as the 4NCL. If you're going to have monthly lists, it seems daft for games played in November to come into the calculations the following June.
There are two side effects to this, which is what people are moaning about. Firstly that ratings jump about on a monthly basis by small amounts, depending on how players got on in the previous rounds. With the legality of board orders being conditional on the monthly ratings, this makes life more difficult for the captains and managers. I could agree that's an own goal as the 4NCL rules could freeze on the start rating. The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.
-
- Posts: 7280
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am
Re: January 2014 Grades
This is the downside to me as a captain of a junior team in Division Three. Whilst I can help those who already have part ratings to complete their rating over the season it's a shame that those with no previous part rating only have an opportunity at the last weekend. Even then it's dependent on all three opponents being rated which may not happen even with the help of other team captains.Roger de Coverly wrote:The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
Why do you say that Loz? The rating regulations in force last year are still in force this year as far as I'm aware. Part ratings are gained over the whole event rather than round by round - in exactly the same way that norms are still achievable despite monthly reporting of results.LawrenceCooper wrote:This is the downside to me as a captain of a junior team in Division Three. Whilst I can help those who already have part ratings to complete their rating over the season it's a shame that those with no previous part rating only have an opportunity at the last weekend.Roger de Coverly wrote:The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.
-
- Posts: 7280
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am
Re: January 2014 Grades
If only I'd consulted you earlier....Sean Hewitt wrote:Why do you say that Loz? The rating regulations in force last year are still in force this year as far as I'm aware. Part ratings are gained over the whole event rather than round by round - in exactly the same way that norms are still achievable despite monthly reporting of results.LawrenceCooper wrote:This is the downside to me as a captain of a junior team in Division Three. Whilst I can help those who already have part ratings to complete their rating over the season it's a shame that those with no previous part rating only have an opportunity at the last weekend.Roger de Coverly wrote:The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.
-
- Posts: 8479
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
As Sean says, players will get initial ratings based on the whole 2013/14 season. New and more liberal rules will come into effect from 1.7.14, eliminating the requirement for the first reported event to contain three rated games, and the whole problem should disappear.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 7280
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am
Re: January 2014 Grades
Thanks for the info. Will there be any change to the 26 months lifespan of part ratings?NickFaulks wrote:As Sean says, players will get initial ratings based on the whole 2013/14 season. New and more liberal rules will come into effect from 1.7.14, eliminating the requirement for the first reported event to contain three rated games, and the whole problem should disappear.
-
- Posts: 2720
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
- Location: NW4 4UY
Re: January 2014 Grades
Apologies for causing confusion! Thanks Nick.LawrenceCooper wrote:Thanks for the info. Will there be any change to the 26 months lifespan of part ratings?NickFaulks wrote:As Sean says, players will get initial ratings based on the whole 2013/14 season. New and more liberal rules will come into effect from 1.7.14, eliminating the requirement for the first reported event to contain three rated games, and the whole problem should disappear.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
Chess England Events - https://chessengland.com/
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Don’t stop playing chess!
-
- Posts: 835
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
- Location: Bradford
Re: January 2014 Grades
So to be clear, players who have not yet had a rating will get a FIDE part/full rating at the end of the 4NCL season. Is that correct?
-
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
If they fulfil the criteria (played at least 3 rated opponents and scored at least 1 point at a performance over 1000), then yes. As I've already said, the regulations have not changed in this regard.Andrew Bak wrote:So to be clear, players who have not yet had a rating will get a FIDE part/full rating at the end of the 4NCL season. Is that correct?
-
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 3:26 pm
Re: January 2014 Grades
Yay, I went up 3 points in January and am hoping to go up a few more points in the next list.