Post
by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:37 am
"As far as reporting club championship results, reporting them to the ECF for grading should ideally be no more complex than informing participating club members. That would be reported more often than every six months surely?"
Er, they look at the crosstable!
"Yes - even if it's only one game. That is the nature of statistics.
If the best estimate of your playing strength is 175 and then you win against a 180 opponent, it is quite reasonable to say that, in the light of new information, the best estimate of your playing strength has risen to 176 or 177. Nobody is suggesting that your actual playing strength has risen overnight, only that the best estimate, based on all known information, has risen.
Another way of looking at it could be that your new grade is a forecast of what your published rating would be at the end of the season if you didn't play any more games. That's meaningful, isn't it?"
I am not really disagreeing - I just think that the published amendment is more trouble than it's worth. I keep records every season and calculate my grade after each game, but that's really to look at trends over a number of games. That is not always a joy.
One issue is that if you have "stars barred" events and you are a couple of points below the limit, you might enter the tournament and book a hotel some way ahead (as accommodation can be hard to find), then a couple of days before the event, you go over the limit.
"The reason for going to monthly gradings is, as I have previously said, it would lead to about 10-20% more competitive chess being played.
I realise that is an unsubstantiated assertion. But we have evidence with the US and FIDE systems. Tell a 10 year old that they will get a grade in 6 months time is a real turn-off.
The live ratings for the top players attracts considerable interest, although it has no official FIDE status."
I don't see why people would play more. But Stewart is one of an ever dwindling band of people who know more about chess than me, so we have to take this seriously! If it does lead to more chess, than great. The numbers of games played will provide concrete evidence.
Anyway, time will tell - theoretically, monthly, weekly, daily, hourly grades would be great. But there are practical issues and I hope someone in authority takes those seriously.