English Chess Forum

A home for discussions on the English Chess scene.
It is currently Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:07 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:05 pm
Posts: 4298
Location: Evesham
I am moving the grading site about to different equipment shortly so a little disruption might be possible

_________________
Cheers
Carl Hibbard


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 4:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:05 pm
Posts: 4298
Location: Evesham
Carl Hibbard wrote:
I am moving the grading site about to different equipment shortly so a little disruption might be possible

The change should now be complete

_________________
Cheers
Carl Hibbard


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:05 pm
Posts: 4298
Location: Evesham
Is this looking any faster to anyone who uses the service regularly :?:

_________________
Cheers
Carl Hibbard


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
Posts: 1612
Location: Berks
Can someone explain why the new grades have occured. I know theres bene threads before. But Its like FIDE ratings. THere use to be a big thing when I was a 133 junior that gettign a FIDE(which was min 2000) was a massive thing. In ECF terms for me personally it is getting over 200 ECF. I beat say 145's who now count as 210 rating points because there 160 on the new list. Whilst its not a bad thing. I dont like things for free, like I dont like cheats in exams and chess etc , I now know if I get over 200 , it isnt the "proper" way.


Ben

_________________
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:43 pm
Posts: 978
Location: Croydon
Ben. The 200 level is almost unaltered by the change. So keep the same target.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
Posts: 1612
Location: Berks
But what Im saying is Its easier to obtain surely because beating 145's now gets you 200 points where as before it was just below.

Ben

_________________
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Posts: 3478
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
There is no change to the calculation of rating results (that I am aware of).

A win versus ECF 145 will yield 195 assuming your own rating lies between 105 and 145.

Any more than 145 and you will get your rating + 50 unless its more than 185 in which case you will get +10.

The alleged corrected ratings do not alter this calculation.

_________________
Chess Images: http://johnupham.smugmug.com/Chess
IT Manager for the British Chess Magazine: http://www.britishchessmagazine.co.uk
Twitter: @jeupham
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/john.upham


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
Posts: 1612
Location: Berks
I was under the impression the new ratings where being used for the calculations...

_________________
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Posts: 3478
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
AFAIK, they will be but the calculation remains unaltered.

_________________
Chess Images: http://johnupham.smugmug.com/Chess
IT Manager for the British Chess Magazine: http://www.britishchessmagazine.co.uk
Twitter: @jeupham
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/john.upham


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:28 pm 
John Upham wrote:
There is no change to the calculation of rating results (that I am aware of).

A win versus ECF 145 will yield 195 assuming your own rating lies between 105 and 145.

Any more than 145 and you will get your rating + 50 unless its more than 185 in which case you will get +10.

The alleged corrected ratings do not alter this calculation.


John is correct that the corrected gradings will not change the calculus (although the new grades are the ones that will be used in the calculation) but the figures he gives are wrong.

A win versus ECF 145 will yield 195 assuming your own rating lies between 105 and 185.

Any more than 185 you will get +10, and any less than 105 and you get +90.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 1033
Ben Purton is correct that certain routes to 200 will now be easier.

For example if a player, strength 175 OG (old grades) previously played in Swiss Weekend events against average opposition of 160 OG he would need to score 4½/5 in 6 events to get to 200. If the same players took part this year with new grades using the ECF approx conversion formula the 160 OG players on average might be a little more than 171.4 NG (new grade) so the 175 player who is now 183.25 NG, only needs to score 4/5 in 5 events and 3½/5 in 1 event to be 200.

However life is not as simple as this because lower scores in a Swiss will result in being paired against lower rated opponents.

The easiest way to 200 is probably to play League chess in a lower division for a strong club where opponents 145 OG are now 159.55 NG so a score of 90% against 145 OG average should ensure 200+. NG. Its not unusual for League players to score 90%.

Watch out for the real sharks, that is players of 185 OG who suddenly became interested in playing League chess again this year and join a strong club to play in a lower division. They are now approx 191.15 and wins against any lower rated opponents eg 125 NG will take them over 200.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Posts: 11487
Quote:
Ben Purton is correct that certain routes to 200 will now be easier.


I think Ben's point about 145 players is that many of them, particularly the juniors will have been revalued to 165+ without ever having demonstrated that they can survive at that standard. Ben himself is one of the players in the 170's who has not received much revaluation (176 to 179) and thus will get greater rewards from ex-145 bashing. I can only suppose that most of Ben's chess over last season was played in the 4NCL or against other comparable near FM/IM opposition. You can for example maintain a 175 grade by scoring 10% against 215 standard IMs. The new grades have been cooked so that IMs stay put, so our Mr 10% 175 would have been unchanged.

By way of illustrating Michael White's point, I scored 50% at my last 5 round tournament for a score of just under 170 (OG) or 180 on the revalued grades. So against the field I played, I would have needed 4/5 (OG) but only 3.5 (revalued) to reach a 200 performance. In fact a last round win would have been enough.

The ECF have not published 2007 (revalued) so we cannot prove the new system inflationary. I haven't really figured out how they've managed to cook grades of juniors by such large amounts but empirically they seem to have broken the premise that players of equal grades should expect to score 50% against one another.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
Posts: 1612
Location: Berks
I was simply going on the fact I play board 1 for Hayes, I play 150 OG's all the time And I tend to win the majority of the time(3/3 thus far). All these guys are counting at 160+ so I get over 200. Where as before it would have been just about 200. Basically What Michael and Roger have said. I do think its adding 10 points to everyone in my situation.

Ben

_________________
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:53 am
Posts: 1612
Location: Berks
Roger you forgot to put that most of my chess is at 4ncl , so Ive got my good old -10 for drink in system :)

_________________
I love sleep, I need 8 hours a day and about 10 at night - Bill Hicks
I would die happy if I beat Wood Green in the Eastman Cup final - Richmond LL captain.
Hating the Yankees since 2002. Hating the Jets since 2001.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Possible Disruption
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:51 pm 
Ben Purton wrote:
I was simply going on the fact I play board 1 for Hayes, I play 150 OG's all the time And I tend to win the majority of the time(3/3 thus far). All these guys are counting at 160+ so I get over 200. Where as before it would have been just about 200. Basically What Michael and Roger have said. I do think its adding 10 points to everyone in my situation.

Ben


Ben,

If you play 150 OG all the time and win the majority of the time (say 90%) you would be graded 190. The fact that you are not graded 190 means that something is wrong, either with the average grade of your opponents, or with your average score.

When they are correctly given (so that they match your actual grade) I am sure that the new grade results will look far more sensible!


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group