Random Ratings Everywhere
-
- Posts: 1865
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
- Location: All Of Them
Random Ratings Everywhere
I dont get why so many players this season are using estimate ratings - I thought that those were just for the purpose of upfloating rapidly improving juniors so they get a better chance, but not so half the league can make up ratings even though they almost all have real fide grades.
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.
-
- Posts: 3048
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
Because the FIDE grades are (for an awful lot people - different in div 1!) simply vastly less reliable than the ECF grades. Based on far fewer games.
-
- Posts: 1865
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
- Location: All Of Them
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
I know fide ratings are a massive mess, but I still think they should take priority - it is frustrating to get results and find your opponent was 100+ points lower then you expected.
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.
-
- Posts: 3048
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
Well, just mentally rate yourself against their ECF then The +- should roughly cancel themselves out.
If you forced teams in Div3 to use the FIDE grades then you'd very likely force some clearly wrong board orders.
If you forced teams in Div3 to use the FIDE grades then you'd very likely force some clearly wrong board orders.
-
- Posts: 4826
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
I don't mind the use of conversions for board order purposes, but I would like the team sheets to display players' ratings as well. It's annoying to not know your opponent's rating in a FIDE-rated game.
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
On the pairing sheets, "e" stands for ECF conversion, not estimate.Joey Stewart wrote:I dont get why so many players this season are using estimate ratings
-
- Posts: 1865
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
- Location: All Of Them
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
I dont want converted ratings - not unless I am going to get that number used for calculating my rating change.
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
Well, the captains did, and IT man had to decide how best to do it.Joey Stewart wrote:I dont want converted ratings - not unless I am going to get that number used for calculating my rating change.
They weighed up which number should be shown, and concluded that the number being used for the tournament should be shown, on the grounds that:
(a) There'd be all sorts of 80-point rule breach observations, which would be spurious.
(b) Eventually there'd be a genuine 80-point breach that everyone missed, but no one noticed because everyone assumed would just be because of the presented numbers.
I don't know why both numbers can't be shown, but the IT person can be asked. Has anyone actually asked him?
There's 90 minutes between publication, so it doesn't seem to me to be too onerous to look up the player's rating on a computer/phone.
-
- Posts: 1865
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
- Location: All Of Them
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
Why is it that only "some" players even get the luxury of getting these converted ratings anyway - I would love to have a big fat 2260 (or whatever 200 is converting to these days) in front of my name and command a bit of respect
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.
-
- Posts: 3556
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
because their team manager opted for it.Joey Stewart wrote:Why is it that only "some" players even get the luxury of getting these converted ratings anyway
I think you'd have to settle for a nice round 2200 (200 * 7.5 +700)Joey Stewart wrote:I would love to have a big fat 2260 (or whatever 200 is converting to these days) in front of my name and command a bit of respect
-
- Posts: 3048
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
Wonder if 200 is even quite worth that now the inflation has got up to that level. Several of the 2200's I can think of round Yorkshire are running closer to 210 ECF nowadays.
-
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
It'll all sort itself out once the ECF reforms the grading system to match FIDE's level of unreliability.MartinCarpenter wrote:Because the FIDE grades are (for an awful lot people - different in div 1!) simply vastly less reliable than the ECF grades. Based on far fewer games.
-
- Posts: 8462
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
It is unfair to criticise the FIDE rating system for failing to take into account games which are not reported to them.Richard Bates wrote:It'll all sort itself out once the ECF reforms the grading system to match FIDE's level of unreliability.MartinCarpenter wrote:Because the FIDE grades are (for an awful lot people - different in div 1!) simply vastly less reliable than the ECF grades. Based on far fewer games.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 21314
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
It is however fair to criticise the FIDE rating system when it would refuse to rate games, even if they were submitted. The simple fact is that in the UK, a lot of chess is played at time limits where the whole game is scheduled to take place in a period longer than two hours and less than four hours.NickFaulks wrote: It is unfair to criticise the FIDE rating system for failing to take into account games which are not reported to them.
-
- Posts: 9085
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
- Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Re: Random Ratings Everywhere
Or indeed have a time control at something other than move 40.Roger de Coverly wrote:It is however fair to criticise the FIDE rating system when it would refuse to rate games, even if they were submitted. The simple fact is that in the UK, a lot of chess is played at time limits where the whole game is scheduled to take place in a period longer than two hours and less than four hours.NickFaulks wrote: It is unfair to criticise the FIDE rating system for failing to take into account games which are not reported to them.
However, there seemed to be a move to change the first of these two problems in the next set of regulations.