Random Ratings Everywhere

Venues, fixtures, teams and related matters.
NickFaulks
Posts: 5186
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by NickFaulks » Tue Mar 22, 2016 10:08 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote: Are you contesting the interpretation of taking these two together that it's a condition of FIDE rating that an arbiter has to be appointed and be at least a National Arbiter?
Correct so far, what's your point?

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9016
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:17 pm

NickFaulks wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote: A genuinely radical idea about ratings: Why not have one rating list only, with k as a function of the time limit?
Suddenly this ancient idea is coming at us from every direction. Do you really want people to qualify for the Candidates by winning a thousand blitz games?
I didn't realise this idea was ancient!

I don't personally have a problem with a player winning 1000 blitz games to qualify for the Candidates, no. I suspect others might! Of course, if two players arranged a 1000-game match that finished 1000-0, then you might get a bit suspicious - but I imagine you have some sort of integrity checking in place already. If it was done in proper blitz tournaments, then fair enough.

In cricket, limited overs is a different game, and so the stats are fundamentally different from limited time games, but 1st Class time games have had a range of 1-10 days at various points in the past.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9016
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:24 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
NickFaulks wrote:
I realise that you have discovered a trove of FIDE regulations that are hidden from the rest of us,
Presence of at least a National Arbiter as a condition of games being rated. Requirement that all non-local nationals have a FIN before games can be rated. These are requirements introduced in quite recent memory. Players are required not to have switched off phones on their person.

I agree that the "presence" is a moveable feast with various people seemingly at odds as to whether said arbiter needs to be present in person.
I liaised with QC about this, and this was the result: https://ratings.fide.com/tournament_det ... ent=133839

There will be no arbiters present for any of the matches* in it because it's a normal inter-club league. QC are the ones responsible for rating the event, so while various bits of FIDE may disagree, really there's only one bit of FIDE that has the authority to actually say what should happen.

* Unless: (a) They're playing in it - which is much more likely to be the Deputy Arbiter, or (b) They just so happen to be in the same venue as a league match going on at the time, or (c) Some other random circumstance that I haven't yet thought of, but reading (a) and (b) probably conveys the level of pedantry to which one must descend to think of such things.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18209
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:27 pm

NickFaulks wrote: Correct so far, what's your point?
You seem to be saying there are no Regulations implying that the appointment or presence of a FIDE registered arbiter is a necessary condition for an event to be FIDE rated.

Let's try an example. The Chiltern Cup is a Saturday afternoon competition between county teams representing Bucks, Berks, Oxon and Hants. it's a self contained competition with no qualifications to ECF run National stages.

Let's ask what changes would be needed to enable it to be FIDE rated.

It's already four hour sessions, so no change in session length needed. The optional move rate of 36 in 90 plus 30 would either have to be dumped in favour of G/120 or modified to 40 in 100 plus 20.

All ENG players would have to be Gold members. That's a purely ECF requirement even if past fibbers on behalf of the ECF have tried to blame FIDE.

Non-ENG players would have to acquire a FIDE Identification Number before participating or risk being classified as ENG. That's a FIDE requirement.

As to whether or not a FIDE registered arbiter would have to be present at every match, you tell me.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9016
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:29 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:As to whether or not a FIDE registered arbiter would have to be present at every match, you tell me.
They would not, see my post above. :)

You just need a Licensed Arbiter to be the person who is referred to in the case of a rules dispute. You probably want to list more than one in case the other is playing in a particular match.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18209
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:35 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote: There will be no arbiters present for any of the matches* in it because it's a normal inter-club league.
I would prefer the wording "deemed present". That makes sure that if an arbiter happens to be passing when an Appendix G claim is made, they have no standing.

There still needs to be a FIDE approved arbiter supposedly responsible for the conduct of the event. In the absence of such an appointment or volunteer, FIDE rating is ruled out. That's a relevant practical point for any League or County Association tempted to rate its events. Confining rating to rapidplay event avoids the three hour problem.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9016
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:41 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote: There will be no arbiters present for any of the matches* in it because it's a normal inter-club league.
I would prefer the wording "deemed present". That makes sure that if an arbiter happens to be passing when an Appendix G claim is made, they have no standing.

There still needs to be a FIDE approved arbiter supposedly responsible for the conduct of the event. In the absence of such an appointment or volunteer, FIDE rating is ruled out. That's a relevant practical point for any League or County Association tempted to rate its events. Confining rating to rapidplay event avoids the three hour problem.
Well, the time limit in our league is G/20 + 10', so Appendix G claims are unlikely. (G/30 is the alternate time limit for non-clock owners.)

Our league doesn't have the problem of not having suitable volunteers: David Thomas and I are happy enough to do it. In your area for the Chiltern League, someone like Neville Belinfante might be prepared to be the relevant arbiter. You'd have to ask him. There may be others.

NickFaulks
Posts: 5186
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by NickFaulks » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:00 am

Roger de Coverly wrote: As to whether or not a FIDE registered arbiter would have to be present at every match, you tell me.
You keep asking this question and I keep replying no. I cannot find a way to express myself clearly enough for you to understand.

Brian Towers
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:23 pm

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Brian Towers » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:07 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:You just need a Licensed Arbiter to be the person who is referred to in the case of a rules dispute. You probably want to list more than one in case the other is playing in a particular match.
I'm curious, Alex. Are you saying that one of the arbiters may play in the competition?

The ICF (through my club chairman, who is an IA and on the ICF board) have made it very clear to me that I can play or I can arbit but I can't do both in the same competition. Perhaps this is an ICF rather than FIDE restriction?
Ah, but I was so much older then. I'm younger than that now.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9016
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Random Ratings Everywhere

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Mar 23, 2016 10:18 pm

Brian Towers wrote:
Alex Holowczak wrote:You just need a Licensed Arbiter to be the person who is referred to in the case of a rules dispute. You probably want to list more than one in case the other is playing in a particular match.
I'm curious, Alex. Are you saying that one of the arbiters may play in the competition?

The ICF (through my club chairman, who is an IA and on the ICF board) have made it very clear to me that I can play or I can arbit but I can't do both in the same competition. Perhaps this is an ICF rather than FIDE restriction?
Correct. FIDE don't allow it in norm events from memory, but this is a Rapidplay team competition where arbiters are not deemed present anyway. The only issue might arise if a dispute happens in a match either of us play in, but if that happens, the other can make a decision. I am very unlikely to play in this competition - it may only happen if my club would otherwise default a board. I'm not strong enough to get in this team, alas...

Post Reply