Page 4 of 6

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:19 am
by Keith Arkell
Hopefully we will put this to bed soon. Alex Holowczak and me have agreed on the start of Hastings 1999 to end of year, and ditto re 2019.

It will be the shock of my life if it is not demonstrated that I am a stronger player now than 20 years ago.We have agreed on including all games in the public domain, and if anyone wants to volunteer in speeding this along then please feel free to do so.

Thanks.

PS: Without wanting to sound Charlie Storeyesque, I'll give odds of 2:1 in case anyone is foolish to bet me.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Wed Dec 25, 2019 10:17 am
by Roger Lancaster
Keith Arkell wrote:
Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:19 am
Without wanting to sound Charlie Storeyesque ...
:)

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Wed Dec 25, 2019 10:33 am
by Daniel Gormally
According to my limited research you had 2545 in 1997, not 1999.

Is this directly comparing strength? so if you do so I suggest comparing all your games played in 1997 to the ones played in 2019. So it's quality of play index right?

And how do you actually measure that?

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Wed Dec 25, 2019 10:38 am
by Daniel Gormally
my rough guess is you'll come out roughly the same. no better, no worse. after all you're still playing the same turgid stuff that you played back then :D

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Wed Dec 25, 2019 10:39 am
by Brian Towers
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 10:49 pm
Dragoljub Sudar wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 1:28 am
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 10:23 am
Actually, if we submitted more of our chess for FIDE rating in England, then I think this problem would slowly disappear; so to some extent the same adults who don't want to FIDE-rate more sections are the ones who are helping to cause the problem.
The ECF can help solve this 'problem' by not forcing us to pay extra money to become Gold members in order to play FIDE rated chess.
Ah yes, "the ECF". Who do you think that is? Given that membership fees are set by Council, if "the ECF" wanted to do it, it could make it happen whether the Board wanted it or not. Nottinghamshire is several votes of "the ECF". Why doesn't it bring a proposal forward?

I suspect the reason is that Gold membership isn't an issue at all. I wrote to the Nottingham Rapidplay Organiser, asking him why he didn't FIDE-rate his Rapidplay. The Gold membership argument doesn't apply to that, it's free, and the ECF charges you as if it were just an ECF-graded event as it is now. There was no reply, and the event isn't FIDE-rated. So I suppose in Nottinghamshire, actually Gold membership isn't the argument. You just don't want to do it.
I think that is a bit harsh. I suspect it comes down more to ignorance and / or laziness.

There are more things you have to do to have your tournament FIDE rated and one of them (registering the tournament with FIDE) has to be done at least a week before the event. You also have to (or at least should) submit your results in the right format within a week of the end of the tournament.

A few weeks ago I played in a rapidplay which was advertised as being FIDE rated. I checked two days before if it had been registered and saw that it hadn't. So, I was puzzled at the tournament to hear the arbiter asking players without FINs to come and tell the arbiter their dates of birth for registration. I don't think this is a case of just not wanting to do it.

To be fair to the ECF they have made it easy. You can go to the ECF website and fill in some information and have your event advertised on the ECF calendar and registered with FIDE at the same time. The one criticism I would have is that the ECF website is very non-intuitive and that particular page is hard to find unless you think it is obvious that you should go through the calendar. Edit: Just checked and you can also find the page through the FIDE page, so I take that back.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:22 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Brian Towers wrote:
Wed Dec 25, 2019 10:39 am
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 10:49 pm
Dragoljub Sudar wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 1:28 am


The ECF can help solve this 'problem' by not forcing us to pay extra money to become Gold members in order to play FIDE rated chess.
Ah yes, "the ECF". Who do you think that is? Given that membership fees are set by Council, if "the ECF" wanted to do it, it could make it happen whether the Board wanted it or not. Nottinghamshire is several votes of "the ECF". Why doesn't it bring a proposal forward?

I suspect the reason is that Gold membership isn't an issue at all. I wrote to the Nottingham Rapidplay Organiser, asking him why he didn't FIDE-rate his Rapidplay. The Gold membership argument doesn't apply to that, it's free, and the ECF charges you as if it were just an ECF-graded event as it is now. There was no reply, and the event isn't FIDE-rated. So I suppose in Nottinghamshire, actually Gold membership isn't the argument. You just don't want to do it.
I think that is a bit harsh. I suspect it comes down more to ignorance and / or laziness.
I think I covered the "ignorance" point by emailing them to make them aware of it. Laziness? Maybe, I guess.
Brian Towers wrote:
Wed Dec 25, 2019 10:39 am
There are more things you have to do to have your tournament FIDE rated and one of them (registering the tournament with FIDE) has to be done at least a week before the event. You also have to (or at least should) submit your results in the right format within a week of the end of the tournament.

(...)

To be fair to the ECF they have made it easy. You can go to the ECF website and fill in some information and have your event advertised on the ECF calendar and registered with FIDE at the same time. The one criticism I would have is that the ECF website is very non-intuitive and that particular page is hard to find unless you think it is obvious that you should go through the calendar. Edit: Just checked and you can also find the page through the FIDE page, so I take that back.
This is the point, the ECF has made it pretty easy to do it if you want to. I don't think registering it with FIDE 7 days before the event - actually it is only 3 days for Rapid and Blitz - is hugely onerous, given the entry form for the tournament probably came out what, two or three months previously?

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:42 am
by Brian Towers
Fair point, Alex. The ECF does appear to have become a lot more FIDE-tournament-friendly in the last couple of years. Maybe there's a need for more education? Maybe more FIDE arbiters, also?

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 3:37 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Brian Towers wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:42 am
Fair point, Alex. The ECF does appear to have become a lot more FIDE-tournament-friendly in the last couple of years. Maybe there's a need for more education? Maybe more FIDE arbiters, also?
I had thought that education, particularly on the Rapidplay point, would help get more Rapidplays rated. I wrote to a few of them, and while one or two thought it was a good idea, but I'm sorry to report that the majority either never replied, or were very much sticks in the mud.

FIDE Arbiters aren't a necessity; an ECF qualified arbiter of either level can get a NA licence, which the ECF even pays for you. It is true that you need qualified arbiters, but the tournaments I contacted had qualified arbiters, and so it wouldn't have been a problem.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 5:02 pm
by Roger Lancaster
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 3:37 pm
Brian Towers wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:42 am
Fair point, Alex. The ECF does appear to have become a lot more FIDE-tournament-friendly in the last couple of years. Maybe there's a need for more education? Maybe more FIDE arbiters, also?
I had thought that education, particularly on the Rapidplay point, would help get more Rapidplays rated. I wrote to a few of them, and while one or two thought it was a good idea, but I'm sorry to report that the majority either never replied, or were very much sticks in the mud.

FIDE Arbiters aren't a necessity; an ECF qualified arbiter of either level can get a NA licence, which the ECF even pays for you. It is true that you need qualified arbiters, but the tournaments I contacted had qualified arbiters, and so it wouldn't have been a problem.
I've hit on two points which, to be fair, aren't major deterrents but which do complicate matters. The first is the need for a qualified arbiter which - and I don't like asking favours for free - increase costs and, moreover, leave the organiser in a difficult position if the arbiter in question has to pull out for any reason - illness etc. The second is that, in some events advertised as FIDE-rated, many of the results [unrated versus unrated] don't qualify for FIDE rating. I can point to one of our juniors who recently played in a FIDE-rated u-1700 event with none of his five games qualifying. That's not, of course due to any failing by the tournament organiser but not unnaturally the player felt that "FIDE-rated" was a bit of a misnomer in this case.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 6:10 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 5:02 pm
I've hit on two points which, to be fair, aren't major deterrents but which do complicate matters. The first is the need for a qualified arbiter which - and I don't like asking favours for free - increase costs and, moreover, leave the organiser in a difficult position if the arbiter in question has to pull out for any reason - illness etc.
I can't imagine too many cricket clubs saying "It would be so much cheaper if we didn't have to pay for an umpire." I accept that you do have to put some effort into ensuring there are adequate arbiting resources, but this is something English chess should have being doing for years and never really got to grips with until recently. There are at least now regular courses being advertised on the ECF website, so there is the opportunity for people to register for them. The next is alongside the final Junior 4NCL weekend in Daventry, so in your Junior 4NCL hat, perhaps that provides an opportunity for people associated with your club?
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 5:02 pm
The second is that, in some events advertised as FIDE-rated, many of the results [unrated versus unrated] don't qualify for FIDE rating. I can point to one of our juniors who recently played in a FIDE-rated u-1700 event with none of his five games qualifying. That's not, of course due to any failing by the tournament organiser but not unnaturally the player felt that "FIDE-rated" was a bit of a misnomer in this case.
I can sort of see the point, but in Rapidplay, the player has not paid anything extra for this. So it is a free benefit.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 7:46 pm
by Daniel Gormally
so are we getting keith's games quality-tested or not? seems we've drifted off the main point here.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 8:05 pm
by Roger Lancaster
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 6:10 pm
I can't imagine too many cricket clubs saying "It would be so much cheaper if we didn't have to pay for an umpire." I accept that you do have to put some effort into ensuring there are adequate arbiting resources, but this is something English chess should have being doing for years and never really got to grips with until recently. There are at least now regular courses being advertised on the ECF website, so there is the opportunity for people to register for them. The next is alongside the final Junior 4NCL weekend in Daventry, so in your Junior 4NCL hat, perhaps that provides an opportunity for people associated with your club?
I don't disagree although, in practice, persuading the average chess player to attend an arbiters' course is not easy. Also, my impression is that anyone attending these courses should have a reasonable grasp of the FIDE Laws before they attend, which would disqualify a goodly proportion of our club members. Many have yet to master how to set a DGT2010 [the juniors, predictably, are rather better at this than the adults] while the number of upturned rooks appearing on chessboards testifies eloquently to the extent of knowledge of the Laws. [In my own case, where you're polite enough not to enquire, I'm pleading general decrepitude arising from old age].

And apologies to Danny - yes, we are drifting away from the original topic here.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 8:25 pm
by David Sedgwick
Daniel Gormally wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 7:46 pm
so are we getting keith's games quality-tested or not? seems we've drifted off the main point here.
David Sedgwick wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:32 pm
This Forum has a long tradition of threads going wildly off topic and of posters making the same point in several threads.
Please don't take it personally, Danny.

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 8:31 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Daniel Gormally wrote:
Thu Dec 26, 2019 7:46 pm
so are we getting keith's games quality-tested or not? seems we've drifted off the main point here.
Two of the three relevant people are otherwise occupied due to more urgent matters for the next week or so...

Re: Is rating deflation a thing?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2019 10:12 pm
by Nick Burrows
It would be interesting to hear Nigel Shorts opinion.

I saw a lecture he gave (possibly in Gibraltar) where he was going over some of his old games from an interzonal he played as a young man - he was generally shocked at how poor quality the games were, with multiple blunders.

Perhaps Keith is onto something..