ECF Grading Proposals

General discussions about grading.
Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 2973
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:23 pm

"Every FIDE-rated event in England with FIDE-rated lower sections and their entrants seem to cope with this major crisis befalling them."

FIDE-rated events are a very small minority of English tournament chess.

I doubt anyone would expect sympathy - but I do have sympathy for the hard working people who run tournaments or anything else, and don't think they should be forced out of organization, by changes for the sake of it. New ideas are great, but people need to think practically.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18105
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:41 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:23 pm
FIDE-rated events are a very small minority of English tournament chess.
I don't think they are that small a minority.

Over the twelve months and a bit since last Easter, my personal count is 11 FIDE rated and 9 ECF only.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 3932
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:00 pm

FIDE-rated Opens are common. FIDE-rated sections with an upper rating limit, which is where the problems lie, are less common.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2364
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Adam Raoof » Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:07 pm

IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:00 pm
FIDE-rated Opens are common. FIDE-rated sections with an upper rating limit, which is where the problems lie, are less common.
They are quite common in Hampstead ;-) Actually in practice people know what their rating is likely to be on the next list, and are able to act accordingly - even when planning a visit from overseas. The actual outcome of a player entering an Under 2200 upper section and then achieving a rating of 2200 or over is not as bad as it used to be - they can still theoretically take part but none of their games would be rated.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8911
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Alex Holowczak » Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:36 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:41 pm
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:23 pm
FIDE-rated events are a very small minority of English tournament chess.
I don't think they are that small a minority.

Over the twelve months and a bit since last Easter, my personal count is 11 FIDE rated and 9 ECF only.
IM Jack Rudd wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:00 pm
FIDE-rated Opens are common. FIDE-rated sections with an upper rating limit, which is where the problems lie, are less common.
There is a geographic bias to this.

In the South (particularly London), it's increasingly common that more and more sections are FIDE-rated. I think the forthcoming Stevenage tournament could have FIDE-rated the Under 120 section if it wanted to - look at how many players in the next section up are eligible to play in the Under 120: http://www.4ncl.co.uk/fide/entrants_easter19.htm Sean started that trend with the e2e4 events, and Adam in particular now FIDE-rates just about everything he does.

In Birmingham and Warwickshire, the majority of tournaments are FIDE-rated; all of the Rapidplays are rated in all four sections, and the top two sections of the Warwickshire Congress are.

In the North, it's much more difficult to find FIDE-rated tournaments outside the 4NCL Congresses, where the top 2 sections are rated. There are some FIDE-rated Opens but not much else. It gets a bit better once you reach Newcastle.

There are quite a few Rapidplays where all the sections could be FIDE-rated at no extra cost ... but very few of them are, particularly north of Birmingham. I'm still not sure if the reason for this is ignorance or a conscious decision not to bother. I tried emailing a few to see if it was ignorance. Alas this was inconclusive, there was some ignorance - specifically a lack of replies to my emails.

All of that said, Kevin is from the South, and not all that far from London - so it's not clear to me how he hasn't noticed the trend forming around him.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8911
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Alex Holowczak » Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:39 pm

Adam Raoof wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:07 pm
Actually in practice people know what their rating is likely to be on the next list, and are able to act accordingly - even when planning a visit from overseas.
We occasionally get entries who send a very polite email saying "My rating is xxxx, I've entered <section>, but I realise I have to play in <section+1> if I go over the limit. Or something of that nature.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 2973
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:19 pm

"All of that said, Kevin is from the South, and not all that far from London - so it's not clear to me how he hasn't noticed the trend forming around him."

I tend not to play English tournaments, maybe one a year, although I look at the results. The usual tournaments where I am arbiter are not FIDE-rated, although I have suggested to one of them it might be an idea. (The other would have to change its schedule.)

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1084
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Joey Stewart » Sat May 18, 2019 11:45 pm

I know this is a bit of an old topic now but I just had an idea that is the best of both worlds - why not do monthly grades for under 18s and leave the rest to be 6 monthly, then we could also do away with the guesstimate ratings for juniors and be able to use whatever their current rating for calculations
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

David Clayton
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by David Clayton » Sun May 19, 2019 12:05 am

Joey Stewart wrote:
Sat May 18, 2019 11:45 pm
I know this is a bit of an old topic now but I just had an idea that is the best of both worlds - why not do monthly grades for under 18s and leave the rest to be 6 monthly, then we could also do away with the guesstimate ratings for juniors and be able to use whatever their current rating for calculations
That is interesting.

When an U18 plays in an evening league match, would the league grader that month submit all the matches played in the league that month, or would he/she have to individually select only the U18 players and just submit them for grading?

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2131
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Ian Thompson » Sun May 19, 2019 1:02 am

David Clayton wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 12:05 am
Joey Stewart wrote:
Sat May 18, 2019 11:45 pm
I know this is a bit of an old topic now but I just had an idea that is the best of both worlds - why not do monthly grades for under 18s and leave the rest to be 6 monthly, then we could also do away with the guesstimate ratings for juniors and be able to use whatever their current rating for calculations
That is interesting.

When an U18 plays in an evening league match, would the league grader that month submit all the matches played in the league that month, or would he/she have to individually select only the U18 players and just submit them for grading?
The likelihood is that the under 18 would have played some over 18s, so you'd have to submit those results for adults, in which case you might as well submit all the league's results.

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1811
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Michael Farthing » Sun May 19, 2019 7:08 am

Strikes me that it is discrimination against oldies!

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18105
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun May 19, 2019 9:43 pm

Joey Stewart wrote:
Sat May 18, 2019 11:45 pm
I know this is a bit of an old topic now but I just had an idea that is the best of both worlds - why not do monthly grades for under 18s and leave the rest to be 6 monthly, then we could also do away with the guesstimate ratings for juniors and be able to use whatever their current rating for calculations
There are several interconnected problems. The first is to revamp the reporting systems so that results get into the grading system within hours or days of being played, rather than weeks or months. The second is what to do with the data once collected in calculation terms. The third is which of the new grades/ratings to take account of and which to ignore.

There's possibly a problem with tournaments that specify an absolute upper bound for grades, particularly those designed to appeal to the "chess tourist". In other words someone travelling away from home for a weekend break. They would have to have a policy as to which monthly grading/rating list would be used for eligibility.

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1811
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Michael Farthing » Sun May 19, 2019 9:59 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 9:43 pm

There's possibly a problem with tournaments that specify an absolute upper bound for grades, particularly those designed to appeal to the "chess tourist". In other words someone travelling away from home for a weekend break. They would have to have a policy as to which monthly grading/rating list would be used for eligibility.
And how is that different from already happens?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18105
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun May 19, 2019 10:13 pm

Michael Farthing wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 9:59 pm

And how is that different from already happens?
It is slightly different. In FIDE rated tournaments, with the exception of the Hampstead series, there's invariably an Open section. So if the second section is under 2000 say and your rating in the relevant list comes out at 2001, you can still transfer to the Open, so your accommodation and travel bookings are not wasted. If it's a tournament where the top section is under 175 and you come out with a grade of 176, you aren't eligible to play. To an extent it already happens in ECF graded events, but only to tournaments scheduled for February or August where organisers have to take a view as to which list to use. With monthly grading it would happen all the year round.

I've just finished playing at Frome. That's a tournament that attracts a considerable number of players from outside the immediate area. Had monthly grading been in place, which list should it have used for eligibility and pairings, 1st March, 1st April or 1st May? Currently there's just the one FIDE rated section, so it wasn't a problem to use 1st May for pairings.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2364
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: ECF Grading Proposals

Post by Adam Raoof » Mon May 20, 2019 7:54 am

At the moment I am considering (for August 2019 onwards) FIDE rating the third section at Hampstead, this will probably be Under 1700 (and you would also have to be Under ECF 135). What do you think? As in the other sections, all players will ideally be ECF Gold members or pay a £10 supplement to the ECF with entry. This is not in order to attract more entries (we are at capacity already!) but in order to encourage players to split more evenly over the bottom two sections - https://docs.google.com/document/d/189i ... sp=sharing

In this case I would have to think about Roger's point - what ECF grade do I use for eligibility for the Under 1900 (Under 160) and the proposed Under 1700 (Under 135)? At the moment if someone hits 2200 then they simply can't play at Hampstead, even if they have bought tickets and booked accommodation - but it is made relatively easy to view and predict rating changes. Will the ECF system be as transparent and easy to predict?
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 10:13 pm
Michael Farthing wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 9:59 pm

And how is that different from already happens?
It is slightly different. In FIDE rated tournaments, with the exception of the Hampstead series, there's invariably an Open section. So if the second section is under 2000 say and your rating in the relevant list comes out at 2001, you can still transfer to the Open, so your accommodation and travel bookings are not wasted. If it's a tournament where the top section is under 175 and you come out with a grade of 176, you aren't eligible to play. To an extent it already happens in ECF graded events, but only to tournaments scheduled for February or August where organisers have to take a view as to which list to use. With monthly grading it would happen all the year round.

I've just finished playing at Frome. That's a tournament that attracts a considerable number of players from outside the immediate area. Had monthly grading been in place, which list should it have used for eligibility and pairings, 1st March, 1st April or 1st May? Currently there's just the one FIDE rated section, so it wasn't a problem to use 1st May for pairings.

Post Reply