July 2019 grades......

General discussions about grading.
David Gilbert
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:03 am

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by David Gilbert » Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:45 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
The FIDE September list was published today.
Without the results from the Under-1750 at the British Championships :(

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18741
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:29 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
Indeed, I too am thankful that the August 2019 grades came out today.
At over 3000, the number of corrections seems higher than in previous years. I am aware of the double submission of some Surrey results and these may have had a limited knock on effect where new players and juniors played Surrey opposition. But what of the others? Missing results or duplicate players?

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:51 am

David Gilbert wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:45 am
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
The FIDE September list was published today.
Without the results from the Under-1750 at the British Championships :(
Indeed, because the ECF never registered it, and thus never submitted the rating file either. Looks like you should write an email to David Clayton and Kevin Staveley.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:55 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:29 am
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
Indeed, I too am thankful that the August 2019 grades came out today.
At over 3000, the number of corrections seems higher than in previous years. I am aware of the double submission of some Surrey results and these may have had a limited knock on effect where new players and juniors played Surrey opposition. But what of the others? Missing results or duplicate players?
A junior tournament in Solihull, played on 30th June, was submitted for grading on 1st July. The files were simply never processed. This accounts for missing/corrected grades in August of about 80-90 children. Given the way the junior grades are calculated, I imagine there would be a pretty big knock-on effect with junior grades around the country, particularly given so many Megafinals are now graded and so the inter-mingling of the juniors is much higher. Will it knock-on to 3000? I doubt it, but it'll certainly be about 5% of that total.

This is why I was so keen for the August grades to come out - I couldn't advertise my junior tournament in October (with grade-limited sections) because I knew full well that most of our regulars' grades would be wrong! :cry:

Nigel White
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Nigel White » Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:57 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:51 am
David Gilbert wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:45 am
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
The FIDE September list was published today.
Without the results from the Under-1750 at the British Championships :(
Indeed, because the ECF never registered it, and thus never submitted the rating file either. Looks like you should write an email to David Clayton and Kevin Staveley.
I spotted this omission from the September rating list yesterday (while I was on the the train coming back from playing in my club's annual pre-season friendly against Hastings). So before I saw these posts, I sent this morning the email Alex suggested.

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2427
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Ian Thompson » Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:10 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
I remember in February 2018, the FIDE February list was published before the ECF January one. The FIDE September list was published today, the same as the ECF August list, too.
You're not comparing like with like though.

The ECF publishes once when it thinks the list is correct. FIDE publishes whatever it has on the due date and then publishes corrections to it nearly every day thereafter.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:33 pm

Ian Thompson wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:10 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
I remember in February 2018, the FIDE February list was published before the ECF January one. The FIDE September list was published today, the same as the ECF August list, too.
You're not comparing like with like though.

The ECF publishes once when it thinks the list is correct. FIDE publishes whatever it has on the due date and then publishes corrections to it nearly every day thereafter.
I assume the ECF publishes the August list when it thinks it is correct; but there are no checks to ensure the July list is correct. There's no check, for example, of tournaments in the calendar marked as being graded versus tournaments that have actually been received. I don't know if one was done for the August list. In fact, when I pointed out my tournament was missing before the July list was published I was told it would have to wait until the August list.

It is true that FIDE publishes corrections punctually when it is aware of them, whereas with the ECF you have to wait for over a month. Both systems have the same human problem, which is that most people only check their results when the new rating list is published, and not before it has been published.

Nigel White
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Nigel White » Sun Sep 01, 2019 6:03 pm

Nigel White wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:57 am
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:51 am
David Gilbert wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:45 am


Without the results from the Under-1750 at the British Championships :(
Indeed, because the ECF never registered it, and thus never submitted the rating file either. Looks like you should write an email to David Clayton and Kevin Staveley.
I spotted this omission from the September rating list yesterday (while I was on the the train coming back from playing in my club's annual pre-season friendly against Hastings). So before I saw these posts, I sent this morning the email Alex suggested.
David Clayton has confirmed that this was an oversight. The tournament has now been registered and the file submitted. David has said that the secretary of the FIDE Qualifications Committee is aware of the situation and will approve the registration. It will then be rated and included on a future September revised list.

Mistakes are unfortunate, but it is good that when people are made aware of them they are dealt with promptly.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:41 pm

Nigel White wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 6:03 pm
David has said that the secretary of the FIDE Qualifications Committee is aware of the situation
Indeed he was, Nigel. Indeed he was.

Mike Truran
Posts: 2392
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Mike Truran » Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:31 pm

:lol:

Paul Buswell
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:56 pm

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Paul Buswell » Mon Sep 02, 2019 7:55 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:33 pm
Ian Thompson wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:10 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 pm
I remember in February 2018, the FIDE February list was published before the ECF January one. The FIDE September list was published today, the same as the ECF August list, too.
You're not comparing like with like though.

The ECF publishes once when it thinks the list is correct. FIDE publishes whatever it has on the due date and then publishes corrections to it nearly every day thereafter.
I assume the ECF publishes the August list when it thinks it is correct; but there are no checks to ensure the July list is correct. There's no check, for example, of tournaments in the calendar marked as being graded versus tournaments that have actually been received. I don't know if one was done for the August list. In fact, when I pointed out my tournament was missing before the July list was published I was told it would have to wait until the August list.

It is true that FIDE publishes corrections punctually when it is aware of them, whereas with the ECF you have to wait for over a month. Both systems have the same human problem, which is that most people only check their results when the new rating list is published, and not before it has been published.
Alex: I have been in the ECF office issuing Game Fee and PayToPlay invoices and have in recent months tried to reverse check on whether events advertised in the Calendar as to be graded have indeed been received. It was not a fully systemic check and rather time-consuming but it did result in my e-mailing a number of organisers to point out that their event had apparently not been received for grading, or received only in part. In some cases I knew that the event had taken place as there was some report somewhere, in other cases I could only assume.
A problem I faced was that there is no standard expectation for how quickly an event is submitted for ECF grading. I know the Grand Prix has a standard, but that's not the same. So how long should one give an event before chasing its apparent non-receipt? Some events submit within 24 hours, others take literally months. and I have heard the view that so long as submission is by the next 6-monthly cut-off that is all that matters.
My handful of e-mails produced several responses: some files were submitted, the organiser having delayed, or overlooked, or the file had been lost in transit. In some cases the organiser never responded so I still have no idea if all sections of their (established) events ever took place. In one example, a very small tournament, the event was clearly advertised as ECF-graded but the organiser no longer wished it to be - as best I recall I flagged this with relevant ECF officers.

Going forward, I hope the ECF will formally institute reverse checking: but it will requite some human resource to do it, and the establishment of an expected time standard for submitting results.

PB

Paul Dupré
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Cove, Hampshire

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Paul Dupré » Mon Sep 02, 2019 9:27 am

Julie Denning wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 9:12 pm

Having spent a while today researching this also, I've realised dates and colours are not accurate either, as well as board numbers not being entertained.

Why have we got a grading system with such massive deficiencies in it?

Are we just hoping that the "graders" do their job properly?

I was a grader in the past and am shocked that this is the current situation.
Paul, I suspect I speak on behalf of a number of graders. I report results not only from my local league but also from several clubs. These come to me in many different forms. Some are perfectly set out with colours and dates included, which I then faithfully report. Others miss out some of this information. At the far extreme I've even had situations of being sent what appeared to be the handwritten crosstable taken off the club notice board. As the system does not demand dates and colours, I submit the best I'm provided with. I suppose I could refuse to submit such results, or try to get the missing data from the club, but as I'm usually then close to the submission deadline and in all probability the club hasn't kept more accurate records, there seems little point. I'm sorry if you regard this as graders not doing their "job" properly.
I couldn't disagree more.

There should be a bare minimum expected from clubs for internal grading with dates and colours top of the list.

If they can't even supply that - then they should not be graded.

How do you know the games were even played ?
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

Paul Dupré
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Cove, Hampshire

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Paul Dupré » Mon Sep 02, 2019 9:34 am

Mike Gunn wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:45 am
In relation to the Surrey grading I spoke to Matthew at the British and it turns out that simplest solution for me (remove the January submitted results) was feasible and I saw him do this. Thanks to Nick for offering his help in checking the results but his help has turned out to be not needed.
I have checked my games on the database and the ones removed were the correct results from before Christmas. Which means they were now graded with the wrong grades. I don't know how clever the 'system' is, but from what I've read here probably NOT. So, I see I dropped points, not enough to change my grade. However, this highlights how much care is taken to provide accurate figures.
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Alex Holowczak » Mon Sep 02, 2019 10:17 am

Paul Buswell wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 7:55 am
Alex: I have been in the ECF office issuing Game Fee and PayToPlay invoices and have in recent months tried to reverse check on whether events advertised in the Calendar as to be graded have indeed been received. It was not a fully systemic check and rather time-consuming but it did result in my e-mailing a number of organisers to point out that their event had apparently not been received for grading, or received only in part. In some cases I knew that the event had taken place as there was some report somewhere, in other cases I could only assume.
A problem I faced was that there is no standard expectation for how quickly an event is submitted for ECF grading. I know the Grand Prix has a standard, but that's not the same. So how long should one give an event before chasing its apparent non-receipt? Some events submit within 24 hours, others take literally months. and I have heard the view that so long as submission is by the next 6-monthly cut-off that is all that matters.
My handful of e-mails produced several responses: some files were submitted, the organiser having delayed, or overlooked, or the file had been lost in transit. In some cases the organiser never responded so I still have no idea if all sections of their (established) events ever took place. In one example, a very small tournament, the event was clearly advertised as ECF-graded but the organiser no longer wished it to be - as best I recall I flagged this with relevant ECF officers.

Going forward, I hope the ECF will formally institute reverse checking: but it will requite some human resource to do it, and the establishment of an expected time standard for submitting results.

PB
Thanks, this is interesting.

My starting point on the checking events received versus events expected is that Richard always used to do it. I accept that it'll need resource, but it used to happen as a matter of course. So I don't think it is asking too much for it to happen now.

I've heard the 6-monthly cut-off deadline mentioned too, which seems to me to be the wrong attitude instinctively, but I couldn't think of an argument to back up my instinct.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: July 2019 grades......

Post by Alex Holowczak » Mon Sep 02, 2019 10:18 am

Paul Dupré wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 9:27 am
Julie Denning wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 9:12 pm

Having spent a while today researching this also, I've realised dates and colours are not accurate either, as well as board numbers not being entertained.

Why have we got a grading system with such massive deficiencies in it?

Are we just hoping that the "graders" do their job properly?

I was a grader in the past and am shocked that this is the current situation.
Paul, I suspect I speak on behalf of a number of graders. I report results not only from my local league but also from several clubs. These come to me in many different forms. Some are perfectly set out with colours and dates included, which I then faithfully report. Others miss out some of this information. At the far extreme I've even had situations of being sent what appeared to be the handwritten crosstable taken off the club notice board. As the system does not demand dates and colours, I submit the best I'm provided with. I suppose I could refuse to submit such results, or try to get the missing data from the club, but as I'm usually then close to the submission deadline and in all probability the club hasn't kept more accurate records, there seems little point. I'm sorry if you regard this as graders not doing their "job" properly.
I couldn't disagree more.

There should be a bare minimum expected from clubs for internal grading with dates and colours top of the list.

If they can't even supply that - then they should not be graded.

How do you know the games were even played ?
So then the club will just make up dates and colours before they send them off to Julie. This ticks the box so bureaucrats can pat themselves on the back, but it doesn't actually address the underlying issue. Some battles aren't worth the time fighting, particularly this one given information like "date" doesn't actually matter for the purpose of calculating the grade.

Post Reply