ELO vs ECF grading systems

[Paul Cooksey]

Oddly enough you can get away with that one, but at a price. The price will be £ 6 per tournament as against £ 19 for membership.

That's not too bad I suppose, just stick to playing in 3 tournaments per year. Saves a quid.

You don't want to contribute to junior chess? have a FIDE rating? feel the Olympiad team represents you? want the British championship to continue?

[Paul McKeown]

Seeing as the topic is ELO vs ECF, not Elo vs ECF, I think that is a valid point.

[Anthony.Ibbitson]

Haha! You have a point.

[Rob Thompson]

No, you haven't. You've said:

"I think the best argument is, if we had an ELO rating system, we would not have to join the ECF."

Which as I've just explained, is absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

Seeing as the topic is ELO vs ECF, not Elo vs ECF, I think that is a valid point.

It would be a valid point if it were actually correct.

[Paul McKeown]

This is romper room material. to bed, children.

[Anthony.Ibbitson]

Oh my goodness!!! I'm going to leave these morons to fight it out, good job someone has the sense to leave them to it!

[Roger de Coverly]

You don't want to contribute to junior chess? have a FIDE rating? feel the Olympiad team represents you? want the British championship to continue?

As £ 18 is (or should be) far more than the marginal cost of grading 15 or 16 games, I'd suggest such a player is a positive contributor to the ECF's revenues as well as helping the viability of the Congresses in which he plays. More so than a Bronze member at £ 13 anyway. You could even term him a temporary or visiting member for the duration of the Congresses. It's when you get him to play in his fourth Congress that the money tree stops producing. The fourth Congress generates revenues of just £ 1 (actually that assumes he buys the membership season ticket before the first event) and the fifth and subsequent generate zero.

[Simon Dixon]

You don't want to contribute to junior chess? have a FIDE rating? feel the Olympiad team represents you? want the British championship to continue?

As £ 18 is (or should be) far more than the marginal cost of grading 15 or 16 games, I'd suggest such a player is a positive contributor to the ECF's revenues as well as helping the viability of the Congresses in which he plays. More so than a Bronze member at £ 13 anyway. You could even term him a temporary or visiting member for the duration of the Congresses. It's when you get him to play in his fourth Congress that the money tree stops producing. The fourth Congress generates revenues of just £ 1 (actually that assumes he buys the membership season ticket before the first event) and the fifth and subsequent generate zero.

Quite right, the ECF makes more money out of non members than it does from those who buy memberships to take advantage of discounts. I pay full whack to play in tournaments, which is a good reason for not having a "licence to play" scheme. The only way I can see the ECF making more money out of a compulsory scheme is to scrap discounts for members.

And to keep on topic, ELO not Elo is better than ECF. If you can't understand that, there is no point in me trying to explain it. You still wouldn't understand.

[Alex Holowczak]

Quite right, the ECF makes more money out of non members than it does from those who buy memberships to take advantage of discounts. I pay full whack to play in tournaments, which is a good reason for not having a "licence to play" scheme. The only way I can see the ECF making more money out of a compulsory scheme is to scrap discounts for members.

The Maths of this have already been done for the original paper, and actually the converse is true; if you find the mean price per game played by members it's something like 80p/game, whereas the mean price per game of non-members is, naturally, whatever the Game Fee rate is.

[Alan Walton]

And to keep on topic, ELO not Elo is better than ECF. If you can't understand that, there is no point in me trying to explain it. You still wouldn't understand.

I think you find it is the Elo rating system named after Arpad Elo, I may incorrect but that is what I always thought it was

[Sean Hewitt]

I think I will be flagging my ECF grade as inactive if they insist on mandatory membership.

Perhaps along with your forum account?

[Simon Dixon]

And to keep on topic, ELO not Elo is better than ECF. If you can't understand that, there is no point in me trying to explain it. You still wouldn't understand.

I think you find it is the Elo rating system named after Arpad Elo, I may incorrect but that is what I always thought it was

You may incorrect if you like, what I don't get is the obsession with the name of the person who the system is named after.

[Simon Dixon]

I think I will be flagging my ECF grade as inactive if they insist on mandatory membership.

Perhaps along with your forum account?

Woo scary man, you don't like opinions that disagree with your blinkered views.

[Roger de Coverly]

The Maths of this have already been done for the original paper, and actually the converse is true; if you find the mean price per game played by members it's something like 80p/game, whereas the mean price per game of non-members is, naturally, whatever the Game Fee rate is.

If you stopped for once relying on averages and looked at aggregates and the effect of differing activity levels, you would see that what he says is correct, for a high number of games at least. There are certainly members who are paying a high cost per game. These fairly obviously are the people who don't play very often. It's a high cost per game that the ECF wants to impose on less active club players as well. Those who play as much as the ECF CEO will be paying a very low cost per game under membership. For silver membership and playing 100 games, you are paying 19p per game. The Scotsman or club player playing his only Congress for the season on the next board is paying £ 1.20 per game.

In a Game Fee costed environment, the more games an individual plays, the more he contributes to the ECF. Think paying for buses by journey versus buying a bus pass. A reason why the Game Fee income dropped a few years ago was when the BCF started making all Internationally rated players into members and again when they launched the NCCU membership scheme and allowed unrestricted access to Game Fee exemptions in Congresses throughout the rest of the country.

[Simon Brown]

Yes, but amusing.

Guess this comment is now completely non-sensical due to moderation, but honestly, it was amusing.......