January 2014 Grades

General discussions about grading.
Jonathan Bryant
Posts: 3104
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Jonathan Bryant » Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:45 pm

David Sedgwick wrote: I can only repeat my long standing suggestion, which was admittedly originally made for different reasons...

David, you appear to have achieved a feat unique in Forum history and come up with an idea about which everybody agrees.

Hats off to you sir.


I was certainly nervous about creating some bizarre behaviours to make sure you play 30 games to get rid of ome bad results - but actually I think there is more incentive with the current arrangement ot try and manage the number of games that you carry forward?
My own new grade exists in part because of one bad result from January 2013 dropping out of the count. This is hardly satisfactory, but like others I can see the value in January grades, but perhaps the system could be tweaked a little.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3122
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by David Sedgwick » Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:10 am

Jonathan Bryant wrote:
David Sedgwick wrote: I can only repeat my long standing suggestion, which was admittedly originally made for different reasons...
David, you appear to have achieved a feat unique in Forum history and come up with an idea about which everybody agrees.

Hats off to you sir.
Thank you for your comment and thank you to everyone who has made supportive remarks.

It's a pity that I couldn't persuade anyone who mattered when I raised this issue three or four years ago. Of course the intended 2011 trial of January grades, which would have identified precisely the sort of anomalies we've been discussing, never happened.
MartinCarpenter wrote:In fact Jon Griffith (who does the Yorkshire live grades) doesn't really agree with the idea that grades should be as close/stable an estimator of strength as is possible. He thinks the benefits from driving people to take more interest in their grades etc from them changing outweight the extra randomness of the live grades.
I'm afraid I find that bizarre.

When I had a new FIDE Rating once every six months, I was interested in it.

Now I have three FIDE Ratings, each of which is likely to change every month if I play in a relevant event, I have little or no interest in them. My memory is not good enough to cope - and what's the point of being interested in something which you can't remember.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7027
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:09 am

Some interesting points. I also agree with David's suggestion, though I am currently in the position of waiting patiently for my results over this grading period to push my results from the previous grading period out of the calculations so I can forget they ever happened (they were that bad). So there are some advantages to having a (hopefully) good grading period following a poor one over six-month cycles rather than twelve. I kind of wrote off the last six months and decided to start afresh in January (it seemed to work, I promptly won five games in row after only winning six in the previous 30 - go figure). If I'd had to struggle through until June, it might have been a different story. (Of course, starting afresh can be done at any time, it shouldn't depend on grading periods!)

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2401
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by MartinCarpenter » Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:58 am

Well the thing that everyone does in Yorkshire is look at the yearly (probably slightly more stable than the ECF) grades as the vaguely serious ones and the live ones as a bit of fun :)

Mick Norris
Posts: 7012
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:55 am

My impression is that the players like January grades but are confused about how they are applied - we spent some time on this at last night's MCF Council meeting

Clearly, the ECF needs to get to the point that the vast majority have confidence in the calculation of the grades - we aren't currently in that position

I agree with David Sedgwick too :wink:
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Brian Valentine
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:30 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Brian Valentine » Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:26 pm

Mick,

Are you talking about confidence in:
1) the arithmetic of an individual calculation
or
2) the method of calculation?

I'm responsible for 1), but only have influence in 2)!

Brian
Manager of ECF Grading

Mick Norris
Posts: 7012
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:49 pm

Brian Valentine wrote:Mick,

Are you talking about confidence in:
1) the arithmetic of an individual calculation
or
2) the method of calculation?

I'm responsible for 1), but only have influence in 2)!

Brian
Manager of ECF Grading
Brian

I'm sure it can be demonstrated that 1) is satisfied

However, 2) is where it falls down
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Brian Valentine
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:30 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Brian Valentine » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:15 pm

Mick,
Thank you for clarifying.

I'm glad that there is one union satisfied with 1), since my e-mail box this week testifies to something else elsewhere!

The Grading Team are discussing a number of ideas at present; there's nothing on this thread that has surprised us (yet). There is a need to look at these "isolated points" with the bigger picture in mind. I need to talk to my boss before I elaborate further (and that will be in a little while as the discussion is on-going).

Brian

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7027
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:25 pm

Are there plans to have games submitted faster than currently? At the moment, some games seem to go up early in the current cycle, and then everything else comes in at the end. It would be nice to get to a point where you can see all your games there, check them, and then the new grades come out a week or so after that.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17316
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:44 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Are there plans to have games submitted faster than currently? At the moment, some games seem to go up early in the current cycle, and then everything else comes in at the end. It would be nice to get to a point where you can see all your games there, check them, and then the new grades come out a week or so after that.
Congresses are expected to be submitted within a month, and need to be for inclusion in the Grand Prix calculations. I believe it's a fairly painless process when the Congress is using one of the standard pairing and results management systems, although identification and correct coding of new players could be a difficulty. Leagues still run on a six monthly cycle for the most part and the integration of league management systems with grading data may not be smooth as might be necessary for more frequent submissions.

Mick Norris
Posts: 7012
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:34 pm

Brian Valentine wrote:Mick,
Thank you for clarifying.

I'm glad that there is one union satisfied with 1), since my e-mail box this week testifies to something else elsewhere!

The Grading Team are discussing a number of ideas at present; there's nothing on this thread that has surprised us (yet). There is a need to look at these "isolated points" with the bigger picture in mind. I need to talk to my boss before I elaborate further (and that will be in a little while as the discussion is on-going).

Brian
Brian

Thanks for that, look forward to hearing more in due course
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

David Blower
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:01 pm
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by David Blower » Thu Jan 30, 2014 3:54 pm

Nick Thomas wrote:
David Blower wrote:My best ever grade of 101! (Finally over 100!)
Made my day, well done mate!
Thanks. But you know very well the mind of a competitive chess player, the feeling lasted for about a minute, before I started thinking: "hhhhhhmmmmmm I can still do better than that."

David Blower
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:01 pm
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by David Blower » Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:09 am

I have written an article for my local chess clubs website about our members January 2014 grades. The link is here: http://brewoodchess.webs.com/apps/blog/ ... 014-grades

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7027
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Fri Feb 28, 2014 1:42 pm

David Sedgwick wrote: When I had a new FIDE Rating once every six months, I was interested in it.

Now I have three FIDE Ratings, each of which is likely to change every month if I play in a relevant event, I have little or no interest in them. My memory is not good enough to cope - and what's the point of being interested in something which you can't remember.
David has a very valid point here. I'm finding the incremental updates from 4NCL weekends a bit pointless:

http://ratings.fide.com/individual_calc ... -02-01&t=0
http://ratings.fide.com/individual_calc ... -03-01&t=0

Does anyone else agree that unless you play a full tournament, having your rating updated monthly after one or two games feels a bit too much like updating for the sake of updating?

Barry Sandercock
Posts: 1329
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:52 am

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Barry Sandercock » Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:53 pm

I quite agree.

Post Reply