January 2014 Grades

General discussions about grading.
Neil Graham
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Neil Graham » Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:15 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
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?
As a captain I also have to check eligibility every month now because of the 80 point rule.

Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Sean Hewitt » Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:19 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote: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?
Accuracy for accuracies sake you mean?!

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by MartinCarpenter » Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:26 pm

They don't use the FIDE grades people were originally registered with in September? That would be the sane response to this sort of incremental update :)

David Sedgwick
Posts: 3669
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by David Sedgwick » Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:37 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote:
Christopher Kreuzer wrote: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?
Accuracy for accuracies sake you mean?!
To paraphrase what you said in another thread about a different subject:

It may be accurate, but that does not mean that it is sensible or satisfactory. In my opinion, it is neither.

NickFaulks
Posts: 5445
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Feb 28, 2014 11:42 pm

David Sedgwick wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote:
Christopher Kreuzer wrote: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?
Accuracy for accuracies sake you mean?!
To paraphrase what you said in another thread about a different subject:

It may be accurate, but that does not mean that it is sensible or satisfactory. In my opinion, it is neither.
I've only just found this thread, because I assumed it was about ECF grades, in which I have no interest. However, I see that it has moved on to FIDE ratings.

There seems to be a feeling that the move to monthly lists was spurious. I have some sympathy for this, since while I want ratings to be the best estimator of playing strength that we can produce, it does in general seem unlikely that if a player's rating goes up by 30 points during the course of a month, that is because he has become a better player during that period. On the other hand, by the way FIDE ratings are calculated, the latest monthly rating is a ( slightly ) better estimate of current playing strength than the latest quarterly rating.

I think the impetus for monthly lists came mostly from a desire for more excitement, as represented by the federations.

A point on which I do feel strongly is the reporting of interim results from long events such as the 4NCL. If you're going to have monthly lists, it seems daft for games played in November to come into the calculations the following June.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18349
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Mar 01, 2014 12:55 am

NickFaulks wrote: A point on which I do feel strongly is the reporting of interim results from long events such as the 4NCL. If you're going to have monthly lists, it seems daft for games played in November to come into the calculations the following June.

There are two side effects to this, which is what people are moaning about. Firstly that ratings jump about on a monthly basis by small amounts, depending on how players got on in the previous rounds. With the legality of board orders being conditional on the monthly ratings, this makes life more difficult for the captains and managers. I could agree that's an own goal as the 4NCL rules could freeze on the start rating. The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by LawrenceCooper » Sat Mar 01, 2014 7:39 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.
This is the downside to me as a captain of a junior team in Division Three. Whilst I can help those who already have part ratings to complete their rating over the season it's a shame that those with no previous part rating only have an opportunity at the last weekend. Even then it's dependent on all three opponents being rated which may not happen even with the help of other team captains.

Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:00 am

LawrenceCooper wrote:
Roger de Coverly wrote:The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.
This is the downside to me as a captain of a junior team in Division Three. Whilst I can help those who already have part ratings to complete their rating over the season it's a shame that those with no previous part rating only have an opportunity at the last weekend.
Why do you say that Loz? The rating regulations in force last year are still in force this year as far as I'm aware. Part ratings are gained over the whole event rather than round by round - in exactly the same way that norms are still achievable despite monthly reporting of results.

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by LawrenceCooper » Sat Mar 01, 2014 12:18 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote:
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Roger de Coverly wrote:The second and more serious point is that it makes it more difficult for players to get ratings in the first place. The 4NCL and the ECF don't seem to have wanted to start a fight on this, but there's a very reasonable case.
This is the downside to me as a captain of a junior team in Division Three. Whilst I can help those who already have part ratings to complete their rating over the season it's a shame that those with no previous part rating only have an opportunity at the last weekend.
Why do you say that Loz? The rating regulations in force last year are still in force this year as far as I'm aware. Part ratings are gained over the whole event rather than round by round - in exactly the same way that norms are still achievable despite monthly reporting of results.
If only I'd consulted you earlier.... :oops:

NickFaulks
Posts: 5445
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by NickFaulks » Sat Mar 01, 2014 1:27 pm

As Sean says, players will get initial ratings based on the whole 2013/14 season. New and more liberal rules will come into effect from 1.7.14, eliminating the requirement for the first reported event to contain three rated games, and the whole problem should disappear.

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by LawrenceCooper » Sat Mar 01, 2014 1:42 pm

NickFaulks wrote:As Sean says, players will get initial ratings based on the whole 2013/14 season. New and more liberal rules will come into effect from 1.7.14, eliminating the requirement for the first reported event to contain three rated games, and the whole problem should disappear.
Thanks for the info. Will there be any change to the 26 months lifespan of part ratings?

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2400
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Adam Raoof » Sat Mar 01, 2014 2:39 pm

LawrenceCooper wrote:
NickFaulks wrote:As Sean says, players will get initial ratings based on the whole 2013/14 season. New and more liberal rules will come into effect from 1.7.14, eliminating the requirement for the first reported event to contain three rated games, and the whole problem should disappear.
Thanks for the info. Will there be any change to the 26 months lifespan of part ratings?
Apologies for causing confusion! Thanks Nick.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
Chessable - http://www.chessable.com
-Tell your friends about the Chess England Online Home Page - https://bit.ly/chessenglandonline
Don’t stop playing chess!

Andrew Bak
Posts: 833
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
Location: Bradford
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Andrew Bak » Sat Mar 01, 2014 5:20 pm

So to be clear, players who have not yet had a rating will get a FIDE part/full rating at the end of the 4NCL season. Is that correct?

Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Mar 01, 2014 5:33 pm

Andrew Bak wrote:So to be clear, players who have not yet had a rating will get a FIDE part/full rating at the end of the 4NCL season. Is that correct?
If they fulfil the criteria (played at least 3 rated opponents and scored at least 1 point at a performance over 1000), then yes. As I've already said, the regulations have not changed in this regard.

Nicky Chorley
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 3:26 pm
Contact:

Re: January 2014 Grades

Post by Nicky Chorley » Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:30 am

Yay, I went up 3 points in January and am hoping to go up a few more points in the next list.

Post Reply