New Grading List

General discussions about grading.
DFernandez
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 1:10 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by DFernandez » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:30 pm

Quite a surprising place to see myself and one of my tournaments being mentioned!

It bears mentioning first of all that the game inputting left much to be desired. For instance, my game with GM Drazic, marked as a 23 move draw beginning 1.c4, http://chess-db.com/public/pinfo.jsp?id=5801605, was in fact an ( at least) 35 move draw beginning 1.d4 (a London system), which I can find the signed scoresheet for if need be.

Possibly 35 was too many new moves for them and they simply decided to use the first half of Rogac-Lundin: http://chess-db.com/public/game.jsp?id= ... 5952.29296

It could be that the laxness of the game inputting is intentional; though intended by whom, and to what end, I have no idea. Though, saying that, two of my draws from the second half were in fact short and not down to bad inputters (I am truly grateful to the much more industrious ones we have here in the UK!)- the first of which was as White against Pikula the day after missing my own norm- which (as anyone who has been my roommate can attest) typically causes a sleepless night or two.

My Fang draw with Black is perhaps also understandable if one reads the subtexts. I didn't wish to share the fate of a certain Vladimir Dobrov, who had lost to Fang in no more than 45 minutes, the day before another invited grandmaster did similarly (though lasting perhaps a few minutes longer), so his draw offer on move 8 suited me just fine...

I am a little surprised that the eyebrows being raised have focused on Vladimir Minko. As far as I am aware, he already had far more than the required norms and rating for the IM title, so from his perspective the event was a failure- he was some way off the GM norm. Equally surprising seems to be the lack of attention paid to the IM section of the tournament, but that is a story for someone else to tell, and on another day.

Overall a relaxing week spent beside the Danube river and playing, despite the pervasive peaceful culture (31 out of 45 draws, and 7 from 9 in my own games) about 250 moves of chess; the only annoyance being that I couldn't beat Dobrov from an exchange up.

Neil Graham
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by Neil Graham » Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:05 pm

Thank you Daniel for your post. The subject of the tournament was initially raised after a post relating to Minko's ECF grading of 259. I have posted a link to the results of the tournament in the International Chess section of the Board including the IM norm section where everyone can see the results of the three English players.

Can I return now to the question of the games/inputting of games? As I stated previously only 14 of the 45 games were decisive and when one hears of GMs turning up and losing in 45 minutes to the eventual winner my eyebrows are raised even more. Of the 31 drawn games shown on chess-results com (and copied onto chess-db.com) precisely six were over 16 moves; of the remaining 25 games nine were halved between 10-16 moves and the remaining 16 games were drawn in nine moves or less. There is little wonder therefore that Mr.Drazic's tournament is being scrutinised.

Mick Norris
Posts: 6481
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: New Grading List

Post by Mick Norris » Sat Aug 06, 2016 9:41 am

Interesting :!: :?: grading stats
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

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

Re: New Grading List

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sat Aug 06, 2016 12:08 pm

Mick Norris wrote:Interesting :!: :?: grading stats
Indeed. No doubt the sage of Bourne End will have something to say? :D

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Aug 06, 2016 12:49 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote: Indeed. No doubt the sage of Bourne End will have something to say?
A reduction in Standard play and an increase in Rapidplay. The increase in Rapidplay being mostly driven by an increase in Junior numbers where universal membership does not apply.

If abolition of financing the ECF primarily by Game Fee was supposed to lead to an upswing in the headcount of adult players, it hasn't happened.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 6564
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: New Grading List

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Sat Aug 06, 2016 12:59 pm

You know, it would help if people pointing out the stats (and also the stats page itself) would say whether the numbers have gone up or down or something else. That would avoid people having to click through and work out themselves whether there has been an increase or a decrease. Hmm. I must be particularly grumpy to say that! :D

For the record, an increase in halfgames of 7,697 from the 2014-15 to the 2015-16 season. An increase of 8601 for rapid play and a decrease of 904 for standard play.

Players active (net value) increased by 628, which was a 322 decrease in standard play and an increase of 737 for rapid play. The figures don't correlate precisely there, because some people play both.

Mick Norris
Posts: 6481
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: New Grading List

Post by Mick Norris » Sat Aug 06, 2016 1:32 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:You know, it would help if people pointing out the stats (and also the stats page itself) would say whether the numbers have gone up or down or something else. That would avoid people having to click through and work out themselves whether there has been an increase or a decrease. Hmm. I must be particularly grumpy to say that! :D
I did think so, but I thought it better to wait until Roger had put a negative spin on it :lol:
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

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

Re: New Grading List

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sun Aug 07, 2016 3:25 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:A reduction in Standard play and an increase in Rapidplay. The increase in Rapidplay being mostly driven by an increase in Junior numbers where universal membership does not apply.

If abolition of financing the ECF primarily by Game Fee was supposed to lead to an upswing in the headcount of adult players, it hasn't happened.
An interesting inference. In reality, comparing standard play over the last 10 years ago

Year Half games Active Players Players published
2006 201539 13089 10383
2011 206558 12404 10105
2016 212562 12167 11017

So number of graded games played - UP
Number of graded players - UP
Average number of games played by player - UP
Active players - DOWN

Those who were not really interested in playing, and so played one or two games per year have stopped. The rest are playing more chess than they used to, exactly as supporters of the membership scheme thought that they would.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Aug 07, 2016 3:39 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote:
Those who were not really interested in playing, and so played one or two games per year have stopped. The rest are playing more chess than they used to, exactly as supporters of the membership scheme thought that they would.
So marginal players are driven away, that's hardly expanding the chess playing world. It was however as opponents of membership predicted. A future of chess leagues having to survive by reliance on players taking part in more than one league or being members of more than one club is not healthy. I would imagine that universities fielding relatively casual teams of infrequent players in their local leagues has been halted.

Still the ECF still has progress to make on driving people away. In the strategic planning document
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/english- ... -strategy/, it talks of
Investigate the possibility of eliminating the remnant of game fee and moving to a universal membership scheme.
That was an answer I could never get from a previous CEO. Did his membership scheme mean an eventual ban on non-ECF members taking part in English league or Congress chess?

Ian Thompson
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Fleet, Hampshire

Re: New Grading List

Post by Ian Thompson » Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:04 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote:An interesting inference. In reality, comparing standard play over the last 10 years ago

Year Half games Active Players Players published
2006 201539 13089 10383
2011 206558 12404 10105
2016 212562 12167 11017

Number of graded players - UP
But only because we now have F category grades. Take them out, so you're comparing like with like across all three years and 2016 players published reduces to 9953.

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

Re: New Grading List

Post by Sean Hewitt » Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:55 pm

Ian Thompson wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote:An interesting inference. In reality, comparing standard play over the last 10 years ago

Year Half games Active Players Players published
2006 201539 13089 10383
2011 206558 12404 10105
2016 212562 12167 11017

So number of graded games played - UP
Number of graded players - UP
Average number of games played by player - UP
Active players - DOWN
But only because we now have F category grades. Take them out, so you're comparing like with like across all three years and 2016 players published reduces to 9953.
It would help not to selectively edit my post. The substantive point is that the number of games played has increased despite the loss of the one and two game a year players. There is no getting away from the fact that more [standard play] chess is being played since the introduction of the membership scheme.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Aug 07, 2016 10:54 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote: There is no getting away from the fact that more [standard play] chess is being played since the introduction of the membership scheme.
More games, fewer players. I'm aware that was the likely outcome, if denied by many of the membership advocates, but is it desirable in the longer run, and if so, why?

Neil Graham
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by Neil Graham » Mon Aug 08, 2016 12:20 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote: There is no getting away from the fact that more [standard play] chess is being played since the introduction of the membership scheme.
More games, fewer players. I'm aware that was the likely outcome, if denied by many of the membership advocates, but is it desirable in the longer run, and if so, why?
Groan! Out comes the membership drum again with the same old tune. The amount of chess players varies from year to year and when someone decides not to play it's normally due to other commitments (work, family, education) or simply that they don't fancy playing any more. I have yet to see anyone pack up chess because of the membership scheme.

Membership is inexpensive (unless you live in Yorkshire) and costs less than admission to a local football league match or affiliation to most other organisations and so on. I'm thinking of taking up golf and see that membership at Wentworth is £16,000 a year and the new owners are asking all existing members to pay a £100,000 debenture to continue in membership. Now that's what I call a membership fee!

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Aug 08, 2016 12:48 am

Neil Graham wrote: I have yet to see anyone pack up chess because of the membership scheme.
The case being made by Sean Hewitt is that players who play one or two games a year are being driven away by membership schemes and that this is a good thing for the future of English chess.

Neil Graham
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: New Grading List

Post by Neil Graham » Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:45 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Neil Graham wrote: I have yet to see anyone pack up chess because of the membership scheme.
The case being made by Sean Hewitt is that players who play one or two games a year are being driven away by membership schemes and that this is a good thing for the future of English chess.
I don't think Sean said or inferred anything of the sort; he merely quoted some figures. Unless someone has access to market research on why players finish or start playing (highly unlikely) we can surmise all we like about why various figures have changed. In general there have been remarkably small changes in the last few seasons.

I would suggest a few reasons for fluctuations
a) Juniors who are active pre-teen often drop out when they find more interesting things to do
b) There is an increase of the "baby boomer"generation reaching retirement age and a consequent increase in games played. I think you will find that Mr R De Coverly (for example) is playing a great deal more competitive chess than he was in, say, 2010-11.
c) Decrease in organised chess (league/congress) may reflect the lack of volunteers, often referred to in my posts on here. I see for example that Buckinghamshire can't play in the Chiltern League this year. The reason - not a lack of players but no-one willing to be captain. I would be interested to see how the number of chess clubs has declined in the past ten years - possibly we have stats on that?

Post Reply