English Chess Forum

Posted: **Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:09 pm**

Sometime this weekend before anyone else asks!

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2011 9:15 am**

Carl Hibbard wrote:Sometime this weekend before anyone else asks!

The new grading list has now gone live

Posted: **Sun Jan 16, 2011 11:05 pm**

Wow. Despite not playing any games in the 6 month period, and my most recent games being appalling, i've managed to go up 2 points. How this has happened is beyond me

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:22 am**

I am most upset! My rapidplay grade has gone above my slowplay grade for the first time ever.

I think it was the 4NCL "rapidplay" that was to blame. Clearly I play better at 10 minutes and 30s/move (or whatever the time limit was), than when I play at a time limit of all moves in 30 minutes (when I tend to lose on time or blunder in time trouble).

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:34 am**

I appear to have become ungraded. Which is odd, because although I haven't played a rapid game in the last 6 months I played 6 in the previous 6 months and 47 in the previous year!

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:02 am**

Rob Thompson wrote:How this has happened is beyond me

The rapid play rating is the average performance in up to six half-year grading periods.

So if p1 is the oldest performance (as total grading points) and p6 the most recent, the grade six months ago was

(p1+p2+p3+p4+p5+p6)/(n1+n2+n3+n4+n4+n6) where n1 etc. is the number of games and the total game count doesn't exceed 30.

The most recent grade becomes

(p2+p3+p4+p5+p6+p7)/(n2+n3+n4+n5+n6+n7)

So the grade changes with the removal of p1 and n1 even if p7 and n7 are zero.

This can happen in standard play as well when (for less active players) the grade is averaged over three yearly periods. You don't see it in practice because grades aren't published for players with no games over a year.

Will this become an issue when six monthly standard play grades are introduced? Almost certainly.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:13 am**

Roger de Coverly wrote:The rapid play rating is the average performance in up to six half-year grading periods.

Not according to this (http://grading.bcfservices.org.uk/help.php#notes) with my bolding:

ECF Grading Website wrote:The Grade is calculated by dividing the total number of points scored by the number of games played. If there are at least 30 games in the current period, then the Grade is based on these games alone. If there are not, results are brought forward from the previous period to make the total up to exactly thirty. If there are not 30 games in the two seasons together, results are taken from the season before that. Games are never taken from further back than this; the maximum is two prior grading periods.

Results are brought forward in two different ways, depending whether the Grade is Rapid or Standard. With Rapidplay, any games brought forward from a previous period will be the most recent games in that period. This is possible because the dates of Rapid games are (almost) always known. With Standardplay, unfortunately, this is not the case. So, instead, the required number of (notional) games is brought forward at the average score for the period.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:20 am**

Sean Hewitt wrote:I appear to have become ungraded. Which is odd, because although I haven't played a rapid game in the last 6 months I played 6 in the previous 6 months and 47 in the previous year!

Sean, I have also seem to have become ungraded.

Last list I was a C code, and admittedly I didn't play in the last period, but I would only have expected to become and D or E code, but because I haven't played a QP game since the British QP 2009 it might be correct

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:25 am**

I haven't played a lot of games either, a couple for my club and the london classic. I can't recall losing any and my performance being around the 180+ mark, but it has crept up to 160. No wonder oppo keep moaning at me saying my grade is wrong. Need more games!

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:32 am**

Ian Thompson wrote: With Rapidplay, any games brought forward from a previous period will be the most recent games in that period. This is possible because the dates of Rapid games are (almost) always known. With Standardplay, unfortunately, this is not the case. So, instead, the required number of (notional) games is brought forward at the average score for the period.

If, like many players, you just play one or two rapidplay tournaments in a year, you will total less than thirty games over three years, so the date of the event doesn't matter.

Assuming you are just over thirty and thus truncating can apply, do they take the round number into account? Suppose in a three year period, you played six tournaments, the sequence being 5 rounds, 6 rounds, 6 rounds, 6 rounds, 6 rounds, 5 rounds, in total 34 games. To make 30, do you just take the last round game from the first tournament, or one fifth of the performance in that tournament?

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:37 am**

Alan Walton wrote: but because I haven't played a QP game since the British QP 2009 it might be correct

The 2009 British Rapidplay was presumably included in the Jan 2010 list. So if you have nil new games in the July 2010 list and nil in the Jan 2011 list, then presumably you become ungraded.

That's another issue for 6 monthly Standard play lists, that players become ungraded six months earlier than they do on annual lists. (Someone whose last Standard play event was Nov 2010 would appear in the July 2010 list and not become ungraded until the July 2011 list)

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:35 pm**

Roger de Coverly wrote: Suppose in a three year period, you played six tournaments, the sequence being 5 rounds, 6 rounds, 6 rounds, 6 rounds, 6 rounds, 5 rounds, in total 34 games. To make 30, do you just take the last round game from the first tournament, or one fifth of the performance in that tournament?

The system takes account of dates but not rounds. If you need n games from a given date, it will take n games at the average performance for that date. It may or may not distinguish between the different days of (say) a two-day congress. The grader may have dated the games exactly or he may have pretended they all took place on the first day. In the former case, the system will give precedence to games played on the second day.

Sean Hewitt wrote:I appear to have become ungraded. Which is odd, because although I haven't played a rapid game in the last 6 months I played 6 in the previous 6 months and 47 in the previous year!

Not true, Sean. Your most recent graded Rapidplay game was on 1st October 2009, which noticeably predates both of the 6-month periods you mention. With 0 games in the latest 12 months you are correctly ungraded.

Richard

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:42 pm**

Richard Haddrell wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote:I appear to have become ungraded. Which is odd, because although I haven't played a rapid game in the last 6 months I played 6 in the previous 6 months and 47 in the previous year!
Not true, Sean. Your most recent graded Rapidplay game was on 1st October 2009, which noticeably predates both of the 6-month periods you mention. With 0 games in the latest 12 months you are correctly ungraded.
Richard

I played the Bury rapidplay in December 2009.

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:44 pm**

It does seem strange that you lose your rapidplay rating if you don't play a game within two 6 month periods, this seems very short. I would have expected to be ungraded if I haven't played within a two-year period

Posted: **Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:52 pm**

Alan Walton wrote:It does seem strange that you lose your rapidplay rating if you don't play a game within two 6 month periods, this seems very short. I would have expected to be ungraded if I haven't played within a two-year period

To be fair - it's the same as standard play where you become ungraded if you don't play a game in the one year grading period.

English Chess Forum

Rapidplay Grades

Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades

Re: Rapidplay Grades