Too much dishonesty in chess

[Ian Thompson]

Personally, I think FIDE event should mean FIDE ratings... I don't like fake FIDE ratings, why does ECF over-ride FIDE in a FIDE event. Obviously, this is something new-ish and I don't see any reason for it. Maybe, there's too much flexibility for organisers / arbiters

FIDE's requirement is that players should be ranked according to strength to determine the pairings. How that is done is at the discretion of the event's organisers. FIDE's recommendation is that if all players appear in a single rating list then that list should be used, but they say nothing about which list should be used if all players appear in more than one rating list.

For the Guildford event all players did not already have a FIDE rating nor did all players already have an ECF rating. The organisers have done nothing wrong by picking the higher of ECF and FIDE rating as they declared that was their intention in the entry information. Whether that's a good thing to have done or not is a matter of opinion. If the organisers had used FIDE ratings throughout would it have been fair to let a player play in the U2000 because their FIDE rating was 1790 when they have an ECF rating of 2068?

[Roger de Coverly]

I believe it was advertised as a FIDE event, yet has not been FIDE rated.

I think you have missed the word "yet" after "rated". ECF ratings are now working off a weekly or faster cycle for publishing and updating data. FIDE ratings are updated monthly and detail results tend not to appear until the end of the month. With the Guildford tournament taking place on 31st March, 1st April and 2nd April, you won't see anything until 30th April or 1st May on the FIDE rating site.

What you will see eventually is games rated according to the FIDE rules and rating list. In other words players will get the performance achieved against the FIDE ratings of their opponents. ECF ratings will not affect this, nor will any players without a FIDE rating. The ECF rating calculation has included all players regardless of whether they have only an ECF rating, only a FIDE rating or both.

For pairings and eligibility the Guildford organisers chose to set a pairing order based on the higher of ECF and FIDE ratings. Empirically those who play quite a bit are aware that for younger players at least, the FIDE rating can lag behind a player's strength. That can apply even where the only games played by these players are rated in both systems. Arbiters and organisers have been doing this or similar for some years. It probably started when organisers running under 1950 or under 2000 tournaments noticed sharks with 190 grades entering and winning.

[Paul Dupré]

You obviously don't know who I am, otherwise you wouldn't have been so insulting.

I am the SCCA rating officer and used to do the ratings for the Surrey Chess Congress and know all about how ratings work and how ECF Grades used to work.

What I'm asking is why a perfectly good system. FIDE ratings taking priority for FIDE rated events where games are expected to be 4 to 6 hours, followed by ECF ratings; has been bastardised into a corrupt system. ECF ratings are based on short standard events of maybe 2 or 3 hours maximum, and therefore should NOT over-ride the correct ratings.

[Paul Dupré]

Might be a misunderstanding, but if it was a FIDE event, all your games will be rated except the ones against players with no Fide ratings.
You will also be rated for Ecf.

You obviously don't know who I am, otherwise you wouldn't have been so insulting.

I am the SCCA rating officer and used to do the ratings for the Surrey Chess Congress and know all about how ratings work and how ECF Grades used to work.

What I'm asking is why a perfectly good system. FIDE ratings taking priority for FIDE rated events where games are expected to be 4 to 6 hours, followed by ECF ratings; has been bastardised into a corrupt system. ECF ratings are based on short standard events of maybe 2 or 3 hours maximum, and therefore should NOT over-ride the correct ratings.

[Paul Dupré]

If the organisers had used FIDE ratings throughout would it have been fair to let a player play in the U2000 because their FIDE rating was 1790 when they have an ECF rating of 2068?

Did I say that, I don't think that was even inferred !!!

[Nick Ivell]

I don't have a horse in this race, but I doubt any insult was intended.

[Paul Dupré]

I think you have missed the word "yet" after "rated". ECF ratings are now working off a weekly or faster cycle for publishing and updating data. FIDE ratings are updated monthly and detail results tend not to appear until the end of the month. With the Guildford tournament taking place on 31st March, 1st April and 2nd April, you won't see anything until 30th April or 1st May on the FIDE rating site.

NOT true, the 4NCL was up before the Guildford FIDE event the following weekend.

[Paul Dupré]

Maybe I have too vested an interest, but the Guildford Event was ECF rated. I find it strange why anyone would want to completely ignore the national rating list, just because the event is advertised as also being rated by another body.

To be put in a class of cheating and dishonesty does a diservice to people like you Paul who help make it as accurate as possible.

I believe it was advertised as a FIDE event, yet has not been FIDE rated.

Non-FIDE rated players should count as zero rated in my mind, with a secondary rating of local rating (ECF) if known.

Might be a misunderstanding, but if it was a FIDE event, all your games will be rated except the ones against players with no Fide ratings.
You will also be rated for Ecf.

I guess your Theo's dad, so I'll forgive your ignorance of me.

But, I've been a member on here since 2008 and maybe gone under the radar recently.

However, I was the one who first highlighted Howard Curtis as the bad man that he is, and I was vilified by many on here for being wrong. Turned out I was right and he end up in prison.

[Roger de Coverly]

ECF ratings are based on short standard events of maybe 2 or 3 hours maximum, and therefore should NOT over-ride the correct ratings.

That's not my understanding. ECF ratings are also based on games potentially lasting four hours or longer, for example games in FIDE rated weekend congresses, 4NCL, British Championship, Hastings etc.

I don't believe there's much difference in relative strengths of players as measured by results depending on session lengths anyway. That's provided distortions inroduced by adjournments and adjudications don't matter.

I don't understand your comment about the 4NCL. Provided the 4NCL or the ECF met the FIDE deadlines, the 4NCL would have been included in the 1st April list.

We played once at Hastings in January 1999. I don't recall if that was FIDE rated. It would have depended on whether you had a rating.

[Paul Dupré]

yes 6th January it was a Wednesday - round 9 board 35, and you won - my rating was 2050 and your rating was 2110 - I was black

I gained 3 points from that event - expected score 2.88 - actual score 3.00 - 0.12 x k of 25 - my new rating was published 1st July 1999, 2053.

Do you want to know how much time we both had on our clocks at the end of the match ?

[Paul Dupré]

you played 56 moves and had 20 minutes left, I played 55 moves and had 38 minutes left.

[Paul Dupré]

I don't believe there's much difference in relative strengths of players as measured by results depending on session lengths anyway. That's provided distortions inroduced by adjournments and adjudications don't matter.

Actually, I agree with you. Therefore, why give priority to non-event ratings (eg. ECF).

[Roger de Coverly]

Therefore, why give priority to non-event ratings (eg. ECF).

There's quite a number of players where the FIDE ratings can be 200 points wrong or more. Events paired purely on FIDE ratings have something of the effect of lottery pairings. Theo Khoury for example is now ECF 2191 but FIDE 2020.so he's one of the ones with a closer difference.

[Paul Dupré]

you played 56 moves and had 20 minutes left, I played 55 moves and had 38 minutes left.

Oh dear, I forgot I changed my way of recording time on my scoresheets several year ago. So, I admit I got that wrong. We must have been using analogue clocks as the time showing is you 2hrs 20mins and me 1hr 38mins. I didn't record what we started with.

[Ian Thompson]

If the organisers had used FIDE ratings throughout would it have been fair to let a player play in the U2000 because their FIDE rating was 1790 when they have an ECF rating of 2068?

Did I say that, I don't think that was even inferred !!!

If

Personally, I think FIDE event should mean FIDE ratings...

doesn't imply use of FIDE ratings for section eligibility as well as your clear desire that they be used for pairings what would you use for section eligibility?

ECF ratings are based on short standard events of maybe 2 or 3 hours maximum

Since I stopped playing evening league chess at the end of the 2015/16 season, I've played 101 ECF rated games. None of them had a maximum playing time of 3 hours or less - the fastest was 100 minutes for the game + 10 seconds increment per move and the next fastest 90 minutes for the game + 30 seconds increment per move.