Resetting your rating?

[Alex Holowczak]

So how does it work for a Swiss? Players without FIDE ratings should get a part-rating, but are you going to not submit their results if they aren't members? If so, is this option available for a standard play Swiss?

I won't assume they'll get part-ratings, because I don't have a list of entries in front of me, or whether people will get the right number of games against rated opponents. In brief, as I understand it:
(1) You don't need to be an ECF member to play.
(2) All games will be submitted for FIDE-rating.
(3) You do need to be an ECF member for any achieved part-ratings you earn to appear on the FIDE website under the ENG flag. They'll still be there as they are for Turner.

I have a feeling that as far as most non-members are concerned, (1) is probably of more relevance to them than either (2) or (3).

[Sean Hewitt]

Practically everyone worth worrying about will be a member within 12 months, so hardly worth worrying about is it?

[Roger de Coverly]

I have a feeling that as far as most non-members are concerned, (1) is probably of more relevance to them than either (2) or (3).

Why isn't the event members only?

Practically everyone worth worrying about will be a member within 12 months, so hardly worth worrying about is it?

But what sort of member? By playing in a club blitz and getting a FIDE blitz rating, is the ECF expecting Gold membership from that player for ever?

[Alex Holowczak]

I have a feeling that as far as most non-members are concerned, (1) is probably of more relevance to them than either (2) or (3).

Why isn't the event members only?

Because the Chief Executive said it doesn't need to be.

Practically everyone worth worrying about will be a member within 12 months, so hardly worth worrying about is it?

But what sort of member? By playing in a club blitz and getting a FIDE blitz rating, is the ECF expecting Gold membership from that player for ever?

I was speaking to Sean via Facebook when he posted above, and I said that your reply would be asking exactly that question.

[Roger de Coverly]

Because the Chief Executive said it doesn't need to be.

As CEO and promoter of a scheme which tries to impose near compulsory ECF membership as a condition of playing organised chess, then why doesn't he follow the logic of the organisation's vote and his own scheme? It might well be that there will be fewer participants if membership is compulsory, but Council knew that when they voted and don't seem to care.

I was speaking to Sean via Facebook when he posted above, and I said that your reply would be asking exactly that question.

The answer being?

To summarise then:-

It is possible to run a club or county Blitz to get players on the new International Blitz list. This is mostly of benefit to existing ECF members with standard play ratings, since a non-member would have to pay £ 27 to the ECF in order to have such a rating published.

If you had twenty players for such an event and at least eight with ratings, it would presumably be more effective in establishing ratings to run two all play all sections rather than a nine round Swiss.

[Alex Holowczak]

Because the Chief Executive said it doesn't need to be.

As CEO and promoter of a scheme which tries to impose near compulsory ECF membership as a condition of playing organised chess, then why doesn't he follow the logic of the organisation's vote and his own scheme? It might well be that there will be fewer participants if membership is compulsory, but Council knew that when they voted and don't seem to care.

If you remember, it chiefly depended on the type of rated/graded events you play, and the costs associated with them. The ECF don't grade blitz games. The rating costs from FIDE are nil for a trial period. The extra task for the ECF is for Howard has to send an extra rating file off to FIDE, for a type of chess he didn't sign up for. He was quite happy to do this without requesting an increase in his honorarium. So there are no costs for the ECF by rating the British Blitz.

It is incredibly unlikely that anyone will play 9 rated games to get a new rating, so the ECF won't have to pay the 1 Euro rating-list fee, even if the players are members.

So the ECF has £0 costs, so why should the players need to be ECF members? That sounds like an entirely reasonable logic to me.

I was speaking to Sean via Facebook when he posted above, and I said that your reply would be asking exactly that question.

The answer being?

Why would either of us know the answer? I know what I know from asking Andrew Farthing by e-mail. Why don't you do the same?

[Roger de Coverly]

So the ECF has £0 costs, so why should the players need to be ECF members? That sounds like an entirely reasonable logic to me.

I thought membership was all about raising money for the ECF to pay for its Battle office and because membership of the ECF is seen in some quarters as a good thing.

Am I right in thinking that it will cost an additional £ 27 for a non-member to have a Blitz rating or part rating displayed on the FIDE site?

[Alex Holowczak]

So the ECF has £0 costs, so why should the players need to be ECF members? That sounds like an entirely reasonable logic to me.

I though membership was all about raising money for the ECF to pay for its Battle office and because membership of the ECF is seen in some quarters as a good thing.

Maybe you thought wrong?

I think Andrew may have thought along the same lines as Sean: given the new funding arrangements are coming in in September, and it's costing us nothing, what difference does it make?

Am I right in thinking that it will cost an additional £ 27 for a non-member to have a Blitz rating or part rating displayed on the FIDE site?

I've already answered that.

I've got things to do this afternoon, so maybe if you have questions, e-mail Andrew to see what the answers are.

[Roger de Coverly]

I think Andrew may have thought along the same lines as Sean: given the new funding arrangements are coming in in September, and it's costing us nothing, what difference does it make?

One of the reasons to oppose membership of a compulsory nature is that it discourages participation. Does the CEO agree with this? I have no desire to indulge in private conversations, let the reply, if there is one, be in public.

So how will the rating process work?

Organiser sends rating report to IRO
IRO sends rating report to FIDE rating office
FIDE rating office processes report
Office/Home Director sends "remove all these people" memo to FIDE (via IRO?)
FIDE rating office "suspends" non ECF members

I've already answered that.

So the answer is "Yes"?

I won't say that it's pointless for a club to run a rated Blitz, but contrary to first impressions, there is a financial sting in the tail.

[Rob Thompson]

Roger, can I ask what relevance any of this questioning has to do with resetting your rating?

[Roger de Coverly]

Roger, can I ask what relevance any of this questioning has to do with resetting your rating?

None whatsoever.

The hijack on the topic of Blitz ratings and membership started from this

For the coming year I suggest that all club-night blitz tournaments be submitted for FIDE Rating. But, of course to get on the FIDE List as ENG, people will have to be members. I have suggested there be a lower fee for those players who will be FIDE Rated solely on the blitz or rapidplay list. But I have received no response. Well, it's breaking news.

and this

We're likely to be holding the British Blitz in Birmingham next March, and I've been speaking to Andrew Farthing about this. It'll be FIDE-rated, and there's no requirement for anyone to be an ECF Member to play in it.

Both would be better placed under ECF issues or Future Events.

[Alex Holowczak]

Stewart mentioned Blitz ratings and membership, and I thought it appropriate to correct him on the one point where I had information Stewart was privy to, on the basis that Stewart's point could have misled. The off-topicness could quite easily have ended there.

[IM Jack Rudd]

The off-topicness could quite easily have ended there.

This is an internet message board. When was the off-topicness ever going to end there?

[Alex Holowczak]

The off-topicness could quite easily have ended there.

This is an internet message board. When was the off-topicness ever going to end there?

Yes, I guess that's true...

[Stewart Reuben]

I think I made a mistake in an earlier posting in response to a point made by E Michael White.
I originally suggested that the number of games where a player's FIDE Rating turned over was 750/K. E Michael suggested this was wrong as each game is now rated separately and the original numbers were published when ratings were averaged. I agreed with him.

On further thought, I think I was right in the first place. In each game a player gains or loses points and this gain or loss is cumulative. For blitz and rapidplay K=20 will be used. Thus the rating will turn over in 38 games. That isn't a large number for blitz and I have written a new rule which has been published. The full text of the statement about the new FIDE initiative can be found on the FIDE website.

I am no statistician and, if wrong, would welcome correction. Nobody in FIDE has challenged the original premise.