5B7 - NEW MOTIONS-Games Played Outside the CFC (Moved Paul Leblanc seconded Denommee)

Motion 5B7. Motion regarding rating of games played outside the CFC

Moved by Paul Leblanc seconded by Pierre Denommee:

Handbook article 436 pertains to CFC members applying to have their results in foreign FIDE rated events rated by the CFC for a fee of $25 provided the CFC is notified a month in advance. I move that FQE and USCF events be added to this article. In the same article, new CFC players with USCF or FIDE ratings are started with whichever of those ratings under which the player has played the most recent games. I move to add FQE to that criteria. Some editorial changes to the wording would be necessary so that FQE members are not referred to as foreign players or non-residents.

I think this is self-explanatory but I would be happy to respond to any suggestions or concerns

The usual "politically correct" term is "players from non-affiliated provinces" or "provinces without a provincial affiliate". I suppose some might think it referred to Saskatchewan but...

I don't think there is any correct way to word this without using FQE, as the "group" has to have a sufficiently established rating system that we are willing to accept it on par with our own.

I am curious about how this works. It will be rated using the player's performance rating in the non-affiliated event? Or the whole non-affiliated event will be rated? If players other than the cfc player requesting to be rated, do we need consent from other players to have them rated? It may have been explained in the cfc handbook. Again, I cannot access the handbook, cfc site is still down.

CFC and FQE ratings are recognized as being equal by most TD. It is possible to rate CFC using the FQE rating of the opponents because those are comparable.

I like this motion and will vote for it.

Usually, FIDE, USCF and FQE ratings are lower than CFC rating. That means, a player likely will lose rating in these events. That means, normally, a player is not suppose to apply for this, unless his CFC rating is too low. Interesting, how many players applied for this last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Lo

I am curious about how this works. It will be rated using the player's performance rating in the non-affiliated event? Or the whole non-affiliated event will be rated? If players other than the cfc player requesting to be rated, do we need consent from other players to have them rated? It may have been explained in the cfc handbook. Again, I cannot access the handbook, cfc site is still down.

---

Still want to know how this works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Victor Plotkin

I like this motion and will vote for it.

Usually, FIDE, USCF and FQE ratings are lower than CFC rating. That means, a player likely will lose rating in these events. That means, normally, a player is not suppose to apply for this, unless his CFC rating is too low. Interesting, how many players applied for this last year.

---

I don’t believe that anyone has used this provision in the last few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Lo

I am curious about how this works. It will be rated using the player's performance rating in the non-affiliated event? Or the whole non-affiliated event will be rated? If players other than the cfc player requesting to be rated, do we need consent from other players to have them rated? It may have been explained in the cfc handbook. Again, I cannot access the handbook, cfc site is still down.

---

Only the requesting player would be rated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

Only the requesting player would be rated.

---

Vlad, thanks.

I'm not in favor of this one mostly because I'm not in favor of doing this sort of thing for any rating system other than FIDE.

I am more interested in the possibility of quarterly "updating" the cfc quick rating with reference to the CMA rating. Most tournament suitable for cfc quick rating are junior tournaments. I believe the cfc quick rating is a pool of dead water now. I organize junior tournaments and rate short game tournaments by CMA instead of cfc quick rating. Not that I do not want to use the cfc quick rating, just that the cfc quick rating is too far off from the junior players' real rating that it is a waste of money and time to use it.

Its not really possible as that would be comparing apples and oranges. I recall objecting when active ratings were lumped in with blitz ratings. I feared that they would slide into irrelevance and that is what happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec

Its not really possible as that would be comparing apples and oranges. I recall objecting when active ratings were lumped in with blitz ratings. I feared that they would slide into irrelevance and that is what happened.

---

Vlad. I think that Quick Chess Tournaments are more frequent than Active Chess used to be. You can ask Bob G, but I'm sure he'll agree with me. We have never used the ratings to compare players nationally, and I suspect rating pools are far more prevalent here than in the Regular ratings. I have asked Bob to update the Quick ratings (Paul has no objection) to fall more in line with their regular rating under certain circumstances. Bob might have an update on when that will take place.