Jason Cao – CFC rating 1921

[Paul Leblanc]

Serge, please post a few examples of people under-rated by 300 or more points for further discussion.

[Andrei Botez]

Serge, please post a few examples of people under-rated by 300 or more points for further discussion.

Laceste Loren
Hui Jeremy
Qian Jack
Rathburn Hector
Tian Tian Geng
Ding Jill
MacInnis, Maggie Rose

[Paul Leblanc]

Serge, I'm only interested in Canadian under-rated players.

Andrei, I can provide some comments:

First, I don't consider Junior tournaments to be realistic rating indicators compared to mixed junior-adult events. So I will confine my observations to open event results.

Laceste: He had one super-result (Langley Open). I was there and watched some of his games. He does appear to have great potential but I'd want to see at least one more tournament before I'm convinced.

Hui: I escaped with a draw against him at the EAC tournament this year and he has repeated superior performance in more than one event. I agree with you that he is under-rated. Can I have my rating points back? (just kidding)

Qian. He had one super-result (Keres Memorial). I'd like to see at least one more tournament before I'm convinced.

Rathburn. Results in mixed/adult tournaments have been disappointing.

Geng. Two super-results this year (Grand Pacific Open and Keres). I agree with you that he is under-rated. A year ago I could beat him most of the time at the Victoria Chess Club, now I have to fight to stay even.

Ding. One super-result (Langley). I'd like to see at least one more tournament before I'm convinced, but I know Jill and she is another one of Greg Churchill's rapidly rising students.

MacInnis. No adult/mixed tournaments.

[Aris Marghetis]

This is a view which I have heard from a number of people who I have much respect for... though I cannot say I agree with it. I feel the rating system has a clear mandate and that is to provide a accurate representation of a person's strength, for the purpose of doing things like making sections/pairings, selecting qualifiers for closed events, ect.

However....
Would not a nationwide Grand Prix achieve your goal? Players could earn grand prix points for participation, and good results versus their peers. You would never lose grand prix points... there could also be prizes to motivate participation.

At first consideration, I don't believe that a nationwide Grand Prix would be feasible, both as to organization, but moreso because it would not mean much for any less active players who value their peak ratings. By the way, another advantage of rating floors would be to discourage sandbagging!

[Fred McKim]

I noticed this a while ago... his profile can be found under Rxxx Pxxxxxxx, though it does not have a rating. Anyone care to elaborate on this? Did he get banned or something? Why would someone's profile get semi-erased?

It's the result of an on-going financial situation with the Panjwani's and the CFC Business Office. I would hope this is resolved to everybody's satisfaction, shortly.

I was tempted not to answer this, so as to avoid embarrassment to anybody, and feel enough has now been said on the matter.

[Paul Leblanc]

Thank you Serge. I have time to comment on the first three and they are good examples to discuss.

Chiku-Ratte:
- only one CFC open event on record. Performance rating +446 compared to pre-tournament rating
- I would like to see at least one more very strong performance to be convinced but he does appear to be woefully under-rated
- a separate issue is the FQE vs CFC rating. I'm not current on the FQE/CFC relationship but perhaps the CFC should accept FQE ratings at par to avoid this sort of situation

Kraiouchkine:
- it became quite obvious that he was significantly under-rated by the time of his second open event (the 2004 Canadian Open). In his first 6 tournaments he over-performed by +215, +346, +127, +222, +139, +137.

Jiang:
- he started playing in open events in 2002 and by the 2003 BC Open it was obvious that he was significantly under-rated. In his first 4 open events he over-performed by +356, +107, +504, +490.

Because Kraiouchkine and Jiang were quite active, they moved up the rating list fairly quickly. This is not possible for players in some regions.

It seems to me that the rating system needs to identify over-performers such as these three and apply some sort of bonus point system to get their ratings in line with their performance in a more timely fashion.

[Ed Seedhouse]

Paul,
I believe you that the young man was some what under-rated, however I feel 1921 is excessive.

On the other hand you haven't played him. I have and as my club rating at the time was about the same as his I can tell you that I was worse throughout the game and only won on time by about two seconds.

I also watched Jason beat a local player with a FIDE rating over 2200 in a 15 minute game.

So those are some facts. You have feelings. Jason lost a few points in the Jack Taylor memorial and his current club rating, if I recall right, is around 1901 versus my own current 1916.

There is also another rising talent in Victoria whom you will also, I predict, hear about it due course. She's a few years older than Jason, but she beat him in a tournament game fairly recently and at the club the other week she took me four to two. She is fifteen and studying hard, and it's having results.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Ed:

Trying to keep her name secret, to keep her out of the spotlight a bit longer??

Is she going to be playing in any BC YCC Qualifier? Do you know if she's interested, and able, to come to Richmond Hill this July for the CYCC, should she qualify? Do you know if she intends to play in the Open section for her age group, or the girls' section ( ie. how good is she for her age from a gender neutral perspective )?

Just curious - we should be aware of our Canadian rising talents.

Bob

[Stuart Brammall]

On the other hand you haven't played him. I have and as my club rating at the time was about the same as his I can tell you that I was worse throughout the game and only won on time by about two seconds.

I also watched Jason beat a local player with a FIDE rating over 2200 in a 15 minute game.

So those are some facts. You have feelings. Jason lost a few points in the Jack Taylor memorial and his current club rating, if I recall right, is around 1901 versus my own current 1916.

There is also another rising talent in Victoria whom you will also, I predict, hear about it due course. She's a few years older than Jason, but she beat him in a tournament game fairly recently and at the club the other week she took me four to two. She is fifteen and studying hard, and it's having results.

Out of curiosity, why does the Victoria club not rate its games with the CFC? Surely it is clear that this problem would not have developed, or at least would be much less likely to develope if these games were rated?

[Fred McKim]

Out of curiosity, why does the Victoria club not rate its games with the CFC? Surely it is clear that this problem would not have developed, or at least would be much less likely to develope if these games were rated?

An interesting question. Any "club" tournament I've organized in the past 30 years that was rateable by the CFC (either standard time control or active time control) was open to CFC members and sent for CFC rating.

I think clubs should follow this policy. In fact Provincial Associations are not allowed to maintain rating systems (although I'm not sure if we would be prepared to take action on this, if someone tried).

No problems with clubs having ratings for 15 minute or 5 minute games.

Of course, that's just my opinion.