Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 55 of 55

Thread: 37A - Underrated Juniors

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Garland Best View Post
    What code is the software written in?
    Pretty sure it was Visual Basic. The OLD Visual Basic.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred McKim View Post
    Bill there are so many kids playing now in tournaments, that I think that starting them at 1000 would lead to some real inflation in certain areas (especially elementary children - might be OK for junior high and high school)). I've run kids tournaments for 30 years and I can tell the sifference between a 400, 600, 800 and 1000 player.

    Rule 716 Applies to low rated players. Established players won't ever go below 800 once they get there and will never go below their highest rating if below 800. Provisional players will never go below 200.

    At one time we had a rule that
    a) if a player below 1200 had a performance rating (on 5 games or more) of 1200 or above their pre tournament rating would be considered 1200.

    b) if a player below 1200 had a performance rating (of 5 games or more) above their pre tournament rating (but less than 1200), the performance rating would be their new rating.

    These rules only applied to permanent players, but I don't see any reason why they shouldn't apply to provisional players also.

    I think we should increase the minimum rating to 400 (this would equate to someone who has just learned the rules).

    Again, we're not even sure we can modify the rating system at the moment.

    It would be possible to manually increase all of the modifed ratings each week to some minimum (besides 200), but I think 1000 as a start is too high...
    I don't really agree with changing it for provisional players - their ratings can already fluctuate a lot.

    Rather, I think it's time we considered a FIDE Rule. Games vs. Unrated players DO NOT COUNT towards your rating. You might even expand this to include provisional rated players.

    The different K-factors is a good idea but figuring out where to draw the line should be fun.

    The ratings committee was Robert Hamilton, myself and Pierre Denommee. The result was the one-time ratings boon, since that was exactly all that we could get Pierre to agree to, and he was ratings auditor at the time. Then he stopped doing anything related to that committee so we didn't end up doing any long-term monitoring.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    2,158
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    I'm not a fan of the "games vs Unrated" don't count in CFC events.

    Back in the days of FIDE ratings only being 2200+, you could assume that most FIDE tournaments were significant and players would "try" vs unrateds.

    If this rule was in place for insignificant events, players could throw games to unrateds and face "no consequences". Then manipulate the ratings by playing them with artificially higher ratings.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    694

    Default

    Bill, welcome to the discussion. Glad to have you aboard.
    As I'm sure you know my basic aim is to accelerate the rating gains of rapidly rising players, particularly juniors, and if possible to mitigate the rating point losses of their unfortunate opponents. I will support almost any idea you come up with to address this issue.
    My gut feeling is that such a measure need not generate rating inflation. We had inflation in the system according to Roger Patterson's analysis but I believe that with the elimination of the participation points as of the 2010 AGM we should start to see mild deflation as players generally retire with higher ratings than when they started playing.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William G. Doubleday View Post
    Hello all

    I still don't know how our software works, but I had an exchange with Fred McKim about the hard to understand paragraph in the handbook regarding unrated players. Apparently Fred and Johnathon Berry built in a deflation of 200 points into the calculations many years ago. If this is still hidden in the program, it could be part of the reason why ratings from juniors tournaments come out so low.

    I don't have any faith in ratings below 1000 and would support starting new players at 1000 based on a phantom five games.

    Another idea I am considering is a scaled k factor starting high (maybe 64) for the lowest rated and dropping gradually to 16 at 2200 and above. This would speed the rise of weak players as they improve and would take fewer points away to fund the rise.

    Bill Doubleday
    Thank you, Bill!

    You hit the nail on the head!

    We need to understand the root cause of underrated Juniors.
    Ridiculously low ratings - is one of the reasons.

    We all understand the meaning of different levels of rating:
    2000 - expert,
    1800 - A class,
    1600 - B class,
    1400 - C class.
    There is a certain set of chess skills corresponding with each class.
    If the rating difference is 200 points, we could expect 3-1 score in 4 games match.
    If the rating difference is 400 points, we could expect 4-0 score in 4 games match.

    But what is the meaning of rating of 800?
    Or 300?
    Could we expect that a player rated 800 will consistently beat a player rated 300?

    I could show a dozens examples to the contrary...

    I would think, if a player could record the moves and play with clocks, he deserves a rating of 1000.
    If another player could consistently beat this beginner player, he deserves a rating of 1400 - C class.

    Let's leave ratings below 1000 for CMA...
    Thanks,
    Michael Barron

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •