Originally Posted by
Michael von Keitz
On the topic of ratings, with the FIDE system now sitting at a floor of 1000, coupled with the fact that the rating list is continually increasing its frequency, with imminent plans for monthly publications, it seems the CFC might wish to consider the eventual abandonment of its domestic rating scale, or, less drastically, promoting the FIDE rating system ahead of its own. Among other benefits, this would allow for a natural transition from domestic certificates to FIDE certificates for higher titles. More importantly, it encompasses a facet of the appeal attributable to online chess - a standard, international measure of chess skill. As long as that measure is perceived to hold weight, the question of whether it actually holds any real value is moot.
For those that feel that FIDE might be motivated to simply cut the legs out from under us and offer their services directly to tournament organizers, keep in mind that we serve as a domestic agent for their organization. Without revenue, we die, leaving FIDE with no official body operating on its behalf in Canada.
Now, in the case of a total conversion, what would be required to achieve the wholesale adoption of the FIDE system?
1. A willingness on FIDE's part to facilitate the conversion.
The prospect of increased revenues seems to make this palatable.
2. Relatedly, a reliable metric for conversion, or a readily-understood means of doing so on a case-by-case basis.
Again, with monetary motivations, it seems a means can be found.
3. Inclusion of all CFC members.
Talk of bringing the FIDE rating floor as low as 650 (approximately equivalent to a BCF rating of 0) is seriously being discussed. However, even if the floor remains at 1000, all members are afforded the opportunity to compete in rated events until such time as they achieve rateable results. With a skill-level of 1000 being roughly equivalent to a competent beginner, it seems
any member of the organization should be capable of achieving it in fairly short order.
4. A clear benefit to the CFC.
No longer would the CFC need to worry about tinkering with a system that some decry as being irreparably broken, instead, wholly leaning on a system recognized the world-over as the international standard for measuring chess ability. More importantly, unlike the CFC, which relies on voluntary efforts (with mixed results), FIDE invests in the study and modification of its rating system, with results to show for it. For those that fear a loss of revenue, rating fees could still be garnered nationally, with the CFC simply serving as a "FIDE rating broker," so to speak. Moreover, the membership database could be used as a means of categorizing information, as opposed to hosting it.