Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: 4I Rating Auditor's Report

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    1,976
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default 4I Rating Auditor's Report

    This is a place holder for Paul LeBlanc's Report

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    624

    Default

    First a big thank you to Vincent Chow for developing a software tool for me to measure the health of the rating system.
    For 5 years until last year Roger Patterson had maintained a similar system for me and we felt it was time that the CFC owned the analysis tool and Vincent is currently fine tuning it on a contractual basis with the CFC.
    Paul Leblanc
    Treasurer, Chess Foundation of Canada
    CFC Rating Auditor
    CFC Governor

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    624

    Default CFC vs FIDE vs USCF Ratings

    Some interesting ideas have been raised by Victor Plotkin. He makes an argument that CFC ratings are somewhat higher than FIDE and USCF ratings and that presents some difficulties when entering foreign tournaments or when foreign players enter CFC tournaments.
    I did some work on this issue a few years ago and came to the same conclusion. Neither my work nor Victor's work is exhaustive and neither of us are prepared to say that decisive action is necessary. The solution might not be as simple as chopping 50-60 points off everyone's rating as there are probably other considerations such as whether the gap in ratings is higher for stronger players.


    I tweaked the rating regulations over the past 2-3 years to accommodate related issues. Now, CFC members with FIDE/USCF/FQE ratings 200 points higher than their CFC ratings can apply to have their CFC rating adjusted to match their other rating. There have been 8 or 9 juniors who took advantage of this option. Also, it is now CFC policy to start players rated under the FIDE, USCF or FQE system at their most current foreign rating when entering a CFC rated event.
    Paul Leblanc
    Treasurer, Chess Foundation of Canada
    CFC Rating Auditor
    CFC Governor

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    624

    Default Under-Rated Juniors

    This is a very popular topic and has plagued me since I became rating auditor 7 years ago.

    First, the good news: the situation is better since the introduction of the bonus point system in early 2012. Since then the average junior rating has increased by more than 100 points with no impact on the overall health of the system. I regularly see young players gaining 100-200 points in a single event.
    The enforcement of the time control criteria for regular rated events has also had a role in reducing the number of under-rated juniors. For several years the CFC turned a blind eye to 30 minute all-junior events being submitted for regular rating. Since most of the players in these events were unrated or very low rated, the practice introduced hordes of low rated juniors to the system. This no longer happens.

    But yes, they are still out there lurking and preying on the rest of us on their way up the rating ladder. This is rather like the animal kingdom, the natural progression of things where the weak are hunted down and eaten by predators.

    Hal Bond and others have suggested a rating floor. No ratings below a given level allowed or perhaps no ones rating allowed to sink below a specified level no matter how many losses. I have up to now resisted going down this path for two reasons:
    - it would seem to be inflationary to the system as a whole if points are gained against someone who doesn't lose points
    - it would create players with artificial ratings (rating doesn't go down no matter how many losses). Surely, this detracts from the accuracy of the rating system.

    Comments welcome.
    Paul Leblanc
    Treasurer, Chess Foundation of Canada
    CFC Rating Auditor
    CFC Governor

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    1,976
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Leblanc View Post
    This is a very popular topic and has plagued me since I became rating auditor 7 years ago.

    First, the good news: the situation is better since the introduction of the bonus point system in early 2012. Since then the average junior rating has increased by more than 100 points with no impact on the overall health of the system. I regularly see young players gaining 100-200 points in a single event.
    The enforcement of the time control criteria for regular rated events has also had a role in reducing the number of under-rated juniors. For several years the CFC turned a blind eye to 30 minute all-junior events being submitted for regular rating. Since most of the players in these events were unrated or very low rated, the practice introduced hordes of low rated juniors to the system. This no longer happens.

    But yes, they are still out there lurking and preying on the rest of us on their way up the rating ladder. This is rather like the animal kingdom, the natural progression of things where the weak are hunted down and eaten by predators.

    Hal Bond and others have suggested a rating floor. No ratings below a given level allowed or perhaps no ones rating allowed to sink below a specified level no matter how many losses. I have up to now resisted going down this path for two reasons:
    - it would seem to be inflationary to the system as a whole if points are gained against someone who doesn't lose points
    - it would create players with artificial ratings (rating doesn't go down no matter how many losses). Surely, this detracts from the accuracy of the rating system.

    Comments welcome.


    How about a memory of 12.5 games for players under 1000.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Will there be an effort to adjust players' Quick rating by their Regular rating? BC players' Quick rating is so lagging that it is practically not usable.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Charlottetown, PE
    Posts
    1,976
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lo View Post
    Will there be an effort to adjust players' Quick rating by their Regular rating? BC players' Quick rating is so lagging that it is practically not usable.
    A general adjustment to the Quick chess ratings was made about 4 or 5 months ago. Unless there is enough activity in an area to allow for three or four rated events per year, these ratings are likely to fall behind regular ratings, especially when there are lots of juniors.

    I think the Rating Auditor would be able to do special adjustments on a province by province basis, where it was warranted.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred McKim View Post
    A general adjustment to the Quick chess ratings was made about 4 or 5 months ago. Unless there is enough activity in an area to allow for three or four rated events per year, these ratings are likely to fall behind regular ratings, especially when there are lots of juniors.

    I think the Rating Auditor would be able to do special adjustments on a province by province basis, where it was warranted.
    I did a CFC rating search with the following filters - BC, All Players, Played a tournament within last year, Current members, Active rating, All Results. Below is the Active/Regular rating variance of the top 10 search results. I will talk to the Rating Auditor for his advise.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	BC_Active_Rating_2017-08-25.png 
Views:	67 
Size:	20.1 KB 
ID:	330

Posting Permissions

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