Originally Posted by
Aris Marghetis
In my humble opinion, I would say no. It seems to me there's a vast difference between UNR and whatever any experienced player has "slipped" to. I don't know what better idea to provide, as you do have a point, it's very uncomfortable for such players to return, just to get wiped out their first few tournaments back until their rating re-stabilizes somewhere lower than before. Maybe Paul could consider some king of "inactivity" formula, but my first instinct is to vote against that, as many people with an inactive CFC rating are still at the same (or even better) playing level, as they might have stayed active but online. But still a good question.
The other situation, which was more what I had in mind, is when a player has a low rating they had as a child when they may have played a few tournaments, and perhaps they've become significantly stronger in the meantime though study or online play etc. so they're now somewhat loath to resume over-the-board play with the rating they had as a child, which may seem quite irrelevant.
In some of these cases, the under-1400 and 5+ years of inactivity would cover it - I'm happy to learn of this rule. Thanks to all who responded.
Marcus Wilker
(Annex Chess Club, Toronto)
GTCL Secretary