Conversion of rating handicaps

[Andrew Zigmond]

Every year my club runs a handicap knockout where odds are given on the basis of the following rating differences;

1 – 14 Pts. No odds awarded a

15 – 29 Pts. Odds of the QBP.

30 – 49 Pts. Odds of the Queen’s Knight.

50 – 74 Pts Odds of the Queen’s Rook.

75pts or more Odds of the Queen

These odds date back to the days of 3 digit grades. Now we have 4 digit ratings I'm trying to work out what the differences should be. Last year I converted ratings back to 3 digits using the standard conversion (rating-600 then /8) but there must be a better way. Simply converting the differences doesn't work as a 2200 player would only give a 1500 player a pawn.

Context - I'm trying to rewrite club competition rules which haven't been touched for almost a decade to bring them into line with existing practice.

[Ian Thompson]

Every year my club runs a handicap knockout where odds are given on the basis of the following rating differences;

1 – 14 Pts. No odds awarded a

15 – 29 Pts. Odds of the QBP.

30 – 49 Pts. Odds of the Queen’s Knight.

50 – 74 Pts Odds of the Queen’s Rook.

75pts or more Odds of the Queen

These odds date back to the days of 3 digit grades. Now we have 4 digit ratings I'm trying to work out what the differences should be. Last year I converted ratings back to 3 digits using the standard conversion (rating-600 then /8) but there must be a better way. Simply converting the differences doesn't work as a 2200 player would only give a 1500 player a pawn.

Context - I'm trying to rewrite club competition rules which haven't been touched for almost a decade to bring them into line with existing practice.

I don't understand your problem. Surely you just multiply your grading differences by 8 to give an approximately equivalent rating difference.

[Roger de Coverly]

Surely you just multiply your grading differences by 8 to give an approximately equivalent rating difference.

Or perhaps 7.5 to reflect the ECF's conversion factor at the closure of the 3 figure system

[Ian Jamieson]

Every year my club runs a handicap knockout where odds are given on the basis of the following rating differences;

1 – 14 Pts. No odds awarded a

15 – 29 Pts. Odds of the QBP.

30 – 49 Pts. Odds of the Queen’s Knight.

50 – 74 Pts Odds of the Queen’s Rook.

75pts or more Odds of the Queen

These odds date back to the days of 3 digit grades. Now we have 4 digit ratings I'm trying to work out what the differences should be. Last year I converted ratings back to 3 digits using the standard conversion (rating-600 then /8) but there must be a better way. Simply converting the differences doesn't work as a 2200 player would only give a 1500 player a pawn.

Context - I'm trying to rewrite club competition rules which haven't been touched for almost a decade to bring them into line with existing practice.

I don't understand your problem. Surely you just multiply your grading differences by 8 to give an approximately equivalent rating difference.

Or 7.5 if you use the ECF’s ridiculous rating = grade * 7.5 + 700

[Andrew Zigmond]

I don't understand your problem. Surely you just multiply your grading differences by 8 to give an approximately equivalent rating difference.

So x8 but not with the +600? That makes sense and having done a few quick match ups from club appears to work. Thank you.

[Joey Stewart]

Do you get many players enter this competition under such incredibly unfair conditions? Giving queen odds is going to lose 100% of the time against any club player regardless of the rating difference

[Andrew Zigmond]

Do you get many players enter this competition under such incredibly unfair conditions? Giving queen odds is going to lose 100% of the time against any club player regardless of the rating difference

Queen odds games are relatively rare given the 75+ rating difference criteria; in an average year you would probably get more games played at evens. It's also played on a rapid control (45 minutes per player though I'm going to propose a move to 30+10 going forward) which levels things up a bit more. At the end of the day it's relatively informal and does give players a chance to sit opposite players they would likely never face otherwise.

Truth be told it is a bit of an anachronism in 2023 but it has a history within the club so it doesn't do any harm to keep it going.

[Roger de Coverly]

Do you get many players enter this competition under such incredibly unfair conditions?

My club experimented with a time handicap. That was using digital clocks to get an increment. The simple idea was that a player had the same amount of time for every game regardless of opponent. So if the lowest rated players had ten minutes, they always had that even when facing one another. If the highest rated had five, their game against the lowest rated would be five v ten, but five v five against one another. In part the idea was to reduce the amount of clock resetting needed between rounds.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Back in the 1980s when I started serious chess the local league had an annual handicap KO competition. Yes the highest odds here was also Queen, though it didn't happen that often and I recall at least one instance of the Queenless player winning.

Then as now, the games don't get rated (except with level handicaps, ie a normal game) so its just a bit of fun - don't take it too seriously.

[NickFaulks]

Then as now, the games don't get rated (except with level handicaps, ie a normal game)

Those games are submitted for rating? Just interested.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Well back then it was grading, but yes equal handicap encounters were treated just as any other "normal" game.

[Joey Stewart]

Back in the 1980s when I started serious chess the club had an annual handicap KO competition. Yes the highest odds here was also Queen, though it didn't happen that often and I recall at least one instance of the Queenless player winning.

I'd say that would have been still true up until about 4 years ago but since lockdown the training resources available have increased exponentially to the point that a modern 1100 level player will have knowledge of theory, middlegames, endings and a fair few tactics up their sleeves - in the past such players would have been a pushover, blundering material and tactics on almost every move and having no realistic way to improve their game.

The skill gap has closed immensely these days to the point that ratings are no longer a particularly accurate way to determine a players strength and certainly not to do any kind of fair handicap tournament other then, like you said, for a bit of fun.

[Chris Goodall]

Guys, I think Joey may have lost to an 1100 player online.

[John Reyes]

i know Paul Shand invited a chorlton chess club handicap event with 10 min each, but if you had a different of like when i was graded 100, and i had to play a player like 190, they had 1 minute and you had 19 minutes

[Matt Mackenzie]

Yes, the current handicap competition at my club is a time related one.