FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Paul Dupré
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Sutton, Surrey

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Paul Dupré » Thu Apr 05, 2012 10:56 pm

Sean Hewitt wrote:
Paul Dupré wrote:Yes thanks very much - I have now calculated what he should be: 1803
page.png
Does anyone disagree with my calculations?
I'm afriad I don't think I do.
Sean, just on a point of order - is there a "don't" in there that should not be there. Should it be:
I'm afraid I think I do.
Makes more sense.
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

Paul Dupré
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Sutton, Surrey

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Paul Dupré » Thu Apr 05, 2012 11:02 pm

Scott Freeman wrote:
Finally, my Grandfather's name was Stanley Gordon Bennett.........! Not kidding! :lol:
I hate to say this but, the Bennetts are in my Ancestral tree as well - my Grandfather's name was also Bennett. But, I'm not going to say what his first name was. We may be related, if your Bennetts are from Blackpool.
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

Scott Freeman
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:42 am

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Scott Freeman » Fri Apr 06, 2012 4:48 pm

In answer to Paul Dupre, the rating report for the Jessie Gilbert B event in 2010 was produced and emailed to me by Jack Rudd (who was my assistant arbiter). I then forwarded it to the ECF Ratings Officer, Howard Grist. As I recall Jack used Swissmaster, which automatically links into the FIDE list and automatically produces a full FIDE report on request. I have cross checked the information in that report and it seems to be correct (ratings and rating codes). The URL for the FIDE web site report on the event is:
http://ratings.fide.com/tournament_repo ... nt16=48043

Please can anyone tell me if we have done anything wrong and, of course, I will take whatever action I can to correct it if so. Anyone can make a mistake although I can't see that it was us on this occasion. Paul used the word "again" in the post that Carl deleted about him feeling that it was us who mucked up. Paul, I am open to other issues if you want to raise them if anything else needs to be checked and possibly corrected.

Paul's further reference to me being "ostructive" (as he sees it) can, I think only refer to one issue going back to 2005 when we had an unfortunate misunderstanding over the county captaincy. There was nothing deliberate about anything and as I believe the chain of events will show - and there was nothing obstructive about it either, but I can see that both of us had a legitimate reason for feeling we had done nothing wrong. This has already been thrashed out on the CCF v Surrey thread, but the basic gist is that when the Surrey Open captain had failed to produce a team for the first match of the season in the Autumn of 2004, he resigned. Against my better judgement, I offered to run the team until such time as a new captain had been appointed. Whilst running the team they then qualified for the National Minor County stages (something that, ironically, had we failed to qualify, the issue would never have existed). At the next Surrey elections (which I was not present at as I was running a tournament) Paul was appointed as captain. This was after the SCCU stage but before the National stages. I thought my job was over as I had said I was running until the new captain was appointed, which I had done. Paul in turn, I discovered afterwards, had assumed I was continuing to the end of the season, which I can see was a reasonable assumption as he was not aware of what I had stated to the SCCA Secretary at the time I offered to take the job. Of course that situation was further complicated by the resignation of the SCCA Secretary before that AGM, thus lines of communication had collapsed.

I am more than happy to bury the hatchet with Paul if he wants to. In fact, until our "exchange of views" on the "CCF v Surrey" thread last year, I had no idea that there was any issue between us and saw him as someone I got on with. I am sure it was since those issues that once I gave him a lift home (I stand to be corrected) after an event of some sort - and I bumped into him in Tescos Purley one night and we had a friendly chat. The offer is there to meet and have a chat (I am happy to buy the drinks!) if he wants. Of course it is possible with his link with the Bennett's that we may be able to do this at the next family re-union! :D

Sean Hewitt
Posts: 2190
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Sean Hewitt » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:15 pm

Paul Dupré wrote:
Sean Hewitt wrote:
Paul Dupré wrote:Yes thanks very much - I have now calculated what he should be: 1803
page.png
Does anyone disagree with my calculations?
I'm afriad I don't think I do.
Sean, just on a point of order - is there a "don't" in there that should not be there. Should it be:
I'm afraid I think I do.
Makes more sense.
Paul - You are correct. I shall amend now!

User avatar
Peter D Williams
Posts: 839
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 2:15 pm
Location: Hampshire

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Peter D Williams » Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:34 pm

Krishna Shiatis wrote:
Paul Dupré wrote:
Scott Freeman wrote:I was pointed to this thread this morning and scanned it with a level of both concern at the mistake and amusement at certain comments. Can I correctly assume from the subsequent postings that Coulsdon did not muck up? Am happy to correct something or apologise if we have.
OK Scott, here's your chance to be useful for once. Tell me what you submitted for Sam Porter in the 2010 Jesse Gilbert 'B' event - in terms of who he played a what their rating was.

If you can't do this simple task, then I will have no alternatively than to assume you are a deliberately obstructive individual.

I do feel that I ought to say something here. I have known Scott now for many years - he is a really kind, genuine, helpful and lovely guy. He has organised countless chess tournaments and runs a very successful club. I have never known him to be obstructive (deliberately or otherwise) to anyone.
I agree well said Krishna.
when you are successful many losers bark at you.

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5412
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by LawrenceCooper » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:05 am

Sean Hewitt wrote:I think I have sussed it, or at least found another problem!

Martin Page appears to have played three rated events.

Surrey Major in April 2009 where he scored 3/4 against rated opposition under his correct FIDE code of 418382.

He then played in the Surrey Major of April 2010 and scored 0/3. This was rated as Martin Page 406376. However, this is an error as this FIDE code related to Adrian Archer-Lock. http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=406376. The ECF grading database tells us that it was Page who actually played http://www.ecfgrading.org.uk/?ref=11661 ... 1512505633

Finally, he played the Surrey Major in April 2011 where he scored 1.5/4 against rated opposition under the correct FIDE code.

So, the wrong code was been used at Surrey Major 2010 which is why these 3 games do not show against Page's record. As Adrian Archer Lock hasd a FIDE rating in April 2010 games against Page at Surrey in April 2010 were incorrectly rated as if they had been played against Archer-Lock. I suspect that it is this that has been corrected as these games should have been unrated. This will have a knock on effect on anyone who played Page at the 2010 event.

The matter is further complicated by the fact that the 1st part rating achieved in April 2009 is now more than 2 years old and so therefore is now discarded.

However this happened, it's difficult to see how any of this could be Coulsdon's fault.

Archer-Lock lost 30 rating points at Surrey in an event he didn't play in and this will have had a knock effect in all the tournaments that he has played subsequently. :oops:
The error involving the games of Page being rated against Archer Lock's rating code has, somewhat belatedly, now been reported to FIDE. I am now waiting for a reply from them.

With Sean's help I have also been tracking the disappearance of Barry Sandercock's rating. This appears to have been created by a domino effect involving Adam C Taylor whose rating disappeared thereby wiping out Barry's rating. Adam's rating disappeared as a result of a game against Kumar Dixit who lost his rating, possibly, although I'm not certain due to a game against Ian Mason (unrated) being initially rated as playing Ian C Mason.

Having only been the IRO since Saturday I do wonder what other surprises I will stumble on as I look at more events in detail :cry:

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5412
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by LawrenceCooper » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:07 am

Somewhat ironically, I've just received an e-mail from Confused.com which seems appropriate given my posting above :lol:

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19349
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:34 am

LawrenceCooper wrote: Having only been the IRO since Saturday I do wonder what other surprises I will stumble on as I look at more events in detail :cry:
Below the pool of "elite" players who take part in Opens and 4NCL, the pool of players taking part in internationally rated chess at the sub 2000 and below level does still seem rather small. The effect of this, as we see, is that one error can have quite a wide domino effect, even on apparently unconnected players.

Mick Norris
Posts: 8520
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Mick Norris » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:20 pm

LawrenceCooper wrote:Somewhat ironically, I've just received an e-mail from Confused.com which seems appropriate given my posting above :lol:
On the bright side, I assume no-one has yet suggested you should resign :lol:

Good luck with your new post
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Paul Dupré
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Sutton, Surrey

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Paul Dupré » Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:56 am

LawrenceCooper wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:05 am
Having only been the IRO since Saturday I do wonder what other surprises I will stumble on as I look at more events in detail :cry:
What happened to Paul from Wales, who was IRO a few years before you.
Any postings on here represent the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,
...and by the way the world is flat.

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5412
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by LawrenceCooper » Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:13 am

Paul Dupré wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:56 am
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:05 am
Having only been the IRO since Saturday I do wonder what other surprises I will stumble on as I look at more events in detail :cry:
What happened to Paul from Wales, who was IRO a few years before you.
No idea, this seems to be the most recent mention of him that I could find: https://www.welshccf.org.uk/article/426

Neil Graham
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: FIDE Rated In January NOT in March.

Post by Neil Graham » Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:03 am

Paul Dupré wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:56 am
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:05 am
Having only been the IRO since Saturday I do wonder what other surprises I will stumble on as I look at more events in detail :cry:
What happened to Paul from Wales, who was IRO a few years before you.
I think it fair to say that there were some problems whilst he was IRO - but these are now many years ago. No doubt if we were to compile a list of "what happened to?" it would take up a huge amount of space. There are thousands of chess players who simply disappear from the game having found more important things to do.

Post Reply