January 2012 grading list

[Christopher Kreuzer]

The ECF cannot be expected to tell every single chessplayer in England directly. It just ain't gonna happen. If you're running an event, and you want it to be graded, I think it is usually normal for the organiser to find these things out in advance, rather than running into unexpected difficulties further down the line. The ECF did all it could to inform those who would do the work that there were two lists per year. You wouldn't run a FIDE-rated event, and then grovel to FIDE by saying "I didn't know I had to register it 30 days in advance!" Rather, you find out as a matter of course before running it.

You miss the point. I'm not talking about a one-off event. I'm talking about events (such as internal championships) that happen every year, where the people submitting grading information work to the same timetable as previous years. You shouldn't expect such people to check every year to see if anything has changed.

Which organisation was this? The information had definitely been widely circulated to every ECF grader. Being one myself, the e-mails are in my inbox. The issue was voted on at Council, so the organisation would have had papers asking them to vote on this issue. (I assume they're ECF-affiliated?) That the organisation didn't know reflects badly on the organisation, rather than the ECF.

Why do you keep going on about graders? I'm talking about the next level down. The people at clubs and other organisations who submit information to the graders. How was information disseminated to them about these changes? The bit about ECF affiliation is a red herring. Some people receiving ECF papers briefly look at them and then file them away. Receiving voting papers on something that was (IIRC) voted on in October 2010, isn't the thing that gets people planning what to do for December 2011. All I'm after is some indication that communication efforts were made beyond just "tell the graders" and "assume that Council members will tell everyone else". I'm assuming at the moment, from what you have said, that this is all that was done.

If the organisation is not ECF-affiliated, does not have a grader on the ECF graders mailing list (which would only happen if he has changed his e-mail address), I'm struggling to see ways in which the ECF could communicate this -or indeed, anything! - with them.

The graders were not asked to communicate the changes to those they correspond with?

When the grading list comes out, or shortly thereafter, you'll be able to see exactly which games have not been graded. Well, you can see which games have been graded, and then work out which games haven't. I'm looking at what will become your new grading page as I write this, so I can see which games are there, and which aren't. You will be able to do this too.

That's nice. Wonder how long it will take everyone to find out about the new features? Word-of-mouth, I suppose. If you are allowed to say, how many games are there? There would be a maximum of 49 games, I think. I estimate that around 8 games will not have been submitted.

I'm aware of one instance where I had an e-mail, along with others, asking whether the issue of two grading lists per year had been fully discussed before it was brought in. They were seemingly oblivious to the change previously, and indeed, had no idea that they had had a vote on it. Or at least, they would have if they affiliated to the ECF...

There you go. Clearly a lack of communication somewhere. QED.

[Alex Holowczak]

You miss the point. I'm not talking about a one-off event. I'm talking about events (such as internal championships) that happen every year, where the people submitting grading information work to the same timetable as previous years. You shouldn't expect such people to check every year to see if anything has changed.

Why shouldn't I expect that? If you're running an event, and you want it graded, you find out the terms on which you get the event graded. This just seems to be basic organisational skills to me. Perhaps I expect too much of people?

Why do you keep going on about graders? I'm talking about the next level down. The people at clubs and other organisations who submit information to the graders. How was information disseminated to them about these changes? The bit about ECF affiliation is a red herring. Some people receiving ECF papers briefly look at them and then file them away. Receiving voting papers on something that was (IIRC) voted on in October 2010, isn't the thing that gets people planning what to do for December 2011. All I'm after is some indication that communication efforts were made beyond just "tell the graders" and "assume that Council members will tell everyone else". I'm assuming at the moment, from what you have said, that this is all that was done.

The proposal was put to ECF Council. The issue was discussed and they had a vote on it. If the organisation in question chose to ignore it, whose fault is that? I would like to think that organisations would discuss the way their votes are allocated on such issues with the clubs that compose them.

The graders were not asked to communicate the changes to those they correspond with?

Most organisations have an elected Grader. For example, the Birmingham League's grader is Dave Thomas. And a fine job he does too. In a report at our AGM in the summer, he made each club in attendance aware of this change, so any clubs would know that the new arrangements. I'm sure other organisations would do the same.

That's nice. Wonder how long it will take everyone to find out about the new features? Word-of-mouth, I suppose. If you are allowed to say, how many games are there? There would be a maximum of 49 games, I think. I estimate that around 8 games will not have been submitted.

The new features were another thing decided by Council, I believe, about two years ago. They would have happened sooner, but Carl never had enough time to do them. Which is fair enough, he's a volunteer. Again, your local organisation should have known about this.

There you go. Clearly a lack of communication somewhere. QED.

But on the bright side, we're going to Membership, so we'll have e-mail addresses for most of the Membership. At which point, such announcements can be made to all of the members at once. It can only help with communication.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

But on the bright side, we're going to Membership, so we'll have e-mail addresses for most of the Membership. At which point, such announcements can be made to all of the members at once. It can only help with communication.

Presumably an item like that would feature in something like a newsletter sent to all members. Did the change to the grading system get mentioned in the ECF newsletter (Chess Moves) that goes to Direct Members? I could look that up, but I'm sure someone has them all filed neatly away somewhere...

[Alex Holowczak]

But on the bright side, we're going to Membership, so we'll have e-mail addresses for most of the Membership. At which point, such announcements can be made to all of the members at once. It can only help with communication.

Presumably an item like that would feature in something like a newsletter sent to all members. Did the change to the grading system get mentioned in the ECF newsletter (Chess Moves) that goes to Direct Members? I could look that up, but I'm sure someone has them all filed neatly away somewhere...

Yes, I think it did appear a part of an AGM summary, but I can't say for certain when.

[Roger de Coverly]

Exactly right. Which is why we can't do it now. We don't have a membership scheme, and so the information is not available.

It nonsense to say there isn't a membership scheme already. What has the ECF being doing for the last ten years signing up 4NCL players at the start of the season? For that matter, what does the M in NMS and other MOs stand for?

The ECF has contact details for a reasonable percentage of English chess players and uses it to send them ChessMoves and membership reminders. For that matter until last year, it sent grading detail prints. So it could certainly have spammed any number of players with details of the grading changes.

[Alex Holowczak]

Exactly right. Which is why we can't do it now. We don't have a membership scheme, and so the information is not available.

It nonsense to say there isn't a membership scheme already. What has the ECF being doing for the last ten years signing up 4NCL players at the start of the season? For that matter, what does the M in NMS and other MOs stand for?

OK, so I generalised. But you know perfectly well what I mean. We have about 25-30% of graded players who are ECF members, as opposed to 85% or above.

[Peter Brace]

Has anybody received a grading check email from the ecf yet? I normally get one every July before the grades are published with a list of my game results so I can check for any errors before my grade is published. I've not recieved an email this month. Has anybody else had one?

[Roger de Coverly]

Has anybody received a grading check email from the ecf yet? I normally get one every July before the grades are published with a list of my game results so I can check for any errors before my grade is published. I've not recieved an email this month. Has anybody else had one?

They haven't said for certain, but I don't think they are sending them. What they may have done is to add the data to the website that used to be sent by email and in printouts before that . No previews have been published so we wait to see what has been developed.

[Roger de Coverly]

Yes, I think it did appear a part of an AGM summary, but I can't say for certain when.

I rather think it was in Andrew Farthing's summary online and/or in one of the issues of ChessMoves. It wasn't very helpful as it was technically incorrect by failing to make the point that the grade in July 2012 under a six monthly system won't be the same as it was under an annual system.

Here's the resulting thread

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2310

[Alex Holowczak]

Has anybody received a grading check email from the ecf yet? I normally get one every July before the grades are published with a list of my game results so I can check for any errors before my grade is published. I've not recieved an email this month. Has anybody else had one?

I can confirm that you won't get them. It is the intention that all players' results will be published online.

[Peter Brace]

Has anybody received a grading check email from the ecf yet? I normally get one every July before the grades are published with a list of my game results so I can check for any errors before my grade is published. I've not recieved an email this month. Has anybody else had one?

I can confirm that you won't get them. It is the intention that all players' results will be published online.

Thanks for your replies Alex and Roger. I'm surprised they're not mailing out a results check. I understand that players will will be able to see their results online after their grade is published but the results check was handy to correct any mistakes before the grades were published. My last year's results check contained errors and Richard Hadrell was able to correct them before the grade was published.

I suppose not doing the results check means the grades get published quicker.

[Alex Holowczak]

Thanks for your replies Alex and Roger. I'm surprised they're not mailing out a results check. I understand that players will will be able to see their results online after their grade is published but the results check was handy to correct any mistakes before the grades were published. My last year's results check contained errors and Richard Hadrell was able to correct them before the grade was published.

I suppose not doing the results check means the grades get published quicker.

The plan in the future is that the website will be updated (say) monthly, so that results can be checked as you go along. That way, you can constantly check!

I'm sure the list will be revised to correct errors, as normally.

So if you are of the opinion that this isn't ideal, then perhaps take comfort in the fact that the problem is about to disappear.

[Peter Brace]

The plan in the future is that the website will be updated (say) monthly, so that results can be checked as you go along..

That's good news. Might also be handy for congess organizers to give an ungraded player an estimated playing strengh if they have a few recent results on the website that can be checked.

[Peter Brace]

new grades are out!

[Nicky Chorley]

I've gone down . Oh well, at least it was only 2 points. Some of my good results aren't in yet. Hopefully I can get to 50ish for the August list.