English Chess Forum

Alex Holowczak wrote:This notwithstanding, if ECF grades were on a rolling, live basis, and incorporated previous grading history as it went, then in the lighthouse men problem, the grades would, too, converge. The second issue is how often you produce a new grading list. Do it live, and it converges. Do it after a year, and you could overshoot.

Finally, you get to the position I stated some 15 years ago, or more....that is

Why can the USCF produce updated ratings each month, when we could only once a year?

Is the ECF incompetant?

Paul Dupré wrote:Finally, you get to the position I stated some 15 years ago, or more....that is

Why can the USCF produce updated ratings each month, when we could only once a year?

Is the ECF incompetant?

I don't think the issue of result reporting is anything to do with the ECF, actually.

When the ECF switched from annual "bundles" to just reporting the results, quite a few graders revolted. One story I'm familiar with is that the Birmingham League Grading Committee resigned en bloc, and the replacement Grader did it in much less time than the Committee ever did. This notwithstanding, this was a nationwide issue, I gather.

When bringing in six-monthly lists, graders complained of an increased workload, even though they were reporting the same number of results, but in two halves.

League graders don't get appointed by the ECF, they get appointed by leagues. The ECF can only do grading with the information graders are prepared to supply it with. Six-monthly lists were hardly welcomed with open arms.

Alex Holowczak wrote:When the ECF switched from annual "bundles" to just reporting the results, quite a few graders revolted.

Yeh, I always knew that there was a lot of revolting graders out there...

Some of them didn't even have a PC...

Maybe, I will set up an alternative Grading System. Where all congresses and leagues send me their grading submissions and I update after each event. That's how it should be.

I can't believe the ECF make a pile of money from published Grading Lists.

Alex Holowczak wrote:I don't think the issue of result reporting is anything to do with the ECF, actually.

When the ECF switched from annual "bundles" to just reporting the results, quite a few graders revolted. One story I'm familiar with is that the Birmingham League Grading Committee resigned en bloc, and the replacement Grader did it in much less time than the Committee ever did. This notwithstanding, this was a nationwide issue, I gather.

When bringing in six-monthly lists, graders complained of an increased workload, even though they were reporting the same number of results, but in two halves.

League graders don't get appointed by the ECF, they get appointed by leagues. The ECF can only do grading with the information graders are prepared to supply it with. Six-monthly lists were hardly welcomed with open arms.

So, clearly being bold is new for the ECF. Why didn't they have the balls previously?

Since, I have been a grader, I have only submitted results - what's so difficult?

What will it take to get monthly on-line grades?

Who do I have to eliminate?

Paul Dupré wrote: What will it take to get monthly on-line grades?

Who do I have to eliminate?

I don't think you can do monthly grades without switching to an Elo method or similar. Juniors and new players don't have grades until the six-monthly consolidation and recursion is run. The best that could be done is an estimate of what the next grade will be. Treating all juniors as new players was a backwards step if the objective was to speed the reliable reporting of new grades.

Elo based systems usually impose the constraint that no rating is published until a minimum number of games have been played against players with ratings. The ECF, by contrast, will award a grade after 9 games, regardless of who they are against, provided at least one player has played against other graded players.

The question was 'What will it take'.

If the ECF board have got no future plans to have Monthly Grades, then they need to be removed. End of.......

I do NOT understand all this stagnation when there's work to be done.....going around in circles will NEVER achieve anything.

Who are the muppets on the ECF Board, that just sit around drinking tea and eating cupcakes.

Paul Dupré wrote:By the way who's stupid idea was it to use iteration.

That would be me. I'm sorry that you think that fixing the problem of under-rated juniors was stupid.

Paul Dupré wrote:Who are the muppets on the ECF Board, that just sit around drinking tea and eating cupcakes.

That would also be me though, for the record, I don't drink tea.

Paul Dupré wrote:

Alex Holowczak wrote:This notwithstanding, if ECF grades were on a rolling, live basis, and incorporated previous grading history as it went, then in the lighthouse men problem, the grades would, too, converge. The second issue is how often you produce a new grading list. Do it live, and it converges. Do it after a year, and you could overshoot.

Finally, you get to the position I stated some 15 years ago, or more....that is

Why can the USCF produce updated ratings each month, when we could only once a year?

Is the ECF incompetant?

What do you think about Yorkshire's Chessnuts live grades?

My suggestion would be a total transfer to an ELO type system, like Scotland and Wales. Makes sense does it not.

We in Scotland also publish (on website) current grade which is updated regularly through the year. So a player will have an annual grade and a current grade. The annual grade is the one used for competition, the current grade is for fun (unless you are dropping like a stone )

Andrew Bak wrote:What do you think about Yorkshire's Chessnuts live grades?

So, not only are we (ECF) the poor relation to Yorkshire (to be expected really), but also Scotland.

When are the ECF board going to stand up and just admit how useless they are. I mean really, iteration to help with the junior grade lag. I bet 20 or 30 people thought that was a good idea. It's laughable that anyone would come up with this idea, let alone vote for it. Why is grading NOT taken seriously.

Live grades are essential in any well run Federation. With monthly as a minimum. Yes, minimum. After each event is preferable.

Penalties for congresses and leagues that breach the 30 day deadline - not as current, a 2½ percent discount for payment within 30 days. Where's the incentive.


I would especially like to here from anybody who's a member of any other Federation - that has a more professional attitude towards grading/rating their members.

Andrew Bak wrote:What do you think about Yorkshire's Chessnuts live grades?

Good, the website works. However, but it's not very professional.

The colours are almost as bad as CCF World.

Patrick McGovern wrote:We in Scotland also publish (on website) current grade which is updated regularly through the year. So a player will have an annual grade and a current grade. The annual grade is the one used for competition, the current grade is for fun (unless you are dropping like a stone )

Yeah maybe, the menu moves when you hover, so again NOT professional.

However, I have to say going by this Sample page. I like pictures - we really lack creativity at the ECF.

I created this webpage (in JavaScript) some years ago, for the 4NCL. With idea of adding photos later.