Junior ECF Grades August 2010

[Alex Holowczak]

I see what you mean:

http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=416681

Who was the arbiter?

The arbiter was Peter Purland. He decided it was best for him to play an unrated player, rather than a fourth FIDE-rated player who was about 1600ish, on the basis that even if he won, his part-rating would have been low.

[LozCooper]

I see what you mean:

http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=416681

Who was the arbiter?

The arbiter was Peter Purland. He decided it was best for him to play an unrated player, rather than a fourth FIDE-rated player who was about 1600ish, on the basis that even if he won, his part-rating would have been low.

Was the player away of this and did he have a say in what happened?

[Alex Holowczak]

I see what you mean:

http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=416681

Who was the arbiter?

The arbiter was Peter Purland. He decided it was best for him to play an unrated player, rather than a fourth FIDE-rated player who was about 1600ish, on the basis that even if he won, his part-rating would have been low.

Was the player away of this and did he have a say in what happened?

Yes, it was explained to him. I don't know if he had a say in it, but I seem to remember he was in agreement.

[Alan Walton]

Just looking at the FIDE details of William, and his 3 results from said event, has given him a very poor part rating anyway, so wouldn't a victory against a 1600 would have improved this part rating quite significantly

Currently he has played 8 rated games (2 part ratings), if he gets another part rating of 2000 from 3 games, he will still only have an initial rating of around 1810, if he beat the 1600 his initial rating may have been around 1770, wouldn't have had a better chance of gaining more points whilst his K equalled 25, than have to play another event to initialise his rating

Seems are very strange decision for him not to play the rated player

[Alex Holowczak]

I think there's some important information being missed here.

You need at least 1 point from at least 3 games to get a part-rating. So as far as I'm aware, that part-rating of 1300odd doesn't count. He needs a part-norm with 4 more rated games to get a rating.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I think there's some important information being missed here.

You need at least 1 point from at least 3 games to get a part-rating. So as far as I'm aware, that part-rating of 1300odd doesn't count. He needs a part-norm with 4 more rated games to get a rating.

That only applies if it's your first part-rating. It isn't, so it will end up counting.

[Alan Walton]

I would agree with Jack on this one, FIDE have already published it on their website so it will definitely count unfortunately

[Alex Holowczak]

I think there's some important information being missed here.

You need at least 1 point from at least 3 games to get a part-rating. So as far as I'm aware, that part-rating of 1300odd doesn't count. He needs a part-norm with 4 more rated games to get a rating.

That only applies if it's your first part-rating. It isn't, so it will end up counting.

Well, at least this gives a chance for him to have a third go at it.

E.g. (1987*5 + 1500*4)/9 ~= 1750
(1987*5 + 1322*3 + 1900*5)/13 = a number higher than 1750

Presumably this gives him the opportunity to play in another tournament; more to his natural 1900ish standard, and then enter the rating at a higher rating than he would have done otherwise.

[Alan Walton]

Alex, it would be approximately 1770, and the other calc is 1800

If he was 1770 rated and performed at 1900 in his next tournament he would be gaining approximately 25 points, so there is not really much difference other than him having a rating earlier and for 2 months able to enter FIDE tournaments with a lower rating and maybe gain more points quicker

FIDE ratings have a tendency to find their true rating if you are an active player (approx 40 games per annum), so it is all down to the player performing to his own ability and his rating would find its own way eventually

[Alex Holowczak]

Alex, it would be approximately 1770, and the other calc is 1800

Thanks, I didn't have a calculator to hand...

If he was 1770 rated and performed at 1900 in his next tournament he would be gaining approximately 25 points, so there is not really much difference other than him having a rating earlier and for 2 months able to enter FIDE tournaments with a lower rating and maybe gain more points quicker

FIDE ratings have a tendency to find their true rating if you are an active player (approx 40 games per annum), so it is all down to the player performing to his own ability and his rating would find its own way eventually

I think this may be the problem; I doubt he'd play 40 FIDE-rated games per year (based on the fact he's played 8 since June 2009). 54 ECF-graded games though...

[Alan Walton]

I used 40 games as a guideline, I play approximately 40 a year, 3 9-round tournaments (normally abroad) and 11 in the 4NCL, nowadays with Sean's tournaments you could easily play 30 games from these weekenders, but it would be his own choice to how committed he is to his chess, but as he is playing 60ish ECF games, maybe he should choose his weekend tournaments more around FIDE rating ones

[LozCooper]

I think there's some important information being missed here.

You need at least 1 point from at least 3 games to get a part-rating. So as far as I'm aware, that part-rating of 1300odd doesn't count. He needs a part-norm with 4 more rated games to get a rating.

That only applies if it's your first part-rating. It isn't, so it will end up counting.

That is correct as shown in the FIDE handbook http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/ ... ew=article

[Alex Holowczak]

I note the person in question is registered for the Anglian Avengers, but didn't play at the first weekend. Hopefully he'll be able to play in later rounds and improve his rating.

[Roger de Coverly]

Hopefully he'll be able to play in later rounds and improve his rating.

Noting that he's 2170 for 4NCL purposes on converted ECF, an actual rating of 1800 or thereabouts would plummet him down the Anglian order and out of the first team. I'm assuming he's not a junior by 4NCL rules.

[LozCooper]

I should mention that my motives for asking the question was purely to see if I could do anything to help those not playing in any international events, not to say what tournaments players should or shouldn't play in. If players aren't interested in getting ratings, don't have the time or any other reason etc then that's their business, but if anyone out there would like to aim for a rating but isn't sure how to go about it or what events to play in then I'd be happy to hear from them, either by private message or via [email protected] Apart from achieving a rating the experience gained from playing in international events, either over 9-10 days or in shorter events should help a player's development.