PDA

View Full Version : Bozo Dunking Corner



Basil
08-12-2009, 09:05 AM
Right. That's it. Ratings wingers. Belly-achers. Dribblers. Confusled road-to-nowhere men tormentors - this is your hole to talk about what the rating system should have you rated as.

Amir has just pronounced "that he came second at the Tin Cup and his ratings held or went down 20 points". He feels this is wrong.

Right here, is where he lists his opponents, their ratings, his rating at the beginning of the tournament, any other rated games in the period and states what his rating shoul;d be.

Should be a fantastic laugh.

Reason for the thread. I've only been on this board three years and I'm sick to faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa ...

Basil
08-12-2009, 09:06 AM
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa ...

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa ...

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa ...

Basil
08-12-2009, 09:07 AM
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaarking

death of would-be rating experts when the system has been detailed sufficiently, the counter-arguments have been addressed sufficiently or that other systems with merit have been acknowledged but passed over as equal.

Apart from thinking you (or England or the Peoples Republic of Blat) have a better system, what are you complaining about - 8 ratings points over your entire life? Are you underrated in Australia by 100 points? Come on!

Vlad
08-12-2009, 09:28 AM
I lost 38 points in the last period... I moved from #11 to #18 in the rating list... It is so unfair...

We should ban all the weekenders... We should ban all Queenslanders from playing in the weekenders... Especially the younger ones... :lol:

Desmond
08-12-2009, 09:40 AM
I lost 38 points in the last period... I moved from #11 to #18 in the rating list... It is so unfair...

We should ban all the weekenders... We should ban all Queenslanders from playing in the weekenders... Especially the younger ones... :lol:Last time my rating went up (good) and my ranking went up too (not good).

Basil
08-12-2009, 09:41 AM
... Especially the younger ones... :lol:
Now, that is the basis of a workable plan!

Denis_Jessop
08-12-2009, 12:34 PM
I haven't lost or gained any points for several years. I haven't played any games either. I still have a respectable looking rating for a bunny and the ?? adds an exotic touch. :cool:

DJ

Bill Gletsos
08-12-2009, 02:03 PM
Right. That's it. Ratings wingers. Belly-achers. Dribblers. Confusled road-to-nowhere men tormentors - this is your hole to talk about what the rating system should have you rated as.

Amir has just pronounced "that he came second at the Tin Cup and his ratings held or went down 20 points". He feels this is wrong.

Right here, is where he lists his opponents, their ratings, his rating at the beginning of the tournament, any other rated games in the period and states what his rating shoul;d be.I will save him the trouble.

Firstly he claims he lost those "20 points" in the 2008 Tin Cup.
He didnt play in the 2008 Tin Cup. :doh:
He did however play in the 2009 Tin Cup where he came equal second.


15/02/2009 Gold Coast Tin Cup 2009

1 Jim Rogers QLD 787 1.0
2 Daniel Torise QLD 1161 0.0
3 Alex Buciu QLD 914 1.0
4 David S Soul NSW 1044 1.0
5 Martin Jack QLD 1314 1.0
6 Matthew Gilpin QLD 1484 1.0
His pre tournament December 2008 rating was 1564.
His performance rating in the event is 1493.

The 2009 Tin Cup was his only event in the March 2009 rating period.

His March 2009 rating was 1555.
That is a drop of 9 points not 20. :hmm:

Phil Bourke
08-12-2009, 09:23 PM
My complaint is that the people who beat me aren't rated high enough, the ones I beat aren't rated high enough. Therefore everyone must be severely under rated. :)

Spiny Norman
09-12-2009, 04:07 AM
Look guys, you're ALL missing the point. Clearly the problem is that although I haven't played any games in the latest ratings period (meaning that my rating shouldn't have gotten any worse), it in fact stayed the same when it should have gone up ... because I WANT to have a higher rating and Glicko 2 clearly isn't doing that job properly.

Desmond
09-12-2009, 08:16 AM
Look guys, you're ALL missing the point. Clearly the problem is that although I haven't played any games in the latest ratings period (meaning that my rating shouldn't have gotten any worse), it in fact stayed the same when it should have gone up ... because I WANT to have a higher rating and Glicko 2 clearly isn't doing that job properly.
Well while kibitzing on the net, I* see lots of things that super GMs miss, so I must be at least high 2700s.


*with some minimal assistance from fritz

Alana
09-12-2009, 11:25 AM
My complaint is that the people who beat me aren't rated high enough, the ones I beat aren't rated high enough. Therefore everyone must be severely under rated. :)

:clap: :clap: :clap: AGREED!!! :clap: :clap: :clap:

especially all the VERY underrated juniors here in ACT who keep beating me! :O

michael.mcguirk
10-12-2009, 11:49 AM
:clap: :clap: :clap: AGREED!!! :clap: :clap: :clap:

especially all the VERY underrated juniors who keep beating me! :O

Fixed.

Thunderspirit
10-12-2009, 06:32 PM
I'm with Gunner on this one.

If you loose rating points, it because you played badly, or your opponent played better. If you think your opponent is underrated, then their victory actually helps address that.

For me I'm sick of the dialouge that argues that every kid is underrated. It's rubbish. I take my ratings (ACF and Rapid) very seriously. (Too seriously) In saying that I will play the same kids on Saturday at Street Chess knowing that most of them are already better players than me and that I have very little chance of winning rating points (unless I play very consistently, which I don't).

The last 3 times I've played Ethan Derwent, I've been busted but I've hung on, only because he is still young and time scrambles are hard when you aren't used to them. Before our game at ANUCC last night, I said, "You'll beat me sooner than later, becuase I'm a rabbit". Ian Rogers never complained about the rating system, he kept gaining points because he was consistent against his field of players. If I am consistent against players I am suppose to beat, then I will stay the same or will go up too...

I lost almost 100 rapid rating points last list. This was my fault, not Bill's as rating officer.

Phil Bourke
10-12-2009, 08:59 PM
Agree totally. My post was in jest, there are probably a half dozen reasons I don't play better and have a higher rating, but they all begin with I do or don't whatever.

Santa
02-01-2010, 03:31 PM
For me I'm sick of the dialouge that argues that every kid is underrated. It's rubbish.


'tis not rubbish.
Ratings measure how well players used to play, back when their games were actually played.

Junior players in particular are improving rapidly, specially when compared with older players.

If the December ratings includes tournaments completed up to Nov 30, and covers four months' play, then on average the games are two to three months old.

If juniors can maintain rating increases of 50 points or more per period, that supports the argument that they're underrated.

If they are underrated, and regularly play at a club such as BHCC, then so too would their regular victims be underrated, when comparing them with players from another club.

Garvinator
02-01-2010, 04:46 PM
'tis not rubbish.
Ratings measure how well players used to play, back when their games were actually played.

Junior players in particular are improving rapidly, specially when compared with older players.

If the December ratings includes tournaments completed up to Nov 30, and covers four months' play, then on average the games are two to three months old.

If juniors can maintain rating increases of 50 points or more per period, that supports the argument that they're underrated.

If they are underrated, and regularly play at a club such as BHCC, then so too would their regular victims be underrated, when comparing them with players from another club.
If you read Thunderspirit's quote, it says every kid. Of course every kid is improving is rubbish. In fact, in relation to the number of juniors who do play any kind of competitive chess, the numbers would be smaller than you think.
The reason that this topic gets a regular run is three fold:

1) Adults notice who the improving juniors are because they are usually the ones winning prizes, especially when the adults are deprived of the prizes because of said juniors
2) Adults do not like losing to juniors, especially the younger ones who are 'not supposed to play that well'. It is an ego crush that quite a few adults can not deal with.
3) The adults take the junior lightly, expecting an easy win, and so when they lose, it 'clearly' must be that the junior is under-rated, rather than because they did not play to their own standard.

Tony Dowden
02-01-2010, 06:26 PM
Feelings: Agreed, not every kid is under-rated but it sure feels that way!

Actual evidence at least some kids are stronger: Most of the uber-talented, computer tutored, highly coached Aussie juniors I've tangled with in the last four years are 200-300 rating points higher than when I played them (wow, even 400-500 points in a couple of cases) - on the Mainland: Morris, Illingworth, Yuan, Schon, Nakauchi, Setiabudi ... - and here in Tassie: Dyer, Horton, Bretag(x2), Carter ...

Perfect solution: Carry out a retrospective re-rating exercise for the last 3-5 years (like NZCF did last year)

Bill Gletsos
02-01-2010, 07:54 PM
Perfect solution: Carry out a retrospective re-rating exercise for the last 3-5 years (like NZCF did last year)It appears that all the NZCF did is introduce a version of the "intermediate rating" concept.

The use of "intermediate ratings" has been in effect in Australia since September 2004.

CivicChessMan
03-01-2010, 01:39 PM
NZCF have introduced a version of intermediate ratings in the latest rating list. See www.newzealandchess.co.nz for details.