PDA

View Full Version : FIDE Ratings Floor



Denis_Jessop
01-11-2005, 09:17 PM
I note from the FIDE website that it is confirmed that the FIDE ratings floor will fall to 1401 from 1 January 2006.

DJ

four four two
02-11-2005, 10:12 AM
So basically anyone who can play 1300 Australian strength can get a FIDE rating. Kirsan must be hard up for cash to go about fundraising this way. :whistle:

ursogr8
02-11-2005, 12:56 PM
I note from the FIDE website that it is confirmed that the FIDE ratings floor will fall to 1401 from 1 January 2006.

DJ

I wonder if Brian Jones, et al, is still so blase (http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=62866&postcount=76) about the threat of FIDE ratings to the revenue infrastructure of Australian Chess. :hmm:


starer

Kevin Bonham
02-11-2005, 02:27 PM
Can't say I'm exactly quaking in my boots about it. If they start rating G60s on their main list, use a credible rating system and drop their floor to 500 we might have an issue. Hardly likely though.

PHAT
02-11-2005, 02:42 PM
Can't say I'm exactly quaking in my boots about it. If they start rating G60s on their main list, use a credible rating system and drop their floor to 500 we might have an issue. Hardly likely though.

Wake up Kevin!

10 years ago it was hardly likely that the FIDE rating floor would drop to 1400, but it has. Visionless bickering thum twiddlers that are the reason that the ACF and now CV too, are slowly becoming irrelavent.

ursogr8
02-11-2005, 02:52 PM
Can't say I'm exactly quaking in my boots about it. If they start rating G60s on their main list, use a credible rating system and drop their floor to 500 we might have an issue. Hardly likely though.

Yeh
Probably you are correct KB.

I was just falling for the old trick of seeing three dots on a trend line and joining them (2200, 1800, 1400). (SWMBO is better at it...she only needs one dot).

BTW, the three elements in your 'analysis' may not be the top three, you know.
> Maybe the $5/7 charged by CV for a 7 round SWISS will be under-cut by FIDE.
>> Maybe the FIDE number will be higher than the ACF number.
>>> Maybe FIDE update frequency will be weekly.

You never know what is appreciated, when your cutstomers are humans.


regards
starter

ps How many of your customers can appreciate your "...use a credible rating system"?

Kevin Bonham
02-11-2005, 10:17 PM
starter: the issue I see is that still the vast bulk of tournaments, and the vast bulk of starting players, will not be FIDE-rated. Beginning players do like to get a number quickly whether it is all that accurate or not, but it doesn't look like FIDE is aiming to compete on that front ... though I do believe their longterm intent is a rating floor of 1000. What are their current ratings fees anyway?

Matthew: Surely if FIDE were able to deliver a quality rating system more cheaply that would be a good thing in terms of the ACF's objectives? Hardly something the ACF has to do itself, so long as it is getting done and getting done properly.

You're big on these dire warnings but how many times have you actually got to say "I told you so" after they've come true? I cannot remember one.

four four two
03-11-2005, 08:36 AM
I think FIDE charges $50 US for a tournament to be rated. In my opinion this tactic of lowering it to 1400 is a desperate attempt to raise cash for FIDE,they are relying on small chess countries with little chess pedigree who are desperate to get their players FIDE ratings. The company that prints the informantator now prints about 30 pages of FIDE ratings instead of just a few,they too are relying on players who want to see their name in print to go out and buy the book.

ursogr8
03-11-2005, 08:42 AM
starter: the issue I see is that still the vast bulk of tournaments, and the vast bulk of starting players, will not be FIDE-rated. Beginning players do like to get a number quickly whether it is all that accurate or not, but it doesn't look like FIDE is aiming to compete on that front

KB
What is the evidence that they do not intend to compete on that front?
I think all you can say atm is that FIDE have given no indication of update frequency in the future.


... though I do believe their longterm intent is a rating floor of 1000.

What are their current ratings fees anyway?

High fees atm.
But, watch that space.


Matthew: Surely if FIDE were able to deliver a quality rating system more cheaply that would be a good thing in terms of the ACF's objectives? Hardly something the ACF has to do itself, so long as it is getting done and getting done properly.
The best I can do KB is repeat Matt's advice...wake up Kevin

The rating revenue (from local ratings) currently flows through Australian national books

regards
starter

four four two
03-11-2005, 08:51 AM
And if it ends up in DC's coffers instead of the ACF's will it be ok?,seeing as he is australian. :hmm: At least the FIDE rating is international,although in my opinion it should have NEVER dropped below 2000. ;)

PHAT
03-11-2005, 01:05 PM
You're big on these dire warnings but how many times have you actually got to say "I told you so" after they've come true? I cannot remember one.


I argued that writing your move before actually making the move was not fair. The FIDE agrees :owned:

pax
06-11-2005, 08:26 PM
Actually, I reckon it is a good move for FIDE to rate more tournaments, and to lower the rating floor. The rating system is often skewed around the rating floor, so it makes sense for the floor not to be at too high a level. Hopefully this will reduce the number of 1600-1800 players who get 2000-2200 FIDE ratings because of the floor effect!

ElevatorEscapee
07-11-2005, 09:45 PM
One man's flaw (floor) is another man's ceiling... :uhoh:

PHAT
07-11-2005, 10:43 PM
One man's flaw (floor) is another man's ceiling... :uhoh:

Once and for wall, cut the puns or roof the day.

Kevin Bonham
08-11-2005, 02:03 AM
KB
What is the evidence that they do not intend to compete on that front?
I think all you can say atm is that FIDE have given no indication of update frequency in the future.

Update frequency is not very relevant unless they also start rating a much wider range of events.


The best I can do KB is repeat Matt's advice...

??


The rating revenue (from local ratings) currently flows through Australian national books

I know that. I'm just surprised to see you running this kind of line given your apparent support for the outsourcing of state titles to private suppliers.


I argued that writing your move before actually making the move was not fair. The FIDE agrees

Irrelevant - I wanted an example of a warning of dire consequences that came true. This is not even a warning, just a case of the world body adopting a position that it was leaning towards for years and happened to be shared by a lot of players, you included.

ursogr8
08-11-2005, 07:18 AM
Update frequency is not very relevant unless they also start rating a much wider range of events.
KB
On the contrary, update frequency is very relevant because one of the most asked questions at Whitehorse is "...when does little Angelic get his/her first rating...". Our ACF frequency is quarterly; if a competitor offered weekly (or even after each game) then I suspect that would be a real attraction.


I know that. I'm just surprised to see you running this kind of line given your apparent support for the outsourcing of state titles to private suppliers.

You seem to be contracting Bill's disease of inserting 'perhaps', 'maybe', 'apparent' weasel words into your posts. Is it a sign that you are
> not sure of your thoughts?
> insinuating something without the courage to say it firmly?

For the record
>> I had a discussion with Barry re the naming of titles
>> I was not in favour of the ACF action to out-source the Mt Buller event to the privateer GH.
If you think I have promoted outsourcing please produce the evidence and let us analyse.

Personally, I think that outsourcing the ACF's main profitable service to a competitor and getting nothing in return sounds like a dumb idea to me.

regards
starter

Kevin Bonham
08-11-2005, 12:24 PM
KB
On the contrary, update frequency is very relevant because one of the most asked questions at Whitehorse is "...when does little Angelic get his/her first rating...". Our ACF frequency is quarterly; if a competitor offered weekly (or even after each game) then I suspect that would be a real attraction.

Not if the answer is "never, because the ratings are updated every fifteen milliseconds but your games were played at too fast a time control to get rated", it won't.


You seem to be contracting Bill's disease of inserting 'perhaps', 'maybe', 'apparent' weasel words into your posts. Is it a sign that you are
> not sure of your thoughts?
> insinuating something without the courage to say it firmly?

No, it is because you referred to outsourcing of state titles as an option in a way which I read as supportive but which was not explicitly so. Post 118 on Cordover Primary Schools thread, bottom paragraph. I will ask you a question about it over there.


Personally, I think that outsourcing the ACF's main profitable service to a competitor and getting nothing in return sounds like a dumb idea to me.

I agree - but at the rate FIDE develops I expect that particular piece of sky to take a very long time to fall. Sure, I see the longterm potential threat, but I think it more likely others may move the same pieces faster. :hmm:

PHAT
08-11-2005, 07:10 PM
I agree - but at the rate FIDE develops I expect that particular piece of sky to take a very long time to fall. Sure, I see the longterm potential threat, but I think it more likely others may move the same pieces faster.

Big Kev washes his hands of responsibility. In another context he could say:

"I agree - but at the rate global warming develops I expect that particular piece of sky to take a very long time to fall. Sure, I see the longterm potential threat, but I think it more likely economics may move the same pieces faster."

Get out of the ACF, you are a liability.

Kevin Bonham
08-11-2005, 10:36 PM
"I agree - but at the rate global warming develops I expect that particular piece of sky to take a very long time to fall. Sure, I see the longterm potential threat, but I think it more likely economics may move the same pieces faster."

That's amusing. Some of the concerns about the impacts of global warming probably are overstated and based on shoddy science. Indeed there is a very strong record of seemingly credible environmental doomsaying being wrong, so your argument from analogy is on extremely dodgy ground.

I think you misunderstood my comment about somebody else moving the pieces, so your mindless outbursts come as no surprise. I'm not going to explain it, but I suspect that starter gets it.

Ian Rout
29-11-2005, 12:45 PM
Browsing the FIDE site I discovered that there are no FIDE-rated tournaments reported from Australia for the 1 January list, which closes 30 November. Does this indicate that there isn't a massive interest in running FIDE rated events (which should have happened to some extent from the drop to 1601, in the same way as has been postulated will happen for the 1401) or is everybody holding off until the 1401 is actually in? Or is the site just not yet up to date?

Rhubarb
29-11-2005, 03:17 PM
Hi Ian,

There are nine tournaments for the January list from Australia for which I am producing reports. They will soon appear on the FIDE site under "tournaments received" and will then be changed to "tournaments rated" at some point in December (probably late December).

I'm not sure how nine for the quarter compares on average - perhaps it is a little lower - but in any case I will soon be in contact with all the organisers I know of for likely candidates for FIDE rated events.

Regards,
Greg Canfell
ACF's International Ratings Officer

Ian Rout
29-11-2005, 03:24 PM
Hi Ian,

There are nine tournaments for the January list from Australia for which I am producing reports. They will soon appear on the FIDE site under "tournaments received" and will then be changed to "tournaments rated" at some point in December (probably late December).

I'm not sure how nine for the quarter compares on average - perhaps it is a little lower - but in any case I will soon be in contact with all the organisers I know of for likely candidates for FIDE rated events.

Regards,
Greg Canfell
ACF's International Ratings Officer
Thanks for info Greg. That sounds like a reasonable number, it will be interesting to see how many 1600-1800 ratings appear.