PDA

View Full Version : Value of long games



Desmond
23-05-2006, 08:47 AM
Can someone please tell me if a longer game has greater weight for rating changes?

For example, if I defeat an oponent 300 points higher than I in an 60 +0 ACF rated game, would this be worth the same as the same result in a 120 + 60 game for instance?

Rincewind
23-05-2006, 09:00 AM
Can someone please tell me if a longer game has greater weight for rating changes?

For example, if I defeat an oponent 300 points higher than I in an 60 +0 ACF rated game, would this be worth the same as the same result in a 120 + 60 game for instance?

Length of game is not a consideration other than classifying it for rating in the standard or rapid list. Both games should be rated in the ACF standard list and therefore would be treated equally.

However, what would be a factor is the RD of your opponents. Defeating an opponent with a high RD (? or ??) would generally earn you less points than defeating one with a low RD (! or !!).

Desmond
23-05-2006, 09:08 AM
Length of game is not a consideration other than classifying it for rating in the standard or rapid list. Both games should be rated in the ACF standard list and therefore would be treated equally.

However, what would be a factor is the RD of your opponents. Defeating an opponent with a high RD (? or ??) would generally earn you less points than defeating one with a low RD (! or !!).

Thanks Rincewind.

Was this always the case? About 10 years ago I thought longer games were weighted more heavily. I could be wrong though.

Rincewind
23-05-2006, 09:14 AM
Was this always the case? About 10 years ago I thought longer games were weighted more heavily. I could be wrong though.

Not that I am aware of but Bill would know for sure.

Bill Gletsos
24-05-2006, 01:50 PM
Was this always the case? About 10 years ago I thought longer games were weighted more heavily. I could be wrong though.I believe the last time weightings were used was in the April 87 list whilst Ian Laurie was the ACF Ratings Officer.
Shaun Press was ACF Ratings Officer from Dec 88 thru to Dec 92 and would be able to confirm that weightings were not used at that time.

Even when weightings were used it was based on the tournament rather than explcitly on longer games. If I recall correctly, Australian Championship/Open were weighted double standard events and State Championships 1.5 times standard events, however events that may well have been using the same time control as state championships were only rated as standard events. Junior events were rated at half standard events.

Basil
24-05-2006, 02:13 PM
Can someone please tell me if a longer game has greater weight for rating changes?

For example, if I defeat an oponent 300 points higher than I in an 60 +0 ACF rated game, would this be worth the same as the same result in a 120 + 60 game for instance?

I think this question raises interesting considerations. I think we broadly agree that very fast controls considerably reduce unique analysis, and favour learned patterns while longer games engender the converse.

At some point, of course, time must be a factor - as it is with most concerns. One could argue that a 60+ game is just as valuable as a 120 + 60 game, with 'time' being acnkowledged as part of the overall skill-set required for battle.