PDA

View Full Version : Fide to lower rating floor again



Garvinator
06-01-2007, 01:55 AM
From the Fide President:


Kirsan also said that FIDE plans to lower the rating limit of those included into the rating list to 1000, something they are going to do really soon. In the slightly more distant future FIDE will start to count all kinds of tournaments, including rapid and blitz.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3589

MichaelBaron
06-01-2007, 10:59 PM
The reason being..fide wants to collect more money in rating fees

Kevin Bonham
07-01-2007, 03:46 AM
The reason being..fide wants to collect more money in rating fees

I have no doubt this is correct.

'Twould be nice if they got a more responsive rating system first.

AlexDavies
07-01-2007, 05:44 AM
'Twould be nice if they got a more responsive rating system first.

One beneficial side-effect of lowering the rating floor is that the resulting rating deflation will add worth to FIDE titles. However, this will make the automatic titles in Zonals and junior events even more controversial.

Since rating deflation would make it more difficult to obtain norms or to fulfill the rating requirements, the zonals will become even more attractive as a way to obtain the IM title. World and Continental junior events will also be affected, because the titled players will have even less reason than now to risk their rating points against severely under-rated juniors. These under-age events will be dominated by players under the title cut-off (2500 for GM, 2400 for IM, 2300 for FM) seeking the automatic title for the winner.

An example of things to come is the 2006 Canadian Blitz Championship. The eventual winner, with 10.5/12, was paired at his Active rating of 1256! This player, Raja Panjwani, made an IM norm at the 2006 World Under 16 Championship. (Incidentally, the Chess Federation of Canada introduced blitz ratings last year, but only about 3 events have been rated, so they are even more of a joke than the Active ratings).

Recherch
11-01-2007, 07:53 PM
Time FIDE switched to Glicko 2? :D

pax
11-01-2007, 08:51 PM
Time FIDE switched to Glicko 2? :D

Well increasing the ELO K factor would be a start. The 10 K factor is ludicrously slow.

MichaelBaron
12-01-2007, 05:06 PM
Time FIDE switched to Glicko 2? :D

NO way, lets not discredit Fide ratings. Unlike the ACF ratings, they do have some value

Denis_Jessop
13-01-2007, 10:15 AM
NO way, lets not discredit Fide ratings. Unlike the ACF ratings, they do have some value

The greatest value that FIDE ratings have for many Australian players is that they are higher than their ACF ratings. The reasons for this are varied but most of them are unrelated to current (or, in some cases any other accurate assessment of) playing strength.

For example, some players have a FIDE rating of 2000 or more which was obtained when the ratings didn't go any lower but it is not, and never was, a realistic indicator of their actual playing strength. Moreover, due to the sluggish reaction of Elo and the small number of FIDE-rated games played, this anomaly persists.

DJ

MichaelBaron
13-01-2007, 10:36 AM
The greatest value that FIDE ratings have for many Australian players is that they are higher than their ACF ratings. The reasons for this are varied but most of them are unrelated to current (or, in some cases any other accurate assessment of) playing strength.

For example, some players have a FIDE rating of 2000 or more which was obtained when the ratings didn't go any lower but it is not, and never was, a realistic indicator of their actual playing strength. Moreover, due to the sluggish reaction of Elo and the small number of FIDE-rated games played, this anomaly persists.

DJ

Dennis, I do not think it is to do with Fide ratings being higher. It is more to do with the fact that they are recognized internationally. Before, some Fide ratings were indeed unrealistically high, but now that Fide has lowered the rating floor they do reflect playing strength. The only reason that in some cases Fide ratings still do not reflect players' true strength is because not all Aus tournaments are Fide rated. If every club has its events fide rated, there will be no problem with objectivity and reliability of Fide ratings.

By the way, there are also cases where Fide ratings are too low rather than too high. If some rapidly improving junior plays club events only, it does not affect his Fide.
Look at Sam Chow. His Fide is still 2200 while his playing strength is 2300

antichrist
13-01-2007, 11:02 AM
Dennis, I do not think it is to do with Fide ratings being higher. It is more to do with the fact that they are recognized internationally. Before, some Fide ratings were indeed unrealistically high, but now that Fide has lowered the rating floor they do reflect playing strength. The only reason that in some cases Fide ratings still do not reflect players' true strength is because not all Aus tournaments are Fide rated. If every club has its events fide rated, there will be no problem with objectivity and reliability of Fide ratings.

By the way, there are also cases where Fide ratings are too low rather than too high. If some rapidly improving junior plays club events only, it does not affect his Fide.
Look at Sam Chow. His Fide is still 2200 while his playing strength is 2300

Does it cost much extra to have those Aussie tourneys FIDE rated?

Another temporary reason for FIDE ratings being unrealisticially high is that if this lower floor rating is only new well not all players may have played sufficient games for their rating to go down accordingly with their proper playing strength.

If the fee is peanuts (and Aussies are as well off as anyone else) well there seems no reason not to go with FIDE and many of reasons to go with them.

I can well understand decent foreign players migrating to Aussie being upset because their previous FIDE rating becomes redundant. They have become international non-citizens. Bit like David Hicks and the Palestinians - sorry Mike, could not contol myself.

Rhubarb
13-01-2007, 09:11 PM
One beneficial side-effect of lowering the rating floor is that the resulting rating deflation will add worth to FIDE titles. However, this will make the automatic titles in Zonals and junior events even more controversial.While it's true that with a larger range there is the potential for individual players to be severely underrated (hence the K factor will prove to be far too low), overall this effect is far outweighed by the number of new overrated players. Every time FIDE lowers the floor it results in inflation because more and more players enter the bottom of the list based on their better performances, not their average performances, hence they're overrated, which eventually leads to a trickle-up effect, so to speak. There are also a number of other reasons for inflation across the system.


An example of things to come is the 2006 Canadian Blitz Championship. The eventual winner, with 10.5/12, was paired at his Active rating of 1256! This player, Raja Panjwani, made an IM norm at the 2006 World Under 16 Championship. (Incidentally, the Chess Federation of Canada introduced blitz ratings last year, but only about 3 events have been rated, so they are even more of a joke than the Active ratings).Not sure what this has to do with FIDE deflation. Ratings that are jokes, regardless of which system is used, are usually the result of insufficient data. So, for exanmple, it will be a long time before any FIDE rating below 2000 can be considered reliable. Ratings in the 2000-2200 interval are only just now becoming reasonable.


If every club has its events fide rated, there will be no problem with objectivity and reliability of Fide ratings.Except that FIDE's time control regulations, as they stand, rule out the majority of club events and weekenders for FIDE rating. And how do you reconcile rating all these events with your post#2: "fide wants to collect more money in rating fees". NSS.


Does it cost much extra to have those Aussie tourneys FIDE rated?
...
If the fee is peanuts (and Aussies are as well off as anyone else) well there seems no reason not to go with FIDE and many of reasons to go with them.FIDE fees cost about three times as much per game as the ACF system, and this doesn't even count all of FIDE's hidden extras, which the ACF currently does not pass on to organisers.

There are numerous other problems with FIDE ratings, which have also previously been discussed many times here in the Ratings Arena, but on a more positive note I did receive an excellent piece of news yesterday. FIDE has launched the FIDE Ratings Server allowing national officers direct access to registrations, tournament submission and basic corrections. No more sending dozens of emails over several months just to get the simplest changes done. :)

Greg Canfell
FIDE Ratings Officer

antichrist
14-01-2007, 10:45 AM
Considering that doing ratings is mostly just entering prepared data into a computer it seems excessive fees. Is that the major source of their income?

AlexDavies
14-01-2007, 02:50 PM
An example of things to come is the 2006 Canadian Blitz Championship. The eventual winner, with 10.5/12, was paired at his Active rating of 1256! This player, Raja Panjwani, made an IM norm at the 2006 World Under 16 Championship. (Incidentally, the Chess Federation of Canada introduced blitz ratings last year, but only about 3 events have been rated, so they are even more of a joke than the Active ratings).

The point of this example is that a similar scenario might result in vastly under-rated players in the FIDE system. Suppose, for example, that the Australian Junior is FIDE-rated and that there aren't many non-junior events for Australian kids to obtain FIDE ratings. Many kids would then obtain a FIDE rating at the Australian Junior and not play many other FIDE-rated games for a number of years. (This has been somewhat true in the past with players obtaining FIDE ratings in the Asian or World Junior events, but being a few points under-rated at 2205 is a lot different to being hundreds of points under-rated at 1001).

It may be, as pointed out by Greg Canfell, that a floor of 1000 might still be high enough that there won't be any deflation. At some point between 100 and 2000, however, the rating floor would be low enough that deflation (due to quickly improving juniors) would occur.

All that being said, I think that lowering the rating floor should improve the accuracy of the ratings of the players above the current floor. FIDE just needs to do it properly. They need to have someone analyse their own data, and to pay some attention to Sonas, Glickman, national rating statisticians, and other experts.

According to information I have found using Google, the optimal k factor seems to be about 24 for players over 2400 (Sonas), and about 48 for players rated 1000 (USCF). However, the k factor for low-rated players may need to be higher in the FIDE system if players aren't playing many FIDE-rated games.

FranzMadeira
09-03-2007, 11:01 PM
Hi

Im a new user here and i saw this article wish is of my personal interest.
im agaisnt the "rating lowering", in fact 1600 is too low already! I believe we should play for the quality not quantity. 2000 of base is ok, in my opinion.

Best
Franz

antichrist
10-03-2007, 10:42 PM
Hi

Im a new user here and i saw this article wish is of my personal interest.
im agaisnt the "rating lowering", in fact 1600 is too low already! I believe we should play for the quality not quantity. 2000 of base is ok, in my opinion.

Best
Franz

Sometimes patzers like myself are visiting some far off place and would like to participate in a big event taking place there, for the experience and meeting people. We may also happen to be giant-killers on our day and rise to the occasion to give a decent game against 2000-rated players.

Don't deny our rare fine wine.

MichaelBaron
11-03-2007, 03:59 PM
A rating is just a rating. A fide rating is just a fide rating! It should not be a "luxury item" limited to the chosen ones. There is nothing wrong with having players with an 1100 fide rating. On the contarary, it enables club players worldwide to compare standards of their play.

FranzMadeira
20-03-2007, 10:14 AM
Sometimes patzers like myself are visiting some far off place and would like to participate in a big event taking place there, for the experience and meeting people. We may also happen to be giant-killers on our day and rise to the occasion to give a decent game against 2000-rated players.

Don't deny our rare fine wine.

You can always take part on that kind of events, i am not a fide rated player yet, but i would like to get my first rating over 2000 (wish need a good rating average) than a 1600 because of a bad luck results in one of that events. A rise after a inicial rate of 1600 will take years of playing.

I dont want to see people discriminated, just believe that the fide list should have over 2000 players, wish not means denying the entrance in fide events, people without fide rating.

best
Franz

FranzMadeira
20-03-2007, 10:22 AM
A rating is just a rating. A fide rating is just a fide rating! It should not be a "luxury item" limited to the chosen ones. There is nothing wrong with having players with an 1100 fide rating. On the contarary, it enables club players worldwide to compare standards of their play.

In your opinion, everrybody can play everywere. Lets pick another case:
Should everybody take place in a run to be president of a country, a state, or mayor of a city, or president of a company?

The answer:
No, only the best ones should sit in that chair! Only the capable ones!


For comparing ratings, national rating lists are enough.

Best
Franz

four four two
21-03-2007, 09:30 AM
You can always take part on that kind of events, i am not a fide rated player yet, but i would like to get my first rating over 2000 (wish need a good rating average) than a 1600 because of a bad luck results in one of that events. A rise after a inicial rate of 1600 will take years of playing.

I dont want to see people discriminated, just believe that the fide list should have over 2000 players, wish not means denying the entrance in fide events, people without fide rating.

best
Franz

If you wish to have your first FIDE rating above 2000,then simply wait for an event where there will be plenty of players rated above 1900...and play well.

Im not to keen on lowering the rating floor to 1400...1800 in my opinion should be about the lowest the floor should go. But the key point here Franz is that if more tournaments in Australia were FIDE rated then peoples ratings would increase faster if they are playing well. Over a period of time the gap between peoples ratings and playing strength would diminish considerably.

You also tend to forget that in Australia there are a number of players whose ACF rating is below 1800 but whose FIDE rating is above 2000...so being rated 2050 FIDE doesnt necessarily mean you are such a strong player.

Rhubarb
21-03-2007, 01:23 PM
If you wish to have your first FIDE rating above 2000,then simply wait for an event where there will be plenty of players rated above 1900...and play well.

Im not to keen on lowering the rating floor to 1400...1800 in my opinion should be about the lowest the floor should go. But the key point here Franz is that if more tournaments in Australia were FIDE rated then peoples ratings would increase faster if they are playing well. Over a period of time the gap between peoples ratings and playing strength would diminish considerably.

You also tend to forget that in Australia there are a number of players whose ACF rating is below 1800 but whose FIDE rating is above 2000...so being rated 2050 FIDE doesnt necessarily mean you are such a strong player.Not even 442 is this stupid. What did you sell your account to Sweeney or something?

bergil
21-03-2007, 01:55 PM
Not even 442 is this stupid. What did you sell your account to Sweeney or something?
ROTFL :P

Garvinator
21-03-2007, 01:56 PM
Not even 442 is this stupid. What did you sell your account to Sweeney or something?
Lately on here there have been a couple of other contenders ;)

four four two
21-03-2007, 02:10 PM
Not even 442 is this stupid. What did you sell your account to Sweeney or something?

Well I thought it was a bit crazy that Franz was only interested in playing a FIDE event if he could get an initial rating over 2000...:P

PS...What do you think the going rate for my account should be?:hmm:

FranzMadeira
22-03-2007, 10:44 PM
Well I thought it was a bit crazy that Franz was only interested in playing a FIDE event if he could get an initial rating over 2000...:P

PS...What do you think the going rate for my account should be?:hmm:

If you want to get some fide titles, is vary difficult to begin with less than that. I had a 8 games fide block with 1927, i those events my oponents average was over 2100, but the anxiety disturbe me alot. I lost a few games wish should be won easely.

So im waiting till 2 years passed to start over again, because after 2 years without playing fide, the players with less than 8 games played will see theyr accounts delected. After that ill start again.

Best

FranzMadeira
22-03-2007, 10:46 PM
If you wish to have your first FIDE rating above 2000,then simply wait for an event where there will be plenty of players rated above 1900...and play well.

Im not to keen on lowering the rating floor to 1400...1800 in my opinion should be about the lowest the floor should go. But the key point here Franz is that if more tournaments in Australia were FIDE rated then peoples ratings would increase faster if they are playing well. Over a period of time the gap between peoples ratings and playing strength would diminish considerably.

You also tend to forget that in Australia there are a number of players whose ACF rating is below 1800 but whose FIDE rating is above 2000...so being rated 2050 FIDE doesnt necessarily mean you are such a strong player.

Im european.... and i realise that in Australia there are not much Fide players