Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

    I was wondering if blitz (somewhere around 5+0) time controls are can be used for CFC active ratings?

    Also, would rating a blitz tournament CFC be economical when considering CFC dues, membership, etc.? - or would have a blitz tournament CFC rated generate a larger player base? I know that under normal circumstances it would however I heard that there was some controversy over active ratings and their accuracy/reputability.

    Best regards,
    Michael

  • #2
    Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

    This has been one of my pet peeves for a few years. This year I'm going to try to drum up support for including Blitz time controls into Active ratings, and maybe drop the cost a bit also.
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

      Hi guys, I believe that Active has to be at least 15 minutes (Regular at least an hour).

      I'm not sure about folding blitz results into an Active rating. There seems to me to be a risk in that the people who care the most about their Active rating would be offended at it being diluted by blitz ratings, more than blitz players would care about an official blitz rating. However, we should survey that, and I could be completely wrong on this one! ;)

      I would rather see Active somehow folded into Regular (with a lower weighting). The following might seem totally blasphemous to some, but as long as it was thought out intelligently, I would not oppose a single "regular" (i.e. no random, Siamese, etc.) chess rating, with ranges of time controls being weighed differently. For example, just as faster games would have less weighting, then longer games from say, a Canadian Open, would have more weighting than usual. If I may suggest, the 1.0 factor line would be the FIDE minimum time control, which I believe is still "90 mins + 30 secs move increment"

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

        Personally speaking... I would likely never play a rated active game again if it might affect my real rating. Maybe that's just petty, but I also doubt I'm the only one who feels like that.
        Christopher Mallon
        FIDE Arbiter

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

          IMHO, the CFC should have four rating categories: Regular, Active, Blitz, Youth.

          Regular is as we know it. I don't know exactly where to set the fee but it would be higher than for the other ratings.

          Active:G/10 up to G/60

          Blitz being up to G/10

          Youth rating for up to G/45 for kids U18.

          Youth is a whole different kettle of fish than what the CFC is used to but the CFC needs start fishing in this kettle. They probably don't need to do much more than to just put some ego aside and find *some*way to make peace with CMA.

          I would place a restriction on the Blitz rating that the results*must* be electronically submitted.

          This may leave the Active rating sort of forlorn but I dunno. I think maybe you do the same thing as with Blitz: lower rating fee than regular fee, but everything must be electronically submitted.

          This setup means that there's a "real" rating, and a bunch of other "lesser" ratings. It allows high school clubs to become part of a national rating system, keeps the entry level cost to the system low (in the youth, blitz, and active categories), and creates a rating category (Blitz) that many people seem to want. And eventually either the Active rating category achieves some relevance, or it dies on the vine.

          Thoughts?

          Steve

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

            I was thinking along the lines of what you said, except the three extra categories are all combined into "Active" ... with fees something like $1 per player ($5 for manual submission)
            Christopher Mallon
            FIDE Arbiter

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

              Originally posted by Christopher Mallon View Post
              I was thinking along the lines of what you said, except the three extra categories are all combined into "Active" ... with fees something like $1 per player ($5 for manual submission)
              This is an aside, but I have to admit that I still bristle at how your post echoes the previous CFC administrations attempts to paint electronic submission as so much better than manual submission, such that more money, much more money, should be charged for the latter. Heck, your last post suggests a 500% difference. However, in my humble opinion, emailing text files in specific formats is not electronic submission to be proud of. I still maintain what I explained directly to David by phone at the beginning of his CFC presidency: the blessed Organizer/TD would be one who could do what has been done with Chess&Math for years now. You go to a webpage, and either upload structured text files (SwissSys), or enter the results into a web interface, which easily builds the data files for the rating engine. Total flexibility and accuracy for less than 50 cents !!

              Anyway, I'll keep sending the text files to save prize money for my participants, but I humbly suggest that rather than emphasizing the crushing of manual submission, why doesn't the new CFC administration look into getting this right once and for all? I mean, how difficult could it be to rent or emulate Larry's Chess&Math rating submission? Or if not that, then ICC, etc. P.S. Please don't take this post personally, not meant that way.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

                It wouldn't be hard at all to get a web application made where you enter the results and it saves it on the CFC end. Basically a web version of Swiss Assistant. Maybe the new administration can do that. My website proposals have for whatever reason never gotten funded, if they had we'd already have a nice new website with completely automated ratings. At this point I'm going to more or less just wait and see what Eric and EKG does or doesn't do with the site because I'm kinda sick of coming up with proposals myself.

                Also the point of my cost proposal wasn't an increase in manual fees ( they would remain at $5 ) but a decrease in the automated fees.
                Christopher Mallon
                FIDE Arbiter

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

                  Wasn't there an officially rated "blitz rating" tournament implemented a few years back in one of the main Canadian tournament side events in Kitchener? Toronto also seems to run their own listing, & for some other programmer with a bit of time on their hands it shouldn't be too hard to add in an extra column. The idea of using a youth rating would also be very useful for youths who play a couple of grades, take up a different sport for a couple of years, & come back in grade 11 or 12 shortly out of high school & in to the University & onwards regular ratings scene. It could make for a good R(provisional) estimator, based age, activity, & an accelerating rating (they say the average adult performs at ~1600, but the youth pool forever populates the remaining low-rated shark-tank with ill-estimated rating from 5 years back of ~500 provisional). It's one of the current major harms of sectional to not have a separate section for strictly unrateds / youths / provisionals when others with real ratings are playing for prizes - & not a family outing day.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

                    The thing really is that the youth in general don't WANT to have a separate rating - they might as well play CMA games. If it's going to be a CFC rated youth event, then it should BE a CFC rating.
                    Christopher Mallon
                    FIDE Arbiter

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

                      Originally posted by Christopher Mallon View Post
                      It wouldn't be hard at all to get a web application made where you enter the results and it saves it on the CFC end. Basically a web version of Swiss Assistant. Maybe the new administration can do that. My website proposals have for whatever reason never gotten funded, if they had we'd already have a nice new website with completely automated ratings. At this point I'm going to more or less just wait and see what Eric and EKG does or doesn't do with the site because I'm kinda sick of coming up with proposals myself.

                      Also the point of my cost proposal wasn't an increase in manual fees ( they would remain at $5 ) but a decrease in the automated fees.
                      Thanks Chris, it seems we have similar views on automated web ratings. Even though I am not young, and don't program http all that well, I do admire the potential power! :)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Blitz time controls for CFC active ratings?

                        Hi Chris:

                        There are several reasons to have a separate youth rating based upon what has been happening for several years. These are:

                        a) many "youth only" events are submitted and rated as regular; many of these events involve first-time players; a good example of this is the Ontario High School Championship; the initial ratings given out in these events is a crapshoot in many cases

                        b) there are a huge number of G/30 youth-only events that get rated as regular (Chess Academy events for example); IMHO they shouldn't be

                        c) as Kai points out there are problems when a kid "drops out" for a few years then comes back on-stream

                        Obviously any event which is a mix of adults and kids should be rated Regular (or Active is that's what the time control dictates).

                        And I also don't see much point in both the CFC and Chess 'n Math maintaining separate youth rating systems, which is why I think the two organizations need to co-operate. I just think the CFC needs to stop rating youth-only events, particularly those with short time controls as Regular. And I think the CFC should be a common access point for all ratings in Canada regardless of whether it is CMA or the CFC that maintains the youth ratings.

                        A fourth problem related to this has to do with provisional ratings. It's not uncommon for a youth player to play in only one CFC event per year (the Ontario High School Championship mentioned above for example). This can create a situation where after 3 or even 4 years a player still only has a provisional rating that is based on games that are ancient in chess terms. Given that youth improve much more rapidly than adults, this becomes a problem as soon as they enter a real tournament or club play with adults, when they are playing at a performance level hundreds of points above their "rating".

                        I think that for purposes of calculating a provisional rating, older results should be stale-dated and discarded. This would only affect relatively inactive players. I don't see rating deflation coming from youth who are active in adult events because the bonus point system should conteract any deflation.

                        Steve

                        P.S. I realize that a youth rating creates some additional problems for events such as the CYCC where because of its nature it would problably be desirable (at least at the upper age categories) to rate it regular given that most of the participants will have "real" ratings and it does mix players from across regions to allow for some decent cross-pollenization.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X