CFC to launch new website

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by Victor Itkine View Post
    ..., I was trying to get to CFC Handbook at chess.ca, but the site shows that the Handbook is under construction.
    I didn't know that old handbook was so popular :). I've added it here: www.chess.ca/en/cfc/rules/

    I've split the one web page from the old website into two documents: (1) the legally binding "continuance" from 2014 and (2) the no longer legally binding legacy "CFC Handbook". I still have some formatting work to do on the legacy handbook but all the words are there. I'd strongly recommend keeping the legal stuff separate from the operating procedures.

    I've converted it to Google Docs format as it will be easier for the volunteer editors to update (than a HTML file on the website).

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Kerry Liles View Post
      ... I wondered whether the rating system could essentially re-rate everything when a late arriving result arrives and is inserted in the correct spot?
      Current process is in sequence of when the tournament results arrive at the CFC, grouped into a weekly batch. Within the batch, tournaments are in end-date sequence. I think this is what we want. If we inserted late arriving tournaments into their end-date sequence, then players might see their ratings mysteriously change.

      Say there were tournaments T1, T2, T3 and T1 was reported well after T2, T3. After T2 is submitted, players get a new rating. Some of them play in T3 and all get new ratings after T3 is submitted. Now along comes T1. Someone who played in T3 and not T1 or T2 checks his rating before T1 arrives and then after T1 arrives and sees that his rating has changed because he played against someone who played in T2 and/or T1. And what if that newly calculated rating would've affected pairings or bumped him to a different section maybe disqualifying him from prizes. Of course, they would email Bob for a detailed explanation and a resolution. Poor Bob!


      Originally posted by Kerry Liles View Post
      As a programmer, I have had some long thought experiments with myself about ways to do this (database transaction timestamping and replay come readily to mind) but this is more of a whimsical concept I suspect.
      If it was desirable (which I don't think it is), create a "checkpoint" that captures the ratings as of 6 months ago. As tournaments arrive, re-rate all tournaments after the checkpoint in end-date sequence. When the checkpoint starts getting old ~18 months, create another checkpoint as of 6 months ago.
      Last edited by Don Parakin; Saturday, 5th September, 2020, 09:38 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Don Parakin View Post
        If it was desirable (which I don't think it is), create a "checkpoint" that captures the ratings as of 6 months ago. As tournaments arrive, re-rate all tournaments after the checkpoint in end-date sequence. When the checkpoint starts getting old ~18 months, create another checkpoint as of 6 months ago.
        Agreed. I don't think it is practical to worry about this situation other than as an interesting puzzle. Checkpointing and reprocessing is clearly the way to go but there would potentially be a lot of explaining to do. I don't think Bob is interested in that sort of activity... :) Besides, now that tournaments can be and often are reported electronically there is less of a barrier to getting results in to the CFC office in a timely fashion - although Bob would certainly point out that a LOT of submissions still need work (by him) to be able to be fed into the rating 'system'.

        Comment

        Working...
        X