If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
CFC Rating Stats: Adult Members Av./Junior Memb. Av.
CFC Rating Stats: Adult Members Av./Junior Memb. Av.
My CFC Ratings Questions
A. Can the CFC database be manipulated so as to give the current average rating of each of the adult pool and the junior pool?
B. If so, do we need to use the out of date membership numbers below?
I posted these questions on May 20 (Post # 20 in the other thread) and had no replies.
I did raise this question with CFC Exec. Dir., Bob Gillanders, earlier this year. He did not have these stats, and believed they could be retrieved from the CFC Data Base, but was not sure.
It seems the question must now go back to Bob G, since no one else seems to know the answer to my question (Nor has anyone come up with the average ratings of the two pools).
Bob G? Help!
Bob A
P.S. I have started a new thread for this since I kind of was high-jacking the other thread, which really dealt with a different issue.
I did raise this question with CFC Exec. Dir., Bob Gillanders, earlier this year. He did not have these stats, and believed they could be retrieved from the CFC Data Base, but was not sure.
Bob G? Help!
Morning Bob, I did get a chance to crunch some numbers on Saturday while TD in Milton.
Massaging the membership data as of May 1, 2023
I was interested in breaking down the membership by age and also between Pre-Covid members vs. Post-Covid new members.
To get to a reasonable stable base, I am including only
1. Members with annual memberships (excluding tournament fee and life members).
2. Established regular ratings only.
3. We have a date of birth in database.
This and other kinds of manipulation should be easy enough with Microsoft Excel or something. Key is proper sorting to minimize the amount of math. Used to do this all the time, 20 years ago.
Senior Drop: 296 pts.
.
It is my assumption that this drop is a result of the large influx of "newbies" into the rating pool, coming to OTB after being "on-line" during the pandemic. Does this seem right? Adjusting to the clock and scoring, after their first not-so-good tournament, do they then start cannibalizing the rating points of the long-established players, as they start climbing the ladder (And there are a lot of them doing this!)
A 2nd Quick Question
Using Seniors as an example: In 3 years, has the playing strength of seniors dropped equally with their almost 300 rating points drop?
Using Seniors as an example: In 3 years, has the playing strength of seniors dropped equally with their almost 300 rating points drop?
Bob, you know seniors: thus look at their rating over three years at the CFC website, and you would make a better conclusion. Even check your rating graph. Did you drop 300 points?
From provided numbers it is not even clear what the percentage of players are still in the "field". It is clear that there was a big influx of "new" members. "New" is also a relative thing, maybe some have already been members before.
Senior Drop: 296 pts.
.
It is my assumption that this drop is a result of the large influx of "newbies" into the rating pool, coming to OTB after being "on-line" during the pandemic. Does this seem right? Adjusting to the clock and scoring, after their first not-so-good tournament, do they then start cannibalizing the rating points of the long-established players, as they start climbing the ladder (And there are a lot of them doing this!)
A 2nd Quick Question
Using Seniors as an example: In 3 years, has the playing strength of seniors dropped equally with their almost 300 rating points drop?
Bob A
Bob, you have completely misunderstood my stats..............
There are two groups of people.
Group 1 - those with CFC numbers less than 173000. These are the Pre-covid group, ie. they were CFC members before Covid.
Group 2 - those with CFC numbers 173000 + they are the memberships joining CFC after Covid.
All the average ratings are as of May 1, 2023.
Further analysis at different times are required to see ups or downs in ratings.
Bob, you know seniors: thus look at their rating over three years at the CFC website, and you would make a better conclusion. Even check your rating graph. Did you drop 300 points?
From provided numbers it is not even clear what the percentage of players are still in the "field". It is clear that there was a big influx of "new" members. "New" is also a relative thing, maybe some have already been members before.
Egis, you have completely misunderstood my stats. Both you and Bob A. so it must be my fault, not communicating clearly. :(
Please see my reply to him. Hopefully more clear now.
I also got emails with totally different take on my stats. I am so misunderstood.
Sad.
Last edited by Bob Gillanders; Monday, 5th June, 2023, 02:42 PM.
Bob A's Notes on Correct Understanding of the Stats of Bob G (Above)
Background
There are three membership levels being used here: Junior, Adult, Senior. The stats are for membership as of May 1, 2023. Note that not ALL members were included in the provided stats in order to get to a reasonable stable base. The members included are:
i) Members with annual memberships (excluding tournament fee and life members).
ii) Established regular ratings only.
iii) CFC has a date of birth in database.
Bob A's Conclusions
1. Post-COVID new Juniors are significantly weaker (1192) than the existing Pre-COVID Juniors (1501); the difference in Av. Rating of the two pools of Juniors: 309 pts.!
2. Post-COVID new Adults (1522) are also weaker than the Pre-COVID Adults (1522); the difference in Av. Rating of the two pools of Adults: 232 pts.!
3. Post-COVID new Seniors are also significantly weaker (1362) than the existing Pre-COVID Seniors (1658); the difference in Av. Rating of the two pools of Seniors: 296 pts.!
4. The difference in the two pools of the same membership is quite large. The large influx of "newbies" into the membership pool post-pandemic, coming to OTB after being "on-line" during the pandemic, initially had trouble adjusting to the clock and scoring. Their first not-so-good tournament result meant a low start to their provisional rating games. But as they adjust, they then start cannibalizing the rating points of the somewhat higher, long-established players, as they start climbing the ladder (And there are a lot of them doing this!).
5. From May 1, 2023 to April 30, 2024, these new “Hungry” players are going to raise their ratings at the expense of higher rated players. The average rating of the membership group should stay stable, but the established players are going to see their ratings drop like a stone.
Any comments on my new conclusions (Assuming I've now got the stats right)?
Though no wonder that they are rated lower too - it is not that the CFC received many strong players from somewhere, and they jumped straightforward above 2000.
Bob A's Notes on Correct Understanding of the Stats of Bob G (Above)
Bob A's Conclusions
1. Post-COVID new Juniors are significantly weaker (1192) than the existing Pre-COVID Juniors (1501); the difference in Av. Rating of the two pools of Juniors: 309 pts.!
2. Post-COVID new Adults (1522) are also weaker than the Pre-COVID Adults (1522); the difference in Av. Rating of the two pools of Adults: 232 pts.!
3. Post-COVID new Seniors are also significantly weaker (1362) than the existing Pre-COVID Seniors (1658); the difference in Av. Rating of the two pools of Seniors: 296 pts.!
Any comments on my new conclusions (Assuming I've now got the stats right)?
Bob A
errr.. no! You are not comparing apples to apples.
The PreCovid group includes many established players - GMs, IMs, NMs, etc. How many newbies start at the top?
What you want to compare for the statement you are trying to make is:
PreCovid newbies in 2019 [i.e. people who joined in 2019 or so] and their average rating in 2019 compared to Post Covid newbies in 2023 and their average rating now.
Last edited by Roger Patterson; Monday, 5th June, 2023, 05:03 PM.
Reason: expanded on what a pre-covid newbie would be
errr.. no! You are not comparing apples to apples.
The PreCovid group includes many established players - GMs, IMs, NMs, etc. How many newbies start at the top?
What you want to compare for the statement you are trying to make is:
PreCovid newbies in 2019 [i.e. people who joined in 2019 or so] and their average rating in 2019 compared to Post Covid newbies in 2023 and their average rating now.
I would also add that you seem to be under a misapprehension of how the rating system works. Newbies have a provisional rating calculated [i.e. if all works as intended, no net effect on the rating system]. They don't start [fully] cannabilizing existing rating points through improvement until they have an established rating.
Tweet
Comment