GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

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

  • #16
    Re: CFC Rating System Problem?

    Originally posted by Victor Itkine View Post
    This might be a great idea. But the problem here is the membership fee.

    In FIDE membership fee is much higher than in CFC...

    And if we will just calculate CFC members' ratings by ourselves using FIDE system, to match FIDE ratings we will need to take into account all the games played by all FIDE rated Canadians out of country.

    Almoust impossible...
    Victor, sorry, but I am a bit confused here :

    1) There is no FIDE membership fee. How could $0 be more than $36 + provincial fee?
    2) If we went FIDE rating, we would use the FIDE rating system, which is worldwide!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Re : GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

      Originally posted by Felix Dumont View Post
      No offense to Bator Sambuev, but doesn't this prove that something's wrong with the rating system?
      Even the USCF rating system has/had problems.

      http://www.chess.com/chessopedia/vie...claude-frizzel
      Gary Ruben
      CC - IA and SIM

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

        Hi,

        FIDE's rating formula is designed to move slower, especially at elite levels.

        FIDE has no membership fees, and to rate a tournament costs $2.20 per player, $0.80 cheaper than CFC ratings.

        Of course that... even if we were to convert to FIDE and abolish CFC, regional pools would be inevitably formed over time, as there are currently across the globe. Sounds like a pretty pleasant deal though in comparison to what we have in place.

        It makes perfect sense why the CFC governing body would want to maintain CFC ratings: they're *the* cash cow. $3 per player per tournament (generally a hidden fee included in your club membership fee or your weekend swiss entry fee), plus the membership fees. In my opinion, over 80% of the CFC membership (from the people I've talked to) care above all (if not exclusively), about their ratings, not the other CFC membership privileges.
        If you take away the CFC ratings and don't fill in with an adequate alternative... CFC would almost certainly collapse.

        It's more serious than that though... CFC holds us hostage when it comes to getting events FIDE-rated. Tournaments must be FIDE-rated through CFC, and all participants in these tournaments played in Canada must be members of the CFC, whether the event is CFC rated or not (!)
        Interestingly enough, Quebec seems exempt from this nonsense, kudos to them, and shame on CFC.

        Alex F.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

          Originally posted by Alex Ferreira View Post
          Hi,


          FIDE has no membership fees, and to rate a tournament costs $2.20 per player, $0.80 cheaper than CFC ratings.

          .....

          It makes perfect sense why the CFC governing body would want to maintain CFC ratings: they're *the* cash cow. $3 per player per tournament (generally a hidden fee included in your club membership fee or your weekend swiss entry fee), plus the membership fees. In my opinion, over 80% of the CFC membership (from the people I've talked to) care above all (if not exclusively), about their ratings, not the other CFC membership privileges.
          If you take away the CFC ratings and don't fill in with an adequate alternative... CFC would almost certainly collapse.

          It's more serious than that though... CFC holds us hostage when it comes to getting events FIDE-rated. Tournaments must be FIDE-rated through CFC, and all participants in these tournaments played in Canada must be members of the CFC, whether the event is CFC rated or not (!)
          Interestingly enough, Quebec seems exempt from this nonsense, kudos to them, and shame on CFC.

          Alex F.
          1) Ratings to FIDE are submitted through the national federation so... you need $2.20 for FIDE plus, if there is no other revenue, some amount to cover the guy in the CFC office who submits it for you. . Not to mention, as you say, the loss to the CFC budget.

          2) The CFC ratings database is potentially a treasure trove of marketing information on customer preferences and activity, not that we use it that way currently. You wouldn't get that if you handed it over to FIDE.

          3) A rating pool is a rating pool is a rating pool. Why send the money to FIDE to have an isolated Canadian FIDE rating pool when you can keep it and manage the rating pool yourself?

          4) AFIK, Quebec is not exempt from the CFC requirements and I would be surprised if that was slipping by.

          As for 2700+ rating, the inflation caused by the participation points is pretty evident as I have posted elsewhere. No more might have been added since the AGM (if in fact the resolution ending them has actually been implemented) but the old ones are still there. Also, the standard deviation on most active players ratings is pretty high (about 80 points) so if the GM in question benefits a) from the overall effect of participation points (and is very active himself) and b) has a good year, well - he gets to 2700.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: CFC Rating System Problem?

            Originally posted by Aris Marghetis View Post
            Victor, sorry, but I am a bit confused here :

            1) There is no FIDE membership fee. How could $0 be more than $36 + provincial fee?
            2) If we went FIDE rating, we would use the FIDE rating system, which is worldwide!
            And yet it costs $100 to FIDE rate a round robin making it cost prohibitive for a small three or four player event. We will be playing a lot of unrated and no fee chess in Windsor if that were to come to pass.

            Things seem to be getting better with Canadian chess so why is everyone hell bent on changing everything?

            So far the CFC has collected $133 in rating fees and membership fees this year as a result of my chess play and I am not anywhere near being done. I can guarantee that I will probably never play this many CFC games in one year again. I will probably cut back to 120 games spread out between CFC and USCF play next year so don't count on my $133 to keep the CFC afloat.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: CFC Rating System Problem?

              Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
              And yet it costs $100 to FIDE rate a round robin making it cost prohibitive for a small three or four player event. We will be playing a lot of unrated and no fee chess in Windsor if that were to come to pass.

              Things seem to be getting better with Canadian chess so why is everyone hell bent on changing everything?

              So far the CFC has collected $133 in rating fees and membership fees this year as a result of my chess play and I am not anywhere near being done. I can guarantee that I will probably never play this many CFC games in one year again. I will probably cut back to 120 games spread out between CFC and USCF play next year so don't count on my $133 to keep the CFC afloat.
              I'm not sure if you expected me to reply, but there is no FIDE membership fee, and Swiss events cost $2.20 per player. I think people it is normal to strive for the best?

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Re : GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

                Originally posted by Felix Dumont View Post
                No offense to Bator Sambuev, but doesn't this prove that something's wrong with the rating system?
                Why is it that when someone precedes his comments with "no offense" he then turns around and says something that offends?

                Bator has been playing very well to raise his rating to such a high level. He is a first class gentleman in addition to being a very strong player. Lets celebrate his accomplishments. He has been winning an awfully large number of tournaments lately. Why do Canadian chess players need to tear down someone's accomplishments like that?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Re : GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

                  Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
                  Why is it that when someone precedes his comments with "no offense" he then turns around and says something that offends?

                  Bator has been playing very well to raise his rating to such a high level. He is a first class gentleman in addition to being a very strong player. Lets celebrate his accomplishments. He has been winning an awfully large number of tournaments lately. Why do Canadian chess players need to tear down someone's accomplishments like that?
                  Right on, back to one of my previous posts, let's choose to enjoy this high score! :)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    CFC Top Ratings Out of Whack

                    Hi Vlad:

                    I don't think anyone is trying to discount Bator as a personable chess player, nor his accomplishments under the CFC rating system.

                    What is being challenged is that the CFC system is inflated compared to the FIDE system. So Bator is rated 2725 CFC. Are CFC ratings equivalent to FIDE ratings?

                    Let's look at who is in the top 100 players' list between 2700 and 2750:

                    11 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2744 20 1983
                    12 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2744 14 1987
                    13 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2742 25 1983
                    14 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2741 16 1968
                    15 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2741 15 1987
                    16 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2735 32 1972
                    17 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2733 10 1986
                    18 Wang, Hao g CHN 2727 22 1989
                    19 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2726 26 1974
                    20 Wojtaszek, Radoslaw g POL 2726 18 1987
                    21 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2726 17 1983
                    22 Adams, Michael g ENG 2723 18 1971
                    23 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2722 16 1976
                    24 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2721 26 1978
                    25 Almasi, Zoltan g HUN 2721 15 1976
                    26 Nepomniachtchi, Ian g RUS 2720 26 1990
                    27 Leko, Peter g HUN 2717 10 1979
                    28 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2716 10 1983
                    29 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2715 6 1983
                    30 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2712 25 1980
                    31 Caruana, Fabiano g ITA 2709 19 1992
                    32 Fressinet, Laurent g FRA 2709 15 1981
                    33 Vitiugov, Nikita g RUS 2709 15 1987
                    34 Navara, David g CZE 2708 28 1985
                    35 Jobava, Baadur g GEO 2707 16 1983
                    36 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2703 29 1990
                    37 Efimenko, Zahar g UKR 2701 27 1985
                    38 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2701 25 1985
                    39 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2700 0 1977

                    I am only a weak player, and so I may not be able to evaluate Bator's actual strength, but, with all due respect, I suspect Bator does not match the players in this list. The CFC ratings are too high at the top, compared to the FIDE ratings.

                    The CFC Rating Auditor, Bill Doubleday of Ottawa, needs to investigate this.

                    That's the point some of us are trying to make - a systemic point, not a personal one against Bator.

                    Bob
                    Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Thursday, 18th November, 2010, 02:12 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: CFC Top Ratings Out of Whack

                      Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
                      Hi Vlad:

                      I don't think anyone is trying to discount Bator as a personable chess player, nor his accomplishments under the CFC rating system.

                      What is being challenged is that the CFC system is inflated compared to the FIDE system. So Bator is rated 2725 CFC. Are CFC ratings equivalent to FIDE ratings?

                      Let's look at who is in the top 100 players' list between 2700 and 2750:

                      11 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2744 20 1983
                      12 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2744 14 1987
                      13 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2742 25 1983
                      14 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2741 16 1968
                      15 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2741 15 1987
                      16 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2735 32 1972
                      17 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2733 10 1986
                      18 Wang, Hao g CHN 2727 22 1989
                      19 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2726 26 1974
                      20 Wojtaszek, Radoslaw g POL 2726 18 1987
                      21 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2726 17 1983
                      22 Adams, Michael g ENG 2723 18 1971
                      23 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2722 16 1976
                      24 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2721 26 1978
                      25 Almasi, Zoltan g HUN 2721 15 1976
                      26 Nepomniachtchi, Ian g RUS 2720 26 1990
                      27 Leko, Peter g HUN 2717 10 1979
                      28 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2716 10 1983
                      29 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2715 6 1983
                      30 Malakhov, Vladimir g RUS 2712 25 1980
                      31 Caruana, Fabiano g ITA 2709 19 1992
                      32 Fressinet, Laurent g FRA 2709 15 1981
                      33 Vitiugov, Nikita g RUS 2709 15 1987
                      34 Navara, David g CZE 2708 28 1985
                      35 Jobava, Baadur g GEO 2707 16 1983
                      36 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2703 29 1990
                      37 Efimenko, Zahar g UKR 2701 27 1985
                      38 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2701 25 1985
                      39 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2700 0 1977

                      I am only a weak player, and so I may not be able to evaluate Bator's actual strength, but, with all due respect, I suspect Bator does not match the players in this list. The CFC ratings are too high at the top, compared to the FIDE ratings.

                      The CFC Rating Auditor, Bill Doubleday of Ottawa, needs to investigate this.

                      That's the point some of us are trying to make - a systemic point, not a personal one against Bator.

                      Bob
                      Bob, if I may ask, if you are "only a weak player", then how would you "suspect" that he is not that good? For now, and until the National Capital Open also gets FIDE rated, I feel that I must put more weight in IM Jean Hebert's evaluation in an earlier post! ;)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

                        I have looked at the Toronto Junior(currently progressing-
                        http://tjcc2010.blogspot.com/
                        I see that the average FIDE rating of the 5 out of 6 players with both ratings is 122 points below the average CFC rating.

                        Wilf Ferner

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Re : GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

                          My simpleton response would be the rating is relative. Thus, the salient point is that GM Sambuev has achieved a high standard than anyone else historically using the same system - that is what it being celebrated and justly so. Quite famous GMs have played in Canada and not had the same consistency.

                          Unless his opponents play better and overcome his talents, he wil become 3000.


                          Brian

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re : Re: Re : GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

                            Originally posted by Vlad Drkulec View Post
                            Why is it that when someone precedes his comments with "no offense" he then turns around and says something that offends?

                            Bator has been playing very well to raise his rating to such a high level. He is a first class gentleman in addition to being a very strong player. Lets celebrate his accomplishments. He has been winning an awfully large number of tournaments lately. Why do Canadian chess players need to tear down someone's accomplishments like that?
                            I really admire Bator Sambuev's play. And even though I love to see him crushing his opponents in a convincing way, we got to admit that he's not of the same strength as Kamsky or Shirov... He is definitely stronger than his 2497 FIDE rating shows, but not at this point. I'm pretty sure everybody had understood what I meant.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Re : Re: Re : GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

                              To the benefit of all, Bator plays chess IN Canada. FIDE rating can be improved by playing mainly OUTSIDE of the country. The comparision with others on FIDE rating list just does not make full sense. I wish Bator will get invited to strong foreign tournaments as well.

                              Statistical analysis says that a sample needs to reach a level of performance A so the whole population reaches a targeted performance B, and A needs to be higher than B.
                              So it is with CFC vs FIDE. Canadian players are a sample of the whole population of FIDE rated chess players. Nothing wrong with it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Re : GM Bator Sambuev new rating: 2725!

                                Originally posted by Brian Hartman View Post

                                Unless his opponents play better and overcome his talents, he wil become 3000.
                                The odd thing is it doesn't matter how high he can get his Canadian rating.

                                He has an international title and the only thing which really matters is his FIDE rating. How well he can score against his peers. What getting a 3000 rating will do is point out worldwide what is possible in Canada.
                                Gary Ruben
                                CC - IA and SIM

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X