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.
You can get tournaments rated "out of order" for certain individuals if (for example) someone plays in a 5-round one-game-a-week event, and plays in a couple of weekend Swisses during that time. His 5-rounder won't be rated until its completion; meanwhile, the Swisses have been rated.
Is the CFC's rating program sophisticated enough to rate games/tournaments like these in exact chronological order?
I asked that very question some time ago - I don't recall the exact answer, but it seems like the answer was "maybe". What I gathered was that out-of-sequence items could be 'inserted' into the proper place but only by going back and restarting the rating grinder and that wasn't something that was fun or popular to do... I think it may have involved restoring backups, then "resubmitting" the events with the rogue event now included... hardly counts as sophistication.
Perhaps my impressions of how it works are wrong; I have yet to meet, talk to, or even hear about anyone who really knows! (if they do, they can jump into this thread)
Last edited by Kerry Liles; Thursday, 25th August, 2011, 09:37 PM.
Reason: typos
Larry, can you expand on the "Victoria-Vancouver philosophy"?
I guess you are aware that as the new Rating Auditor I've been trying hard to enforce the CFC rules regarding time controls for Regular Rated events.
Larry, can you expand on the "Victoria-Vancouver philosophy"?
I guess you are aware that as the new Rating Auditor I've been trying hard to enforce the CFC rules regarding time controls for Regular Rated events.
Paul, no doubt you will find much to keep you occupied as rating auditor, but you may want to look into the 'procedures' and processes too (I am not implying there is - or ever was - anything sinister going on, just the possibility for some problems). In particular, I don't know if there is an established procedure for handling events that are submitted:
- out of order (presumably because the report is late, delayed because the fees were wrong or short, delayed to make corrections etc)
- incorrectly (you have already encountered this: active versus regular or vice-versa)
- way too late (not sure what 'too late means')
etc
as I suggested in a previous post, I have no idea what collection of software/manual procedures/tweaks the CFC uses to produce ratings... perhaps a careful analysis of that would reveal opportunities to streamline and solidify the process.
I asked that very question some time ago - I don't recall the exact answer, but it seems like the answer was "maybe". What I gathered was that out-of-sequence items could be 'inserted' into the proper place but only by going back and restarting the rating grinder and that wasn't something that was fun or popular to do... I think it may have involved restoring backups, then "resubmitting" the events with the rogue event now included... hardly counts as sophistication.
Perhaps my impressions of how it works are wrong; I have yet to meet, talk to, or even hear about anyone who really knows! (if they do, they can jump into this thread)
Kerry - that is basically correct. Gerry will keep several weeks in a temporary batch so that each week the program will rerate them thus maintaining chronological order. Once he is confident he has them all, he can "close off" a period of time by moving them into the permanent database. So if a tournament is submitted "too late", it will be out of chronological order.
FYI - all games in a tournament are rated as of the tournament finish date. :)
When I was ED I didn't bother taking this extra step. Each weeks rating was permanent, so there were more "out of order" tournaments. IMHO, the rating error is small and not worth the extra effort to rerate. I guess Gerry isn't as lazy as me. :)
Is that a reference to the long standing Victoria - Vancouver philosophy regarding this question? Or is this something of which I am not aware :)
Perhaps you are reading too much into what I wrote. Simply, there have been a number of tournaments that were played under active time controls and incorrectly rated as regular. See Paul's post elsewhere on this.
Kerry - that is basically correct. Gerry will keep several weeks in a temporary batch so that each week the program will rerate them thus maintaining chronological order. Once he is confident he has them all, he can "close off" a period of time by moving them into the permanent database. So if a tournament is submitted "too late", it will be out of chronological order.
FYI - all games in a tournament are rated as of the tournament finish date. :)
When I was ED I didn't bother taking this extra step. Each weeks rating was permanent, so there were more "out of order" tournaments. IMHO, the rating error is small and not worth the extra effort to rerate. I guess Gerry isn't as lazy as me. :)
Go to know how the process works Bob - thanks. I would agree that the potential difference caused by rating a tournament out of sequence is likely small, but it seems some people are quite obsessed with their rating (and I could see that if I was 1 point away from being a GM)
Go to know how the process works Bob - thanks. I would agree that the potential difference caused by rating a tournament out of sequence is likely small, but it seems some people are quite obsessed with their rating (and I could see that if I was 1 point away from being a GM)
Perhaps we should start listing ratings including basis points as we do with interest rates.
You should just take the attitude, easy come, easy go. :D
It works for me.
It doesn't work for high rated players or correspondence players. Lose rating points and losing invitations follow. Anyone organizing an international correspondence category 12 event doesn't want players with category 10 (as an example) rating. I'd assume it's the same for over the board.
It doesn't work for high rated players or correspondence players. Lose rating points and losing invitations follow. Anyone organizing an international correspondence category 12 event doesn't want players with category 10 (as an example) rating. I'd assume it's the same for over the board.
The only Canadian player to receive invitations to International (ie out of country) Invitationals recently is Mark Bluvshtein, at least as far as I know.
That is clearly an advantage to correspondence. Geography is not a barrier. Also by the very nature of the game, swiss tournaments don't exist.
That is clearly an advantage to correspondence. Geography is not a barrier. Also by the very nature of the game, swiss tournaments don't exist.
That's not exactly correct. Large events with over 100 players in one section are paired in correspondence chess using the Silli system. It's usually used in a qualification event like the world cup where maybe 10 players go to the next round. I played in it once and qualified for the semi final of the world cup, before there was computer chess programs, and I directed one such large section with over 100 players in a postal event.
Each player had 10 opponents, 5 with the white pieces and 5 with the black pieces. It was a nightmare to direct. The event was for the ICCF Jubilee tournament and the entries were free. So there were silent dropouts and I had to write to all a players opponents to inform them they had won after I tried to find the silent player who often didn't reply to me.
I guess if you have 1200 players you could have 10 preliminary sections with the top 10 going to the final round and the final placings from that.
Part of the secret of getting invitations is to be a character who becomes well known. That helps to get in IF a person can also play.
Some nations organizers look for old titled players well past their prime, who still have their rating so it will be easier for their players to obtain titles. They need players from 3 different nations so a Canadian is a natural. This would also work well for over the board organizers trying to get titles for our players.
Maybe I should tell you why I declined my invtiation to play on the upcoming Pan Am correspondence team. The invitation made a mistake the CFC seems to make when they invite players, if I'm understanding the invitation process properly.
That's not exactly correct. Large events with over 100 players in one section are paired in correspondence chess using the Silli system. It's usually used in a qualification event like the world cup where maybe 10 players go to the next round. I played in it once and qualified for the semi final of the world cup, before there was computer chess programs, and I directed one such large section with over 100 players in a postal event.
Each player had 10 opponents, 5 with the white pieces and 5 with the black pieces. It was a nightmare to direct. The event was for the ICCF Jubilee tournament and the entries were free. So there were silent dropouts and I had to write to all a players opponents to inform them they had won after I tried to find the silent player who often didn't reply to me.
I guess if you have 1200 players you could have 10 preliminary sections with the top 10 going to the final round and the final placings from that.
Part of the secret of getting invitations is to be a character who becomes well known. That helps to get in IF a person can also play.
Some nations organizers look for old titled players well past their prime, who still have their rating so it will be easier for their players to obtain titles. They need players from 3 different nations so a Canadian is a natural. This would also work well for over the board organizers trying to get titles for our players.
Maybe I should tell you why I declined my invtiation to play on the upcoming Pan Am correspondence team. The invitation made a mistake the CFC seems to make when they invite players, if I'm understanding the invitation process properly.
I mean no disrespect Gary, but we're talking about CFC otb ratings and not correspondence chess and Fred is right in that Mark is probably the only one recently who actually plays in Canada to get invitations to good tournaments. I don't know how correspondence invitation rating works but I assume most of the readers on chesstalk only care about otb ratings and otb invitations. Therefore, it doesn't really make much of a difference if a certain tournament was rated a bit late seeing as how it has no effect on their overall standing unless they want to say that for the current tournament period they are National Masters. I personally don't care that Gerry is a bit late, I still remember the days when ratings were updated 3x slower than now on a Wednesday and sometimes they weren't even updated properly.
Fred was a bit misinformed about pariing systems in CC and the importance of international ratings.
Although I think the CFC going to national titles is a good move, is anyone getting international invitations based on Canadian ratings?
Anyhow, we're on the eve of the World Cup and I'm rooting for both our representatives so don't want to get into who gets invitations and that sort of thing. I was writing generally and not specific to anyone.
Tweet
Comment