Author: Albert Silver
Date: 06:20:25 12/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 25, 1999 at 16:14:39, Stephen A. Boak wrote:
>Hi Albert,
>
> (NOTE--my below questions can be answered by *anyone*, not just Albert, thanks)
>
> I'm not really trying to debate (despite my style of writing, sorry about
>that!), as in trying to win an argument or a contest involving debate. I am not
>concerned with winning/losing a debate or argument. I am not interested in
>proving that your opinion is wrong or inferior to another opinion or my opinion
>(I was teasing about looking over your postings very critically).
>
> I often air my opinion (yes at length, since I write that way--I think that
>way) in order to have another poster clarify *their opinion* and show me how it
>differs from my opinion and why. This isn't a personal matter, it is simply how
>I learn about the world and other people.
>
> You provide many interesting postings, but I don't understand all of them.
>
> I am curious to to understand what you are saying and why. I am trying to
>discuss some points that confuse me. You've got me interested in the FIDE
>ratings inflation subject. Here's some of my basic questions.
>
> 1. Do you believe FIDE ratings are inflated? (Y/N)
>
> 2. If so, why? (please indicate briefly what causes the inflation)
>
> 2A. Example--Is it that you think FIDE starting ratings are inflated,
>therefore the ratings of opponents who play starting FIDE players are inflated
>(Y/N)?
>
> I was confused by your posting, which mixes several points that are not all
>related to rating inflation, IMO. Example--you seem to discuss points regarding
>TPRs that use non-FIDE games and non-FIDE ratings.
>
> 3. Does FIDE use non-FIDE games or TPR calculations including non-FIDE ratings
>to establish initial FIDE ratings for a new FIDE player (Y/N)?
>
> I don't know the FIDE rules for initial ratings. Please help me understand
>them, thanks.
>
> 4. When a player first plays a FIDE rated game, does he/she get a minimum
>rating assigned by FIDE for the purposes of rating his/her opponents who are
>already established FIDE rated players (Y/N)?
>
> Example, I play my first (and only) FIDE rated game against a 2300 FIDE player
>and lose.
>
> 5. Although I am only 1900 rated (USCF), will FIDE give me a minimal starting
>rating of 2000 (instead of the previous 2200 minimal amount?) so that my
>opponent (2300 FIDE) is rated against me as though I were FIDE 2000 rated (Y/N)?
>
> 6. What will be my FIDE rating, after that one game?
>
> 7. Or, if FIDE only rates a player after at least 4 games have been played,
>let us say that I lose 4 times to FIDE 2300 rated players--what will my FIDE
>rating be after those first four games?
>
> This discussion is not about being right or wrong I just wanted to know what
>were you were trying to say, and what is the basis for your opinion.
>
> If these questions are too lengthy or too difficult, ignore them. However I
>am seriously interested in the answers.
>
> Thank you,
> --Steve Boak
Ok, I'll try to explain it as I understand it (BTW, don't worry about being
verbose, I just meant you caught me by surprise that first time). If you have no
FIDE rating, the only way to acquire one is to play at least 9 games against
FIDE rated players. These 9 games can either be played in one shot (one event),
or must be divided at MOST in two "blocks" (not sure about the jargon) of 4
games minimum. This means it can be 4 games and 5 games (or more), but not 4
games plus 4 games plus 2 games. There used to be a rule about scoring at least
50% as well, but I don't think this is in vigor anymore and believe that what
prevails is one's performance which MUST be at least 2000 (used to be 2200). So,
in answer to your question, your single game against a 2300 would not be held
over (you would need at least 4 games total), and would only count if you
already had a FIDE rating. When you play a FIDE rated game, you are not granted
any minimum or temporary rating (what they do in Olympiads is a pure fiction) so
that the FIDE-rated player can NEVER lose points to you as you do not have a
FIDE rating.
Inflation? There can be no doubt.
Each block of 4 games in an event will count towards your new FIDE rating, and
only the successful ones will be held over. Ex:
Event A: You play 5 games against FIDE rated players, but score a 1/5 and a
performance of 1850. Your slate remains clean according to FIDE.
Event B: You play 4 games and have a fantastic tournament scoring 2/4 against
the FIDE players with a TPR (of the 4) of 2250. This goes to FIDE, and is held
though not published.
Event C: You play 6 players though again crash, and score 1.5/6 and a
performance of 1800. FIDE ignores this and you still only have 4 games for your
FIDE rating.
Event D: Your tournament is a mixed one (you lost against an 1800 and a 1660
player) but you are successful against the 5 FIDE players and achieve 1.5/5 and
a performance of 2160 (thanks to your loss against GM something whose 2570
rating seriously raised the average rating of your opponents).
You now have 9 games and on the next list get a rating of 2200. Does this
correspond to your actual playing strength? No. Perhaps you can hold on to the
2000 mimimum though, but for a while you are redistributing those extra points,
which slowly but surely affect the whole pool (unless you just stop playing as I
have seen many newly FIDE-rated players do).
This phenomenon used to be much slower when the minimum rating was 2200 as there
were less players entering the list, but with the drop to 2000, the number
increased enormously, and the ratings inflation has accelerated. The above isn't
without exceptions, but does usually describe what I see most.
The above is exactly like that crazy rule FIDE used to have in which the winner
of a tournament could NOT lose ratings points independently of their
performance, only in this case only the good performances are kept. It
practically guarantees inflation.
Albert Silver
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.