National Tournament Rule proposed addition

[rich beckwith]

Alex,

I am merely gathering feedback from everyone at this point, and appreciate your comments of the privilege of a top pair for the last round.

I think where Gene is coming from is that the leader (who has clinched the tournament already) is often content to "rest" the last round, but a case can be made that this should remain only an option for the leader.

[bazkitcase5]

not to mention that 20 points would be rather high seeing how i did not lose a round in the 2005 national tournament, yet my rating didn't go up more than 20 pts for the entire tournament

might i mention again how bogus that is?

[Alex_Moiseyev]

did not lose a round in the 2005 national tournament, yet my rating didn't go up more than 20 pts for the entire tournament

Clay, what was "an average rating" of your opponents in this event ? Was it much more higher than your own rating ? Personally, often enough I am losing rating points even if I win event, because I simply don't meet my expectations.

Althouh, the tendency is - when raring gets higher, the progress in rating points gets more and more slow until you hit your bareer.

An ideal situation is when your rating don't go up or down - this means your rating very well reflects your strength and level. If rating continue growing, this means - you've got a progress in your level, or your rating has not been stabilize yet.

Alex

[MFulkerson]

will you be remembered more for your accomplishments or for your rating? i can not tell you tinsley's best rating but his games are in books and nemesis site...

[Alex_Moiseyev]

i can not tell you tinsley's best rating

Mike, Dr. Tinsley best rating was 2812 ... this is quite an accomplishment ! I'll try to reach it some day - isn't a bad goal ?

On my prospective - good ratings are accomplishments as well as titles. If I can hit 2700+ or 2800+ bareer - this would be like a Champion Title, and after many years I can say: "One day I had my rating higher than 2800+ !"

But more important then points is motivation - one of the most important benefits of ratings. Rating and strength are synonyms, and If I say - "Some day I had a high rating", this is the same as "Some day I played chekers well"

Sincerely,

Alex

[Gene Lindsay]

Yes, Richard if I have the ty won before the last round I would prefer not to play the last round. I guess I am not as agressive as Alex, maybe that's why he is the World Champion. I was also saying if I am in 8th, 9th or 10th place going into the last round I want to have a chance to get 4 points the last round, forget about the honor of playing the TY winner. No more players than we have these days, and the spread of the points down from the top 2 or 3, if you make the 10th place guy play the ty leader you may be dooming him to last place,whereas if he plays someone with the sme points he could put himself in the top half of the group. This seems the most unfair thing that could happen.

Gene Lindsay

[Michael Holmes]

I agree with Lindsay. If the tourney is already won then 1st place can take a bye while the others play high point vs. high point! However, I suspect that by the end of this year moiseyev will not be afforded so many opportunities as he has in the past. Many of the masters are starting to build momentum and will be giving him very tough competition in the very near future!
Michael Holmes

[Michael Holmes]

I have been winning tournaments since 1992 in the masters division and it was not until Millhone took over that my rating started to change. I complained to the last president but it fell on deaf ears. This system needs some tuning up but it is much better than it has ever been. Is there a reason why the ACF can not get possesion of the excel sheet used to update the tournament information. I am volunteering to input the information once received but as I have recently learned from a case study on management I will insist that the directors give it to me in the format required.

Michael

And I just posted the below information on the ratings too.
I see that the WCDF Rating does not have information from the U.S. tourneys that I played in recently. I also noticed that the spreadsheet that is provided omitts the year the person last had data input into the system.

Will this rating ever be official? Is someone keeping track of what goes in it (which tournament results) and why would it be so hard for that to be listed too!

food for thought,
Michael

[Alex_Moiseyev]

I suspect that by the end of this year moiseyev will not be afforded so many opportunities as he has in the past.

This may happens even faster and much earlier if people buy SIXTH and study it seriously. This book has "all my best" in it very much up to day, and after you read everything and memorize / imporve it - you will be fully armed to provide a toughest competition ever to any opponent, not only myself.

Promoting checkers as game and helping people to improve and raise respect to the game - my goal and resposibilities as a World Champion.

Quote of the day: if competition is higher, accomplishments are more significant ! Higher competition - higher respect and recognition !

Sincerely,

Alex

==============================================================

If people don't pay much attention and study game seriously, if they continue to treat the game as kids brain game, if they are playing for fun and enjoyment (only) - my title is secured for many years to come !

[matthewkooshad]

will you be remembered more for your accomplishments or for your rating? i can not tell you tinsley's best rating but his games are in books and nemesis site...

You're a wise guy. Cheers for the good words.

[bazkitcase5]

i agree that u want to be remembered for your accomplishments rather than your rating, but as alex said, ratings can serve as motivation to set goals and improve until u meet those goals

ok alex, altho the ratings r a bit different now than they were at the time of last year's nationals, lets look at the ratings of my opponents:

my rating: 2305

round 1 - earl morrison - 2314 - drawn round (4 draws)
round 2 - carl reno - 2196 - drawn round (1-1-2)
round 3 - nathaniel grosvenor - 2160 - drawn round (1-1-2)
round 4 - alan millhone - 2027 - won round (3-1-0)
round 5 - elbert lowder - 2521 - drawn round (1-1-2)
round 6 - jack francis - 2388 - won round (1-0-3)
round 7 - richard beckwith 2399 - drawn round (4 draws)
round 8 - jack francis - 2388 - drawn round (4 draws)

avg. opponent rating: 2299, but i finished 3 games above par, but my rating did not go up more than 20 pts

it was explained to me in e-mail for some strange reason, that mr. butler (who does our ratings) only does nationals results by round, which explains why my rating did not go up very much, it was recorded that i had 2 won rounds and 6 drawn rounds

so my rating was credited for 8 games, despite me working hard for 32 games - note that beckwith also got the raw end of the deal in the same fashion, despite his excellent resuls

[bazkitcase5]

might i also mention that were using ratings as a guide to place players in the correct divisions at nationals, yet the system is very much behind

for fast improving players, especially the younger players, their rating can be as much as 200 pts behind their true skill level

so when nationals consists of 32 games yet only 8 go down for ratings, it certainly doesn't help speed up the process

[Alex_Moiseyev]

it was explained to me in e-mail for some strange reason, that mr. butler (who does our ratings) only does nationals results by round

Clay, thanks for interesting statistics and research ! In this particular situation - concerning Natl 2005, I completely agree with your arguments and objections: once the results were scored for each game (due to procedure change), rating also should be counted separately for each game.

In other hands, when we count the whole round - ratings also should follow this concept and be counted (thats what we have now anyway) per round.

I think ACF Exec Committee should have ruling on this to clarify procedure.

For Richard Beckwith:

when directors send a results for rating processing, they should specify - what scoring system has been used.

Alex