Ratings

[Jason Solan]

Ahhh, but Alex, consider tournaments such as Ohio or Pennsylvania where so many master players play, yet don't often have enough players for more than 1 division. If I were to play in Ohio tournament next weekend and your suggestion were applied, I could see where one of two things would happen.

1. Average rating of players would drop significantly such that the 300 point difference could exclude the top players. This seems unfair in such a "top heavy" event.
2. If we throw out the extremes for the average. Any games that I would play would be meaningless in the ratings. Not that I personally have ever (or will ever) care about a number designed to describe my ability, it appears that number is very important to young players.

Truth of the matter is there is no perfect system, but I think Eric is doing a great job trying to get the best possible to please the majority of players.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Jason, OK, I partially agree with your argument. But ... lets do bareer 500 (!!!) points. If average tournament rating is 1900, than rating for anyone above 2,400 or below 1,400 not counted. Would this work ?

I am sorry to say that even not belonging to group of "young guns" this number is quite important for me as well, due to sport competitive spirit. Checkers is sport for me for more than 40 years.

Truth of the matter is there is no perfect system, but I think Eric is doing a great job trying to get the best possible to please the majority of players.

Yes, he does a wonderful job. He abonded Dave Butler and Glicko system only after he studied , examined and compared them well, finding all weaknesses and strengths.

There is no ideal system, but influence of obvious paradoxes can be minimized.

Alex

[Jason Solan]

I did not mean that rating is not important to players other than young players. I should have phrased that better.

What I meant to say is that players just starting out or even weak players that have improved but still have a low rating would not be able to improve their rating by playing in these tournaments. To me, I would not care if my rating did not change, others would and may choose to skip these tournaments because they would not be able to improve their rating.

[Eric Strange]

I was thinking that the magical number was 400 because that's the number that all the rating systems tend to base everything off of. The only issue I am seeing with this is for the lower rated players, I know if I was at a tournament and I beat Alex or even draw him I would want something for that.

As far as Alex's idea with the average rating determining whether points will count or not I do not like at all. If i do decide a system like that it would be on a case by case basis, not the average as a whole. I also don't like determining someones rating based off of a solid average of opponents. Although that is MUCH easier to calculate ratings. I would like to calculate the rating after each round.... maybe even each game, like it is done on gaming sites.

Please keep arguing these ideas amongst each other. It is the best way for me to make a decision that is good for everyone.

On another note. My friend from Kurnik went over to Alex's house and played some games with John Acker and Alex. This same friend gets called a prog by everyone who doesn't know him at kurnik. From what I hear he pooped on John Acker and drawed Alex. I look forward to seeing him play at some tournaments. He said that if he is forced to play in a low division just because he's unrated that he wont even bother playing in a tournament at all. With my rating system I plan on working out.... I think this will be possible without hurting anyones rating. I am considering making it where provisional players will NOT count against anyone as far as rating goes. The games will be used to calculate that persons rating to determine what division he is in... instead of assuming he belongs in minors. In fact I am pretty sure that's how I will work it. Players that are rated should not get the chance to play up though, because their rating would be more correct and would have no reason to play above their ability.
I would like to hear some views on this idea as well.

Thank you guys

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Hi, Eric !

You are mainly responsible for everything. You choose the system, and now you are working on details. I only putted here my personal thoughts and ideas.

Yes, provisional ratings immediately will determine what division new player REALLY belongs to. In fact, in most state tournaments placing new players in high Division will not be a problem at all. Only In National tournaments it is considered seriously, but even in this case we can use recommendations and references.

I am ready immediately to give Ray my personal references to play in Major Division. It is very possible that he even can try Master, but his knoweldges of PP must be improved. It maybe a bit painful for him to play his very first tournament in National Master Division.

However, it's also not a case for him. He said he is very busy with college graduation this fall, but he will consider seriously OH State tournament and IL ty. So ... he has plenty time until National next year to establish his play in real ty's.

I am very happy with my meeting with John and Ray. At the end of our meeting at parking lot near John appartment, I gave Ray complimentary Sixth copy, but refused to sign it until he shows up at his first ty ! Ha-ha. I think he is OK with everything. I had explained Ray that based on my experience, noone in first real tournaments did extremely well but he shouldn't be afraid of this and shouldn't wait until he reach world champ level playing on Internet only

John, thanks for complimentary copy of "Animal Farm". Paul already finished to read it and was very excited and little bit shocked when at the end of story animals stand on both legs ! "1984" was written mainly about Soviet Union, but many things defined in "Animal Farms" can be apply to USA and other countries. It was a strong warning message from author which is still active today.

Regards,

Alex

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Josh,

So far we don't have situation when Ray is asking to play in Master Division and someone block him. For the time now me and John highly encourage him to play in 1-2 State tournaments by the end of year - OH, IL or KY, District 4, Alabama. That would be a good start. Both, Clay and Clint played in Major first, won it and then played in Masters. Both finished in Masters around 50%. Clint never seriously exceed that level - "around 50%". Clay worked hard and started moving ahead of this zone.

Yes, Ray may finish among top 10 in Masters, but there is only one way to prove pudding ...

[Alex_Moiseyev]

I think he should start off in majors to get used to the tournament style of play.

Lets do one thing on time. Next year National is one year ahead. In the next several months Ray can play in some State events to establish his tournament style of play. After then, he is smart and intelligent enough to evaluate his level and make decision.

I didn't see anything visual wrong in his play rather than lower practice and some lack of PP knowledges which can be fix easiely.

I also played my ever first National in Master Division in 1996 and did quite well, by winning 3 rounds, losing two and placing 5-7 among humans. You never know ...

Regards,

Alex

[Eric Strange]

Well John,

I like your quotes about "really as good as you think he is" and all of this talk about how play is different in a tournament blah blah. First off playing a game across a board is 1000000 times easier than blitzing online. Second off Ray plays slower than the rest of us. My biggest argument is that your talking like you doubt he'd do good when he made you look like a child with learning disabilities HAHAHAHAHA. He said you fell for a simple shot in laird and I almost died. Maybe you need to play majors and let Ray play in the big boy group mmmkay

In all seriousness. I played a few of the masters at nats in 07 and I am very familiar with Clint Olson, Clayton Nash, Dale Rumpf, and Ryan Pronk.

Ray is also very familiar with all of them and has played all of them. He beats them all fairly easily. Judging by the level of play I endured playing games against masters at nationals I think Ray would do much better than 10th.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Clint Olson, Clayton Nash, Dale Rumpf, and Ryan Pronk.

Ray is also very familiar with all of them and has played all of them. He beats them all fairly easily.

Details to studio, sir ! Where, when and with what score he beat them ?

BTW. What Ray told you about participating in state ty's in the nearest future - OH, IL and ohter ? He can make one or few of them ?

First off playing a game across a board is 1000000 times easier than blitzing online.

Are you telling this to me, baby ?


Alex

[Eric Strange]

All of them including Heath Pearson played checkers online with us for years. It is where they learning the game. I think the last time ray and clint played a game (when Ray had not played hardly at all). The final score was like 8-6 with ray coming out on top. Clint and Ryan Pronk, Ray just pretty much slaughters. In kurnik Ryan Pronk is not considered a great player (he's just ok). The top players in kurnik are Ray, Fredo, Jolt, and Adam. Fredo and Jolt know some 3-move PP and some gayp PP and great cooks. Ray and Max are all crossboard, but play so well that they end up playing a lot of PP just off of instinct. You said that Ray needed to learn more PP but when we went over the 9-13 3-move you and him played across the board the final outcome was that you guys pretty much programmed it. Perfect moves with cake on infinite. Accept for like 1 move towards the end of one of the games.

As far as the 1000000 times harder than sitting across the board. Yes im talking to you cupcake we don't consider 3/2 blitzing. You come to kurnik and play one of us 1/0 games and guarantee you get beaten pretty bad at first until you learn to beat your opponent on skill as well as timer. We have to develop a sight to see everything in a split second and it gets pretty rough and very fun.
next time I see you in kurnik. We will play some 1/0... just remember you don't have time to think.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

just remember you don't have time to think.

I have my own instincts, and one of them - my brain tries to think even when i tell him - "don't think, don't think !"

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Of course the problem with this is, young players have lives to settle into. But if you were patient and wait 10 more years, everyone will see the potential of the generation from the technology age.

With all my best, for years I am trying to encourage young players come to real ty's. I know - it will be revolution. I really hope this happened faster than 10 years, so - I have a chance to compete with them.

About progress ... hmmm ... As more your level improve, as slower you are moving higher. You can easy improve your rating in 2-3 years from 2000 to 2400. Than it may take another 3-5 years to move from 2400 to 2500. And another 10 years to make it 2550 ... and so on.

All after all ...

intuition = experience + knoweldges + talent / natural abilities / instinct. Role of last component is only 30%-40%.

[Eric Strange]

Well Alex, I have noticed that you think think think. Which is why you would have trouble with our blitzing. You run out of time in 3/2... which we consider to be SLOWWWWW. I defend you though and explain to the players that you have SOOOO much gameplay going through your head you don't know which way you want to play it. We should play some 1/0... maybe unrated. Just to see how well you do. maybe you can beat the record of 2100 in 1/0. But what Josh was saying is very true.... Kevin burkes is considered to be a weak player and won majors easily. Ray beats Kevin like 10-1-2 and Kevin is considered a master after winning Majors.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

We should play some 1/0... maybe unrated. Just to see how well you do.

Why not, lets play with one ammendment: in obvious drawn situation you agree with draw and stop the game. I am not at "mouse grandmaster" level and probably never will

[Jay H]

We should play some 1/0... maybe unrated. Just to see how well you do.

Why not, lets play with one ammendment: in obvious drawn situation you agree with draw and stop the game. I am not at "mouse grandmaster" level and probably never will

What site, and what time ...if possible, I'd like to come and watch......

Regards

Jay H