rich beckwith wrote:Hmmmm, maybe Tennessee wasn't rated after all, as I noted there were a couple "05"s in there. Thanks, Patrick. Will check on this, as well as getting an updates "rated events" list.
tommyc wrote:My question is ....are Tys outside of the USA rated??
Hi, Tommy ! Good question As far, as I know (and assume) - all events where USA players attend, inside or outside of USA, get ACF rating processing. The torunaments / matches outside of USA, which don't have USA players, are not rated.
So ... outside of USA players have ACF rating based only on ACF events they attended. I don't think it is very accurate, thats why we also established recently WCDF ratings, which (hopefully) cover all World events.
On 2006 TN, the last I heard from Dave is that the TN Masters was probably the only class rated, nor were the lower classes intentionally omitted. I pointed out to Dave just this week about the cross-table info for the remaining classes on the NC site.
As for International events, I think Alex said it pretty well. Events like International Matches, Qualifiers, 2004 Barbaodos Open, etc. get rated since at least two ACF members are present (and since rating data gets turned in!). Admittedly, our ACF list does focus on ACF members, and people like Mr. Canning will have limited "ACF" data to base a rating on. Our international friends are welcome to send their cross-tables to Dave (I suspect people haven't done this), but if one or none of the participants are currently in our ACF list, then there is no frame of reference to rate people. Yes, the WCDF ratings will make more sense to account all international events equally.
There is no "authorized" WCDF rating yet, but I think if the work of the commitee continues as good as now, it is just a matter of a relatively short period that it is published "officially". A provisional list is on Igors site:
But since then we got more reported events from 2003-2005 and a few results from 2006, so the list is now quite different. Also the titles mentioned there r only proposals based upon a norm table we still have not much expirience with.
Greetinx from Dortmund at midnight,
Ingo Zachos
You can rent this space for advertising, if you like!
Does the RD catagory on that list stand for rounds played? If so (lol i'm not complaining about it or anything), but I'm just currious how i've played more rounds then Alex M., Mike Holmes, ron king and other players like that who have attended many more tournaments then I have.
Does the RD catagory on that list stand for rounds played? If so (lol i'm not complaining about it or anything), but I'm just currious how i've played more rounds then Alex M., Mike Holmes, ron king and other players like that who have attended many more tournaments then I have.
Jonathan, RD stands for 'rating deviation'. It is a margin of error. If your listed rating is x, with an RD of y, then your true rating is somewhere between x+y and x-y. The size of your RD depends on how many events you have played in. A small number of events means a high RD, and conversely. The RD tells you how reliable your listed rating is. John.
Alex says they dont use clocks in local or state Ty......Im very surprised even shocked by that as if we didnt use clocks we would nvr get the Ty over.Most of our Tys are over one nite a week of two games(1round) over 6-7 weeks.
Its a poor advertisment for the game,clocks are really not that expensive and of course clocks are then thrust up on unsuspecting minors/majors in bigger Tys . Its all adding up to the amatuerish state of play in our game.
Maybe the idea of notation is light years away yet in some locations.
Mr. Canning raises an interesting comment that I have looked into myself. There seems to be a difference in cultures across the Atlantic. Clocks appear to be the norm in Europe, but the exception in the U.S. (unless it is an international match, or National Masters, etc. ). Our ACF president has mentioned in the past that clocks would bring more professionalism, and I have started using clocks in Ohio State Tournament. Perhaps other U.S. members want to speak for or against clocks here?
But is omitting clocks really all that bad? Personally I am on middle ground on this issue. In the U.S. we still have time limits on the rounds and usually don't have problems. (The non-masters tend to place fast on their own anyway.) Also, I have seen clocks create new problems, like imposing sloppy "blitz checkers" situations on players that encounter long endings where one player will not agree to a draw knowing his opponent is in time trouble.
Also, the lack of clocks is not unique to ACF. American pool checker associations don't use clocks either, as most perceive it as an unnecessary "bother."
Tommy, how they get the games finished is when your alloted time is up for the game, both players are put on a move a minute. Even if one player uses 45 minutes and the other player uses 15 minutes in a game alloted for 1 hour, both players have to finish the game at a move a minute. This is why I have always been in favor of time clocks. Richard at least with a clock, you and your opponent both have an equal amount of time before you are forced into blitz checkers. I think clocks should be used in all divisions. Most minor games it would probably not have much of an affect anyway, but to the aspiring player who moves on up it would have them used to clocks by the time they reach the masters.