ACF rating

[tommyc]

Yes Gene i think we should start as we mean to continue that is getting ev1 used to clocks as much as is possible,there may be the odd xception of course. My view is that clocks are part and parcel of the bigger PACKAGE i.e. its not just the moving of the pieces that matters but other things too come into it like notation,clocks etc .Its important to have the practise for future reference when one is put in that situation.





tommy

[Pedro Saavedra]

I know I will be a dissenting view, but I do dislike the emphasis in ratings. I was president of a state chess federation and eventually got tired of being asked my rating before I was asked my name. I play in an e-mail chess site which posts both players ratings prominently and I dislike that feature. Yes, I would like to play opponents of similar skill, but I do not like the perpetual comparison.

This means that in server-based e-mail games (the only ones I play these days) I prefer ladders and multi-round tournaments which do not depend on ratings. I know one needs ratings to pair opponents in OTB Swiss System tournaments and to award class prizes, but I find the overemphasis distasteful. It was in part this feeling towards chess that drove me to checkers some thirty years ago. I know it is a matter of personality, but I would prefer an alternative system.

Our president would like a more professional system, and in that he probably speaks for most of the membership. Whether that would appeal to other potential members, I do not know. I joined in spite of it because I love the game and would play it if all that were available were a red and black board and Coca-cola caps.

[Patrick Parker]

one thing here in the states....some people just go to local tournaments
and its mostly for fun only and i know some of them wouldnt want to use clocks
but i think they should definetly be encouraged for all levels of play at the next US nationals .........could this be done?

encouraged doesnt mean forced upon the minor players but merely if two
agreed to it perhaps?

[David Harwood]

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."

[Michael Holmes]

Are there going to be any more updates before the USA National on the ratings?
Michael

[bazkitcase5]

doubtful... heck, at this rate, i might be qualified to play in the majors if they go by ratings (kidding ofcourse)

guess i'll have to inherit that into part of my goals, be 1 of the top players in the world with a 2300 ACF rating - i'm sure that will make a lot of sense

[matthewkooshad]

What can be done to improve the rate of this? Is it a one man job at the moment?

[Armlock]

I went 2-2-4 against a ACF rated 2300+ player on kurnik, is the ACF rating accurate or not really? Because I'm only rated about 1950 on yahoo

[Ingo_Zachos]

Internet games will not be rated, not by the WCDF and ,I guess, not by the ACF either.

Any rating gives only an average of the results you scored so far.
It does not reflect your future playing strenghts, as you may improve.

Also the results in checkers r not transitive, that means a weaker player may win against the stronger player, and it is even likely that this happens sooner or later, although the reversed case is more likely to happen!

If you score 50 percent against all 2300 rated players in all tournaments during the next, say 5 or 6 tournaments, ( and you don't loose against weaker rated players), you will most likely improve to that rating, but the result only against one opponent in games that will not be rated do not cause any effect on your rating.

Greetinx from Dortmund, Germany

Ingo Zachos

[rich beckwith]

Michael & Matthew:

I did post a ratings update earlier in the week, although this was a minor update than what you may expect. It was for the classes of 2006 TN state that were previously missed. Also, I think there was one old IL 101 tournament that wasn't ever rated that was recently thrown in (which is why Bill Henson shows an 06 by his name). This most recent update does not include Strawberry TN and NC state. However, I have recently typed those up myself in the Excel "T" format and have forwarded to Dave and Igor. Will hopefully have this update after the holiday. At any rate, I always try to get a rating update after PA tournament so the latest figures are available for the National.


Matthew, it currently is more than a "one man job" right now. Tournament organizers have to submit results to a "National Organizer" type person (which I'm trying to cover now). Then results go to Dave Butler, then back to me to post on ACF site. As you can see, there are a number of transfers that slow things down, and not everyone gives immediate e-mail responses (including myself at times). Also, many scoresheets are submitted in a non-Excel format which can mean more time required of me or Dave to re-type. Of course, not all tournament promoters are Excel users and we still want cross-table info in any format rather than none at all, and this isn't really the slowest step of the process anyway. A new "National Organizer" volunteer that can speed up this process is very welcome, as I am already busy (and have trouble keeping up) with many other ACF duties (Player rep, ACF Store, running tournaments).

Charles Walker has suggested to me in the past ideas like pairing/rating software that can automatically update ratings after a tournament. This would be a great idea for someone to work on, but perhaps hard to implement as some tournament promoters are not computer users.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Richard,

the problem (unwelcome multi-questions ) could be easy resolve, if ACF Execs make a straight rule: release rating list in every 3 (6,9,12) months. Some time before (just few years ago) ACF posted ratings only once in year (!) - before or after National. Noone really complained about this.

Usually players knew very well (better than anyone else) what Division they belong, and this never cause any serious problems. Today it is anarchy, and as soon, as tournaments are over, people start asking questions about ratings update next day after closing ceremony ! Grrr ... It would be a true to say - it is not exception in my case

If I am not mistaken - in FMJD they release new rating list every 6 months. We really use ratings for serious needs only once a year - prior National. Anything between them - just alot of speculations.

My personal opinion - semi-annual release (every 6 months) of rating is a perfect solution.

And also there suppose to be some sort of deadline. All ratings must be submitted 30 days prior official release time.

Simple and easy

Based on my long professional experience, and playing most part of my checkers career (25 years) in rating environment, I can prove that ACF ratings are calculated very much accurately.

Regards,

2692

[Patrick Parker]

thanks to all the people who do all the work
like beckwith for example
i dont think its unappreciated just maybe
people are impatient
i wish there was software to simplify
just to erase the problem

[matthewkooshad]

i wish there was software to simplify

i do not care of ratings, but i want to help out checkers. i have proposed an idea for this some time back. i posted a few posts ago wondering if this was a one man job? who is doing the tasks? i want to help with the things i can help with.

[Michael Holmes]

moiseyev is wrong about people complaining about the yearly release. Also, the current performance of the ratings update is far superior to that of the past. I won my first state tournament in 92 and then another in 93. At the time, those were the only ones I played in. However, under the old regime my complaints went unanswered and ignored. It was about 10 years later before the real improvement started. I can say that those officials with the ACF now are doing a superior job to that of those in the past. moiseyev is also wrong about the ratings being correct but that is another long story.
Michael

[Alan Millhone]

Hello everyone:

Dr. Beckwith has all he can do for the ACF and our game. He is processing what is sent to him and then forwards to Mr. Dave Butler. I am sure both could use some help if you are qualified in the area of ratings ?

I also know of ONE way to boost your ratings.................. " Win Wins " as Mr. Alex once told me at the Kentucky Tournament. At the Nationals this next month if you don't play your round and agree to draws then your ratings will move like a snail.

I am also looking forward to going to the Pa. Open early in June as a 'tune up' for the Nationals............... I will need it !! Hope to see many of you at the Pa. Open and at the Medina Nationals in June.

Sincerely:
Alan Millhone, President
American Checker Federation
" AN AVERAGE 2027 RATED CHECKER/DRAUGHTS PLAYER "
===============================================
" Hoping to get my own copy of SIXTH soon"
===============================================