Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 15232425
Results 361 to 374 of 374

Thread: Rating Systems

  1. | #361
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firegoat7 View Post
    This thread has some interesting points about Australian rating systems in general.

    The ACF product argument appears to be fixated upon overall pools of players.
    The Tornelo argument involves perceived value for players.

    In Victoria, Tornelo has gained a market niche by appealing to something that organisers deem value for dollars spent. It may be better for the ACF to understand why this is important for Victorian Chess organisers.The Victorian chess market has decided that the ACF product is less desirable from a value perspective. If the ACF wants to capture this market of the revenue stream then they ought to focus on how to improve their services. Tornelo must be doing something right because there is a market that supports its service over the ACF product. The solution is simple. If the ACF wants this particular market they need to provide better value then Tornelo.

    As a side note, regulating rapid and blitz markets in relation to tournament chess is a silly business plan. They are separate markets that deserve their own relative criteria, independent from each other. OTB systems seem to miss this opportunity. Online providers do a much better job at meeting the demands of chess consumers. Online providers attempt to add some value and status to their products because there is a demand for such services.

    cheers,
    An excellent post by fg7 identifying the real drivers of change of preferred rating systems.

    An excellent example of a recent Tornelo rating of the October Rookies can be seen here
    https://au.tornelo.com/tournaments/rookies-cup--21

    An aspect not examined by fg7 is whether organisations such as Chess Ideas or Northern Star would look at the service provided or look at who provides the service. In the case of the latter perhaps the Qld rapid rating system is more to their liking.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  2. | #362
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MOZ View Post
    An excellent post by fg7 identifying the real drivers of change of preferred rating systems.

    An excellent example of a recent Tornelo rating of the October Rookies can be seen here
    https://au.tornelo.com/tournaments/rookies-cup--21

    An aspect not examined by fg7 is whether organisations such as Chess Ideas or Northern Star would look at the service provided or look at who provides the service. In the case of the latter perhaps the Qld rapid rating system is more to their liking.
    A later advice received is that the QLD rapid rating system is not scaleable to cope with the volume of Victorian potential users.
    Attention is thus turning to other options. Waiting on a report from a ratings guru.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  3. | #363
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default Rookies 2017: August, September, October, November

    All these events rated under Tornelo with Dr Peter Tsai as Arbiter.
    All events were rated within 1 week of tournament conclusion.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  4. | #364
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    178

    Default Stocking filler.

    The minutes of the Chess Victoria Executive this evening make reference to topics raised in this thread:

    5. Ratings Issue of different rating systems being used, particularly for Rapid chess (FIDE, ACF, Tornelo, etc); Potentially aim for setting up some sort of official system for Victoria in 2018 → unify systems & controlled by Chess Victoria;

    There was by no means a consensus about creating YARS (yet another rating system) but there were a few parties who thought YARS might fit on someone's Xmas Wish List.

    The full Executive agreed to examine any business case put forward.
    The Guidelines for management of CV financial reserves v4 will be used as a yardstick.

  5. | #365
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    689

    Default

    I trust you (plural) are keeping in mind that a condition for submitting an event for FIDE rating is that it also be submitted for ACF rating.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  6. | #366
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    I trust you (plural) are keeping in mind that a condition for submitting an event for FIDE rating is that it also be submitted for ACF rating.
    Thank you for your reminder. You were probably reflecting on your deontology.

    Nevertherless, we let you down by not have context in our minuted comment (post #364)
    The conversation is solely in regard to YARS for rapid rating.

    What became evident at the meeting is that the three largest (non-guru) chess coaching organisations in Victoria would like a different rapid rating offering. At the moment they are concentrating on different in the sense of who provides the formula (see previous comments in this thread on QLD). Eventually they will realise that their desire for some sort of official system for Victoria, might simply be satisfactory if the current ACF rapid rating system was delivered to them at no charge. Anyway, it is their business case, not mine, so I will sit as a scrimshank on this point.
    But you (metaphorical) would reckon no charge would be reasonably OK from the CV view given that they currently get no revenue from rapid ratings anyway, consequence on CJCC ceased being wastrells and turned to Tornelo.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  7. | #367
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    689

    Default

    The ACF did deliver rapid ratings for free briefly in the past but it resulted in a flood of the system with Queensland events full of unrated juniors, so I don't think that will be happening again.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  8. | #368
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    The ACF did deliver rapid ratings for free briefly in the past but it resulted in a flood of the system with Queensland events full of unrated juniors, so I don't think that will be happening again.
    I added metaphorical to my previous post.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  9. | #369
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Actually I may have misunderstood the comment "might simply be satisfactory if the current ACF rapid rating system was delivered to them at no charge" in your post. (This was the only part of the post I was responding to). I took the hypothetical to be the ACF not charging fees for rapids but perhaps the issue is instead or also the extra fees added by CV.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  10. | #370
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Actually I may have misunderstood the comment "might simply be satisfactory if the current ACF rapid rating system was delivered to them at no charge" in your post. (This was the only part of the post I was responding to). I took the hypothetical to be the ACF not charging fees for rapids but perhaps the issue is instead or also the extra fees added by CV.

    I understood you may have misunderstood which is why I directed (successfully) the interpretation to the metaphorical 'you'.

    And yes, rather than YARS, the business case would be better directed to the ACF charges being absorbed by CV.

    Footnote: Remember, you (metaphotical) read about this solution on Ozchess first. More scoops to come.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  11. | #371
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MOZ View Post
    ...

    What became evident at the meeting is that the three largest (non-guru) chess coaching organisations in Victoria would like a different rapid rating offering. At the moment they are concentrating on different in the sense of who provides the formula (see previous comments in this thread on QLD). Eventually they will realise that their desire for some sort of official system for Victoria, might simply be satisfactory if the current ACF rapid rating system was delivered to them at no charge. Anyway, it is their business case, not mine, so I will sit as a scrimshank on this point.
    But you (metaphorical) would reckon no charge would be reasonably OK from the CV view given that they currently get no revenue from rapid ratings anyway, consequence on CJCC ceased being wastrells and turned to Tornelo.
    Oh dear, it has been relayed to me (in the past 2 days) that the three largest (non-guru) chess coaching organizations in Victoria have a poor view of the ACF rapid rating system in regard to
    the three points that I wrote earlier in this thread
    i) lacking presentation, ii) only 4 times issued per year, iii) biased cohort.

    where your response was:

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTed
    Quote Originally Posted by MOZ View Post
    The ACF product is viewed in Victoria as
    lacking presentation
    basically out of date before it is issued
    a biased cohort
    These are your views, but I am not aware of any club that has actually switched to another system for these reasons as opposed to others, such as avoiding ratings fees, avoiding having to replace an arbiter, or existing ties to the owner of Tornelo. If there is any sound evidence that anyone actually changed for the reasons above it would be interesting to see it.
    Thus, the coaching organizations are still seriously Looking for YARS.
    Personally I still hope the zero-finance dimension might be a deal-sealer.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  12. | #372
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    689

    Default

    And I am still not aware of any club (or for that matter, commercial enterprise) that has switched to another system for those claimed reasons as opposed to others. Any entity that has in fact done this can contact me directly if it wishes me to know it, as I'm not disposed to regard word-games (or Chinese-whispers games) as evidence.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  13. | #373
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    And I am still not aware of any club (or for that matter, commercial enterprise) that has switched to another system for those claimed reasons as opposed to others. Any entity that has in fact done this can contact me directly if it wishes me to know it, as I'm not disposed to regard word-games (or Chinese-whispers games) as evidence.
    Not surprising really given that folk are likely to write to the NRO instead.
    He advises:

    Quote Originally Posted by NRO
    For ACF only rated events there is the ACF Admin fee.

    The ACF Admin fee is 40 cents per player per game for normal games, 15 cents per player per game for rapids and 5 cents per player per game for blitz.

    For FIDE rated events there are 3 fees.

    1) The above ACF admin fee.

    2) There is the FIDE tournament registration fee charged by FIDE. This varies based on whether the event is a swiss or round robin. For a swiss it is one euro per player, whilst for round robins it is based on the average rating of the players. The minimum fee for a round robin is 50 euro for the whole tournament, with the next level up 100 euro. Most club round robins would be 50 euro. Currently FIDE is not charging a registration fee for Rapid or Blitz tournaments.

    3) The ACF FIDE admin fee, charged by the ACF. This is 15 cents per player per game with a minimum charge per tournament division of $30. This fee applies to all FIDE rated normal, rapid and blitz tournaments.
    CV adding a surcharge on top of this may induce sticker-shock; although most adverse discussion has concentrated on
    • the closed cohort of CJCC members
    • updates only quarterly
    • historical display not ready-at-hand and graphed.

    The ACF charge is sustantial.
    Made more unattractive by the CV surcharge.
    And only when the alternative of Tornelo was examined did the much better price (of Tornelo) become apparent.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  14. | #374
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,787

    Default And, one of our sponsors has YARS

    1600 Australians are listed in this system titled Universal Rating System

    Details can be seen here


    What caught my eye?

    "Since the URS ™ rating services will be free for local organisers and federations who choose to submit games for rating purposes, we are confident that millions of new chess players will shortly enjoy the privilege of earning a world rating that they can then use to monitor and track their progress moving forward."
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 15232425

Members who have read this thread since 08-12-17, 09:20 AM : 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •