19-06-2013, 09:43 PM
Phil Thomas Wrote:For Monica on the grading database I can see, today ,4 tournaments with grading results of 1663(Ayr) 1347 (Edinburgh) 1621 (Glenrothes) 1375 (Girls Championship).
Please don't bring individual cases into this, we don't want anyone's name to be dragged through the mud.
Firstly, with regards to this bad data as such I disagree. Obviously, the data becomes bad when you make it up to be such but, in general, higher rating performances come as the player becomes older and better. As selectors, we do take into account when a performance is recorded. This isn't such a bad idea to measure a current junior's strength, you can think of it as a live rating over a smaller period.
Secondly, live ratings aren't the only criteria, of course.
Live ratings aren't particularly accurate in terms of a ranking for junior players, their strength can be badly hidden by a low/high rating. I can explain a couple of decent reasons for this.
It's possible to get a 2000 performance by scoring 5/5 vs 1600s or 2.5/5 vs 2000, with the latter being harder.
Playing abroad also gives an inflation as these guys tend to have higher ratings for the same ability. This can be seen very clearly when comparing results of players up to a very high (23/2400) level. Note that there are quite a few top players with discrepancies between their Fide, usually achieved abroad, and their Scottish rating. This effect gets even more significant lower down the rating scale.
While I don't really want to get into selection policy I feel something must be said considering there has been some, unjust in my opinion, criticism of policy and selectors.