Win games, but drop points

[PShafi]

I see that Declan's live grade has dropped 6 points despite winning all 6 games at the Megafinal.

Yes, I know its just a number etc, etc, etc.

Indeed, I had expected this. I understand the maths. But does the current grading system need modified? It seems to discourage aspiring juniors from playing lots of games in a season and taking part in events like the UKCC.

Updating the published grade twice a season would do it. But I guess the resource aren't available to make these changes anyway.

Sorry, this has probably been asked before.

Thanks,

Paul

[Andy McCulloch]

This has been discussed before, extensively.

This is entirely the result of grading Junior only 25 minute games as regular grade games. Declan was presumably much higher graded than his opponents, and won all his games as predicted. The end result however is that his average opponent was reduced, thus the fall in his grade.

I was assured that only 'real' grades encourage juniors, and that the fact that some good long-play juniors lose grading points is just unfortunate. In years past these events were not graded at all. In fact only the last two rounds, Giga and Terra finals are ever graded in England. This year even they might not be graded in England as a result of the English Chess Federation insisting on Silver ECF membership or at least £6 per head to grade tournaments.

Updating the grading system twice a year would perhaps make the effect worse.

[PShafi]

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the reply.

> This has been discussed before, extensively.

Thought so - sorry!


> This is entirely the result of grading Junior only 25 minute games as regular grade games.

Clocks were not used. Unless the games went on for a while, then a 5 minute clock was added to finish off. SInce many of the players will not have used clocks before, this seems reasonable enough to me really.

It says in the FAQ that clocks are not required for grading "for domestic school events and primary leagues." So the UKCC counts as a "domestic school event"?

[Andy McCulloch]

Actually I pursued the topic for a while, not too many others got involved.

I am a little surprised to see that UKCC events have been getting graded over the last few years, I thought the idea had been dropped. I must confess to having stopped looking for these results when my offspring ceased playing in them.

I was opposed to the idea that such games, particularly those without clocks, were graded that I took it as far as an AGM and thought that the motion proposing that was carried. I can't at present find the records of past AGM's to check.

Now a topic, started today, on the unnofficial ECForum

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=5443">http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=5443</a><!-- m -->

Again a variety of views being put forward.

[Jacqui Thomas]

Hi Paul,
The West Megafinal was not graded when I ran it for 5years & wasnt done this year. the reason its not graded is because more than 50% of the players have never played in a tournament before or ungraded & therefore would not get a grade out of the event & would be a negative affect on the established players. Also 95% of those new players would never be seen again. This year that ration was even higher.

Andy is correct. It was because the East were grading the event without clocks & adjudications were taking place that the grading issue was raised in the past.

I personally think we should be supporting our established players & therefore not grading the megafinals. The Gigafinals & Terrafinals results can be submitted for grading if the grader is advised in advance so as to avoid cherry picking events.

This losing points has always been an issue. I recall Dan playing in the P5& under in Edinbugh & getting 6/6 & dropping 50points.

[PShafi]

Andy wrote.... "I was opposed to the idea that such games, particularly those without clocks, were graded that I took it as far as an AGM and thought that the motion proposing that was carried"


Your 2008 motion (carried) said ‘That only games of at least 30 mins per player are graded as main list (exceptions being justified by describing the extenuating circumstances.)'

Didn't mention not grading games without clocks (or grading a hybrid system of no clocks then 5 minute blitz).

'Extenuating circumstances' could cover anything.

You can get AGM minutes here: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.chessscotland.com/csinfo.htm">http://www.chessscotland.com/csinfo.htm</a><!-- m -->




Thanks Jacqui for your reply.

> I recall Dan playing in the P5& under in Edinbugh & getting 6/6 & dropping 50points

That would have been hard to explain to him.

Well.. its not a big deal. But maybe go east or north next year!

[Douglas Bryson]

The losing by winning is because there is a divisor in the formula. It can happen in any event regardless of time control.

It affects players already well ahead for the season with regard to games where they have high expected scores. It doesn't affect players on 30 games or less for the season since it's only above 30 that the constant changes with the number of games.

eg Actual 40, Expect 30, Games 60 = players gains 133.33

Add on another win against someone where you are expected to get .918

Actual 41, Expect 30.918, Games 61 = player gains 132.22.

The grading system using the current formula does need modified. The solution would be a programming change to go through a player's game record and delete all games counting where the marginal effect of a win reduces the final gain.

The programmers are not in a position to make changes to the program at the moment. So unfortunately I dont have a solution.

[Mike Scott]

With regards to the Megafinal I do think that there is a good case to be made - as put forward by JT - for not grading these events but against that I am not sure it is fair to deny the vast majority of getting some graded games under their belt just for the sake of the few 'seniors'. If an argument is made that the playing conditions (duration/use of clocks etc) are not sufficient/ good enough to grade then that would be fair enough, otherwise I am not sure it is right to cherry pick which thrash chess events that you grade.

I have not checked but I assume that the older sections i.e. secondary were graded as allegro?

One of the reasons the East event started to be graded was to try and encourage some of those '1 event a year players' to go on and play more events. I still think this is probably correct but requires more marketing afterwards to highlight future events to them and to link in with getting a published grade.

[Jacqui Thomas]

Hi Mike
Getting people on the grading ladder is good if (a) they continue to play (b) if there are neough graded players to get them some graded games.

We had the West event last weekend & we only had 2-4 graded players in sections so if it had been graded new players would have been lucky to get one graded game recorded.

Regards

[Mike Scott]

J.
I would tend to concede the point as the proof is in the fact that i do not think grading the East Final has resulted in more players then attending the WH Junior congress. However my feeling is that that failure is one of marketing - given the vast numbers of ungraded players that attend there is clearly a market. The question must be how to engaged with these players so that they do return?

One of the problems I think is that on the day organisers are so busy running the damn thing they have little time or energy for anything else.

One immediate thought is that we need to strike while the iron is hot and while this is hard, given the time of year, perhaps there could be other finals that players could qualify for who do not qualify for the next stage of the UKCC??

Perhaps additional prizes could be awarded that encourage players to return to another event - either free entry (or discounted) or a coupon for a prize that can only be collected at the next event??

Any thoughts?