Forums

Full Version: 2012 Olympiad
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
There is a cost to rate FIDE events. FIDE charge CS 1 Euro per head - it doesn't matter how many games submitted. Currently to process a FIDE rated event CS charges congresses £1 per head for all players (apart from SCO registered non-members when its £2). <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://chessscotland.com/grading/fide_registration.htm">http://chessscotland.com/grading/fide_registration.htm</a><!-- m -->

There is extra work involved of making sure the FIDE name database is correct, there is more correspondence required with FIDE in sorting out identification errors, events have to be registered and a lot of care required that the results are uploaded correctly. Programmer Gordon Rattray created a routine some time back which converts CS domestic data into FIDE format. Arbiter Alex McFarlane also has software which creates the required output.
However the workload is not so massively onerous that its not worth trying to expand the range of FIDE rated events. As already suggested we see other countries pass us by - the lack of international type serious events here must surely be a factor in why they are getting ahead.

CS Treasurer David Congalton would be happy to look at prices if cost is a major issue. However I dont think cost is the main problem.

Players dont seem to want to risk their FIDE rating in events where the conditions are not completely perfect ie one game a day, and you can do targeted preparation. I can understand why 2 games a day is extremely tiring but your opponent will be enduring these same conditions. OK the oldies might suffer against the more physically robust younger players - but that's a legitimate factor and might mean you are not as strong as your rating initially indicated.

It's a vicious circle - because FIDE events are so rare here players struggle to get rated initially and to change the rating. So players guard their FIDE rating...by not playing FIDE events.

When the Richardson/Spens was graded there were complaints from a number of clubs. We also had one player complained directly to FIDE that the event should not have been rated. Andy Muir took on board the club and player points of view and stopped FIDE rating. However the clear majority of comments that I have heard say it should be rated.
Douglas Bryson Wrote:CS Treasurer David Congalton would be happy to look at prices if cost is a major issue. However I dont think cost is the main problem.

Players dont seem to want to risk their FIDE rating in events where the conditions are not completely perfect ie one game a day, and you can do targeted preparation.

Yeah, agreed. One euro per person can be added to congress fee/Richardson entry fee with no one (I hope) caring.
This suggests to me that people don't want to play when there is a possibility of losing their rating. What if we FIDE rate every open in Scotland? Then aspiring players get the games they want and people have no place to hide if they want to continue playing.

2 games a day might not be ideal but it's the best we've got.
Who is this player who complained!? I have heard it mentioned a few times now, I have my suspicions Tongue

Of course the Richardson should be FIDE rated, it is Scotland's premier team event, with a really good time control.

FIDE rating of the SNCL never bothered me, I was only against it because it could well be discouraging stronger players from taking part (we will see if this is actually the case this year though).

Don't see the point of sitting on an over-inflated FIDE rating, doesn't prove anything. There are quite a few seriously under-rated players with FIDE ratings as well though.
Unless you are close to a title or in contention for selection for the Olympiad, protecting your FIDE rating really has no point. And those are only a very small minority of players, who don't play in weekenders anyway...

I would also like to see more/all congresses, Richardson, SNCL FIDE rated.
The rules for SNCL & Richardson are decided by a vote by participating clubs, not by players, and this has led to the current set of rules. Dougie's club is not in the Richardson so he gets no votes.
The top players at the major clubs don't want FIDE rating, they will not play for the club if it is brought in, so the club votes against it.
With Richardson, you only get 2 or 3 games , 1 if team knocked -out early.
What we want are 9 round opens. Can Edinburgh CC not organise some more FIDE rated events - either one or two games a day depending on demand ? or Andy Howie in Glasgow. That's the way forward.
I thiik it has to come down to what the people actually want. From a purely selfish point of view I would love to see more 9 rounders here as I am collecting IA norms at the moment!
amuir Wrote:The rules for SNCL & Richardson are decided by a vote by participating clubs, not by players, and this has led to the current set of rules. Dougie's club is not in the Richardson so he gets no votes.
The top players at the major clubs don't want FIDE rating, they will not play for the club if it is brought in, so the club votes against it.
With Richardson, you only get 2 or 3 games , 1 if team knocked -out early.
What we want are 9 round opens. Can Edinburgh CC not organise some more FIDE rated events - either one or two games a day depending on demand ? or Andy Howie in Glasgow. That's the way forward.

You've stated something similar before Andy about the top players not wanting them to be FIDE rated.

When do the clubs get to vote on this? I've never heard anything about such a vote in the Richardson, although I do recall a vote at the SNCL a few years back. I've no idea if the top players at any club had much say in it though?!
if a club wants to propose a rule change - let me know - I 'll arrange a vote before the start of the 2013/14 season.
we had a vote a couple of years ago on FIDE ratings
I trongly feel that the SNCL should be be FIDE rated even though it wouldnt affect us lowly division 3 players. The previous vote at the SNCL was for division 1 only and I was told in no uncertain terms that the "stronger" players wouldnt play in the SNCL if division 1 was rated. Why? Certainly not for the time control. I also feel the the SNCL should be supported at all levels from the so-called bottom to the top of our players. If more FIDE events were played in Scotland with more accessibility to top players for weaker players and more competition for the stronger players, then or course the playing strength would increase. I also think more weekly tournaments (with double gand prix points like the weekend tournaments) rather than rely on weekend tournaments
I also think handicapping weekly tournaments tournaments such as the EK Open with single GP points ( 2011 had over 65 entries this year only 40-odd) is detrimental to the game. I dont see why a 60 entry open tournament should be penalised against a weekend tournament
Ian,

I think the reason weekly tournaments have single GP points is that they are geographically limited to who can play, i.e. people who can travel there after work/school etc.
For similar reasons, the "old" West of Scotland and East of Scotland championships were single-pointers when entry was closed and limited only to players who lived in the West or East. They are now open tournaments.

Alan
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12