On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:01:17 -0600, Kenneth Sloan
wrote:

As an analogy, suppose I offer to flip a fair coin 100 times, and ask
you to guess how many Heads will show up. Suppose further that you
guess "50". If I then flip the coins and it turns out that there were
53 Heads - has it been demonstrated that you made an incorrect guess?
(in the sense that some other guess would have been better)

Of course. Even though "50" was a rational and well-founded guess, it
turned out to be incorrect. "53" was correct and, therefore, in this
case, better.

On Nov 22, 2:26 am, David Richerby
wrote:
wrote:
if you're not playing over the board tournaments I'd guess--- not to
be mean, just to be honest--- that your USCF rating would be lower
than 1100, maybe 900-1000).Why should somebody who doesn't play in tournaments necessarily be
such a weak player? After my first tournament, I had a provisional
rating of about 90BCF (very approximately 1700FIDE).

I based this on the writer's own 1100 estimate, and the fact that
without tournament experience we tend to over-estimate our ratings at
least somewhat. Of course, he could be 2000+ and not know it. But I
think the odds are that my guess will be right much more often than
not, especially for a first tournament outing, where things are strange
and much more difficult than you might imagine based on casual friendly
play.

On Nov 22, 9:26 am, David Richerby
wrote:
wrote:
if you're not playing over the board tournaments I'd guess--- not to
be mean, just to be honest--- that your USCF rating would be lower
than 1100, maybe 900-1000).Why should somebody who doesn't play in tournaments necessarily be
such a weak player? After my first tournament, I had a provisional
rating of about 90BCF (very approximately 1700FIDE).

Dave.

I don't know what formula you use, but the one i've always known of is
where you multiply your BCF grade by 8 and add 600, therefore your
grade would be approximately 1320 FIDE.

Even if that method is not totally accurate i'm pretty sure 90BCF is
nowhere near 1700FIDE.

I don't know what formula you use, but the one i've always known of is
where you multiply your BCF grade by 8 and add 600, therefore your
grade would be approximately 1320 FIDE.

Even if that method is not totally accurate i'm pretty sure 90BCF is
nowhere near 1700FIDE.

from what I have read, that is the old formula the new one is
ELO = 1250 + (BCF x 5) for BCF 216

which comes to 1700 ELO

wrote in message
ps.com...
I'm a hobby chess player, around 1100, maybe less, maybe more a little
bit.
I want to improve up to 1800 (or more if it's possible, I just want to
keep my target realistic).

Chess is my hobby, so I don't want chess trainers or go into
tournaments, I just play for fun with my friends...

What is the best way to do that? Just play as much as I can?
What books are recommended for an 1100 player?
I have Chessmaster 10th and I'm thinking to buy the Saitek Chess
Academy for this Christmas, but I don't know if it worth it also...

Thanks for your answers!


The most important rule - reasonable goals!!! Dont set it too high. If you
are 1100, set your goal to achieve 1200 with no time limits. You will be
surprised how quickly you can get there. Then set your goal to 1300 and so
on. Be objective. "I wanna beat 3400 elo rating Fritz 25 in year 2019" is
not reasonable.

Tip no. 2 - play slightly stronger opponents

Tip 3 - dont analyse GM's games, analyse your own games - wins and defeats.

Finish Chessmaster academy and you will probably hear these tips there also.
I was 1300 when i started using CM. In 4 years I jumped to 1900 then to cca
2000. Now I'm 1900 again because I didnt play for a long time (military).

Tip 4 - Use Fritz for analysing your games

"Duncan Oxley" No@Thanks wrote in message
...

"Jason911" wrote

Richerboy is a 106 BCF rated weakling. Don't listen to anything the
idiot
says!

I completely disagree. David Richerby is actually one of the few here
worth
reading. What is a 106 BCF converted to USCF or FIDE? Actually, who cares
why should his rating matter to try to help the poor chap out?

Sigh...

--Duncan

USCF = FIDE + 100
FIDE = 8 x BCF + 600
(source: De La Maza - Rapid chess improvement - 2002)

Richerby:
106 x 8 = 848
848 + 600 = 1448 FIDE = 1548 USCF or Class C player

That is weak

On Nov 24, 7:43 pm, "Inconnux" wrote:
I don't know what formula you use, but the one i've always known of is
where you multiply your BCF grade by 8 and add 600, therefore your
grade would be approximately 1320 FIDE.

Even if that method is not totally accurate i'm pretty sure 90BCF is
nowhere near 1700FIDE.from what I have read, that is the old formula the new one is
ELO = 1250 + (BCF x 5) for BCF 216

which comes to 1700 ELO

I stand corrected, I was not aware of this new calculation.

But.....

The original poster estimated they were around 1100 and someone else
suggested they may really be as low as 900-1000. If you use the
calculation you provided to work backwards from ELO to BCF you get a
figure anywhere between -30 and -70 BCF.

The lowest grade I have ever known on the BCF system was about 10 which
using the new calculation equates to approximately 1300. This suggests
to me that the 216 calculation method is flawed for converting low BCF
grades, or the original poster must be a really abysmal player.

Ivan Baricevic wrote:
Duncan Oxley No@Thanks wrote:
What is a 106 BCF converted to USCF or FIDE?

USCF = FIDE + 100
FIDE = 8 x BCF + 600
(source: De La Maza - Rapid chess improvement - 2002)

The BCF-to-FIDE formula you quote there is only valid for BCF grades
over 216 (roughly 2300 FIDE). For grades in the range 150-215, the
correct formula is

FIDE = (BCF * 5) + 1250

See

http://www.bcf.org.uk/grading/2002/h...conversion.htm

for details. As I recall, the BCF changed their conversion formula
after de la Maza's book was published.

The BCF don't give a formula for grades under 150 but it seems more
reasonable to use the formula for 150-215 than the 216+ formula. So
my 106 BCF is more like 1680 USCF. Still pretty weak, of course.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Cheese T-Shirt (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ fashion statement that's made of
cheese!

thebooradley wrote:
The original poster estimated they were around 1100 and someone else
suggested they may really be as low as 900-1000. If you use the
calculation you provided to work backwards from ELO to BCF you get a
figure anywhere between -30 and -70 BCF.

The lowest grade I have ever known on the BCF system was about 10
which using the new calculation equates to approximately 1300. This
suggests to me that the 216 calculation method is flawed for
converting low BCF grades, or the original poster must be a really
abysmal player.

This is because the FIDE = 5xBCF + 1250 formula is only valid for BCF
grades between 150 and 215. There aren't enough players with BCF
grades below 150 who have FIDE ratings (partly because FIDE only keeps
track of ratings above 1800, IIRC) to allow the BCF to construct a
formula with any accuracy. There's certainly no reason to assume that
there's a linear relationship between BCF grades and FIDE ratings --
the formulae that the BCF use are just rough and ready approximations.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Beefy Pants (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ well-tailored pair of trousers that's
made from a cow!

Ivan Baricevic wrote:
Tip no. 2 - play slightly stronger opponents

But also play some weaker opponents. It's important to practise
winning won positions, even if you don't need the psychological boost!


Tip 3 - dont analyse GM's games, analyse your own games - wins and
defeats.

I still think it's a very good idea to go over some well-annotated GM
games. Note that, by ``well-annotated'', I don't mean ``deeply-
annotated.'' But something that points out the typical plans and
explains where the game is going is invaluable.


Tip 4 - Use Fritz for analysing your games

But only after you've analyzed them yourself. Get used to finding the
mistakes yourself and only using Fritz (or pretty much any other
strong program) to check your answers.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Transparent Shack (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ house in the woods but you can see
right through it!