Home 
Search 
Today's Posts 
#1




What about this rating calculation?
Suppose player A has a rating of 1700, player B has a 2000 rating.
They play a 100 match game which ends in 5050. This is obviously a great result for A and A can be considered about equally strong as B. But wat happens to the ratings. According to the FIDE expectation table A was supposed to score 15 points. Assume a K factor of 20 then his new rating is: Rnew = Rold + K(RealizedExpected)=1700+20(5015) = 1700 + 700 = 2400 For B the rating result is: Rnew = Rold + K(RealizedExpected)=2000+20(5085) = 2000700 = 1300 This is definitely not a fair result. A now playes at grandmasters level, and B has become a beginner. Is there something wrong in the rating calculation; is this a "bug" in the formula's. Is this problem covered anywhere. I love to get the option of some rating experts here. Thank you, JP. 
#2




In Belgium there is a rule that if in 1 period (6months here) you played
more than 25 games, and your rating varies with more than 150 points then your new rating will be equal to your performance. So in this case the new rating of player A would be 2000 and the new rating of player B would be 1700 which is still not 100% fair it seems but ok. I don't think this rule is used by fide though, what I have heard is that there used to be a rule that your rating couldn't change more than 100 points during one rating period but that they abandonned this rule because it had little purpose. A 100 game match in a period of 3 months just isn't going to happen and would never be accepted for calculation by fide anyway. "JP Hendriks" schreef in bericht ... Suppose player A has a rating of 1700, player B has a 2000 rating. They play a 100 match game which ends in 5050. This is obviously a great result for A and A can be considered about equally strong as B. But wat happens to the ratings. According to the FIDE expectation table A was supposed to score 15 points. Assume a K factor of 20 then his new rating is: Rnew = Rold + K(RealizedExpected)=1700+20(5015) = 1700 + 700 = 2400 For B the rating result is: Rnew = Rold + K(RealizedExpected)=2000+20(5085) = 2000700 = 1300 This is definitely not a fair result. A now playes at grandmasters level, and B has become a beginner. Is there something wrong in the rating calculation; is this a "bug" in the formula's. Is this problem covered anywhere. I love to get the option of some rating experts here. Thank you, JP. 
#3




JP Hendriks wrote:
Suppose player A has a rating of 1700, player B has a 2000 rating. They play a 100 match game which ends in 5050. This is such an unlikely scenario that the rating system has not been designed to cope with it. Remember that FIDE Rating periods are only three months long so it's very difficult to play 100 rated games within a single period. Also, your assumed K=20 is a little out  FIDE uses K=15 for established players (those who have played more than 30 games) and K=10 for estab lished players whose rating has ever been over 2400. Even K=15 will give the unfair results you describe for this match, of course. Dave.  David Richerby Salted.com (TM): it's like an www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ Ecommerce portal but it's covered in salt! 
#4




David and others,
I agree that this is not likely to happen. But I face a problem of calculating club ratings for an annual event in the sense that it actually lasts 30 or 40 playing rounds. Players with a too high start rating will lose too many rating points, because of their heavy distance of estimated and realised score. Next season, for the same reason their rating is too low, and win much more than realistic. They become jojo players. I would recommend rating adjustment after each playing round for long tournaments. The extreme case I gave before results in better ratings, and I assume this will also happen in my 40 rounds tournament. Does anyone see serious drawbacks? JP David Richerby wrote: JP Hendriks wrote: Suppose player A has a rating of 1700, player B has a 2000 rating. They play a 100 match game which ends in 5050. This is such an unlikely scenario that the rating system has not been designed to cope with it. Remember that FIDE Rating periods are only three months long so it's very difficult to play 100 rated games within a single period. Also, your assumed K=20 is a little out  FIDE uses K=15 for established players (those who have played more than 30 games) and K=10 for estab lished players whose rating has ever been over 2400. Even K=15 will give the unfair results you describe for this match, of course. Dave.  David Richerby Salted.com (TM): it's like an www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ Ecommerce portal but it's covered in salt! 
#5




The problem with your scenario is the length of the match. Had they played 20 separate matches of 5 games each, and submitted a rating report after each one, both would have a rating of about 1850, which is halfway between 1700 and 2000. That's ignoring any bonus factors (USCF awards bonuses for higherthanexpected results). It strikes me as unfair that this should happen though. Obviously either the 1700 player is much stronger than his rating, or the 2000 player has suffered brain damage. I believe this scenario is quite possible, although unlikely due to the length of the match, between an improving 1700 youngster and a 70yearold 2000 player. USCF awards rating floors which are 200 points below one's highest rating class (1700, 1800, 1900, etc.). However, I like Bruno's idea from his country's federation. There should be some mechanism for substituting performance rating for actual rating (especially w/ respect to calculating opponents' new ratings) in situations where one player is rapidly improving. "JP Hendriks" wrote in message ... Suppose player A has a rating of 1700, player B has a 2000 rating. They play a 100 match game which ends in 5050. This is obviously a great result for A and A can be considered about equally strong as B. But wat happens to the ratings. According to the FIDE expectation table A was supposed to score 15 points. Assume a K factor of 20 then his new rating is: Rnew = Rold + K(RealizedExpected)=1700+20(5015) = 1700 + 700 = 2400 For B the rating result is: Rnew = Rold + K(RealizedExpected)=2000+20(5085) = 2000700 = 1300 This is definitely not a fair result. A now playes at grandmasters level, and B has become a beginner. Is there something wrong in the rating calculation; is this a "bug" in the formula's. Is this problem covered anywhere. I love to get the option of some rating experts here. Thank you, JP. 
Reply 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Forum  
Taylor Kingston caught lying again, says that his Elo rating was 2300+  rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)  
Taylor Kingston caught lying again, says that his Elo rating was 2300+  rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)  
AntiCheating Policy  rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)  
UPHILL RATING?  rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics)  
Does unofficial rating of 2200 counts as NM?  rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 