USCF rating to ECF grade

Originally posted by no1marauder
You people are idiots. I'm not the one who even brought up my OTB rating (YOU did on page 3) and I'm certainly not "talking it up". I'm actually answering the first post in this thread using what data I have.

When the ECF artificially increases its rating, I'm sure the USCF will adjust its formula to correct for this. There is absolutel ...[text shortened]... t him in a higher section. They didn't and the results speak for themselves.

I must come to the US and win some easy money.

Can you send me details of these tournaments so I can enter them?

Originally posted by Jie
I would not mind kicking your b*** at 20 mins on ICC or even on the RHP flagpole especially since you claim I "lack chess knowledge". You are the one going ballistic then seeking to change the topic when you are on the losing side.

I repeat: I have no interest in playing someone who has shown the lack of integrity you have for obvious reasons.

You are the one flaming and taking the subject off-topic with personal attacks. Your lengthy forum ban doesn't seem to have taught you anything.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
I must come to the US and win some easy money.

Can you send me details of these tournaments so I can enter them?

That's probably what Paul Haddock thought since your ECF conversion formula told him he'd be a 1760. He must have thought that 12 grand was already in his pocket playing USCF Class C's.

Knock yerself out: http://main.uschess.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=199

The big events are usually in Grand Prix.

The Continental Chess Association runs a lot of the bigger tournaments: http://www.chesstour.com/refs.html

Originally posted by no1marauder
That is correct; if the performance was under 1400 according to the FIDE elo system the player would remain "unrated".

The USCF gives three different formulas for converting FIDE ratings to USCF in Rule 28D1 (which are "provided for guidance"😉. Two are simple: USCF = FIDE + 50 and USCF = FIDE = 100. The other is USCF = 0.895 (FIDE) + 3 g ECF ratings to FIDE, however. That formula seems flawed at the levels we are discussing.

Lets deal with where we agree.

(1) All formulas are flawed at the levels we are discussing;
(2) From Fat Ladys original post. However that formula would suggest that a player with a USCF rating of 1500 would have an ECF grade of roughly 50, which seems to me to be far too low. I agree.
(3) There are 2 conversion formula used by the ECF 600 + 8 X ECF and 1250 + 5 X ECF.
(4) These 2 formulas give differing results at ECF 150 of 1800 and 2000. This is clearly an anomaly at ECF150 level.

We agree on the above 4 points I believe.

Where we nay not agree is that I believe for ECF150 2000 is closer to the mark and for ECF80 1240 is about right. I don't agree at ECF149 a player is suddenly 1792 (i.e. 208 points less than an ECF150). For ECF80 - ECF150 they are somewhere between these 2 calculations but who (noone) knows for sure where.

We also know that ECF is revising its grades up for most players below about 200 so it is likely a ECF80 will become about ECF100 instantly changing his current grade for 1240 to 1400 (using the formula that makes this the lowest figure).

We have seen evidence that USCF grades are possibly slightly inflated so where does that place a USCF1500?

I don't have a definitive answer just a gut feeling from the few USCF players I have played OTB in my time.

Amazing how a trivial question leads to 6 pages of flaming.

My impression has always been that USCF ratings were about 100 higher than the equivalent FIDE ratings, the relationship with ECF/BCF ratings is a little more murky as the statistical method for generating them is different to FIDE. This is no reason to start shouting abuse though.

No1marauder, you don't seem to be able to conduct a conversation like an adult and here you have already called people idiots (normally you call people retarded). I was in fact offering you advice to "do your talking OTB" not here and you thanked me by saying I "lacked chess knowledge". I challenged you to prove how i "lack chess knowledge" and you immediately backed out.

BTW for arguments sake, you are 1400 OTB and 1950 now. How many of those who are 2200 OTB on this site are ranked 2700 here?

Originally posted by DeepThought
Amazing how a trivial question leads to 6 pages of flaming.

... This is no reason to start shouting abuse though.

Agreed. No1 is the one doing the abusing here and claiming I "lack chess knowledge". Even the neutral reader cannot help but marvel at this. In fact I was even helping No1 out with useful advice.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
Lets deal with where we agree.

(1) All formulas are flawed at the levels we are discussing;
(2) [b]From Fat Ladys original post. However that formula would suggest that a player with a USCF rating of 1500 would have an ECF grade of roughly 50, which seems to me to be far too low. I agree.
(3) There are 2 conversion formula used by ...[text shortened]... a definitive answer just a gut feeling from the few USCF players I have played OTB in my time.[/b]

I agree on the first three.

4 seems to be apples and oranges. One is converting to a national rating and the other to a FIDE rating. However, there seems to be an anomaly at these levels when comparing what the ECF says is an equivalent FIDE rating to what it says is an equivalent USCF rating (is that clear?).

Using a couple of different formulas for an ECF 150, we get anything from 1800 to 2000. The USCF "official" formula gives it a 1900. That seems reasonable to me. When the ECF ups it grades, I'm sure that the USCF will change its formula so I'm not sure what difference that makes. An ECF 80 now won't become a stronger player just because his grade is revised upward.

USCF ratings are inflated compared to FIDE at Class A levels and above on average. That is clear from the data. What that means to a Class C USCF player is unclear though perhaps we can say that his rating might be a little inflated. But it doesn't follow from that that USCF ratings are inflated compared to ECF ratings. The USCF conversion formula from ECF to USCF seems to work. It appears that the simple ECF conversion to FIDE ratings is flawed at these levels.

Originally posted by Jie
No1marauder, you don't seem to be able to conduct a conversation like an adult and here you have already called people idiots (normally you call people retarded). I was in fact offering you advice to [b]"do your talking OTB" not here and you thanked me by saying I "lacked chess knowledge". I challenged you to prove how i "lack chess knowledge" and you immedi ...[text shortened]... 0 OTB and 1950 now. How many of those who are 2200 OTB on this site are ranked 2700 here?[/b]

Your flaming is off-topic as was your original comment. Your data is incorrect as well.

You don't seem to know anything about this topic. Please stay out of the discussion if you have nothing to add pertaining to the topic at hand.

Originally posted by DeepThought

My impression has always been that USCF ratings were about 100 higher than the equivalent FIDE ratings, This is no reason to start shouting abuse though.

that was always my impression too.

There seems to be some potential for debate contained in this thread.

Although, it is difficult to wade through the flaming and abuse to find the actual arguments and formulas.

One thing I would like to add: there are substantial regional differences within the US. Players on the coasts tend to carry higher ratings than comparable players in the heartland.

A 1500 in NYC would not be as strong a player as a 1500 in albany and the 1500 in albany would not be as strong as a 1500 in Iowa.

I would estimate that the difference between Iowa and NYC would be over 100 points.

This is a generalization that is generally true.

Not sure if the regional differences in the UK would be as pronounced.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I agree on the first three.

4 seems to be apples and oranges. One is converting to a national rating and the other to a FIDE rating. However, there seems to be an anomaly at these levels when comparing what the ECF says is an equivalent FIDE rating to what it says is an equivalent USCF rating (is that clear?).

Using a c ...[text shortened]... work. It appears that the simple ECF conversion to FIDE ratings is flawed at these levels.

I honestly think the areas we disagree are actually quite trivial.

The formula FIDE [ELO] = 600 + 8 X ECF was the old formula.
FIDE [ELO] = 1250 + 5 X ECF is the new formula.

The distinction between FIDE and National is simply because I believe FIDE ratings only go down to 2000 so anything below 2000 is a National Rating. National does not imply USCF it merely implies non FIDE.

The new formula seems to get the conversion accurate above ECF150 and the old below about ECF100. In between I personally believe the conversion is less accurate and the true rating falls somewhere between the old and the new.

There is no reason for the USCF to adjust its conversion once the ECF changes the grades at the end of this year. The ECF basis of calculation will remain unchanged and only those players whose ratings are deemed to be inaccurate will change. I don't know exactly how it is happening as not everyone graded 135 will jump to 150 (some may only go to 140) so it constitutes a correction rather than an upward movement.

I can only judge my own performance as a basis of comparison I am afraid. 23 years ago living in Africa my rating peaked at 2170. After I left Africa it was 5 years before I played again and my initial ECF after my 1st season was 158 in 1991. I wasn't playing as well then as I was 5 years earlier but I didn't do too badly as I played 6 games and won 6 games. After 2 seasons I didn't play again for a few years and my rating started of fresh at 148 the next time I played. In Africa I played opponents with USCF ratings and certainly was totally untroubled by anyone rated 1500-1600.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Your flaming is off-topic as was your original comment. Your data is incorrect as well.

You don't seem to know anything about this topic. Please stay out of the discussion if you have nothing to add pertaining to the topic at hand.

I have yet to see your proof that I "lack chess knowledge" and also examples of people rated 2200 OTB reaching 3000 here. Is this hot air coming from your OTB performances or from your 1600 ICC performances? I have every right to participate in this discussion particularly when you throw insults with one hand and claim I lack chess knowledge on the other hand. Even you cannot have your cake and eat it.