Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Main

Date: 06 Sep 2008 00:00:18
From: John Salerno
Subject: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

No, I'm not ratings-obsessed yet, just curious how it works. I just read
the chapter in Patrick Wolff's book about tournaments and he explains
the basics and mentions ratings, but I wasn't clear on if these two
organizations use the same rating (I know they both use the Elo system,
but what about the actual rating itself?) or if you have to play in
tournaments specifically sanctioned by one or the other to get rated
with them. Or can a tournament be sanctioned by both? How does this work
exactly? Do you pick one or the other to get a rating in, or does it all
just work out that you get a rating with both?

Thanks.

Date: 06 Sep 2008 06:01:45
From:
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On Sep 6, 12:00=A0am, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:
> No, I'm not ratings-obsessed yet, just curious how it works. I just read
> the chapter in Patrick Wolff's book about tournaments and he explains
> the basics and mentions ratings, but I wasn't clear on if these two
> organizations use the same rating (I know they both use the Elo system,
> but what about the actual rating itself?) or if you have to play in
> tournaments specifically sanctioned by one or the other to get rated
> with them. Or can a tournament be sanctioned by both? How does this work
> exactly? Do you pick one or the other to get a rating in, or does it all
> just work out that you get a rating with both?
>
> Thanks.

I wouldn't worry about getting a FIDE rating, at least not yet,
John. Most rated American players have only a USCF rating. FIDE
competition is usually limited only to very strong players. Until a
few years ago, IIRC, the lowest possible FIDE rating was 2200, a
rating only the top few percent of USCF players would ever reach.
Both FIDE and USCF use the Elo system, designed by the late Arpad
Elo, PhD, a Hungarian-American mathematician and physicist. He
designed it at the USCF's request, and the USCF began using it in
1960. FIDE adopted it in 1970. There are slight differences in the way
the two organizations do the computations now, but the basic method is
Elo's.

> if you have to play in
> tournaments specifically sanctioned by one or the other to get rated
> with them.

Yes, that's how you get the rating. You join USCF, play in USCF-
rated events, and based on your performance you will get a certain
rating. Your rating is recalculated after each event.

> Or can a tournament be sanctioned by both?

Good question. I know that one can get FIDE norms by playing in the
US Championship, so it seems reasonable that one could also get a FIDE
rating there. I'd be curious to know if one can get FIDE ratings
playing against foreigners in big open tournaments, like the New York
Open and such. Any TDs here know?

Date: 09 Sep 2008 01:50:29
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 9 Set, 04:08, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> Alessandro J. wrote:
>
> > For your future reference, you can access your ratings from :www.fide.c=
om
> > , top right you will find " ratings " , and then " all players ", type
> > in your name and you will access your page, where you can consult all
> > the available data for you.
>
> > Alessandro.
>
> Right - I can find *that*. =A0Even better, the USCF player lookup provide=
s
> a link. =A0But, I can only find the partial ratings - not the cumulative
> one you found.
>

On your main page you have a column named " individual calculations
" : click on " Check * next to " more periods ", then click "
Available " next to January 2006, you will get to the Fort Lauderdale
Open report, with the cumulative scores reported on top, and the two
separate tournaments underneath.

This is the link : http://ratings.fide.com/tourarc.phtml?codt=3D18&field1=
=3D2025833

Date: 08 Sep 2008 14:45:50
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 8 Set, 22:24, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:

> I just double-checked. =A0The lines you quote (please - where did you fin=
d
> them?) are *cumulative*.
>
> The event rated in October 2005 was 1.5/4 and the event rated in January
> 2006 was 1.0/3, for a total of 2.5/7 for two events.
>
> My next event, rated in October 2007 was 0.0/3. =A0According to what I
> have been told by USCF folk, this event *should be* ignored (because I
> did not score. =A0You said that this is not correct, but offered the idea
> that my previous results may have "expired".

http://ratings.fide.com/tourarc.phtml?codt=3D17&field1=3D2025833

is your October 2005 page for Phoenix US, scoring 1.5 / 4

http://ratings.fide.com/tourarc.phtml?codt=3D18&field1=3D2025833

is your January 2006 page for Fort Lauderdale, US, held in August
2004, ( hence one and a half years late ) which gives two results ,
and I know realize that what FIDE has done is calculated a cumulative
score together with your previous result , which explains the unusual
format, to give one part-rating for the two tournaments. ( It is the
first time I see two results for one tournament, I had assumed you had
taken part in two events at the same venue, which is an option at the
bigger events ).

At this point I really don't know what to say, as either option
( third tournament ignored due to 0 points, or previous rating
expired ) is valid. As you say, best wait for your next US Open, and
be done with it. :o)

For your future reference, you can access your ratings from : www.fide.com
, top right you will find " ratings " , and then " all players ", type
in your name and you will access your page, where you can consult all
the available data for you.

Alessandro.

Date: 08 Sep 2008 21:08:30
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Alessandro J. wrote:
>
> For your future reference, you can access your ratings from : www.fide.com
> , top right you will find " ratings " , and then " all players ", type
> in your name and you will access your page, where you can consult all
> the available data for you.
>
>
> Alessandro.
>
>
>

Right - I can find *that*. Even better, the USCF player lookup provides
a link. But, I can only find the partial ratings - not the cumulative
one you found.

--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/

Date: 08 Sep 2008 04:51:07
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 8 Set, 01:48, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:
>
>
> > First off, I can't understand why you didn't receive a rating in the
> > January 2006 list, as the prescribed number of games seems to have
> > been reached.
>
> I was told by two people who should know that 0.5 was required.

I read on your card :

October 2005 : 1.5 / 4 RP 2073
January 2006 : 2.5 / 7 RP 1947

Something is wrong, according to this data you should have entered the
January 2006 list with a rating of 1993, the only possible explanation
is that the October 2005 data was inserted after the January 2006 part
rating, and therefore the system ( or whatever ) didn't take it into
consideration.
You might want to ask the rating officer at the USCF to look into it
( FIDE ignore individuals' queries ).

Regards,

Alessandro.

Date: 08 Sep 2008 15:24:10
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Alessandro J. wrote:
> On 8 Set, 01:48, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> First off, I can't understand why you didn't receive a rating in the
>>> January 2006 list, as the prescribed number of games seems to have
>>> been reached.
>> I was told by two people who should know that 0.5 was required.
>
> I read on your card :
>
> October 2005 : 1.5 / 4 RP 2073
> January 2006 : 2.5 / 7 RP 1947
>
> Something is wrong, according to this data you should have entered the
> January 2006 list with a rating of 1993, the only possible explanation
> is that the October 2005 data was inserted after the January 2006 part
> rating, and therefore the system ( or whatever ) didn't take it into
> consideration.
> You might want to ask the rating officer at the USCF to look into it
> ( FIDE ignore individuals' queries ).
>
> Regards,
>
> Alessandro.

I just double-checked. The lines you quote (please - where did you find
them?) are *cumulative*.

The event rated in October 2005 was 1.5/4 and the event rated in January
2006 was 1.0/3, for a total of 2.5/7 for two events.

My next event, rated in October 2007 was 0.0/3. According to what I
have been told by USCF folk, this event *should be* ignored (because I
did not score. You said that this is not correct, but offered the idea
that my previous results may have "expired".

In any event, FIDE still appears to consider me as unrated.

I hope that I still have the 2.5/7, so that my next 0.5/3 3 will put me
on the list - but if not, I'll just have to work harder (or wait as
lower and lower rated players show up at the US Open - I played a
1900FIDE player this year, and expect to see more as time goes by).

Given the nature of the US Open (one very large section), I see players
rated 2000+ and 1600-, so I'll either have to beat a few more masters,
or wait until the C players have FIDE ratings.

--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/

Date: 08 Sep 2008 15:14:29
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Date: 07 Sep 2008 12:32:39
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 7 Set, 19:32, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:

> > Subsequently, for your part
> > rating to be valid, you must perform at least 1400 or above ( which is
> > the current rating floor for FIDE, who are planning to lower it
> > still ), which implies getting at least a draw somewhere.
>
> I'm not sure about this - I have a detail in my record where I scored 0
> against 3 FIDE players, but had a performance (reported by FIDE) of
> 1419. =A0This detail did NOT count. =A0I suspect some confusion on what a
> "performance" is. =A0Check my FIDE rating history and look at the Rp of
> 1419 (approximate...) with a score of 0.
>
> So..it seems to me that FIDE is enforcing "at least a draw" and not
> "performance above 1400".

Interesting Fort Lauderdale rating page : was it really submitted a
year and a half after the event ?! :o)

First off, I can't understand why you didn't receive a rating in the
January 2006 list, as the prescribed number of games seems to have
been reached.
As for your October 2007 part rating, the reason it might have been
ignored might be that part ratings have a limited lifespan ( 18
months to 2 years, I can't remember for sure ) so it could be that
your previous part ratings are no longer valid, and that the October
2007 part - rating has been discarded due to it being a " new " first
rating without the prescribed point.

I checked the FIDE handbook and found :

10.21

If an unrated player scores less than one point in his first rated
event, his score is disregarded.

10.31

Where a player`s first result(s) is less than 1401, or the FIDE rating
floor at the time of the event, the result(s) is ignored.

10.33

Only Rn >=3D 1401, or the FIDE rating floor at the time of the event, are
considered. ( not sure wether Rn is rating or part-rating )

No mention of limited lifespan for part ratings, though I know of a
couple of Italian players who deliberately waited a considerable
amount of time before entering a new tournament so that they could get
rid of a low part- rating.

Date: 07 Sep 2008 18:48:09
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Alessandro J. wrote:
> On 7 Set, 19:32, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>> Subsequently, for your part
>>> rating to be valid, you must perform at least 1400 or above ( which is
>>> the current rating floor for FIDE, who are planning to lower it
>>> still ), which implies getting at least a draw somewhere.
>> I'm not sure about this - I have a detail in my record where I scored 0
>> against 3 FIDE players, but had a performance (reported by FIDE) of
>> 1419. This detail did NOT count. I suspect some confusion on what a
>> "performance" is. Check my FIDE rating history and look at the Rp of
>> 1419 (approximate...) with a score of 0.
>>
>> So..it seems to me that FIDE is enforcing "at least a draw" and not
>> "performance above 1400".
>
>
> Interesting Fort Lauderdale rating page : was it really submitted a
> year and a half after the event ?! :o)

Probably.

>
> First off, I can't understand why you didn't receive a rating in the
> January 2006 list, as the prescribed number of games seems to have
> been reached.

I was told by two people who should know that 0.5 was required.

> As for your October 2007 part rating, the reason it might have been
> ignored might be that part ratings have a limited lifespan ( 18
> months to 2 years, I can't remember for sure ) so it could be that
> your previous part ratings are no longer valid, and that the October
> 2007 part - rating has been discarded due to it being a " new " first
> rating without the prescribed point.

Logical. I was also under the impression that part ratings expired -
but people I consulted didn't think so.

Is there some corner of the FIDE webpage that might answer the question:
how many games do I have AT THIS MOMENT?

All very interesting - but it's not as if my life depends on actually
achieving a FIDE rating. That should take care of itself in a few years
as more and more players playing in the US Open have FIDE ratings. I
think I might have a few more >1400 FIDE performances in me...

--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/

Date: 07 Sep 2008 07:53:47
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On Sep 7, 5:20=A0am, "Alessandro J." <[email protected] > wrote:

> > =A0 One advantage of joining the USCF (for
> > instance) right away, is that if you begin
> > playing in rated tournaments, you can
> > measure your improvement over time by
> > your results-- not guesswork.

> If only Getclub could join ....

Alas, even if GetClub could join, we would
have the rare case of a player "loosing" every
game "like a carrot", and thus, its rating
would still not tell us precisely how weak
the program is. All we might learn is that it
is possible to "loose" every game, and to
excel at being the worst one can be. : >D

Seriously though, I believe there are big
differences in ratings not just from one
country to another or from one system to
another, but also within, say, the USCF's
own ratings pool. I experienced this fact
many years ago, when I occasionally
traveled some distance away from the
local pool of players, with which I had
become all too familiar.

My adventures in Kentucky, for instance,
left their mark in the rating points I almost
invariably left behind, while my travels to
Chicago resulted in a major disturbance
of their ratings pool-- a hundred points
magically disappearing therefrom in a
single day. One explanation is that
the larger pools tend to get a bit frothy,
while smaller pools may be relatively
depressed, or compacted toward the
middle (i.e. 1400 or so).

But the worst distortion of rating pools
has got to be where a rapid influx of new,
young and improving scholastic players
enters the fray. Without "bonus" or
"feedback" points, old men are doomed
here, for the rapid improvers leach points
at an astounding pace, and who better
to target than us slow-thinking old men?

-- help bot

Date: 07 Sep 2008 06:34:56
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

HOW GOOD IS YOUR CHESS?

This quiz by GM Larry Evans is designed to help you estimate your own
aptitude "far from the hurly burly of the tournament arena without any
pressure."

Here is what one reader had to say:

The best chess book I have bought in ages, May 9,
2006
By overlook 1977 (Raleigh, NC United
States)

This is an awesome book. It's very straight forward...100 different
positions from REAL GAMES, each with three options. You must decide
the best move. The logic behind the best answer, in addition to the
two inferior answers, are explained. The positions span across
openings, midgames, and endgames. Each correct answer is worth 25 Elo
rating points so you can get a rough estimate of your chess rating.

This book is for a chess player who knows the rules and basic theory,
but needs to hone their calculation and analysis skills. It is
helping me calculate deeper and put more thought into my moves. This
book is a great value for the price.

http://tinyurl.com/5frcx3

John Salerno wrote:
> help bot wrote:
>
> > One advantage of joining the USCF (for
> > instance) right away, is that if you begin
> > playing in rated tournaments, you can
> > measure your improvement over time by
> > your results-- not guesswork.
>
> I definitely plan to join before I try a tournament, but I doubt I need
> to join right now since I don't plan to play in tournaments just yet.
> (Although I was just on USCF's website looking at membership costs!)

Date: 07 Sep 2008 02:34:21
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 6 Set, 15:01, [email protected] wrote:

> > Or can a tournament be sanctioned by both?

FIDE being the union of all Chess Federations, any event sanctioned by
it is sanctioned by default by the National federation where the
tournament takes place. Infact, tournament ads usually specify whether
a tournament is FIDE rated or not, and if it is, it is Nationally
rated by default ( a TD might decide to hold his tournament outside of
the national chess federation for whatever reason, but could not have
it rated by FIDE ).

Italy have adopted a radical solution to the problem : they are
phasing out their national ratings altogether, as soon as someone gets
their FIDE rating, it becomes their national rating as well,
cancelling the old Eloitalia.

Alessandro

Date: 07 Sep 2008 02:24:46
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 7 Set, 10:56, "Alessandro J." <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Infact, you need to score at least 1 point against FIDE rated
> opponents in your first FIDE rated event. Subsequently, for your part
> rating to be valid, you must perform at least 1400 or above ( which is
> the current rating floor for FIDE, who are planning to lower it
> still ), which implies getting at least a draw somewhere. This is
> valid even in the case of obtaining a 9 game part - rating, which
> would qualify you to get your first provisional FIDE rating.

Of course it is, since you need at least 1 point ( regardless of the
number of games played ) in your first part rating anyway ....

Alessandro, a little redundant.

Date: 07 Sep 2008 02:20:04
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 7 Set, 03:41, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:

> =A0 One advantage of joining the USCF (for
> instance) right away, is that if you begin
> playing in rated tournaments, you can
> measure your improvement over time by
> your results-- not guesswork.

If only Getclub could join ....

Alessandro

Date: 07 Sep 2008 02:09:51
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 6 Set, 21:19, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:

>
> If you only play in USCF tournaments and get rated there, and then later
> decide to play in FIDE tournaments, does this mean you somehow "start at
> 0" again with FIDE, or do they give you a rating based on your current
> USCF rating?

FIDE systematically ignores national ratings, and considers all player
without a FIDE rating as unrated players. This does not mean " start
at 0 ", as there is no default grade of entry, but the first rating
will be simply the end result of the first 9 games, which can usually
be off by 200 points.
>
> Mainly I'm just wondering what the norm is when people mention a rating.
> Is it USCF or FIDE? It seems weird to compare ratings if they are from
> different organizations (who calculate them differently), so what
> exactly should someone shoot for if they want to get rated? Stick with USCF?

No two national ratings are the same, and relationship between them
and FIDE ratings have changed during the years. I am familiar with
FIDE, British ECF, the Italian Eloitalia, The Swiss rating and
vaguely how they relate to USCF.

In the nineties a 2000 FIDE was equivalent to 175 ECF, 1900 Eloitalia,
2100 USCF and possibly a 2000 Swiss.
Today, a 2000 FIDE is equivalent to 150 - 160 ECF, 1900 - 2000
Eloitalia , 2000 Swiss, and possibly 2000 USCF though relations
between the grades might not be the same at other levels, and
inflation and deflation in national ratings added to the fact that the
FIDE rating pool is expanding enourmously means that 5 years down the
line the numbers will be different yet again.
To sum up, tempting though it is, to say that you are " a 2000 rated
player " is infact a meaningless proposition, and someone's Elo can be
taken only as a relative measure of how you stand compared to all the
players in the current rating pool.

Alessandro

Date: 07 Sep 2008 01:56:34
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On 6 Set, 20:34, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:

As correction was welcome,

> My understanding is that you need:
>
> a) 4 FIDE-rated opponents in your first FIDE-ratable event
> b) 3 FIDE-rated opponents in subsequent events

Any part - rating , be it the first or subsequent, always requires at
least 3 games against FIDE rated opponents

> c) score at least 0.5 in each event

Infact, you need to score at least 1 point against FIDE rated
opponents in your first FIDE rated event. Subsequently, for your part
rating to be valid, you must perform at least 1400 or above ( which is
the current rating floor for FIDE, who are planning to lower it
still ), which implies getting at least a draw somewhere. This is
valid even in the case of obtaining a 9 game part - rating, which
would qualify you to get your first provisional FIDE rating.

Alessandro

Date: 07 Sep 2008 12:32:46
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Alessandro J. wrote:
> On 6 Set, 20:34, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> As correction was welcome,
>
>
>> My understanding is that you need:
>>
>> a) 4 FIDE-rated opponents in your first FIDE-ratable event
>> b) 3 FIDE-rated opponents in subsequent events
>
> Any part - rating , be it the first or subsequent, always requires at
> least 3 games against FIDE rated opponents
>
>> c) score at least 0.5 in each event
>
> Infact, you need to score at least 1 point against FIDE rated
> opponents in your first FIDE rated event.

Thanks - I remembered that there was a difference with the first event -
but forgot exactly what the difference was.

> Subsequently, for your part
> rating to be valid, you must perform at least 1400 or above ( which is
> the current rating floor for FIDE, who are planning to lower it
> still ), which implies getting at least a draw somewhere.

I'm not sure about this - I have a detail in my record where I scored 0
against 3 FIDE players, but had a performance (reported by FIDE) of
1419. This detail did NOT count. I suspect some confusion on what a
"performance" is. Check my FIDE rating history and look at the Rp of
1419 (approximate...) with a score of 0.

So..it seems to me that FIDE is enforcing "at least a draw" and not
"performance above 1400".

> This is
> valid even in the case of obtaining a 9 game part - rating, which
> would qualify you to get your first provisional FIDE rating.
>
> Alessandro
>

--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/

Date: 06 Sep 2008 18:41:52
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On Sep 6, 9:14=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:

> Kenneth Sloan wrote:
> > But, enough theory: go tohttp://www.uschess.org and purchase a
> > membership. =A0Then, poke around that site and find a nearby tournament=
.
> > PLAY!
>
> Yeah, I do plan to do this eventually, but I want to keep learning more
> first. I know a lot of the basics after reading a few books over the
> past month, but do you need to be "ready" to play in a tournament, or do
> people join even if they aren't all that good? (I don't mean "ready" in
> the sense of having to meet requirements, I just mean should you study
> first and know a lot, or should you just join and learn as you go.)

One advantage of joining the USCF (for
instance) right away, is that if you begin
playing in rated tournaments, you can
measure your improvement over time by
your results-- not guesswork.

You might begin by finishing last with
almost all losses, but over time, come
to see that even in these games you
had opportunities galore to "nail" the
opponent on his blunders, but missed
them! Or you may find that you are
already able to draw or even defeat a
few players, and the goal will be more
to reduce needless losses (you need
not worry about losing to grandmasters
at this time, for they have spent years
studying your openings and preparing
"surprises" by which to catch you in
some trap or other).

But do not expect "instant results"
each time you make an effort to learn
or study; often as not, matters of form
or luck intervene, and it may require
time for any new learning to show
itself in an improved rating.

On the other hand, some naysayers
may point out that the USCF in
particular is not the finest of its kind,
or that one can join some free clan
and get a chess rating at no cost, or
play remotely against "other human
opponents" (mostly operators of
various chess engines these days).
But this style of play lacks a certain
something which may best be
summarized in the famous words of
Bobby Fischer, who said: "I like to
watch 'em squirm!"

-- help bot

Date: 06 Sep 2008 22:16:47
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

help bot wrote:

> One advantage of joining the USCF (for
> instance) right away, is that if you begin
> playing in rated tournaments, you can
> measure your improvement over time by
> your results-- not guesswork.

I definitely plan to join before I try a tournament, but I doubt I need
to join right now since I don't plan to play in tournaments just yet.
(Although I was just on USCF's website looking at membership costs!)

Date: 06 Sep 2008 17:31:50
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On Sep 6, 3:19=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:

> So when someone says their rating is 1800, for example, should I assume
> that means USCF?

No. You should strive to avoid careless
assumptions, and rather, ask for
clarification. Of course, if you are at an
event in which there are no FIDE-titled
players, you may be able to slip by with
an assumption that numbers in the
range you described are USCF ratings.

In the old days, people were quick to
point out, or at least claim, that there
was a big difference between FIDE and
USCF ratings. But now things aren't
so simple, as some "studies" have
indicated a superiority of USCF over
FIDE in certain ranges-- the opposite
of what had been assumed to be the
case by those who live by making
unwarranted and/or warranted
assumptions.

This brings us to the interesting case
of the Evans ratpack versus Taylor
Kingston, in which the former accused
the latter of crimes against humanity
with regard to deception, and yes,
even impersonation of an over-the-
board rated player! Rational judges
threw the case out of court upon
discovery of plaintiff's true motive, yet
it remains to this day a testament to
what can happen when one is so
careless as to make unwarranted
assumptions regarding ratings or
chess titles.

-- help bot

Date: 06 Sep 2008 12:39:59
From:
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

On Sep 6, 3:19=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > =A0 I wouldn't worry about getting a FIDE rating, at least not yet,
> > John. Most rated American players have only a USCF rating. FIDE
> > competition is usually limited only to very strong players. Until a
> > few years ago, IIRC, the lowest possible FIDE rating was 2200, a
> > rating only the top few percent of USCF players would ever reach.
>
> So when someone says their rating is 1800, for example, should I assume
> that means USCF?

I'd say that will be a safe assumption at least 90-95% of the time,
if you are talking with an American.

> If you only play in USCF tournaments and get rated there, and then later
> decide to play in FIDE tournaments, does this mean you somehow "start at
> 0" again with FIDE, or do they give you a rating based on your current
> USCF rating?

I can't answer that.

> Mainly I'm just wondering what the norm is when people mention a rating.
> Is it USCF or FIDE?

Again, in the USA, they usually mean USCF, if they're talking about
themselves and folks they know. If they're discussing top GMs, they
usually mean FIDE ratings.

> It seems weird to compare ratings if they are from
> different organizations (who calculate them differently), so what
> exactly should someone shoot for if they want to get rated? Stick with US=
CF?

If you want to start playing rated chess, I would stick with the
USCF for now.

Date: 08 Sep 2008 09:14:03
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:1adf9d75-fcc2-4f17-9f23-222555c03d1b@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 6, 3:19 pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > I wouldn't worry about getting a FIDE rating, at least not yet,
> > John. Most rated American players have only a USCF rating. FIDE
> > competition is usually limited only to very strong players. Until a
> > few years ago, IIRC, the lowest possible FIDE rating was 2200, a
> > rating only the top few percent of USCF players would ever reach.
>
> So when someone says their rating is 1800, for example, should I assume
> that means USCF?

I'd say that will be a safe assumption at least 90-95% of the time,
if you are talking with an American.

**Additionally, it will be a safe assumption that it is an OTB rating if you
are talking with an American, rather than for example, a postal or blitz
rating. If people mean that they will say so.

> Mainly I'm just wondering what the norm is when people mention a rating.
> Is it USCF or FIDE?

**Fide until very recently didn't rate sub-master play at all. Therefore,
unless it is otherwise qualified it means regular rating at regular chess.

Again, in the USA, they usually mean USCF, if they're talking about
themselves and folks they know. If they're discussing top GMs, they
usually mean FIDE ratings.

**Very uncertainly so. I wouldn't say that. Only outside the US would it be
Fide.

> It seems weird to compare ratings if they are from
> different organizations (who calculate them differently), so what
> exactly should someone shoot for if they want to get rated? Stick with
> USCF?

If you want to start playing rated chess, I would stick with the
USCF for now.

**Makes sense, they are the default US rating system. Your most likely
results will come from tournaments - and it depends if the tournament
organiser uses USCF or XPR rating services, for example - though that is
beyond your control. Other than from esoterica about rating floors for
higher rated players, the means of generating your rating are both evolved
from Elo's idea.

Phil Innes

Date: 08 Sep 2008 15:28:15
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Chess One wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:1adf9d75-fcc2-4f17-9f23-222555c03d1b@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 6, 3:19 pm, John Salerno <[email protected]> wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
...

>> So when someone says their rating is 1800, for example, should I assume
>> that means USCF?
>
...

>
> Again, in the USA, they usually mean USCF, if they're talking about
> themselves and folks they know. If they're discussing top GMs, they
> usually mean FIDE ratings.

How many "top GMs" have ratings (FIDE or USCF) of 1800?

I would think that an 1800 player would merely be "nearly a GM".

--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/

Date: 09 Sep 2008 07:10:21
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

"Kenneth Sloan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chess One wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:1adf9d75-fcc2-4f17-9f23-222555c03d1b@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> On Sep 6, 3:19 pm, John Salerno <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
> ...
>
>
>>> So when someone says their rating is 1800, for example, should I assume
>>> that means USCF?
>>
> ...
>
>>
>> Again, in the USA, they usually mean USCF, if they're talking about
>> themselves and folks they know. If they're discussing top GMs, they
>> usually mean FIDE ratings.
>
>
> How many "top GMs" have ratings (FIDE or USCF) of 1800?

None of them. The phrases above are seperated by a period, thereby the
comment on US ratings is related to USCF. Then comes a comment about top GMs
who have Fide ratings since that is their peer-group.

> I would think that an 1800 player would merely be "nearly a GM".

Only in the USCF's rating system.

I heard about a 1900 player the other day who had a 2200 floor! Can you
imagine how that could have happened?

I also heard that nothing happened to change USCF's quality control system,
even after some other guy wrote to the NY Times chess blog and said he wrote
to USCF for a masters rating and a floor, and without checking any records
nor requiring him to sign anything, no witnesses &c, they gave him one!

Apparently my almost is far closer than USCF's nearly.

Phil Innes

> --
> Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
> Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
> University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
> Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/

Date: 06 Sep 2008 15:19:58
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

[email protected] wrote:

> I wouldn't worry about getting a FIDE rating, at least not yet,
> John. Most rated American players have only a USCF rating. FIDE
> competition is usually limited only to very strong players. Until a
> few years ago, IIRC, the lowest possible FIDE rating was 2200, a
> rating only the top few percent of USCF players would ever reach.

So when someone says their rating is 1800, for example, should I assume
that means USCF?

If you only play in USCF tournaments and get rated there, and then later
decide to play in FIDE tournaments, does this mean you somehow "start at
0" again with FIDE, or do they give you a rating based on your current
USCF rating?

Mainly I'm just wondering what the norm is when people mention a rating.
Is it USCF or FIDE? It seems weird to compare ratings if they are from
different organizations (who calculate them differently), so what
exactly should someone shoot for if they want to get rated? Stick with USCF?

Date: 06 Sep 2008 16:35:27
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

John Salerno wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't worry about getting a FIDE rating, at least not yet,
>> John. Most rated American players have only a USCF rating. FIDE
>> competition is usually limited only to very strong players. Until a
>> few years ago, IIRC, the lowest possible FIDE rating was 2200, a
>> rating only the top few percent of USCF players would ever reach.
>
> So when someone says their rating is 1800, for example, should I assume
> that means USCF?

1800 is a low FIDE rating. So...it's most likely to be USCF. But, it
could be ICC, or Yahoo!, or....many different organizations calculate
ratings. They are all more-or-less correlated - but they are all
different. To first order, you do not go too far wrong by assuming that
FIDE ratings and USCF ratings are about the same - but they are not
exactly the same, and they do not apply in the same situations.

>
> If you only play in USCF tournaments and get rated there, and then later
> decide to play in FIDE tournaments, does this mean you somehow "start at
> 0" again with FIDE, or do they give you a rating based on your current
> USCF rating?

As far as I know, FIDE completely ignores USCF ratings. FIDE requires a
certain minimum level of performance, and a certain minimum number of
games played against players who already have a FIDE rating.

USCF computes ratings and publishes a rating after you have played 4
games (and these games *might* all be against unrated players). Of
course, such ratings are not very precise. Once you have played 50
tournament games, your USCF rating is about as precise as it ever will be.

USCF recognizes FIDE ratings and uses them to kick start your USCF
rating. FIDE ratings are also used for pairing and prize purposes in
USCF events. The opposite is not true (I think) for so-called "FIDE
events". But...most "FIDE-events" are held under the auspices of *some*
national federation. If you are in the USA, that would be USCF.

>
> Mainly I'm just wondering what the norm is when people mention a rating.
> Is it USCF or FIDE?

USCF does not (currently) have "norms". FIDE norms are progress towards
the IM and GM titles. USCF used to have a norm-based title system, and
is in the process of implementing YetAnother - but it does not exist
right now.

> It seems weird to compare ratings if they are from
> different organizations (who calculate them differently), so what
> exactly should someone shoot for if they want to get rated? Stick with
> USCF?

Perhaps best is to play chess for its own sake. The ratings will take
care of themselves. You should play USCF Over-The-Board tournaments
because they are well run and reasonably standard. The same goes for
FIDE events - but if you are asking these questions and live in the USA
you will be hard pressed to find FIDE events that are not also USCF
events. Individuals do not join FIDE - it is a collection of national
federations. Individuals join USCF, and gain a connection to FIDE
through USCF.

But, enough theory: go to http://www.uschess.org and purchase a
membership. Then, poke around that site and find a nearby tournament.
PLAY! Start with a section that mentions unrated (UNR) players - and
see how it goes. Keep playing at that level until you have a published
rating. Then, let your rating and your ambition be your guide. My
usual advice is: if your rating is within 100 points of the top limit
for a section - play up in the next higher section; if your rating is
within 200 points, CONSIDER playing up but recognize that it will be a
significant challenge. But that's for when you have a published rating.
In the beginning, play in the lowest section for which you are eligible.

--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/

Date: 06 Sep 2008 22:19:17
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Kenneth Sloan wrote:

> 1800 is a low FIDE rating. So...it's most likely to be USCF.

Just a random number I made up. :)

But, it
> could be ICC, or Yahoo!, or....many different organizations calculate
> ratings.

But USCF is a legitimate, valid rating, right? I wouldn't imagine
someone using their Yahoo rating to try to compare to a tournament player.

Date: 06 Sep 2008 21:14:20
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

Kenneth Sloan wrote:

> But, enough theory: go to http://www.uschess.org and purchase a
> membership. Then, poke around that site and find a nearby tournament.
> PLAY!

Yeah, I do plan to do this eventually, but I want to keep learning more
first. I know a lot of the basics after reading a few books over the
past month, but do you need to be "ready" to play in a tournament, or do
people join even if they aren't all that good? (I don't mean "ready" in
the sense of having to meet requirements, I just mean should you study
first and know a lot, or should you just join and learn as you go.)

Date: 06 Sep 2008 13:34:13
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Rating: USCF and/or FIDE?

[email protected] wrote:
>
>> Or can a tournament be sanctioned by both?
>
> Good question. I know that one can get FIDE norms by playing in the
> US Championship, so it seems reasonable that one could also get a FIDE
> rating there. I'd be curious to know if one can get FIDE ratings
> playing against foreigners in big open tournaments, like the New York
> Open and such. Any TDs here know?

Yes. An increasing number of USCF tournaments are also submitted to
FIDE for rating. Players do not have to do anything special for their
games to be rated by USCF - just play in an event that advertises "FIDE
rated".

For example, the US Open has been FIDE rated for several years. As a
result, the number of FIDE-rated players in the US Open is slowly going
up. The more FIDE-rated players who play in the event, the more likely
it is for a new player to get a FIDE rating.

My understanding is that you need:

a) 4 FIDE-rated opponents in your first FIDE-ratable event
b) 3 FIDE-rated opponents in subsequent events
c) score at least 0.5 in each event
d) accumulate 9 FIDE-rated games

When you do all of that, you get a published FIDE rating.

Before your first published FIDE rating, events where you do not score
0.5 or better are simply ignored. After that, they count.

I may have a few details wrong - I welcome correction. I have omitted a
host of other details that can make a game not eligible for FIDE rating
- most notably those related to the playing schedule in the event. But,
the OP has little or not control over most of this. For him - join USCF
and play in USCF Tournaments. That will get you a USCF rating. Worry
about FIDE when your USCF rating goes above 2000 (at which point you may
well discover that you already *have* a FIDE rating).

Note that if you simply play in a FIDE-rated event you will get a FIDE
ID - even if your result does not earn you a FIDE rating, or even
*progress* towards a FIDE rating. The USCF webpage includes a link to
"most recent FIDE rating" for players with FIDE ID's - even if they do
not yet have a published FIDE rating.

--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://KennethRSloan.com/