WCDF ratings

General Discussion about the game of Checkers.

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:34 am

Igor_Razumikhin wrote:L.Valenta does not earn a Master status for winning a Class C type tournament.


Privet, Igor !

I agree with you about event status, but disagree about awarding. As I said - WCDF title (MF/MI) must be giving to the Youth World Champion due to his/her title, which should raise respect to event (Youth World Championship) and motivation for youth players.

This is not a new practice and use with success in FMJD for years.

Respectfully,

Alex Moiseyev
checkers player
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby AKA on Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:59 am

How did Nathan Gogo earn a 2200 rating?
AKA
 

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby AKA on Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:12 am

In your opinion, Alex, name all of the living current players that deserve Grandmaster Status.

I think it should be limited to 10-15 players. Here are 12 players (living), in my opinion, with GM Status.

A. Moiseyev USA
R. King BAR
R. Pask ENG
J. Morrison USA
J. Francis BAR
L. Levitt USA
R. Hallet USA
E. Lowder USA
M. Durdyev TUK
B. Durdyev TUK
L. Edwards WAL
W. Docherty SCO

If there was another status level higher, it would only include A. Moiseyev and R.King. They are in a class of their own.

I think the difference between MI and MF is: MI is International Master, meaning you are a recognized Master internationaly, where as MF is Federation Master, meaning you are only a recognized Master in your Federation/Nation.

Youth players are willing to play offline, but are their parents willing to do their part? The top Youth players play online, and really, could compete and do well against any age in offline play. I think you could support this Alex, I think you have broken a few sweats at Kurnik in those blitz games.

Did you expect this level of play online at Kurnik? Just from KIDS who have never seen a checker book?
AKA
 

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:40 am

Different people - different opinion. Thanks for sharing your views with us. We shouldn't create "new level" or new title for me and Ron King, but we have to fill out a big gap among those two players and rest - this is our goal. And motivation, including titles, plays here a major role.

Modern "Internet generation" is doing pretty well :lol: and I really enjoy my blitz games on Kurnik. But I didn't intend to test anyone. I played here for my own training to refresh and improve some skills. In fact - these non-serious 2/0, 3/2 games helped me to win easy in powerful fashion TN Open.

Respectfully,

Alex
Last edited by Alex_Moiseyev on Sun Mar 12, 2006 4:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Gene Lindsay on Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:28 pm

Who is Dale Rumpf and where did he play the 157 rounds used in these ratings? It says he is from USA but I have never seen him that I am aware of.

Gene Lindsay
Gene Lindsay
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:54 pm
Location: Morristown,TN

ACF Ratings ??

Postby Alan Millhone on Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:42 pm

Hello Draughts/Checker players:

I find the discussions interesting about the new WCDF World Ratings. I also found it interesting that an average player as myself made it into the top 100 players (quite an honour).

Little or no discussions ever take place over the ACF ratings. Also at our upcoming ACF 2006 Medina,Ohio 3-Move National Tournaments I assume we will use the current ACF ratings for players ? Or do we take the WCDF and ACF ratings and average the two ?

In the past there has been a player or two that has slipped thru the 'cracks' rating wise and were allowed to play 'down' into the next group. I apologize for this and will have our two joint referee's (Mr. Leon Creek and Mr. Don Brattin) strictly enforce placement of players who are rated in Medina this June. Current ACF ratings will be in their hands for use when players register. Master players will use clocks for their rounds of play and ALL games will be recorded and turned in (legibly) before their next round can begin. The ACF "Master's Rule'' will be strictly enforced.

Looking forward to seeing all of you in Medina for this year's 3-Move Nationals. The weekend before will be the 2nd. annual "Arthur Niederhoffer 2006 ACF Youth Tournament". ACF membership will as usual be required and you can join ahead of time or join when you register to play. Also if your dues have expired you can make yourself current as a ACF Member at registration time.

Sincerely:
Alan Millhone, President
American Checker Federation
District 6 Champion
===============================================
"Hoping to have my copy of " SIXTH" to study before Medina Nationals.......... Reading my copy of 10th. ACA at Flint till then"
===============================================
Last edited by Alan Millhone on Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Alan Millhone
User avatar
Alan Millhone
Site Admin
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:02 am
Location: Belpre,Ohio

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Gene Lindsay on Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:42 pm

Igor you said in you said to name all living players that deserve Grand Master Status. Paul Davis from Virginia is still living although he has not played in a ty since 2001. Paul certainly deserves Grand Master Status as he was the first person to have won both the US 3-move National TY and the US GAYP TY.

Gene Lindsay
Gene Lindsay
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:54 pm
Location: Morristown,TN

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:56 pm

Gene Lindsay wrote:Who is Dale Rumpf and where did he play the 157 rounds used in these ratings? It says he is from USA but I have never seen him that I am aware of.

Gene Lindsay


Gene, you saw him ! He played one year in TN ty, Major division, and won it. Dale resides in PA. He used to be very active player in Internet in 1999-2003. I spent some efforts to bring him to real ty's. He played in 2 or 3 PA tournaments and did extremly well. If I am not mistaken - one time he played in TN in Masters. I remember - he lost his license, and I brought him in my car.

His high rating (also high ACF rating) is reasonable and good demonstration of some "rating paradoxes" - players, who did well when they start - get very high rating.

I know Dale personally - he is very nice guy. He probably shouldn't have such high rating, but this is "formula fault", not Dale. He was very potential.

BTW. 157 - not round. I failed into this also :roll: This is some component of Gluco system, which indicates "uncertaincy" of your rating - exactly what you asked ! High RD number means - this player has small (!) number of rounds and his rating can be very vary.

Regards,

Alex Moiseyev
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Gene Lindsay on Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:11 pm

Alex,
If he played in Major Division I understand why I didn"t notice him. I never said he didn't deserve his rating I just wondered where he played the 157 rounds they used for his rating when they ony had 55 rounds for me. If these are not rounds then that explains it. If he played in TN masters one year I certainly didn't play him. How did he finish in the Masters.

Gene
Gene Lindsay
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:54 pm
Location: Morristown,TN

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby AKA on Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:29 am

Dale Rumpf is known as the undisputed best 1/0 online player while he played. He hasn't attended anymore offline tournaments because "the gas money to get there would be more than the prize money"
AKA
 

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Ingo_Zachos on Sun Mar 12, 2006 6:26 am

RD means "Rating Deviation", not rounds.
High RD means a rating is uncertain. It is somewhere between 157 higher or lower then the calculated value for Dale Rumpf (to experts: the Glicko system is used).
High RD means either not so much games rated by that player, or a player has unstable results, making it hard to evaluate him properly.

"Anomalies" might be explained by the fact that we have only rated the tournaments prior to 01.01.2006 that were reported to us.
Still some major events might be "missing".
A player most likely is too high or too low, because we did not get his/her good/bad results, and so he/she might be over/underrated, but this is a problem of raw data, not of the system.
We will provide a list of rated events in the future, that will answer most of your questions.

Also the titles are just provisional proposals.
We know that some players like Davis, McGill, Andersson, etc. are not active anymore, but deserve titles for their merits.
We have made no final decision on who gets which title, and as you see it, it is not so easy as you think.
Most likely players with high rating will get respective titles, but we have to consider that some players r inactive, other r past their prime, some r more unstable then others, and our list still does not contain many events.


To Mr. Razumikhin:
This list and the final official list as well as any title awarded will only reflect results in real-life events, no virtual internet games with hidden names, no referee, lag problems (if I play an American on Kurnik with 3 minutes each, I will only get about 30 seconds, he will get 3 minutes), equal conditions for all, and in that circumstances visualisation and even memory work different.
If those players r really as good as you think, they should enter tournaments and prove it like Mr. Rumpf or I did.

Greetinx from snow-covered Dortmund, Germany

Ingo Zachos
Ingo_Zachos
 
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Dortmund, Germany

Who is Dale Rumpf and where did he play the 157 rounds used

Postby JR Smith on Sun Mar 12, 2006 8:49 am

Gene, if you want to see a picture of Dale Rumpf visit http://www.nccheckers.org and click Tournament Galleries and then go to 2003 TN State Open
A Checker Friend, JR Smith
User avatar
JR Smith
 
Posts: 766
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Sun Mar 12, 2006 12:06 pm

Ingo_Zachos wrote:RD means "Rating Deviation", not rounds.
High RD means a rating is uncertain. It is somewhere between 157 higher or lower then the calculated value for Dale Rumpf (to experts: the Glicko system is used).


Ingo, I am not an expert indeed, :lol: but as professional, I am familiar a bit with Glicko system. Everything in your message is correct except one thing - you real rating can be anywhere between the given rating plus or minus twice the RD - in Dale case 314.

The ratings deviation (RD) gives a measure of the unreliability of the given rating.

Regards,

Alex
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4091
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

ratings

Postby kiwinurse on Sun Mar 12, 2006 3:40 pm

I do not understand how this rating system works, but it seems to me there is a travesty being committed here, and a case of an old boys network sticking together.I for one am disgusted that Wilma Wolveton,who has played and supported checkers in America for years, and who is the only woman in history to become the Missouri State Champion, has a rating of 295! She is also American Champion.How insulting is that! It seems to me peoples rating is being too inflated or too underinflated, and it seems very unfair to me.I would like whose responsible to explain how these people are measured in this system.
kiwinurse
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 6:49 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: WCDF ratings

Postby Ingo_Zachos on Sun Mar 12, 2006 3:48 pm

Statistical interpretation of RD

We are both right, Alex. The following sentences show what RD could mean:

1.The interval formed by Current rating +/- RD contains your true rating with probability of about 0.67.

2.The interval formed by Current rating +/- 2 * RD contains your true rating with probability of about 0.95.

3.The interval formed by Current rating +/- 3 * RD contains your true rating with probability of about 0.997.

"Anomalies"


The following example shows the explanation of some "anomalies" that arise within this system.
Just remember: it is based upon an average performance, not on personal comparisons!

Ingo Zachos (Germany) scored 18 points out of 36 at the qualifier in Prague, Igor Keder (Czech Rebulic) 13 points. Also Zachos beat Keder in their personal encounter with one win and a draw.
Zachos has now 2276, but an RD of 188,
Keder has 2340, but an RD of 69.

How can it be, that someone (Zachos) played his first tournament, outscored Keder by points and in personal encounter, but yet trails in rating?
Note:
1. Keder played many rated tounaments before. In Prague his performance was bad, but in Pardubice 2005 he won as well as at the CEMSO inPrague 2003, here he clearly performed much better then 2340, in Prague he was below that level, but in average he had an 2340 level with a lower RD than Zachos. (In this case this explains the difference nearly entirely.)
2. Also it was swiss system. So both had different opponents, and it might be that Keder's opponents were better then Zachos opponents.
In the worst case, Keder played against the 9 highest rated, and Zachos against the 9 lowest rated. (In this case, this point did not cause the difference, for Keder and Zachos had nearly the same oppopents' average, Zachos even a slighly better one)
3. Zachos might win the personal encounter in all tournaments boths played in, but yet Keder performed better against other opponents, so that his average performance is higher then Zachos' performance.(In Prague Zachos lost both games to Michael Holmes, but Keder won one and lost one against Michael Holmes!).
A mathematician would say: playing strenghts is not transitive, that means if Holmes dominated Zachos, and Keder is equal to Holmes, it does not mean that Keder will dominate Zachos.

May this notes give you some information about why a player you seem to dominate still gets a higher rating, even if all events you both played in, good ones and bad ones were rated.


"Missing Tournaments"

Jan, I don't know which list you r referring to.
Wilma Wolverton has 1913 with an RD of 141 so far, not 295.
But even this 1913 is deceptive, as the high RD indicates that it is based upon just a few games, the Missoiri Tournament has not been rated, but because the crosstable including rounds per rounds results with every game result declared was not sent to us. If you or Wilma could provide us with the crosstable, her Rating will reflect her playing strenght better, and her RD will decline.
In general, a RD of more then 100 indicates that it is based upon very few tournaments, and provided this tournament was played below the usual strenghts, it is likely to rise. In case the tournament rated was played above the usual strenghts, it will decline if further tournament results will be given to us (The New Zealand National Ty. was reported, and I hope all federations will sent their results to us like you did)
It is no conspiracy that this happens. It is just our raw data, which r tournament crosstables, r not (yet) collected sytematically so far (remember it is the inital list we are gong to make.).
Most Czech events r rated, as they were reported to Igor and those crosstables members of the committee provided as well as those we found pulished.
The further our project continues, with more and more results reported, the more reliable the rating will be.


Greetinx from snow-covered Dortmund, Germany

Ingo Zachos
Last edited by Ingo_Zachos on Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:33 am, edited 4 times in total.
Ingo_Zachos
 
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Dortmund, Germany

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

class=