Clarification of Rating Groups

  

Back to forum


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-04)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I have just seen the chat bar exchange where George Jempty has said:

You can play up if you are within 50 points, and now I am in and my account has been debited e points.

Where has this rule come from?

On countless occasions I have enquired about being able to enter a higher division than my rating when I have just been under the rating cutoff, and been told no.

The policy as I have known it has been that a player must win a lower division, and then can only enter the higher division when the field has gotten to the last two entries.

Has this policy changed?

If it has, then it would have helped to have it publicised, but also I would spoken against the changed as it makes a mockery of any rating divisions.

If this is the case, might as well call 2200 - 2600, 2150 - 2600


George Jempty    (2025-11-08 12:11:03)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Hello Garvin Gray, there is a similar rule if you are within 50 points of the floor of the next higher group, and "the field has gotten to the last two entries", and you pay 10 e-points.

I think this policy helps fill up hard to fill groups, like standard-M. Nobody has joined the new/empty rating list for that group in the meantime.

On a personal note, my future rating just since the last update earlier this week, has even gone up over 20 points and now stands at 2199, AND I have a clearly winning position (+3.0 per SF 17) against a 2300.

IMO I am clearly worthy of standard-M, and am not making a mockery of anything.


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-10 05:48:20)
Clarification of Rating Groups

George:

As I stated in my original post:

The policy as I have known it has been that a player must win a lower division, and then can only enter the higher division when the field has gotten to the last two entries.

Has this policy changed?

Your reply would fit if the player had won the lower division and was then trying to enter the higher division.

This is the rule I was quoting.

Your justifications about where your rating sits, or where your rating maybe in the future does not matter. Many players can show this pattern.

I certain have and have been stuck just below a rating cut off and when I have attempted to enter a higher division when there are two spots left open, I have been told no as I not won a lower division.

Therefore, this is why I am seeking a clarification from Thibault.

And it is only Thibault that I want a public answer from.

Either the rule has changed and it should be told to everyone, or an exception has been made for you, which is then clearly wrong as that is favouritism.

I have been told no in the past.

So, which is it Thibault?


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-10 17:23:03)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Yeah, I'd just want the same chances since I'm at 2274 and would like to join tournaments a tier up, but I don't see any "pay 10 E-points to join". I could claim that I've drawn +2300 players many times and "worthy of" being with the higher ups, or whatever it takes, but the purpose would be defeated if I get to face the same people I'm facing now because the +2300 tournaments would be full of 2250+ rated players.


George Jempty    (2025-11-17 23:47:07)
Clarification of Rating Groups

There is no favoritism in my case, the rule ALSO states if your rating is within 50 points of the higher group, that waiting list has at least 5 entries already, and you pay 10 epoints, you can enter. Perhaps those last qualifications have been amended since last time knew of the rule? I've just brought up my ratings to defend against that I'm making a mockery of this rule. So no favoritism, no mockery, and I'm done with this discussion altogether,


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-18 02:55:42)
Clarification of Rating Groups

It is really annoying when the site owner does not bother to clarify this issue and instead leaves it to the players to have to dig through the rules themselves to sort out this issue.

Tickets for a higher class tournament :

However, when you win a rated tournament (only after that you receive an email specifying it or when the tournaments list shows your name as winner or co-winner of the tournament) or if your rating is at most 50 points below the low rating limit of the next class tournament's waiting list, it is now possible to buy a ticket for the next class tournament's waiting list (for example if you win a chess class A tournament, you may ask for a ticket for the next class M tournament) for 10 Epoints if the following conditions are filled : 1) No more than 2 players obtained the best score in the tournament. There's no winner otherwise. 2) The player's TER must not be more than 200 points below the low rating limit of the tournament's waiting list. 3) At most 2 players may buy a ticket to enter the same waiting list. 4) Five players at least must have entered the tournament's waiting list already so that you can buy a ticket for this tournament. 5) The possibility to buy a ticket is valid after the official end of the tournament [when the tournaments list shows winners, not leaders of the tournament]. 6) As the price for any ticket is 10 Epoints, the player's account must be credited of at least 10 Epoints.


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-18 02:57:20)
Clarification of Rating Groups

So, based on this, each time I have tried to enter a higher rated tournament and received a message saying, you are outside the rating range, this has been false.

The rules of this site have actually allowed me a method of getting in, but that automated message has not been updated.

That is extremely poor and has now left a very sour taste in my mouth.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-18 10:33:59)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I demand a button that buys a ticket automatically when a player is elegible for playing a higher rated tournament and the Epoints to pay it are available, because right now, I have no idea how to do such a feat, in that case, Jempty outsmarted us all, unironically.
Not that my demands have any weight, I think people's lives have gotten better since they ignored me, and perhaps it'd be better for everyone if these rules remained hidden and nobody ever used them again (except Jempty would continue to play a tier up when able), but it's worth a try.
I don't have a bad taste but this has caused me physical pain in the lower back part of my head, is it stressful?
It's nothing personal against George, it's just that climbing the rating ladder is one of the most difficult tasks one can do in life, so when one sees a 2400 player, one respects them, because of all the time and effort they had to put to get there, which, for all players below that tier is immeasurable, if we could measure it we could have that rating too.
But someone getting there by buying tickets that allowed them to face higher rated opposition and take shortcuts to avoid dealing with lower rated players does cheapen the meaning of the number.
I guess it's all about the money, pay to win iff someone buys the Epoints for this reason, and holds a higher rating to skip a tier (note I said iff, not if, not accusing anybody of doing that.)
It's like buying a car instead of running the marathon, and the rating doesn't actually reflect chess skill anymore.


Bahadir Ozen    (2025-11-18 13:32:10)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Mr. Ulises Pineda,

I read what you wrote. I understand and agree with you. However, you're missing a crucial point.

The FICGS website doesn't charge any fees for entering tournaments like the ICCF or other sites. And we know that the world is currently dominated by a capitalist system. Mr. Thibault's efforts shouldn't be discounted here. As correspondence chess players, our numbers are small, anyway.

There's a lot of effort involved, and you can contribute through e-points or donations.

At the end of the day, think about it this way: FICGS offers a free marathon service, and we're debating whether it should be 20 or 40 km...


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-19 06:45:16)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I'm contributing with my moves and participation in the platform, I also don't ask for money to the site owner to see my moves or to start new games, because it goes both ways, without players like me participating, the site would die, if someone gets a very sour taste in their mouth that they stop participating, it's the beginning of the end.
The players are needed, is the site needed? We're already playing a game in another place, Ozen, I see you making conditional moves over there that you can't send here, so what's the advantage of playing over here instead of playing over there?
At the end of the day, I come here because of the players I can face here, that only play at FICGS, so it's the only way. If they happen to leave because of some circumstances, then the site becomes pointless.
FICGS is its players.
FICGS needs the players more than the players need FICGS.
Gratitude goes both ways, I don't feel appreciated because the site's owner hasn't even replied here, because I'm just another useless player and if I left someone else would come to replace me, perhaps someone that buys tickets.
If I'm not valuable, if my games and move contributions are meaningless perhaps I should stop creating new games around here, there's other places that are completely free, have more features, and don't let players pay to get in higher rated tiers.


Bahadir Ozen    (2025-11-19 08:46:16)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Mr. Ulises Pineda,

Of course, you're valuable. The time you spend, your actions, and your interaction enrich both me, the players, and the site. Thank you for your efforts.

It's clear that each site has its own infrastructure and process. Yes, we play on a different site, and there can be conditional moves there. But FICGS's games also go to the Corr Database, and they're respected. We can say it's a proven platform.

You're right about the ticket issue being annoying. In that case, the paying player has a slightly greater advantage.

I agree with you in the long run, but the person who keeps the site "usable" also puts in the effort. Perhaps a different update on this rule will be forthcoming.


Thibault de Vassal    (2025-11-19 16:17:50)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Hi all,

Garvin & Ulises points are very good actually... I never thought about a button or something to remind that rule in the waiting lists.

I'll do it right now...


George Jempty    (2025-11-20 22:23:26)
Clarification of Rating Groups

I guess I "opened a can of worms" by exercising the rule regarding the ability to enter a higher rated group. But in my case specifically, my future rating is now over 2200, so I personally believe there has been NO HARM DONE. But I intend to continue to use this rule, for instance to enter >=2300 tourneys, if/when I get to 2250, there are already five entrants, and I pay the requisite e-points. I didn't outsmart anybody, I just found the necessary rule at https://ficgs.com/membership.html#tickets. A button or some other mechanism however would be a great idea


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-23 16:26:06)
Clarification of Rating Groups

Sent email to Thibault a few days ago to try and get into a group via the ticket system. No reply to email