future rating discussions

   		Free Internet Chess Games Server

Install FICGS apps
play chess online


Game result  (chess)


B. Ozen, 2269
N. Wilson, 2121

1/2-1/2

See game 152323




 Hot news
 Discussions
 Files search
 Social network



American Go Association

                                          
Forum


Back to forum


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-19 19:04:26)
Future rating !

Hello to all.

I've added a feature to know the future rating, based on games finished since the last rating calculation.

Click on the magnifying glass near the player's name, then click on ELO, it will appear on the elo history page.

http://www.ficgs.com/directory_players.html


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-08-22 03:34:48)
Future Rating

I did not want to post this. I tried to find your e-mail address but could not. How ofton is Future Rating updated. Immediate ? My game 2179 was agreed draw. The result has not appeared in future Rating. It should as I understand it. Future rating for game 2163 was accounted for in future rating. It is the only game (1 game) that is credited. Again wish I could have kept this private via email Thank you Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 14:45:55)
Future Rating

Hi Wayne.

Reason is game 2179 was not agreed as a draw yet... It's your turn, so you may have forgotten to confirm your move ;)

Future rating is updated instantly.

You can email me at : info [at] ficgs.com


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 14:55:18)
How to know future rating

Hello to all.

A reminder about future rating and personal statistics... You can check it by going into Preferences, click on the picture just after your chess rating, a new window will appear, then click on "elo"... Several pages with different informations will be displayed.

You can check these informations for any player, by clicking on this pic in the rating list.


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-08-22 16:50:00)
Future Rating

I am very sorry. it is game 2177 Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 17:52:30)
Future Rating

You were right, there was a small bug in the last update... That's fixed.

Thanks !


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-11 06:16:23)
@ Sebastien Marez

Hello Sebastien.

That's always interesting to compare IECG and FICGS... Several players asked me about your forfeit in the previous tournaments, so I'm curious : Can I ask you why you finally came back to play some games at FICGS (after loosing about 240 points - future rating : 2204) ?? I suppose the time controls here are too slow for you (as Henri), do you have an idea about a "perfect" formula ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-27 03:09:26)
Elo calculation

Hello Nicola.

Elo calculation must be a clear and fair algorith as much as possible... These rules are statistically quite good IMO (and I suppose not many players will ask for less points ;)) because rating is quite dynamic (if your rating is really too high, you'll most probably quickly lose points until the next update) then most forfeits are done before the 10 first moves. In a way, you deserved these points because you played moves enough in these games, otherwise ie. what would happen if a player forfeits after 40 moves in a drawn or lost position ? .. Is the game unrated, rated as a win, a draw ? .. It would be unrated in some other places, that's not fair IMO. There are more complex cases. One thing most important is to make rating calculation 100% automatic (no human decision is a very asked 'feature'), this way there can't be any complaint about ratings as the future rating option makes it clear.

Best, Thibault


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-04 17:03:06)
Wch 3 in rating order

Well, by using the future ratings, I'm not in second place anymore. Anyway the final rating order will be known on July 1st.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-21 15:21:45)
Ratings

Yes, actually I just wanted to order the first players by their future rating. Wolfgang has made a great performance these last 2 months (future rating 2544) :

http://www.ficgs.com/players/utesch_wolfgang/history.html


Salut Sacha-Alexander :) .. C'est agréable de lire du français venu d'aussi loin ! J'avais quelques notions de russe il y a longtemps mais j'ai oublié depuis :/ .. A bientôt !


Dwight Oldenhof    (2007-08-06 15:05:52)
future rating

What happens when I win a game (e.g. game 11686) and nothing changes the number of games calculated or my future ELO rating? That number was 3 before I won the match and unfortunately stayed 3. Consequently, future ELO and performance rating didn't change either.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-08-06 23:42:20)
future rating

Hello Dwight.

According to the rules, the game is not rated if less than 10 moves have been played by your opponent.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-02-07 02:59:03)
Tie break rules

Yes knock out winner likely to have higher rating. However the round robin winner might have increased rating in getting to the candidate final. For example in 000002 Harry Ingersol could draw all his games in the knockout final and drop from his rating of TER 2555 and go through to candidate final (his future rating at the moment predicted at 2493)The other contestant Wolfgang has a predicted rating at 2489. Whereas Daniel Brunsteins could put in a strong showing winning the round robin final and improve his TER of 2476 (future rating estimated at 2487)Its quite possible that he could go into a candidates match with the higher TER and lose where all the games are drawn under the present rule. Why not just keep to the higher TER winner for an even result with draws and the lower TER tie break winning in a tie where the ganes were not all drawn


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-03-27 23:03:53)
Future rating & statistics

Hello Vjacheslav, everything's ok : Your rating first depends on your opponents ratings, obviously it will increase during next months :

http://www.ficgs.com/display_history.php?member=2290

ELO : 1867
Future rating : 1922
Games calculated : 9
Result : 77 %
Elo opponents : 1809
Performance : 2020

Rating history (from first to last) :
1600 1696 1740 1823 1867


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-06 15:01:06)
A bird in the hand

I think comparing f4 to b4 is quite reasonable - they are both off beat openings. On the question of chess knowledge I do not know how much he knows about b4? It can also be a dangerous practical weapon and can pose the black player more problems than f4. It is played by serious professional chess players in tournaments eg GM Christian Bauer (2626) has played it several times successfully this year and quite a few IM's regularly play it with success. Now to comparing rating sizes something I confess to not having done since I was in short trousers. My current rating is 2225 with a future rating of 2247 but with 2 rapid games in the pipe line this should be a future rating of 2300 + shortly lets see. Mr Repas rating is 2281 with a future rating at the moment of 2316. How significant is that? Well I had the opportunity to look at his games to see what his rating is made up of. 10 of his wins have come against the same opponent Sandor Porkolab and in 7 of these Mr Porkolab abandoned the games in level, drawn or in some cases better position for him. Given that in these "wins" he was often rated over 2100 or in one case over 2200 this has boosted Mr Repa's rating significantly. He has not so far had much success in WCC not having got past stage 2. As reference to my loss was made I can say that this was in a variation (the Prins of the sicilian) that I believe is unsound. Actually I overstepped the time limit while on vacation although I think the game could not be saved I learnt my lesson and do not play dodgy openings any more. I have never on the other hand been busted after 17 moves in a main line opening at cc as sadly Mr Repa found himslef against Bucsa Loan (Game 1249),then rated 1700. Then again I have stopped trusting the books and analyse for myself. Still less could I imagine being lost in a cc game after 16 moves in an exchange French (by tranposition) An instructive loss to Torsten Opas ( game 4388)- won with simple developing moves - worth playing over. Incidentally proves what I was saying about the exchange french it can be dangerous - although not of course, at cc. Finally there is Mr Repa's pet Bird shot down by Mr Kotlyansky in the approved way as follows 1 f4 d5 2 Nf3 g6 3 e3 g7 4 Be2 Nf6 5 0-0 0-0 6 d4 c5 7 dxc5 Qc7 and Black was fine winning in 72 moves. Never having lost with f4 did not include this because I suppose it was a bullet bronze game. I am afraid I am naive enough to think that people play chess on the server to win and increase their rating - clearly there are people who play to learn and strengthen their game and for whom results and rating are secondary. No doubt such people would not be interested in anything so vulgar as comparing ratings. Neverthe less its all just opinion and we are all free to express it within the rules of the server. So: f4 is a waste of time at cc little more than an invitation to draw and the From is unsound and almost like resigning.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-06 23:08:30)
Bird Brain loses in 33 Moves!

"I think comparing f4 to b4 is quite reasonable"

You would. But we all know what happened to you when you and I played chess. I beat you in 33 moves. And we can see how not only do you not provide a game that's at least somewhat representative of the critical lines of the opening, but you can't even figure out when the supposed game was played, or whether or not White or Black won, and you only post a tiny fraction of it to boot. So evidently, what YOU think is not exactly to be regarded in high esteem here. Most people wouldn't have required my explanation where I described quite clearly how there have been many books written about the Bird's Opening. It has it's own discrete chapter in MCO, and its played in serious games in professional chess still today. They would already understand on their own, or would at least be intelligent enough to look up the information without having to have their hand held and have it spoon fed to them. But even after all this, you STILL don't understand. And you mention Christian Bauer who only pissed around with 1.b4 when he was playing opponents 400 elo LOWER RATED! One of his fabulous wins this year, that you were alluding to, was against 1861 rated Jacques Decamps, lol. The rest of the time they were 2100-2300. Has he ever played 1.b4 against another GM? (never mind super GM, as 1.f4 has many times been played against)

An opening move like 1.b4 might be fairly compared to something such as 1.g4. You won't see any dedicated chapter in MCO to either of those openings, but they're at least interesting enough to warrant some discussion in the "misc flank openings" chapter. 1.f4 might better be compared to something like Larsen's 1.b3. A sound sideline.

You want to talk about ratings? I've had to build up my rating from starting at the default of 1700, by winning 117 games (one of them against you), because I wasn't aware when I opened the account that the admin would let you start with your established elo. It's not surprising I played Sandor Porkulab a lot of times, as we both were very active playing a lot of games. Unlike you who started with the advantage of an inflated rating, which was somewhat tempered after that beating I gave you last year.

Sometimes in correspondence chess people abandon games and don't log in again. This was the case with Sandor Porkulab, although I had already beaten him a few times in games that were played to completion, and he wasn't better in any of the games that were abandoned. You're lying through your teeth there, or perhaps you're just too incompetent and dishonest to assess the games objectively. Why would Porkulab have 7 games against me where he was "level or better" when I had already beaten the guy every time we played before that? Did you even look at those games? Or is this just your pathetic way of trying to "score points" by using lies and deception? Additionally, the way the elo system works is that even if you do get a few easy points from say a win from an abandoned game that perhaps might have ended in a draw, that gain is quickly diluted and your rating naturalized as you play more games, because you win less points when you win,(or draw a higher rated opponent) and lose more when you lose (or draw a lower rated opponent), than you would have if you didn't receive those points. I've played many games since then and my rating here is probably where it would have been If I had not played Porkulab at all. Or if not already will soon be. So this is a pretty weak argument from you. A better argument is the fact that I CRUSHED you in 33 moves when we played. Porkolab at least gave me a decent fight when I played him. That's more than I can say for you. I felt like all I had to do was outsmart a machine when you and I played. I didn't have to worry about any human judgment from a real chess player getting in the way of my victory!

As for me getting a lost position after 17 moves against someone? For starters, I've played about 190 games here. What have you played.....32? And I think that's a testament to the fact that, unlike you, I'm a REAL chess player, so my goal here isn't to simply try to win the most online CC games to try to give myself some artificial illusion of ability. I don't always play what I consider to be the objectively best moves because I like to experiment and LEARN SOMETHING from the time I spend here. But having said that, I STILL outperform you greatly, and crushed you when we played last year. I'm also higher rated with a higher future rating, even though you had the advantage of started with a boosted initial rating. So much for what you "think" you know about the strongest moves in cc, lol. And your future rating is only 2247, not 2300+. If you want to discuss what might happen after some of your current games are resolved, don't sell me short at 2316, which is already a given. Talk about the 2370+ I expect to have after some of MY current games are resolved. If you want to argue/debate with someone, learn to do it in an intelligent and fair way. So far all you've accomplished is to lose the paltry amount of credibility you once had.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-12 14:40:08)
Rating changes

"11. 1. Netiquette (...) No player may post in forums or send to another member any voluntary message that contains abusive, insulting, provocating, advertising, vulgar, foul, racist, sexist or other discriminatory or politically sensitive content. Doing so may lead to being immediately and permanently banned. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic, comment or message at any time should they see fit. Responding to a provocative message is strictly forbidden (...). In this case, please just warn the moderator or webmaster in private."

Don the more I think about it the more I think your view is correct there is no need to make the drastic change that was proposed. I have a current rating of 2225 and future rating of 2247 but have no problem with a person whose rating falls after they enter a 2200 tournament I am in. However it would be good to get other players views as this proposed change would affect players of all levels.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-12 21:42:44)
Rating changes

Nice of you to quote the one single solitary "M" class tournament that I was a few points short of 2200, out of the 7 such tournaments that I've played in, Mr. Lehnhoff, But my point stands. I would have had no problem waiting one more rating cycle back then if the rules were such to maintain the integrity of the rating categories.

As for the provocation that's going on here....It's amazing the lengths someone will go to for petty "revenge" after you beat them in chess.

Also, there is no point in quoting a "future rating" if you're not taking into consideration your losing games, some of which may end before the next rating cycle begins, that may indeed put someone under 2200.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-05-19 21:54:37)
Fritz 12, Shredder 12, Junior 12

While Rybka 2.3.2a w32 1CPU/mp still leads CEGT rating lists, Fritz 11 is now only about 50 elo points behind...

CEGT 40/20 (AMD 4200+)

Rybka 2.3.2a w32 1CPU - 2966
Fritz 11 - 2913
Naum 3.1 w32 1CPU - 2890
Deep Shredder 11 w32 1CPU - 2890
Hiarcs 12 SP 1CPU - 2869
Toga II 1.4.2JD 1CPU - 2864
Fruit 2.4 Beta A w32 1CPU - 2864
Zappa Mexico II w32 1CPU - 2844


Any predictions on the future ratings of Rybka 3 & Chessbase engines : Fritz 12, Shredder 12, Junior 12, Hiarcs 13, Zappa or other free engines ?

I can't find a rating for Junior 11 in CEGT rating lists, does anyone know it ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-04 15:18:08)
Performance

Hello Lars, Performance (next to Future rating) is calculated according to FICGS rules and based only on your results in the current rating period - ie. from september 1st to november 1st.

Have a good day :)


Wayne Lowrance    (2008-11-14 00:58:53)
Future Rating

Hello Thibault, In the short msg's window all I was asking for was what happened to the feature ! I click on my tournaments, click on magnifying glass, then try to click on elo, but no longer does this respond. What am I doing wrong sir. I accepted a draw offer, wondering what impact it will have Thank you. Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-14 01:05:06)
Future Rating

Hi Wayne, there was a small change a few weeks ago to make it clearer... Please click the magnifying glass in Preferences, then click History, thus you'll see your future rating.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2008-12-22 17:08:59)
Outstanding future rating 2.610 by ...

Michael Aigner!!! And 2 GM-norms!!! Congratulations, Wolfgang


Wolfgang Utesch    (2009-01-22 19:33:40)
Outstanding future rating 2.616 by ...

Eros Riccio!!! Congratulations, Wolfgang


Don Groves    (2009-04-06 06:37:12)
Ratings

Both Go and Poker ratings are changed after each game and doing the same for Chess would make all FICGS games consistent in this regard.

Also, I think Scott has a good point about having to wait to enter a tournament for which one is qualified based on "future rating" but must wait, perhaps weeks, until the next ratings update.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-04-30 12:16:34)
Xavier Pichelin wins the 2nd FICGS WCH

First of all, congratulations Xavier !

That's a real performance to beat Wolfgang in a match (whatever the score..).

These games will have to be analyzed, Xavier has good positions but the FICGS withdrawals rule 11.6 may apply in a few games (otherwise basically Xavier's future rating is 2682 !!).

Any opinion on each game is welcome.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-05-01 20:57:25)
Applying FICGS rules

I just had a deeper look at the 12 games and I applied FICGS rules only (just like in the match Lacrosse-Ghysens).

According to me, Xavier has an advantage in game 28302, it is not so clear in game 28305 but IMO this game should be rated also. As a result, 4 games will be rated in this match, Xavier's future rating is now 2577.


Daniel Parmet    (2009-08-26 05:51:01)
another rating problem.

I don't think my most recent win is being calculated in my future rating ? It says it only has 2 games for the future rating when it should have 3.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-03-13 21:43:04)
Rating calculation

You have to make the difference between ratings updated in real time (like advanced chess ratings) & the FICGS correspondence chess rating calculation, the idea of those ratings updated every 2 months is to avoid peaks, consequently when you win, draw or lose three games after the last rating calculation, your future rating does not take account of the first result THEN the second one THEN the third one, it is actually completely recalculated by taking account of all results at the same time, so you DO NOT win or lose points AFTER EACH result, your performance is recalculated according to the formula explained in the rules & that looks like the french FIDE rating calculation. One thing that explains "strange" variations after 2 or 3 results only is that the rating calculation is just more accurate when you have many results & particularly when your score is near 50%.

That should answer to the discussions I had with Kamesh & Ralph, but maybe my explanations are not so clear, sorry about that again.


Ralph Deline    (2010-03-17 07:27:30)
Rating calculation

Thanks for the helpful comments. I feel much better now that I understand how ratings are derived. I made the assumption that since my rating changed after the conclusion of every game, that the past games had no influence on my future rating, that is, within the two month rating period. It is the same type of rating system I'm accustomed to; results, strength of opponents, a little math thrown in, and presto, a new rating. I can now go on living. Cheers.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-06 15:41:33)
Ratings calculation

Hi Lazaro, correspondence chess ratings are not calculated in real time, it is calculated every 2 months, see the complete rules :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_chess

You may see an estimation of your future rating (taking account of the games played after the last rating calculation) at :

http://www.ficgs.com/players/munoz_lazaro/history.html

A 1885 rating should look like more logical to you :)


Andres E. Leon    (2010-08-09 15:15:52)
Future Rating Question

From the last rating actualization, I finished five games. However, my future rating is now computed with only one game. I believed that in the past when I finished a game, my future rating was instantly actualized. How this issue works in FICGS?. Thank you very much, in advance.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-08-09 19:40:51)
Future Rating Question

In some cases, games are not taken in account in the rating calculation, e.g. if less than 10 moves are played (for the winner only).

Complete rules:

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html

Feel free to ask if you have any doubt...


Andres E. Leon    (2010-08-11 00:41:41)
Future Rating Question

I am sorry to bother you, but I do not understand why the system does not take into account three of my last four games, in the moment to calculate my future rating. For example, the last game that I finished in the FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_A__000075 tournament was:

Game 39469

Last move : 1-0 2010 July 3 22:30:1

[Event "FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_A__000075"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2010.01.20"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Leon,Andres E."]
[Black "Faust,Dieter"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1904"]
[BlackElo "1980"]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.Bd2 Qa5 9.a4 Nbc6 10.Nf3 c4 11.Be2 b5 12.O-O bxa4 13.Ra2 Ba6 14.Rfa1 Bb5 15.h4 h5 16.Qg5 a6 17.Bc1 Kg8 18.Qd2 Nf5 19.Bf1 Rh6 20.g3 Re8 21.Ba3 Rg6 22.Bh3 Rh6 23.Rb1 Rb8 24.Bxf5 exf5 25.Qe3 Nd8 26.Ne1 Ne6 27.Ng2 Rc8 28.Qf3 g6 29.Nf4 Nxf4 30.Qxf4 Rh7 31.Bd6 Rg7 32.e6 fxe6 33.Qh6 Qd8 34.Be5 Qf8 35.Re1 Rc6 36.R2a1 Kf7 37.Qxg7+ Qxg7 38.Bxg7 Kxg7 39.Kf1 Kf7 40.Ke2 Rb6 41.Rab1 Rc6 42.Kd2 Ke7 43.Kc1 Rc7 44.Kb2 Rc6 45.Ka3 Rc7 46.Re5 Kf6 47.Rbe1 Bd7 48.f3 Rc8 49.Ka2 Rg8 50.Rb1 Bb5 51.R5e1 Rc8 52.Rb4 Rg8 53.Rg1 Rb8 54.Ka3 Rb7 55.Rgb1 Rg7 56.Rg1 Rb7 57.R4b1 Rg7 58.Kb4 Rc7 59.Rh1 Rh7 60.Rh2 Rb7 61.Ka5 Rh7 62.Rg1 Ke7 63.g4 fxg4 64.fxg4 hxg4 65.Rxg4 Rh6 66.Rh1 Kd6 67.Rb1 Rh8 68.Rxg6 Rxh4 69.Rbg1 Rh2 70.R6g2 Rh3 71.Kb4 Rh6 72.Rg8 Rh2 73.R1g2 Rxg2 74.Rxg2 Be8 75.Ka5 Bb5 76.Kb6 Kd7 77.Kc5 Kc7 78.Rg7+ Bd7 79.Rh7 a3 80.Rh1 Be8 81.Ra1 Bb5 82.Rxa3 Kd7 83.Ra5 Ke7 84.Ra1 Kd7 85.Rh1 Kc7 86.Rh7+ Bd7 87.Rg7 a5 88.Rh7 1-0

Besides, I am playing the FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_13__000008 group of the WCH, and I already finished three games.

Game 45063 Leon - Leclerc
Game 45064 Piantadosi - Leon
Game 45065 Leon - Dsouza

In one of them less than 10 moves were played (Game 45063 Leon - Leclerc ). However, in the other two games more than 20 moves were played, but when I finished these two games they were not taken into account in my future rating. Some of these games, particularly the Game 39469, I like very much and I spend a lot of efforts. It is a bitter that it is not used in my rating. I am afraid that the system is not actualizing my future rating, Can you help me to understand what is happening?

Again, I apologise for this inconvenience and I appreciate any help, thank you very much.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-08-11 11:09:44)
Future Rating Question

No problem, it is always good to check from time to time if everything works fine :)

So, your current rating is now 2031.

1) Game 39469, win against TER 1980, more than 10 moves, the game counts! It is obvious when looking at the Opponents elo average in the Future rating : Games calculated : 1, Result : 100 %, Elo opponents : 1980

2) Game 45063 : less than 10 moves played.

3) Game 45064 : does not count, explained by the rule "The rating calculation does not take account of wins obtained by a stronger player when the Elo difference is greater than 350 points, the same with losses by a weaker player." <- see http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_chess

4) Game 45065 : same reason.


Of course you cannot win Elo points by beating opponents who are much weaker (even if you have to play them sometimes, e.g. in WCH tournaments)... That's the core of the Elo system.


Andres E. Leon    (2010-08-11 14:35:34)
Future Rating Question

Thank you very much Thibault, now it is clear. My apologies to waste your time with such things. Thank you very much again and I take the opportunity to congratulate for building this place where all chess fans can play, and discuss about engines, data bases, etc..


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-09-16 13:01:23)
Chess WCH knockout final #6

Alberto Gueci beats Peter Schuster 7.5-0.5 in their match in FICGS__CHESS__WCH_KNOCKOUT_FINAL__000006

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__WCH_KNOCKOUT_FINAL__000006

As this is a general forfeit at the end, according to the rule 11.6 it seems to me that all games should be rated for the winner except Game 45571 where the advantage is not obvious.

The score looks severe but Peter's play is always interesting & risky (look at game 45574)...

Alberto's future rating is now 2620, congrats you're the man to catch now :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-01-10 23:07:31)
Ratings UpDates

Correspondence chess ratings (that are taken in account when a new tournament starts) do not change after every game, but yes you can see your provisional "future rating" as George says.

It is different for Go to allow strong players to climb faster the enormous ladder (2500 points for Go at most). For Poker the difference is less obvious but the game is less serious than chess and it is quite exciting to see this rating list evolving each day :) At the end I wouldn't change anything now.


Mark Josse    (2013-01-03 21:05:10)
winning on time

Hi All

I have won some games on time but they dont seem to show up in my future rating performance. Do you get rating points for time wins or do they become unrated games ?
Please Advise
Thanks
Mark


George Jempty    (2025-10-07 17:20:01)
Cheating / Forfeiting

You know what angers me about these players, is that I entered a tournament when one of them was around 2150 and me around 2000, and I stood to GAIN rating points by drawing. Well they've forfeited a bunch of games and there rating is down to close to 2000, whereas my latest rating was 2125, and my future rating is over 2150 at the moment. So now if I only draw against them I stand to LOSE rating points, unless they forfeit against me, which may or may not happen,


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.


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








 		 
 
Support to all people under attack    




Social network : create your photo albums, discuss with your friends...
Hot news & buzz : discover the latest news and buzz on the internet...
Discussions : questions and answers, forums on almost everything...
Seo forums : search engines optimisation forums, web directory...


Play the strongest international correspondence chess players !


Rita, Giacomo     (ITA)        [member # 12108]

Correspondence chess : 2422       FEM

Ranked  #  72   in the rating list.

Rating history :   2411 2430 2419 2391 2398 2440 2422




Graph


Future rating : 2409       Games : 3     Result : 50 %     Perf : 2334


Advanced chess :   2255       Big chess :   1668      




This member has no profile in the social network.




FICGS Go server, weiqi baduk banner facebook      
Correspondence chess

World championship

Play chess games

Go (weiqi, baduk)

Advanced chess

Play big chess

Chess trainer apk

Rated tournaments

Poker texas hold'em

Fischer random chess

       FICGS correspondence chess banner facebook