Year Book 2018-19 Contents |
Notices |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
21/04/2019 ECF Grading Consultation, Stages 2 and 3
A short while ago the ECF conducted a consultation with members (as players) on possible future changes to the ECF grading system. The outcome was essentially that a majority (of the 900+ who participated) would prefer monthly grading lists, and 4-digit grades (or ratings if “FIDE-speak” is to be adopted). See https://www.englishchess.org.uk/grading-consultation-results/ for an analysis by age group and by membership category. It was not clear whether 4-figure “numbers” was meant to imply a fundamental change in the calculation method, i. e. ECF-style to ELO-style.
The next stage, here unofficially called Stage 2, is a consultation with organisers. The ECF's grasp of who to contact for this one may not be as complete as it could be. If you organise an ECF-graded league or congress, and have not received an e-mail from the ECF Grading Manager, Brian Valentine, titled “Chess Organisers' Consultation”, then maybe you should send an e-mail to manager.grading@englishchess.org.uk asking that you be included. The questions asked (see below) are ones which a non‑organiser might find tedious in the extreme, but about which an organiser might get quite exercised.
Thereafter, unofficially-styled Stage 3 will be a consultation with graders, so-called, who submit result data, in a prescribed format, to the ECF for processing. (They don't actually perform grading calculations, so are not literally graders.) Too eager to wait for the impending grader consultation, or unware of it, some graders have started a reply-to-all-style e‑mail discussion from which it is apparent, as might be expected, that practices around the country differ very widely.
For league organisers, the main impact of proposed changes would be the need to keep up to date with result entry. Within Yorkshire, as all leagues are using the ECF's League Management System, from which can be called off a data submission file at any time, the impact for league administrators should be minimal. If late results miss the boat, then they will be reflected in the next month's grading run. The data submission file still should be checked as regards apparent “new” players, in which process an ECF grader is assisted by the supplied “checker” program in conjunction with the latest downloadable “master list” of players. As all ECF graders potentially take holidays, it would be best if local leagues each had their own ECF Grader, as do Hull and Sheffield.
For congresses organisers, the impact would be that they would need to ensure results were processed promptly, unless they were happy to receive complaints that results from an end-of-month congress were not reflected in that month's grading list. Again, the ECF Grader chosen to process the data submission could well be on holiday at the end of the month . . . . There could also be a slight problem regarding selection of a specified month's grading list to regulate admission to grade-limited congress sections. In case anyone is interested, the questions being asked of organisers are as follows:
Steve Mann 21/04/2019
|