We have two new USCF members (who joined on their own) who have Danish and Greek national ratings. Does the USCF have any use for that information in giving them an initial rating?
Also, are there any accurate conversions for either of those ratings or is the Foreign+200 the best we have for giving them an estimated rating?
Hi Tom,
Unless the player has a FIDE rating also, and you can use the added-on points to = a USCF rating, I think the only thing to do is add on the 200 points (varies with the country of rating) recommended in the rule book. The foreign rating plus the 200 points would be the rating for the tournament and would be used by the USCF toward a publishable USCF rating. USCF doesn’t take the time to look into foreign ratings on its own.
Hi,
What do you mean “would be used by the USCF toward a publishable USCF rating”? Wouldn’t they start at zero and provisional like everyone else?
I thought that the rulebook estimations were just for pairings…
Luis
I believe FIDE-rated players are supposed to start with their FIDE rating as a one-game provisional. Whether this is always done is another matter.
It seem obvious that neither of you have actually read the descripton of the USCF ratings formula (not that I can blame you, it is not light reading.) There’s a link to it on the ratings page.
An unrated player’s initial pre-event rating is based on a series of rules, the first one that applies is chosen.
The only foreign ratings that are specifically cited are FIDE and CFC (Canadian).
Here’s the FIDE rule, which is the one most frequently used:
A player’s USCF rating is started at his FIDE rating + 50 points. If the FIDE rating is over 2150, the initial USCF rating is based on 10 games, otherwise it is based on 5 games.
The formula for converting CFC ratings to USCF ratings is a bit more complicated and can be found on page 2 of the ratings formula description referred to above.
The USCF office can use other foreign ratings to start a player’s USCF rating on a case by case basis, there are no predefined conversion formulas that have been approved by the Ratings Committee. Such ratings are started as based on 0 games.
A quick rating can be initialized based on a player’s regular rating and vice versa.
In the absence of any rating information, whether from another rating system or from a USCF rating, the player’s age is used to set an initial rating. If no age information is available, the membership type may be used.
If no other information is available, a player’s initial rating is 750.
I have read the ratings formula overview and more detailed description. I was basing my comments on:
a) what is in the rule book
b) what is available on the membership batch entry and regular entry forms
I know there a slot for FIDE ID, but that’s it.
What you seem to be saying is that the procedure is still available, but only by contacting the USCF office outside of the membership entry form. If so, it is not documented.
Why wouldn’t there be a field for initial TD-assigned rating with explanation if we were following the ratings formula specification to the letter?
I had an italian player a couple of months ago who was expecting his national rating to be used in some form or another, but I did not find anything in the rulebook to justify anything other than adjustment for pairing purposes. I also had a polish player who was asking similar questions last month. That’s why I’m curious. 
You’re confusing apples and oranges. The conversion formulas in the Rulebook are intended to a) produce a rough-and-ready wallchart rating to allow reasonable pairings and b) restrict class eligibility of foreign/FIDE rated players. This has nothing to do with generating the player’s first USCF rating, any more than a TD-assigned rating for a new unrated would.
John,
See my first post in this thread. I agree with you. It’s not me who’s confused.
Cheers,
Luis
John, I’m not sure I understand your point about starting with the FIDE rating (plus 50 points) as a provisional rating being “what the Rulebook says you shouldn’t do”, though I assume you’re referring to the difference between what should happen at a tournament and what should happen at the USCF office when rating an event.
There are good reasons why there is no space for providing a foreign rating for a USCF-unrated player through TD/A:
The USCF office needs to confiirm FIDE or CFC information, including rating. Recently we discovered a few players for whom we had the wrong FIDE ID. This will result in submitting corrections to at least two rating reports that were sent to FIDE in the last month or two.
The office also needs to put in the correct ‘effective date’ for the initial rating. I’ve seen several cases where it turned out that a player had two or three events rated before anyone got around to telling the office that the player was FIDE rated. (With rerating this is less of a problem than it used to be, because we can go back to 1/1/2004, but we still have to KNOW about it.)
For other foreign ratings, the office has the discretion whether to use the foreign rating, I know of only one case in the last half year where they have started someone’s USCF rating based on a third party rating system other than FIDE or CFC.
The current upload (DBF) file format doesn’t have a place for the player’s rating at all. It doesn’t have a place for the player’s name or state either. This has been a source of many rating reports with incorrect USCF IDs in them. I need to find time to finish the revised upload format and write something to parse those files, but that’s not the highest priority task on the list. (I think the validation checks in the new ratings programming is catching about 80% of the ID errors.)
For now, the best approach to this is:
A. When submitting an event online, put in a membership exception request giving the player’s FIDE or CFC ID and rating. For other rating systems provide as much information as possible about the player so the office can decide whether to use that rating to start the player’s USCF rating. The office is supposed to be reviewing exception requests on a daily basis, but not all requests can be handled immediately.
B. When submitting an event on paper or diskette, put a LARGE note on the rating report that clearly identifies any players for whom FIDE, CFC or other foreign rating system information is being provided.
You’re right; the second paragraph of my last post is irrelevant to the question.
Okay, but in that case I don’t understand the point of your last post. TD-calculated ratings (whether based on foreign/FIDE ratings or not) are simply irrelevant to the USCF calculation of initial ratings. Possibly there should be a field to flag FIDE-rated players without USCF ratings, but that’s another matter.
There appear to be two problems here. The first is that the Rulebook recommendations in 28D and the formulas actually used for rating new players have entirely different origins and purposes. 28D, which is largely a carryover from the 4th edition, is intended to prevent foreign ringers from winning big class prizes. The routine designed by the Ratings Committee is intended to produce a slightly more accurate initial USCF rating for a new player with a foreign/FIDE rating.
The second problem seems to be the unstated assumption that there exists somewhere an “accurate” conversion factor for all the various foreign ratings. There isn’t any, for the obvious reason that there is not enough player overlap. The best you can do is set an upper or lower bound, which is more or less what the Rulebook does.
There are around 22,000 players who had one or more games rated for the October 2005 FIDE Ratings List, including 540 USA players.
There are a total of 683 players who had one or more rated games for the October 2005 FIDE List and who have also had at least one USCF rated game in 2005.
I’ve sent detailed data to the Ratings Committee for their review, but it appears to me that the USCF=FIDE+50 rule works best for players rated above 2350 (FIDE). For players below about 2130 the player’s USCF rating is generally lower than his FIDE rating, though that’s based on only about 200 players.
TDs may want to take this into consideration when deciding if they should use the FIDE+50 rule or one of the other conversion formulas offered in the Rulebook.
Is it possible that the comparison data might be made available? I’d like to see it. I did a comparison myself a year or two back, though I’m sure I missed many players and misidentified a few.
-ed g.
If you’re looking for a list showing both the USCF and FIDE IDs for players, I posted one on the Ratings page several weeks ago, though it needs to be updated to reflect changes and additions since then.
The office is working on a list derived from the October Fide Rating List (FRL) that shows potential matches between players in the USCF database and ones on the FIDE list who are:
A. Listed as USA, Mexico or Canada by FIDE
B. GMs or WGMs
Once they’ve worked through that list, I will update the USCF/FIDE matchup list. FIDE identification information now shows on MSA, too, but not FIDE ratings.
A player with an old BCF grade of 135 has registered to play in an upcoming tournament. For pairing purposes, I would like to convert this to a USCF equivalent rating. I borrowed my rulebook to someone over this Thanksgiving week, but seem to vaguely recall seeing a suggested conversion formula for this case. Help!
/Jens
28Dd: 8x135+700=1780
With the new conversion to FIDE+50 this probably should now read 8x135+650.
You can now actually check someone’s British Chess Federation (BCF) grade online at http://grading.bcfservices.org.uk/.
Chris
As a reminder, the Ratings Committee recently made a change in the ‘FIDE+50’ rule, at least as far as the ratings system is concerned.
USCF=FIDE+50 only applies for FIDE ratings of 2600 or higher
For FIDE ratings below 2200, the initial USCF rating will be the same as the FIDE rating.
For FIDE ratings between 2200 and 2600, USCF = FIDE + (FIDE-2200)/8.
Chris, I actually tried that and then wrote the Grading Administrator of the BCF. It turns out that the online database only includes active players (at least 1 game in the last year!). Moreover, their central database goes back only to 1994, which in this case is not far enough.
/Jens
P.S. Bring back FantasyChess!!
The USCF crosstables only go back to late 1991 because the USCF didn’t have a proper data retention policy. (It does now.)