TD for a 5 rd swiss open U1600 prize is available. First two rounds an 800 plays like a 1400. I look at rating history. I see rating was based on G/40. This is G/120. Should I establish a pairing floor say 1200?
Depending on the size and strength of the field, such an adjustment may be unnecessary. We don’t have those details, though you do.
The number of games the rating is based upon is probably more useful than the time control.
G/30 is enough to be regular rated, so G/40 provides a valid rating. Unless there is more information than just two games of play it may be difficult to justify a 28E2 assigned rating.
Some reasons are below (others not listed in the rulebook may also be valid)
a. The player has shown significant superiority to those in a particular class.
b. The player has demonstrated a tendency to achieve much better results when significant prizes are at stake than when they are not.
c. The player’s rating has recently dropped into a lower class due to results that are statistically highly unlikely.
d. The player’s moves, time management, statements, or other actions, during play in a previous tournament have cause the director to conclude that the player did not make a reasonable effort to avoid losing games.
If there is a U1600 prize but no U1200 or U1000 prize then assigning a rating will not change the prize eligibility. It will change the pairings, so I am left guessing that your only goal is that you want those different pairings.
Note that an opponent may make a win/draw decision based on how the 1200 posted rating affects that opponent, and may be quite indignant finding out that the actual pre-tournament rating was 800.
I would be very leery of assigning this player a rating unless you have more information than is divulged here. Two games is an exceedingly small statistical sample on which to base any decision.
First, three out of 100 players with a rating of 800 will defeat a 1400 if Elo’s probability formula is deemed to be correct. Hardly unheard of.
Second, ratings lag improvement. Underrated players get properly rated by playing.
Third, Rule 28C states that the last published rating list shall be used unless an alternate rating is assigned under Rule 28E. Rule 28E2, in turn, specifies that a rating may be assigned only for reasonable cause, which is not shown on the facts presented.
These days many 800 players play like 1400. When I watch other games after my game is over, I am constantly amazed by how well these three-digit players play – even in endings, which are supposedly the weak link in the play of inexperienced players.
Bill Smythe
It would be extremely unusual to assign a higher rating to a player mid-event without additional outside information, and somewhat unusual even then. (I suppose it might be justifiable for a one-game-a-month event if other events have been rated for that player; in fact, such an event could even build that into the design of the event.)
For the most part a Swiss system event is self-correcting for players with inaccurate pre-event ratings, they’ll move up or down into score groups based on their actual results.
Also, rule 28E1 states that when assigning a rating the assigned rating may not be lower than the player’s current published rating for that event. TDs using recent unofficial ratings for players need to take care not to violate rule 28E1.
With advance notice that is slightly alterable.
For instance events in early May might say in their advance publicity they use the April rating list even if the May rating is higher than the April rating (such as the National Elementary or Supernationals) and other events may say in their advance publicity that the “rating list” used is the latest rating even if unofficial (yes, rerating might mean that the rating used for the tournament would no longer show up anywhere in a player’s rating history).
When I said “…current published rating for that event” (emphasis added), that was very deliberate, because events are free to define what the current supplement is for their events, like the spring nationals and the USATE do.
On the other hand, there is no ‘unofficial ratings list’, and a TD cannot claim that an unofficial rating is someone’s published rating for the purpose of satisfying the rules.
Specifying ‘Latest unofficial ratings will be used’ in advance publicity is one way around the rule, but this still leaves a potential that someone’s unofficial rating could change between when the TD looks it up and when some player looks it up.
However, it is possible to request a file of the unofficial ratings as of the point in time when the file is created (perhaps on Friday evening for a Saturday event) using the TD/Affiliate Support Area and use that, which has the advantage that someone claiming that his rating should be Y instead of X can be shown that list.