Last night I played an older player who had a floor of 1800. Being the curious (nosy? ) type I went to look at his MSA history to see when he was over 2000.
His earliest MSA results show ratings in the low to mid 1700s. He the had a result in a Marshall tournament in 1992 where he went from 1791 to 1800. That was followed by a tournament where he went 1-4 and stayed at 1800. (floor? unclear) Then he had some tournaments that took him back under 1800 including an event that caused his rating to drop to 1700. He maintained a rating in the 1700s from 1992 through 1997 with an occasional peak to low 1800s. Then this comes up:
3/9/97 Eastern Class Championship 1729 to 1731 (1-3 and a forfeit win. Hardly a money floor result)
4/6/97 NY Open 1800 1800
I found him on 1985 rating list with a 1675 rating based on 8 games. On subsequent annual lists he was rating low 1700s.
How did a player suddenly get assigned a higher floor with no apparent result that would justify a higher floor?
We have no detailed records of manual ratings or floor changes made prior to February of 2005, but it was not unusual for the processing of money prize floors to occur months after the event in which they were earned. (That could still happen, if someone notices that a player should have a money prize floor based on some event and contacts the USCF office, though of course the office would need to verify that information with the TD or organizer of the event.)
And in those days, those floors could not (easily) be retroactive because rerating hadnât been invented yet.
These days a money prize floor is considered to take effect at the conclusion of the event in which it was earned. It is possible (but very unusual) that a playerâs post-event rating might not be as high as the money prize floor earned, in which case the post-event rating would be raised to the money prize floor level after the final pass through the ratings formula.
Is it not also possible for a player who, say was rated 2200 in 1972, then ceases to play, for 37
years, purchasing a new membership. Say this personâs skills are not even close to what they
were in 1972, and with their new membership is now 1700. Regardless of the amount of time or
tournaments in which they played under this new rating, would they not then have the right
to demand their floor be raised to 2000 based on their 1972 rating??
Good catch! I missed that one. Itâs interesting because it looks like they gave him a money floor in September of 1996. Then effective January 1, 1997 all the floors were dropped another 100 points. (I remember that all too well! )His first tournament of 1997 dropped him below 1800, with the lowered floors. He had several more tournaments where his rating continued to drop towards 1700, then it looks like the money floor of 1800 was put back at the time he played in the NY Open in April of 1997. I guess the 100 point floor drop was not supposed to apply to money floors.
I think thereâs more âmuscle memoryâ than that. It would be hard for someone who was 2200 and is still in good health to lose 500 points of strength. The question is relevant for our rating floor policy.
At some point old age sets in and the mistakes become more numerous. I remember Norman T. Whitaker, in my first tournament and one of his last, playing very fast but at only an Expert level because he dropped a piece in most of his games. That means he was still tremendously strong (at least in the eyes of a new player like me) except for the glitches. He may have been a 2500 strength player in his prime (if they had had ratings then), having been a contender for the US Championship.
That is what âOnce rated, always ratedâ is supposed to mean. I think it is reasonable to make exceptions for players whose strength has improved dramatically during their absence from USCF rated chess (such as foreign titled players who have an old USCF rating from when they were younger and much weaker players.)
Otherwise, Iâm inclined to agree with David that unless there is solid evidence that a playerâs rating has declined markedly (such as due to a stroke), the old rating should remain in force.
Either the player will regain his old playing strength within a few tournaments or his rating will go down. If the latter, the player can request a lower floor if necessary.
) type I went to look at his MSA history to see when he was over 2000.
)His first tournament of 1997 dropped him below 1800, with the lowered floors. He had several more tournaments where his rating continued to drop towards 1700, then it looks like the money floor of 1800 was put back at the time he played in the NY Open in April of 1997. I guess the 100 point floor drop was not supposed to apply to money floors.